As my convictions are now spent I wanted to get back into the habit of doing something more constructive and CA seemed like a good cause.  Going through some of the paperwork about it I found this

Anyone with a caution or conviction for a sexual offence against a child or vulnerable adult is considered unsuitable to volunteer.

(only can find the online reference at https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/about-us/support-us/volunteering/about-volunteering-with-citizens-advice/volunteering_faqs/ )

The role I was looking at didn't need even need a basic DBS check, but they seem to say you can't apply at all.  Is this common or even correct?  I would have thought the CA would be the best people to understand what they can and can't do about spent convictions and yet they seem to be applying a blanket ban on this.

I'm getting a 404 on that link.

I'm in Scotland and had a wee look on the Scotland part and can't seem to find anything about it. I don't doubt it for a second though and thought this part of requirements for the volunteering advisor role was interesting: Are open–minded and don’t judge people or their circumstances

Sounds to me like they're not overly open-minded and would be judging you on your circumstances.

If you've got an active conviction I can sort of see why they wouldn't want to take someone on. If everything is spent and you're no longer subject to any notification requirements and are essentially "free" then I honestly don't see why they should have an issue and if they do it just shows more prejudice, discrimination and contradiction and is certainly not a company I'd want to associate myself with.

The link supplied had a ) at the end causing the 404 issue. Corrected link is https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/about-us/support-us/volunteering/about-volunteering-with-citizens-advice/volunteering_faqs/

"Citizens Advice have a policy in place to ensure that ex-offenders are treated fairly. Having a criminal record is not, in itself, a barrier to volunteering. We consider each offence individually, looking at issues like risk to the client, how long ago it took place, the circumstances and whether they are relevant to the volunteer role. Anyone with a caution or conviction for a sexual offence against a child or vulnerable adult is considered unsuitable to volunteer."

So when they say anyone with a conviction or caution of a sexual offence "against" a child or vulnerable adult. Are those with convictions of images treated as equally to those who have caused actual harm?

We consider each offence individually, looking at issues like risk to the client, how long ago it took place, the circumstances and whether they are relevant to the volunteer role.

Anyone with a caution or conviction for a sexual offence against a child or vulnerable adult is considered unsuitable to volunteer.

They obviously don't do the first statement then. At least they're blatantly obvious with their contradictory and discriminatory practices though...

xDanx - I reckon image-based offences will almost certainly be covered under that. In fact, a lot of offences will. The offences they probably don't care too much about are ones when you shoplifted 20 years ago or were caught drink driving that one time.

Very valid point, I suppose you could always go to citizen advice to seek advice for contradictory and discriminatory practices from citizen advice. I bet that would go down well.

Most of the time when I have gone to them for advice in the past, I am basically left in a room for 10 - 20 mins while they google and print of their "advice" and send me on my way. Citizen advice really would benefit accepting volunteers who have an understanding of many types of offending and have their own experiences who can share and advise those under similar circumstances.

I looked at citizen advice and came across this too.

My question is, if your conviction is for a sexual offence and it’s spent, and the role asks for no DBS check, how do they know that person even has a conviction in the first place?

They would probably ask you, as I'm sure some people would tell them even though they don't have to. If you are still under police supervision, the police would make a decision on whether you needed to disclose it. If you're not under police supervision, then if your conviction is spent, there is no way for them to find out other than via online searches. However it is worded, any disclosure question amounts to "If/when we do a criminal record check on you, what would we see?"

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

Hi Mark

"how would they find out"

Before I answer that in a wider aspect to the normal considerations I will mention my own interaction with the PPU on this subject.

When I was questioned why i did not volunteer I asked "what confidentiality processes do you think are in place in the actual charity shop?" I live in a small town were an interview would be done by whoever is in charge that day.There is no confidentially document to sign. By previous shopping visits to the shops you hear the gossip. So why would I risk my new identity being disclosed that would allow a society to punish me further? Please do not suggest "legal" safeguards as they are all after the fact; the damage will of be done."

I show / inform my PPU the facts about my life, my projects, the aspects that support me and others in my life; and yes even strangers. If they wish to place me under surveillance they will see my positive interactions with others, be they strangers or friends. They will see how I "protect myself" from any misinterpretations by anyone. By "facing" the challenges imposed on me, they would see I am not the threat society presumes I am because of their interpretation of my offence.

Fact: I informed them I was going to undertake a volunteer  role for an estate agent were I showed prospective property buyers around empty properties, and no declaration was required. I just wanted work activity for my CV at the time. I was informed by my previous PPU officer, he would inform the estate agents as I could break my conditions by being alone with a person under 16. I asked how, and he said the child might be with me alone at the property? When I asked how many under 16 year olds he knows buy property his response in not worthy of writing.

Back to the question on "how would they find out?". Unless you have managed to change your identity and the media have not linked it, a google search is quite a common process by employers now.

take care

Society suggests I must let go of all my expectations but I disagree, as whilst I have a voice, I have hope.

Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope is for tomorrow else what is left if you remove a mans hope.
------------------------------

This forum supports these words, thank you Unlock and your contributors.