Change the Record

What is Change the Record?

Change the Record is a new campaign from Nacro, the crime reduction charity, to help ex-offenders back to work by tackling discriminatory practice and laws that prevent them finding a job. The campaign focuses on amending the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974.

What is the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act?

The 1974 Rehabilitation of Offenders Act was an important piece of legislation, designed originally to help people with criminal convictions move on from their past.

The act allows people to stop declaring a past conviction to potential employers (except for jobs working with children, vulnerable adults or in some legal or financial positions) after a set period of time. This means the conviction has become ‘spent’.

However, since the law was passed in 1974 the world has changed. Sentence inflation means that people are now getting longer sentences for the same offences, which means it takes longer for that offence to become spent.

Because employers are so reluctant to employ people who they know have a criminal record, it greatly reduces the chances of ex-offenders finding employment.

Why should it be changed?

The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act is widely accepted to be out of date. It discriminates against ex-offenders and is compounded by CRB checks which are often used unlawfully to expose spent crimes or non-disclosure where people have been to worried to admit their past.

A Government Review of the act published in 2002 stated: “There are no winners…not those with a criminal record denied the opportunity to put their past behind them. Not employers who lose out on committed and conscientious employees, and on resources and skills that otherwise may not be on offer. And certainly not our communities, because denying employment opportunities to people with a criminal record increases the risks of re-offending.”

The problems are:

  • People who have committed offences, usually minor ones, are put off from applying for jobs because they feel they will be rejected if they admit their unspent records
  • The amount of time it takes for a record to be spent is disproportionate
  • ‘Sentence inflation’ means that sentences are getting longer and as a result more people are having to wait longer before their offences are spent

How does this impact on the general public?

The act doesn’t just affect ex-offenders. The current legislation also has a negative impact on wider society.

This is because:

  • Employment offers the strongest protection against reoffending. Reform will reduce reoffending creating a safer society for everyone.
  • One in four people in the working population have a criminal record[i], so the costs of their exclusion from work are substantial.
  • There are no winners: employers and employees alike lose out.

How should it be changed?

The Change the Record campaign launched a detailed report at the House of Commons on 13 September 2010 making the case for the act to be amended.

Put simply, we would like to see the length of time it takes for a conviction to become spent to be reduced, so that it is proportionate to the crime committed and brings us into line with the rest of Europe.

What have criminal records bureau (CRB) checks got to do with Change the Record?

In theory, CRB checks are carried out for posts where people are working in an unsupervised capacity with children or vulnerable adults. Some other posts including some legal, financial and national security roles.

CRB checks means that the employer has access to an applicants records including spent records. The trouble is that CRB checks are so widespread, that the principle of the ROA – which is that people who have committed offences can reform and after a while should be given a second chance – is undermined. Nacro has come across examples of CRB checks being carried out on dog walkers, administrators, plasterers, car park attendants and many others.

Very often, when a CRB check discloses a spent offence, the applicant is rejected. This undoes the principle of rehabilitation.

So many reformed offenders are finding it increasingly difficult to find work because of the growth of CRB checks.

Between 2002-2009, 19m CRB checks were carried out.

The most commonly disclosed offences were for shoplifting and driving offences that didn’t result in third party injury. These are offences that most people grow out of.

  • 75% of employers would treat a candidate with a criminal record less favourably. One in seven said they would reject any applicant with a criminal record, whatever the offence.
  • Half of male offenders and three quarters of female offenders have just one conviction. 55% of men and 80% of women have an offending history of under one year.
  • By the age of 25 43% of men who have been offenders are classified as ‘desistors’ meaning that they have not offended for five years.

This information was provided by NacroChange the Record Campaign.

 

One Response to Change the Record

  1. Mark says:

    I was given a custodial sentence of three and a half years in april 2003 for being present when some of my mates committed a street robbery, the sentence was later reduced to 18 months by the court of appeal who based their decision on the fact I didn’t play an active role in the robbery. If I was not fortunate enough to have my sentence reduced it would never become spent meaning I would always have to disclose my conviction when asked and have it show up on a CRB check for life. In some instances if not all this in my opinion can be too harsh because its preventing ex offenders from ever being employed. The current government does little to ensure ex offenders receive help against re-offending and help in finding employment, instead it seems to be content with ex offenders signing on for the rest of their lives or going back to prison. What the government does not understand is that those in this situation have their whole future destroyed because of one or two mistakes basically they go into prison serve their time, come out and continue to be punished for the rest of their life’s. Those who have not experienced this type of hardship would probably feel its right to have such harsh measures in place but what they cant see is that these measures are damaging society.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>