A Government blacklist of nurses and care workers deemed unfit to work with children and vulnerable adults has been ruled unfair by the House of Lords. The Royal College of Nursing has campaigned to end the provisional list - nurses put on the list are immediately banned from working with children or vulnerable adults without …
A ban is bad enough without deafening them as well!
I'm so sorry.
It will go underground, into whispering campaigns
If the list exists, whether they can legally use it or not, it will become used by a whispering campaign. You can't have a list that spreads potentially false accusations on a 'no smoke with fire' basis.
'no smoke without fire' has no place in government.
So the list has to treated as the slander it is.
Well done to the Law Lords. As a general principle, any adverse quasi-judicial process like the "black-listing" of individuals which has a major impact on the ability of a person to live a normal life should be subject to appropriate safeguards. Some of the decisions made can have extremely far reaching effects comparable in impact to court decisions. I realise that some of the issues will involve security or confidential information, but the operation of systems based on "intelligence" alone under the opaque cloud of some government agency or other is a recipe for injustice. Subject to appropriate safeguards the processes involved should be as transparent as possible - at least to the individual concerned.
Good - common sense prevails
Excellent. This sort of nonsense should be severely trampled on. All that matters is:
1. Has the person in question being found guilty of a criminal offence that has a relevant bearing on the work they do.
2. Has the person in question been severely reprimanded for a work related offence that may have a bearing on the work that they do.
Opinion or suspicion is irrelevant and unsubstantiated...nothing more than malicious gossip or rumour at best.
Does this mean . . .
. . . that eCRB checks are also unlawful, given that they can be used to ban someone from working based on an assertion, not on trial evidence.
Similarly, no-one should be on the Sex Offenders register without having gone to trial, since they have no right of appeal.
Who thinks this type of list is OK
And how do we get THEM on the list they can't get off of or even know they're on or have NO right to appeal. Where's that handbasket again...
Another shining example
This is just another manifestation of a Government policy to remove all elements of fairness and responsibility from any legal process. Who knows, maybe soon we'll see more legal reforms to finally get rid of any pretence of the need to emphatically prove the guilt of a person.
.... they'll also do something about the nonsense in the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act which allows someone to be blacklisted for "conduct involving sexually explicit images depicting violence against human beings (including possession of such images), if it appears to IBB [the Independant Barring Board] that the conduct is inappropriate"
Presumption of innocence until guilt is proven? Sweaty Gordon and his minions will have no truck with this one rearing its ugly head again after they've gone to so much trouble to stamp it into the ground. I foresee a legislative change in the near future (and a few Law Lords getting their P45s).
@ Graham Marsden
That word "inappropriate" is one of the worst of weasel words, nearly devoid of any meaning except "I don't like you."
When I was working I used to have regular run-ins with my sociopathic bosses, and "inappropriate" was often the justification they used for giving me the gears. As a result, I am very sensitive to the use of bullshit like it. The voice of experience -- with scars to prove it.
For those in similar situations, a useful comeback is "Where does it say that? Or is this just something else you've made up on the spur of the moment?"
Spare me "inappropriate".
Carry on Nurse!
A list of naughty nurses!
wink wink, say no more....
Having worked in this environment for 30 years in Oz, this is a great move. It hasn't happened to me but I watched as a fellow worker was dispensed with without pay for 2 weeks & without any voice when the likelihood of any wrongdoing was somewhere in the nether regions. Good on Lords for having the awareness of the unfairness of these decisions. Now it needs to be replicated here in Oz.
- Xmas Round-up Ten top tech toys to interface with a techie’s Christmas stocking
- Xmas Round-up Ghosts of Christmas Past: Ten tech treats from yesteryear
- Google embiggens its fat vid pipe Chromecast with TEN new supported apps
- Exploits no more! Firefox 26 blocks all Java plugins by default
- Review Hey Linux newbie: If you've never had a taste, try perfect Petra ... mmm, smells like Mint 16