The existence of a criminal conviction may prevent a staff member from continuing to perform the duties of their current role.
This procedure applies to all staff employed by the University regardless of their role duration or contract type. This procedure applies irrespective of how the University becomes aware of a staff member’s criminal convictions and therefore include self-disclosure by the staff member, DBS checks, information in the media and/or a search of the DBS barred lists.
All staff are required to disclose criminal convictions acquired during employment at the University which may be relevant to their position or that relate to violence, assault, or damage to property. Disclosure should be made confidentially to the line manager who will consider the effect of the offence on the employee’s post as outlined in this procedure.
Examples of convictions relevant to positions include a driving offence for a role requiring driving; theft or fraud for a Finance position; and convictions relating to vulnerable groups if working in regulated activity. Disclosures relating to vulnerable groups will be referred to a University of Bristol Safeguarding contact who will consider whether a referral to the DBS is necessary.
The University must assess whether it is appropriate to permit a staff member with an unspent conviction to continue in their current role. In circumstances where an individual is working in a role which involves regulated activity or in a position which is listed in the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act (Exceptions) Order 1975 or the Police Act Regulations, the University conducts DBS checks every three years to confirm the staff member’s status in relation to their role. It is a criminal offence for an organisation to allow a barred individual to work in regulated activity.
We will follow this procedure if we find out that a staff member has been convicted of a criminal offence after starting in role.
In all cases of unspent convictions the staff member will be referred to the Appropriate Manager (usually their line manager or head of section) to investigate, with support from their HR Business Partner. We will contact the individual to ask for information from other sources, such as the Probation Service. Alternatively, we might ask the individual to provide information themselves.
We will consider whether the conviction amounts to misconduct and what further action, if any, needs to be taken.
We will consider whether the offence(s) would make it inappropriate for the staff member to continue to undertake the duties of their role.
If the Appropriate Manager, supported by their HR Business Partner, considers it appropriate not to take any further action, we will write to the staff member to let them know the outcome.
If the Appropriate Manager, supported by their HR Business Partner, considers the conviction amounts to misconduct the relevant ordinance procedure will be followed.
In all cases of unspent convictions the staff member will be referred to the Appropriate Manager (usually their line manager or Head of section) to investigate, with support from their HR Business Partner. We will contact the individual asking for information from other sources, such as the Probation Service. Alternatively, we might ask the individual to provide information themselves.
We will consider whether the offence(s) would make it inappropriate for the staff member to continue to undertake the duties of their role.
If the Appropriate Manager, supported by their HR Business Partner, considers it appropriate not to take any further action, we will write to the staff member to let them know the outcome.
If the Appropriate Manager, supported by their HR Business Partner considers that the offence(s) may make it inappropriate for the staff member to continue in role the individual will be suspended pending a case investigation. We will write to the individual to let them know about the investigation, outlining the issue and inviting them to attend a case meeting.
We will consider:
If, having followed these procedures, the Appropriate Manager, supported by their HR Business Partner, considers it appropriate not to take any further action they should also consider any specific changes in conditions that may need to be attached to the outcome, for example, limits or changes to duties to enable the staff member to continue to undertake the role. We will write to the staff member to let them know the outcome.
If the Appropriate Manager, supported by their HR Business Partner, considers that it is not appropriate for the individual to continue in their current role, but they may be able work in an alternative, non-regulated role, the staff member will be served notice for ‘Some other substantial reason.’ The individual can join the University’s Redeployment Pool for the duration of their notice period.
If the Appropriate Manager, supported by their HR Business Partner, considers that it is not appropriate for the individual to undertake any role at the University, the staff member will be served notice for ‘Some other substantial reason’. The individual will not be placed in the University’s Redeployment Pool and their notice letter will confirm why redeployment is unsuitable.
If the conviction(s) place the individual on the DBS barred list, the Appropriate Manager, supported by their HR Business Partner, may consider summary dismissal for the reason ‘Statutory barring.’
If the circumstances in which the conviction was discovered constitute a fundamental breach of trust, the Appropriate Manager, supported by their HR Business Partner, may consider summary dismissal for the reason ‘Breach of trust and confidence.’
For more information and advice about using this procedure, contact your HR Business Partner or the HR Resourcing Manager.
