|
|
|
Really sounds as if you're settling into this new jobbie very well!! I take my hat off to you since I think the bliss is making me completely unfit for gainful employment at all. Still, it's great that you've got more dosh and something that seems to suit you. It's the up and up! Hurrah! Hotboy
Anonymous |
09.10.09 - 7:28 am | #
|
|
"Though I'll never be houseproud, it's been years since the flat was so tidy."
I shall be bringing the white gloves, then.
David Traynier |
09.10.09 - 2:15 pm | #
|
|
Dear Ion,
I've just found your blog today, and spent a very enjoyable hour reading it - many thanks.
I couldn't find any recent updates on the 'Enhanced Disclosure' thread - was there ever a definite ending? I'm hoping I'm not in a similar position; mine was a minor theft conviction in 1990 [yes, totally dumb, don't I know and regret it!!!] which may or may not have been 'weeded' as per the guidelines in (I think) year 2000. The retention of your 1984 record suggests that it may not have been. Why am I not surprised!
Carry on the good work (and blog).
Kenneth |
09.11.09 - 2:10 pm | #
|
|
Sorry, I forgot to say that my record was (is??) with Sussex Police too.
Kenneth |
09.11.09 - 2:12 pm | #
|
|
Dear Ion, well done for attracting a genuine new reader, on a serious topic too!
Meanwhile, my colleague in the semiotics section, currently asleep in the next room, informs me that there is no such thing as objective truth, and so-called reality is simply the product of an ongoing process of negotiation an debate. No wonder nothing ever gets done in this house.
Your great-auntie's heuristic principle of "Mix 'em up, mix 'em up", is a cracker, and these days I subscribe to it, though the challenge in my case is to keep my motives ethical.
rob |
Homepage |
09.11.09 - 5:31 pm | #
|
|
Dear Kenneth, hello and welcome.
I didn't resolve my criminal record issues with Sussex Police, although I believe record-holding of my 1984 conviction for 22 years was unlawful, regardless that I had a second conviction in 2006. I disclosed my latter conviction to employers this year, since this wasn't expired under the Rehab of Offenders Act, and was employed nevertheless. A large section of the upstanding community does have criminal convictions, and employers have a legal duty to take the relevance and age of offence into consideration. In this we trust..
ion |
09.12.09 - 5:33 pm | #
|
|
Yous are all a bunch of convicts!! Thank god that I at least, being from the joyous proletarians, have no need to castigate myself over misdemeanours since I was only ever arrested three times and that because of total prejudice and religious bias! Hotboy
Anonymous |
09.14.09 - 5:33 am | #
|
|
Commenting by HaloScan
|