Only a 3 month job but requires an enhanced CRB check. Can this be accomplished within 3 months?
The CRB no longer facilitates portability, organisations that choose to accept a previously issued Disclosure do so at their own risk
Owning a CRB means nothing if it's not been done very recently, i.e. when you are appointed to a new job & before you actually start.
If say a person got sacked from their last job because they were convicted of a sex offence then they could still be in posession of a CRB certificate which states that they have no convictions. If a school accepted this without renewing/checking the convicted offender would be back working with kids. So there shouldn't be any discretion - it should surely be compulsory to re-check the CRB? Otherwise the whole CRB process is a complete farce.
I'm recruiting for this role too so if anyone wants some advise on applying PM me ;-)
I thought a CRB was only valid on the day, I've needed a new one even when I changed jobs even within the same LA so technicaly I was still working for the same employer.
technically they are only as good as the day they are released by the police but its all about managing risk until the new ISA registration numbers come out (what should have been done originally)
This employer will accept CRB's as long as they are enhanced and under 3 years old. The agency is in effect the employer and it will be on their heads to do further risk assessments and hopefully another CRB check but in the interim the employer would allow the agency staff to start work at the school
there are some councils who will not have any engineers on site unless the council has processed the CRB in effect restricting emplyment to a waiting time of possibly 4-8 weeks or someone who has worked through the council before on one of their CRB's
i think given the CRB is in effect obsolute the day after it is cleared the ISA check which is updated as soon as any child protection issues are flagged up will give schools a better sense of security than the current method is what I am trying to get at with that statement