CRB Checks (was: Trade,Ratty is it worth it)

[lawrenson]

Hi,

out of interest - and I know nothing about this area - if you have "volunteers" looking after a kids sports session or something, do they have to be vetted by the police?
I just know there have been a lot of changes in the law in this area over the last few years.

Some (non-gaming) Conventions have a Family Day (usually the Sunday), when 2 adults + 2 kids can get in cheap, and some more child friendly activities tend to run.

Cheers,
Karen
House Atreides

[JennImpey]

Hi,

out of interest - and I know nothing about this area - if you have "volunteers" looking after a kids sports session or something, do they have to be vetted by the police?
I just know there have been a lot of changes in the law in this area over the last few years.

Cheers,
Karen
House Atreides

My understanding is :

If the parents are present then there need to be no special requirements.

If the parents are not present then the person 'in charge' needs to be CRB checked, and they are not to leave the children alone with any other person. If the lead person is CRB checked and any other volunteers are no alone with the kids they do not need to be CRB'd.

Most, if not all, coaches / other children's entertainers will be CRB checked already, because it means people will employ them so if we were to look at a sports or music session with a professional person then this wouldn't be an issue. If we were to have a volunteer led session we'd need to ask to see the paperwork.

There is a lot of confusion as to whether CRB checks are applicable to more than one situation (ie if you're checked for a church group do you need to be re-checked for a scout pack?), but I hope that isn't the case for something like this as CRB's are expensive (mine was £50 + two years ago).

I think this could be very important, and may limit whether we have any 'parents leave them' activities, anyone know where we can find the exact wording / legislation / guidelines or whatever?

As an aside, are the members of this forum still happy to have this whole discussion on this thread, or should we move it to a more sensibly titled thread so those not already involved will have a clue what it about without trawling through back posts?

[darrell]

If they have sole responsibility for the kids then they have to be CRB checked. If they are there to run activities, but the children's parents have to be there at all times, then they don't.

(That's the simplified version.)

[w00hoo]

There is a lot of confusion as to whether CRB checks are applicable to more than one situation (ie if you're checked for a church group do you need to be re-checked for a scout pack?), but I hope that isn't the case for something like this as CRB's are expensive (mine was £50 + two years ago).

You & Yours (I believe, could have been the law program they do) did some stuff on this on Radio 4 a couple of weeks ago and one of the interesting facts that came up was that a charity didn't have to pay for a CRB check to be done, only a business, and even then the department makes a decent profit by the end of the year. I don't know if any of the Cons are registered as charities (or whether merely being a non-profit organisation would be sufficient) but there is definitely the need to research things properly on that front. Apparently a lot of places get checks undertaken because they think they probably need one and not because they actually do and even then there are cases of people getting flags returned on their test which sees them denied jobs without further exploration, the quoted case was a teacher who was flagged for 'being a lot like someone else who was on the sex offenders register' and lost her job for it despite not actually being that person...

[dpmcalister]

There is a lot of confusion as to whether CRB checks are applicable to more than one situation (ie if you're checked for a church group do you need to be re-checked for a scout pack?), but I hope that isn't the case for something like this as CRB's are expensive (mine was £50 + two years ago).

My wife has 2 CRB checks in place at the moment. One for the local Brownies/Guides and the other for work (because she does school visits with the RAF). She got the RAF one first, but the Brownies said she needed one specifically for them so... (it could just be the Brownies making doubly sure so don't take this as gospel).

[w00hoo]

There is a lot of confusion as to whether CRB checks are applicable to more than one situation (ie if you're checked for a church group do you need to be re-checked for a scout pack?), but I hope that isn't the case for something like this as CRB's are expensive (mine was £50 + two years ago).

My wife has 2 CRB checks in place at the moment. One for the local Brownies/Guides and the other for work (because she does school visits with the RAF). She got the RAF one first, but the Brownies said she needed one specifically for them so... (it could just be the Brownies making doubly sure so don't take this as gospel).

It would appear that it's mainly about covering your own back and fear of reprisals. My wife has something like 4 current CRB checks (two different schools she works for, Guides and PADI IIRC) because none of them will take the risk on accepting the check another place has commissioned. It is often quoted as being an 'MoT' equivalence, so fine for yesterday but doesn't mean you didn't just do something bad today. Some places are perfectly happy for you to have any valid CRB. I think it is one of those subjects that actually very few people know the complete facts about.

[Greentop]

Jen
There is a lot of confusion as to whether CRB checks are applicable to more than one situation (ie if you're checked for a church group do you need to be re-checked for a scout pack?), but I hope that isn't the case for something like this as CRB's are expensive (mine was £50 + two years ago).

First off Welcome to the Boards Jen

Next as far as I am aware, in the case above, then yes that individual would have to be checked for a second time. For example
if you were involved in a church group as youth leader in Lancashire you would have to be checked, if you moved to Yorkshire and did the same role you would need to be checked again. So if you then wanted to assist HE in a similar role you would need to CRB checked for each location that they use

[w00hoo]

Jen
There is a lot of confusion as to whether CRB checks are applicable to more than one situation (ie if you're checked for a church group do you need to be re-checked for a scout pack?), but I hope that isn't the case for something like this as CRB's are expensive (mine was £50 + two years ago).

First off Welcome to the Boards Jen

Next as far as I am aware, in the case above, then yes that individual would have to be checked for a second time. For example
if you were involved in a church group as youth leader in Lancashire you would have to be checked, if you moved to Yorkshire and did the same role you would need to be checked again. So if you then wanted to assist HE in a similar role you would need to CRB checked for each location that they use

Surely you are rechecked because you move diocese and so your 'employer' changes. It's not like they only check if you've been bad for a small area of the country. Equally are you suggesting that a school inspector would need to be CRB'd for every school that they went to?!?

[Greentop]

WooHoo

That is the impression I get, it maybe that it is Job specific. Like your good lady.
Are both schools under the same education board/council?? If they are then the CRB is Job specific not by County/District etc ?

This is my impression, but if tghis is to be applied to HE then they need to do a serious amount of research to ensure the legislation is covered

[Phil Masters]

I think this could be very important, and may limit whether we have any 'parents leave them' activities, anyone know where we can find the exact wording / legislation / guidelines or whatever?

Well, the Protection of Children Act 1999 (the relevant law) is available online at http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS/acts1999/uk ... 90014_en_1 - but that of course is solid legalese. Still, anyone who wants to wade through it can do so.

There's an irritating lack of clear explanations of the law anywhere online that I could find with five minutes on Google, though. http://publications.teachernet.gov.uk/e ... d/PoCA.doc is the best I could see, but that isn't saying much. I can't even find a firm legal age definition of "children" anywhere, though mostly it seems to mean "under 16". This is slightly worrying for conventions, if you ask me; if anyone who's going to GM a game with a couple of 15-year-olds signed up while their parents are out of the room technically needs a CRB check, a lot of cons are potentially stuffed. Events I've seen running creches for small kids have generally had them handled by well-clued-in professional nursery nurses, but the law may be just as strict in theory for young teens...

Also, incidentally, the CRB thing might only be half the issue. Conventions also need liability insurance, and insurance companies can be terribly picky about the small print.

Oh, and the cons I've been involved with have been set up as non-profit organisations, but not charities.

[StuartBall]

It's organisation specific, so that would cover companies, charities etc.

If you did work for another organisation you would need to be checked for them, so if Organisers A of Con A checked its staff, Organisers B would need to check the same people for Con B, But Con C from Organisers A would not need to check again, unless it had expired.

IANAL, however as I understand it:
It would be better for an umbrella organisation, the RPGA for example, to get its convention GMs checked, it could then supply those GMs to the convention A if Organisers of Con A were willing to accept the RPGA has performed due diligence, and legal documents in place to protect both parties in the event it goes titsup.

That to me makes the most sense and reduce costs to conventions across the board, some sort of GM Guild...

Of course this means that delegate organised that are run by gms not part of any organisation, are a risk/liability that needs mitigation, whether that is through managing where they can happen, or what I don't know. But it is still a risk.

The other problem is if people do not feel they should be checked on the offchance, as it can be a very intrusive process. You could end up with a serious shortage of volunteer staff, if you get the wrong marketing pitch.

Pip Pip Onk Onk

Stuart

[w00hoo]

That's what I mean, the whole thing is quite complicated and a bit of a grey area. Then the department responsible for it all complains when people are asking for checks they don't need, or are refusing to employ people for 'failing' a check when all they actually got was a flag that a little more investigation was needed.

If you get too paranoid about it you would just stop running conventions. The insurance one is a biggie too, I don't know if anyone really has a solid answer for it. I think most groups either do nothing, or do what they hope will be sufficient and then cross fingers that it doesn't actually get acted upon. For CRB's, as you say, what age is legally a child? There's also suggestion that it needs to be used for working with anyone who is possibly at risk, the elderly for instance, not just children. Would everyone running a game in one room require a check, or just one person? I think it could all be taken far too far in the name of 'security' when what is really called for is common sense.

[DigitalMage]

Quick question - why are some people assuming the GM must be CRB checked?

As a GM I take on some more responsibility for the game, but I don't agree to take on any other responsibility, e.g. for the safety of the other players. In essence if we were playing Monopoly I would just be the person who brought the game to the table and opted to be banker.

So how does the law determine who needs to be CRB checked? It isn't feasible to have all players at the table CRB checked, and as the GM is just another player in the game, does anyone need to be CRB checked?

Is it enough to have one person at the game table CRB checked rather than it specifically being the GM? If so, then does it then mean that a CRB checked person just has to have visibility of the area in which minors are playing? If so could a CRB checked member of the con organisers be sufficient to "monitor" a gaming room?

Of course if a GM is being rewarded for GMing it could be argued he is "working" with the minors and as such does need to be CRBed. However volunteers are just that - the rewards aren't equivalent to minimum wage and thus the person is not officially an employee they are categorised as volunteers. What is the legal standpoint around this? If giving rewards does mean a CRB check is required - shoudl rewards be scrapped?

[w00hoo]

Quick question - why are some people assuming the GM must be CRB checked?

Good point, and one that would probably have come up a lot quicker if we were on, say, The Forge I reckon...

The actual requirement would need to be checked because it's possible that the only people who need to be CRB checked, if anyone does, are the Con organisors as they are the only ones potentially 'working' with risk cases.

It's the classic, if I leave my kid with his uncle then that's fine. If his uncle becomes a recognised carer, then he can only have my kid with a valid CRB.

The classic view, and probably the argued view if this was ever in a court of law (and not just laughed out by the judge the minute it arrived) would be that the GM is 'in charge' because they are the GM. That's that. But there is no reason at all for that to be the case. If you were gaming in a shop and the owner of the shop was a player, the GM wouldn't become responsible for what happened in the shop, would they? Also, starting with the argument 'the GM is God' could lead to questions of meglomania a long time before it anything else.

Finally, like the GM would have time to do anything that could be perceived as wrong. They'll be far to busy trying to herd the cats that are their players!

[Phil Masters]

Quick question - why are some people assuming the GM must be CRB checked?

Personally I'm not.

As has been pointed out, GenCon and plenty of other cons already have kids of various ages coming in. I assume that, in practise, this doesn't raise any protection issues because gaming areas are, more or less, public spaces; leaving a sensible 13-year-old on their own in a game is no more significant than leaving them on their own in a shop or a public park - and no one says that shop assistants have to be CRB-cleared. I guess that a cautious con should avoid having games specifically aimed at children run in closed rooms, but beyond that, well, no worries.

But this is a reason why advertising a con as "family-friendly", let alone "child-friendly", might actually be a bad idea. It may be interpreted by some parents as "you can leave your 10-year-old alone here for the day". And the first time that one of those parents notices that one of the GMs is an (actually perfectly harmless and really very pleasant) gamer-shaped ageing death metal fan with the straggly beard and T-shirt to prove it, and starts asking questions, well, things start going south at speed.