A jobseeker with convictions from childhood has won a court case against an employer who has been deemed to have prying too deeply into their past private life, winning the case because it was seen as a Human Rights breach.
The jobseeker in question, who was applying for work in a care home, was denied employment after a disclosure highlighted criminal offences committed when he was 14-years-old.These offences were described as “lewd and libidinous”.
Whilst criminal disclosures, such as DBS checks, might seem mandatory for jobseekers, especially those working with vulnerable people, a ruling judge deemed that, in this case, it was “unlawful” – Scottish Legal reports.
Lord Pentland, the deliberating judge on this matter, cited Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights, which sets out that “everyone has the right to respect for his [or her] private and family life, home and correspondence”, in his ruling. He believed the disclosure to be an “interference” with the applicant’s rights under this Article.
Concluding, Pentland said: “In summary, there was no consideration given to whether the deemed conviction had any rational connection to the aim of protecting vulnerable adults in a care home environment.” Revelations of past convictions and overly-nosy recruiters are not the only reasons stopping applicants from obtaining their desired employment.
Qualified Deck Officer Sophia Walker was once told by an interviewer she’d be “better off working on a cruise” ship when applying for a job as a deck hand, Walker believes sexism was the reason she failed to get the job, whilst Paul Fennel, who was once a £35,000-a-year telecoms managers, believes that his current inability to find work is down to ageist employers.
For guidance & advice from a UK leading specialist in Employment law, HR and Health and Safety Services, please contact HPC.
For a full article on this issue please click the link here to the HR Grape vine website: https://www.hrgrapevine.com/content/article/news-2017-03-24-convicted-jobseeker-wins-humans-right-case-against-employerHR