So a company wont be able to refuse you a job as a DRIVER because you have a conviction for drink driving? And that is considered unlawful discrimination?
If the conviction is classed as spent ie more than 5 years since date of conviction, yes.
So 49 months after getting caught drink driving (only since the last time caught remember,not necceserrily the last time they’ve done it) they can get a job driving for a living? And an employer isn’t allowed to say “No” on that basis?Sorry,but if someone has a history and conviction for drink driving then if I am a company owner I should be allowed to decide I dont want to take the chance. And as a road user,I have a right to think that companies can at least make an informed decision and be in possesion of ALL the facts of a persons background. And that includes all drink/drug offences
And I dont buy the morning after drivers who get caught and bleat about being only just over. If your STILL over the limit 12 hours later then they must have had a right skinful so why would you get behind the wheel? Yes your probably fine and not ompaired but why risk it if you’ve had THAT much?
SuperMultiBlue:
The-Snowman:
And I welcome anyones counter argument as to why they shouldnt be allowed to use it as a reason
That’s not really a counter argument. Thats just a copy/paste of the url with the law on it. Im not saying your wrong re the license,im saying that I personally think that companies should be able to go right back on a persons license to when they passed their test and make their own mind up as to whether to offer employment or not
The simple opt out for any employer is the question. Have you EVER been convicted of ANY criminal or motoring offence.
By saying No or refusing to answer when the answer would be yes and it may be found out at a later date, your employment is terminated for non disclouser. That then is not discrimination. I
Excerpts taken from DVLA live Q&A session re: counterpart abolition.
What about DR convictions - will they be displayed for the full 10/11 years?
In line with legislative requirements these endorsements will only be displayed for third parties for up to 5 years. An individual driver will be able to see current endorsements as long as they are in force.
Why are you only displaying endorsements for five years when some categories of endorsements I.e. DR offences remain on the licence for eleven years?
These are legal requirements. The display of endorsements has to reflect the provisions of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act.
nick2008:
do the crime do the time. In another twist if your a pedo you get 10 or whatever years inside come out and because you’ve done your time that’s its you can go get a job working with kids same thing different scenario …
Nope, the rehabilitation of offenders act doesn’t apply if you’re working with Children. You have to declare everything and it will be verified with a CRB check (and some other checks as well).
SuperMultiBlue:
Excerpts taken from DVLA live Q&A session re: counterpart abolition.
What about DR convictions - will they be displayed for the full 10/11 years?
In line with legislative requirements these endorsements will only be displayed for third parties for up to 5 years. An individual driver will be able to see current endorsements as long as they are in force.
Why are you only displaying endorsements for five years when some categories of endorsements I.e. DR offences remain on the licence for eleven years?
These are legal requirements. The display of endorsements has to reflect the provisions of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act.
You seem a bit overly keen to make sure everyone
A - Knows about the law regarding endorsments
B - Try and make sure everyone agrees with you
Im gonna go out on a limb here and take a wild guess that you have a drink driving endorsement that is between 5-10 years old
nick2008:
do the crime do the time. In another twist if your a pedo you get 10 or whatever years inside come out and because you’ve done your time that’s its you can go get a job working with kids same thing different scenario …
Nope, the rehabilitation of offenders act doesn’t apply if you’re working with Children. You have to declare everything and it will be verified with a CRB check (and some other checks as well).
I know … what I was meaning was crime done time done slate cleaned …
You’ve made your view pretty clear, we get it. Looking for other views. Are there any transport managers on here?
I’ll take that as a yes then.
Esp since you conveniently didnt come up with a decent counter argument for why drunk drivers should be allowed to hide this fact from potential employers instead of a copy/paste of a url
Or deny it.
In which case instead of getting shirty because im not telling you its oh so unfair on you,and almost looking for sympathy of how hard done by you are,you ■■■■ it up. I have zero sympathy for drink/drug drivers and,law or not,theres no way anyone with that on their license would get anywhere near a vehicle I paid tens of thousands for and you shouldn’t be allowed to count the days till you dont need to tell potential employers about it NOW my view is clear
You’ve made your view pretty clear, we get it. Looking for other views. Are there any transport managers on here?
I’ll take that as a yes then.
Esp since you conveniently didnt come up with a decent counter argument for why drunk drivers should be allowed to hide this fact from potential employers instead of a copy/paste of a url
Or deny it.
In which case instead of getting shirty because im not telling you its oh so unfair on you,and almost looking for sympathy of how hard done by you are,you ■■■■ it up. I have zero sympathy for drink/drug drivers and,law or not,theres no way anyone with that on their license would get anywhere near a vehicle I paid tens of thousands for and you shouldn’t be allowed to count the days till you dont need to tell potential employers about it NOW my view is clear
nick2008:
do the crime do the time. In another twist if your a pedo you get 10 or whatever years inside come out and because you’ve done your time that’s its you can go get a job working with kids same thing different scenario …
Nope, the rehabilitation of offenders act doesn’t apply if you’re working with Children. You have to declare everything and it will be verified with a CRB check (and some other checks as well).
I know … what I was meaning was crime done time done slate cleaned …
In that context the slate is never clean, even if you have completed a custodial sentence. It should still be there on your record, and if you a ■■■ offender rightly so.
If the reabilitation of offenders act says it shouldn’t have to be declared as a criminal offence that should take precidence the reason a drink/drug coviction stays on for 10 years is because if caught again during that time you automatic ly get a three year driving ban.
If someone went to prison for theft they wouldn’t have to declare it after five years so what’s the difference. Some people do learn from there mistakes dispute what the daily mail tell you.
im saying it because you didn’t deny it last time,you just made a dismissive comment and asked for transport managers views so what am I supposed to think? Your whole posting style on this thread says you are annoyed at having to declare it since its over 5 years old. I asked if that was the case and got attitude instead (Something I don’t take kindly to) It’s a bit late in the game now to say you dont have a DD is it not?
If you say you don’t then so be it but your pushiness of the rehabilitation law,and in particular your request for a TM’s views,says to me you do and your desperate to know if you need to tell employers about it. It also suggests you’ve been knocked back from a job for having it and are not happy. Almost like you want to know if suing for unfair discrimination is a possibilty
But,like I say,if you say you dont then,like potential employers, i’ll need to take your word for it. But I remain to be convinced.
And my stance on never being allowed to hide it for any length of time remains the same,and I still welcome counter arguments (not copy/pastes of the rehabilitations act url) of just exactly why someone who’s putting their company image in the hands of someone they effectively don’t know is not allowed to be in possession of ALL the facts.
I don’t have a problem with the information being available to employers, but I wonder if this will be yet another database to be flogged off to all and sundry. Bloody sick of people making money of my data and getting junk mail etc when I can’t do anything about it.
kr79:
If the reabilitation of offenders act says it shouldn’t have to be declared as a criminal offence that should take precidence the reason a drink/drug coviction stays on for 10 years is because if caught again during that time you automatic ly get a three year driving ban.
If someone went to prison for theft they wouldn’t have to declare it after five years so what’s the difference. Some people do learn from there mistakes dispute what the daily mail tell you.
Is the correct answer. There is clearly a need for the ROA as without it we would have about 50% of the population sitting on the dole due to never being able to find work.
SuperMultiBlue:
Snowman, I don’t have to justify myself to you. I have largely ignored your posts due to your aggressive posting style.
I am glad that the upcoming law change has seemed to annoyed you though
Your right,you dont need to justify yourself to me. Im not asking you to. But with a DD on your license and pretty much moaning its stopping you getting employed,im not the one you need to justify too though am I? If you dont like my opinions then dont post on an open forum
Aggressive posting? Last nights one,yes. That was because of your attitude. A simple no I havnt would have sufficed. A dismissive attitude and then asking for transport managers views pretty much confirmed my suspitions you had a DD and wanted to know if potential employers would find out about it,or if TMs knew how far back they could check on the new system. If you think my previous posts are aggressive then you really have led a sheltered life.
The law change doesnt bother me. All it does is shorten the period for disclosure from 11 yrs to 5. Hardly a big deal. If you have’nt been caught again in 5 years you’ve either learned your lesson or it was an honest mistake(eg morning after). It’s the fact that it reaches a point where it does not need to be disclosed at all that bothers me,and always has. Nothing new. Employers should be in possession of all the facts. 1 DD 20 years ago shouldnt be held against you. But in 16 years someone can have 3 DD convictions but not reveal them because they are 5 years apart and “spent”?
Still no counter argument? But I wont hold my breath waiting on one because
A - there isn’t one
B - I suppose you’ll be ignoring me now because of my still “aggressive posting”
Try not to cry at my aggressive post you poor lamb
same thing different scenario …
I’ll go with that 
