-
Being Outted by Police Child Protection checks
I’ve recently become aware that whenever we apply for employment which requires Police Child Protection checks, we’re being outted in that we must, by law, include all names we use – by the letter of the law this does include “part-time” girls too.
Because we’re outted to prospective employers, the potential, and anecdotal evidence suggests does in fact, is that our employment prospects are being compromised.
We need to write to out local state MPs, and members of the Upper House, demanding some solution be found.
This situation is forcing us to be outted on every occasion we seek employment.
WE. full-time, part-time, and closeted girls are the only people who will lobby on our behalf. Have a serious think about this
A carpenter working on a school building site – stimulus package, librarian, teachers, nurses, volunteer workers.
I once volunteer to monitor the school crossing when nobody else would. The Authority with controls this didn’t even bother acknowledging my application.
This has very wide reaching implications
-
27 Replies
-
I’ve been thinking about this one Christina, for a while in fact.
We do need to understand that in these recent times, (what with all the paedophile stuff etc. in the media) that the authorities do have to do a thorough job when running checks on people. The one fact that remains is that if anyone gets refused a position because of their transgender nature then there is a discrimination issue as we all know. Trouble is, it has to be proven as we all know as well which at times can be hard if not impossible.
The other thing to remember is that if they really want to, the authorities can find out through their own channels that we have become who we are now (in the case of someone who has transitioned, had SRS etc.) all because of the fact for starters to my knowledge that your tax file number remains the same even if you do change your name and birth certificate etc. It’s just a question of how hard they want to look. I’m not anywhere near being in this issue in life but I would (personally) find out where I stood before I got too involved anyhow but if you don’t have a criminal record etc. then what else can they do?
Peta A.
-
ATO are happy to change your gender with a GRS/SRS Cert and they will chnage your name with a change of name Cert
But as you say your histroy on their system must still be there.
xxx
Kelly Jones
-
Hi Christina, I have a current Blue Card And Disability card as Ella-Kristine …soo just need too show these too propective employer !! Cheers
-
I see I have not been clear in my articulation of what I see is the issue here. I have no problem with appropriate Police Criminal Record checks – one of those necessary intrusions for the protection of children – I have 3 children, and grandchildren; and a former brother-in-law convicted of molesting a niece (3 actually)
As happened when I volunteered to monitor a school crossing, someone at the RTA decided I shouldn’t be allowed to do this – for what reason? No police check was done. The School Principal, P&C, and other parents made no objection that I am aware of, and in fact were supportive.
With employment, we’re being forced to out ourselves to prospective employers. Why would someone who is well qualified and experienced be culled and denied even a first round interview. The gymnastics with words means it is virtually impossible to prove discrimination, and the complaint process would ensure we’re further outed, and also unfairly earn a reputation as “trouble maker” or “boat rocker”.
I believe the appropriate Child Protection checks could be undertaken at the time of name change, and some dispensation given from needing to out ourselves to prospective employers.
We then have THE BROADER ISSUE: part-time girls, infrequent cross dressers. If a nom de plume is used, the letter of the law requires all aliases be recorded when making a Child Protection check. For those of us who have formally changed our names, with effective lobbying of our politicians there can be a solution. For the rest of us, have I opened Pandora’s Box?
I believe this is a broad based community issue with far reaching implications. This is not about Police Child Protection checks. It’s about being compelled to out ourselves when seeking employment, offering to coach the local footy team, work in the school canteen, or help with a sausage sizzle run by the P&C.
Do you want all the boys on the building site knowing you’re a cross-dresser? For me, my current employer – every new employee, every new department I work in, they all know before ever meeting me. Just gossip, or violation of my privacy by Managers/Human Resources Dept?
Discuss. Thankyou for responding
-
Hi all.
As long as the name you give is your legal name you will have no problems (unless you have a conviction).
Privacy laws in Australia are really tight, in fact an employer is asked questions if he is trying to check on people other than the person(s) employed.
When the check returns it says either yes or no, that’s all.As a former employee of many i had to check all of my current staff to gain a contract to work at a high school.
It was a hassle and i had to explain in depth why.One of my best employees came back with a fail to his check and that’s all it said. He had informed me previously that he had been prosecuted for smacking his child at coles whilst standing in line and it just so happens he was standing in front of a government employee of child services.(trust me the kid is a wild one).
So at the end of the day if a non legal name is submitted it will come back unknown, if a legal name is submitted you will either pass or fail, if a fail is returned it will just say that.
Dont worry, nothing else is revealed, even bankruptcy is not.
Look carefully as most of the forms we fill out are only stat dec’s.
Maddy Sparks
Junior coach. -
Hi Maddy,
Thankyou for your input. The information and assurances you have given is important for us to know. However, the problem I’m raising isn’t about the Police Checks per se. This process compels us to out ourselves to a prospective employer. How the employer uses this information is the issue.
-
Hi Christina
Yep – transphobia sucks, and so does discrimination. I think this surely arises from lack of understanding or education. But I think that the government does recognise some of the short comings of its laws, processes and documentation (see the 2009 Australia Human Rights Commission report on The Sex and Gender Diversity Project): http://www.hreoc.gov.au/genderdiversity/sex_files2009.html
One of the ways we can change things is to lobby government (or join a political party – the Greens seem to be most sympathetic towards gender diverse issues), and also encourage dialogue with as many people as we can about our plight. In the report mentioned, the government (well, the Human Rights Commission, at least) does recognise the need for more education. But the education needs content and content is based on an understanding of our plight.
How we do this is quite dependent on how we define ourselves. How can we discuss our plight to someone who doesn’t understand anything, when we don’t even know how to describe ourselves? That is why the posts here about labels was important. Labels do have a very important role. If you want to say, they don’t apply to me, and life will go on, then that doesn’t help changing the world. That means life will go on, and transphobia will not abate, and discrimination will still happen, and “life going on” will be less enjoyable for us all.
This may not immediately overcome the real concerns that you have identified about the Police Checking process, but I think it is a start and one day, these things (and life) will be a lot easier for us.
Virginia xo
-
I found this info. from the NSW government so I thought that it might be prudent to put the link here for anyone who wants to have a look. It is to do with child potection checks both for employees and volunteers as well as employers.
https://check.kids.nsw.gov.au/index.php
Peta A.
-
Thanks for posting that, Peta.
I see that one of the statements to be declared is:
Quote:I have not omitted any names or aliases that I use or used in the past.So Christina is correct – even before the Police Check can be done, you need to disclose your previous name(s), including your male name if you have changed that.
-
Thank you Peta. This is all important information.
Again, I need to re-state. My post is not about the need for Police Checks. I am raising the issue of how an employer is able to use, or misuse, the information that we are transgendered – full or part-time
Reality is, girls are being refused interviews for employment for which they are well qualified and experienced, simply because their former name is listed on the Child Protection Check form – and this includes ALL part-time girls if they use a nom de plume, i.e. an alias.
I am not questioning the need for Police Child Protection checks. The situation is that the law as it presently stands is that we must OUT ourselves whenever we apply for any position which requires a Police Check.
Maddy has stated that as long as we give a legal name all is well. But we are still required to list ALL previous names and aliases, which the prospective employer reads, and then is supposed to forward to the appropriate checking athority. The law compels us to OUT ourselves.
As I have noted earlier, when I volunteered to monitor the school crossing, a Grade I clerk at the RTA rejected my application and no Police check was undertaken. No explanation was given. My application was not acknowledged.
Through 13 years of my son’s schooling – 7 years at the local Public School, and the next 6 at a private Seventh Dav Adventist School, where my son was honoured as School Captain, I was visible and a commited and involved parent. No child was traumatised. A (state) School Principal, who was unable to make even eye contact with me for the first 2 years, showed growth and became very cordial after seeing I was just another parent.
-
I think the above is the true description of the situation. My view is: If you have not changed your name legally, you do NOT have to list your other name. After all, if there is no legal evidence to support the other name, there will be no record of your other self at all. Other employers requiring police checks are major financial organisations, (Banks, Finance Co’s, Insurance Co’s), critical infrastructure organisations, (Integral Energy, Energy Australia) dependent upon your job requirements asset access/responsibility.
If you are concerned about this level, please bear a thought for prospective and current ASIO employees, ie; previous names, Previous and current relationships, when and how they started and ended, all previous addresses, all your current debts, any past bankrupcty or bad debts, any court judgements, when and where you went to school, your family. All this as well as the Police checks.
-
Well then girls, do I need to start a new thread or is there one already here that will suit?
The next part of this is that if (?) we are being faced with prospective employers not giving us a second look in because of our TG nature what can we do about it?
Virginia supplied a link here which is a good read too, I’ve even saved it to my hard drive for future reference (the web page that is) so have a read of it too. Like I said though, is there a previous thread or not? I’m interested in this quite a lot, I’ve got another 25 years to go before I retire and I don’t know what my future will bring just as much as the next person.
Maybe it’s time that we really did get active with our politicians or whoever and change things for the better? Let’s get the right thread and do this huh? Is anyone else up to it?
Peta A.
-
Does anyone know where I can find a sample of the forms or whatever that are needed to facilitate these checks? If I’m going to write letters to pollies and so on then I want to see what I’m up against.
Peta A.
Moderator
Quote:This thread is as good as any – go for it Peta! -
WOW, Hi there girls, I have been reading this from afar, well WA at least
)For those who know me I am one of the girls in blue, I may be able to put a little bit of clarity on it from a WA perspective and a little more over all perspective on the issue that Christina has raised.
Firstly, and as Maddy pointed out, if you have done nothing wrong in the past you have nothing to fear.
Secondly, when a check is done here in WA if the check comes thru clear then it simply says on the certificate No offences recorded, if you have been charged with serious offences (sex offences, murder etc) then it will list the offences, if you are awarded a spent convicion, that is where you have been charged found guilty but awarded a spent conviction, the conviction will not appear on the certificate.
Thirdly, I believe that this then places a moral and legal issue on the person requesting the certificate for keeping the information on that certificate secret as a chriminal history is not for private information but as you are giving permission for the information to be released it is for the purpose of employement only and the only person who should be seeing it is the HR director/manager and that then will incur its only privacy act / discrimination act offences should they breach that privacy.
Fourthly, I am led to believe that even if you list an alias name it will not list that name on a certificate only your application name, but I can check that out as well.
On a personal note I would not if I were CD I would not be putting my name down anywhere unless you have committed an offence under that name.
Its not an ideal world we live in but this is all we have and as Peta says it is up to us to change it if it needs changing but dont expect it to happen overnight.
There has been a private members bill here in WA dealing with a section of the Equal Opportunities Act pertaining to use of facilities that has been in progress since 1997!!!!!.
I know what I have said above is no cold comfort but we do live in a sick world, I was terrified when I got outed so I cn understand.
Hugs
Stef
-
I firmly agree with Christina’s concerns. Its been a concern of mine ever since I had to fill one of these out on behalf of my 16yo son last year when he volunteered to assist for a scouting jamboree.
I feel the document should not be seen by the employer although I do strongly agree with these type of police checks. The document should be sealed in a envelope by the applicant to be handed to the police to do their checks. The employer can then be notified by the authorities if there are any problems without going into detail. To me that be fairer.
I’m not very good at writing these letters but if someone can send me a draft I’d be happy to sign it and send it on.
