[djsumdog]

Readers from other countries, what is it like there?

I remember when I lived in Australia, my friends told me that many crimes do not show up on background checks after 5 years. Also in Australia, the sex offender registry is confidential, and can only be checked for very specific things (jobs involving children, certain types of housing, etc.)

In the US, there are ways of getting records expunged for some crimes, but due to freedom of speech laws/1st amendment, typically background check companies are free to hold on to older records if they were at one time public.

I know in the EU, many countries have right to be forgotten laws, but the EFF has historically stood against them due to the fact they've often been used by wealthy individuals to hide their crimes.

[chmod775]

> I know in the EU, many countries have right to be forgotten laws

These are not even really relevant, since in most places it's considered unethical or even illegal for journalists (or anyone really) to publish names of suspects or convicted common* criminals. You will generally read "Man/Woman convicted for X" and sometimes just their first name.

This is a consequence of systems that mostly focus on rehabilitation and reintegration. Having your name show up in newspaper articles would seriously hinder that.

If your main focus was punishment instead, then publishing the names of criminals just goes well with that.

And finally you can't just ask to see the criminal history of X, and it would be illegal to discriminate based on such knowledge if it is not relevant to the job. In Germany only yourself can obtain your own criminal record (Führungszeugnis) - your employer can't obtain it directly. It's generally thought to be illegal for an employer to ask you for this (it was never tested in court though, because nobody was stupid enough to try). The only exception are if you will be working with minors or if it's specifically relevant to your job (compliance officers, financial stuff...).

*If you are a high-profile individual you are fair game. For instance the Wirecard CEO and COO.

[anttisalmela]

Here in .fi employers are not permitted to do any background checks - all they can legally use is the information provided by the applicant. They can ask permission to request security clearance from the Finnish Security and Intelligence Service (Supo), which would then do the background checks, but this is allowed for only some jobs.

Working with children may require that you provide extract from the criminal record, but only certain crimes (violence, child abuse, sex offences, drug offences, human trafficking etc.) are considered.

[polytely]

Here in the Netherlands some jobs require you to submit a Certificate of Conduct. It's a document you can request from the Ministry of Justice and Security that declares that you have not been convicted for any crime relevant to the job you request the declaration for.

I have never really thought about it that deeply but it seems like a decent way of doing things. I really like that your employer can't just look it up.

[beachy]

In New Zealand, your criminal record consists of solely those crimes you have been convicted of in court, and is automatically clean slated if you have gone >7 years without an offence (unless you have been convicted of a serious crime in which case it's on your record for life). In fact it is an offence for most employers to ask for your full (non-clean-slated record.

We also have a system known as police vetting, which is a far more intrusive background check, and includes not just actual convictions but also mere encounters with the police, warnings, etc. Police vetting can only be requested for roles that involve working with vulnerable adults or children.

In all cases the candidate must (a) consent, and (b) be supplied with a copy of the results. Overall I think this is a good system though there are some areas for improvement.

[AdrianB1]

It depends on the job, for some jobs employers are required to ask you for a clean police report; if you don't have criminal records you can get it, if you have something then you either don't apply or they will have to disqualify you for missing that clean record proof from the police.

Some examples that I know personally: sports club gun trainer (precision shooting is an Olympic game); policeman; any job as security guard, driver on armored cars that carry money from banks etc.

I think for cashiers there is a similar requirement, not 100% sure. It was ~ 20 years ago, but laws change from time to time.

Not so funny is when I had to go to the police section, take such a "clean bill of criminal record" from one office and give it to another policemen at the next office 5 meters away. It was the third time that month because I needed some certificate that had cascaded requirements to have other certificates that also depended on this bills and each required a separate bill in the list of documents.

[Kosirich]

Croatia - it's common to ask a person applying for a position a proof issued my Ministry of Justice that they don't have an active criminal case against them but some will ask for an equivalen of background check from the Ministry of Internal Affairs ("police")

Denmark - I have a friend who was asked to provide something like a proof of not being prosecuted for a an engineering position, while another colleague who applied and for the same position wasn't asked for one. The difference between the two was the country they were from with, I'm guessing, appearance of the former one playing a role. The guy looks like a bouncer with his 1.90 height, 100 kg of muscle and a crooked nose from being an ex amateur boxer (under the appearance he is a teddy bear).

[Ichthypresbyter]

In the UK, it's changed recently because of a Supreme Court ruling, but AFAIK there are various levels of check depending on the specific job. In most cases a conviction for which the person was sentenced to less than 4 years in prison will eventually become 'spent' and won't show up on background checks apart from for specific jobs (such as working with children). Even for those jobs, some minor convictions are 'filtered' and removed from the record.

[voxic11]

> typically background check companies are free to hold on to older records if they were at one time public.

That is true, but it is however often illegal for employers to base a hiring or firing decision on expunged records. So background check companies do generally try to comply with record expungement as it protects their customers from liability. However due to the complexity and variety of laws on expungement and lack of direct consequences for them they frequently fail at it.

[seer]

In Bulgaria (EU) they often ask you to provide proof that you are currently not being prosecuted, but apart from that, the only time I’ve been asked to get a criminal record was when applying for a citizenship. And having one is not something that would stop the process, but can be grounds for denial.

Programmers can get a free pass for a lot of things here though.

[Justen]

Just curious how you would typically prove you aren't being prosecuted.

[seer]

Go to the police station and ask them to give you a “note”

Fun fact is that you need this note even if your dealing with another government agency.

When applying for Bulgarian citizenship, I was required to obtain such note. I would have guessed that they have more reliable ways of telling if someone actually is in an active police case, but no, they want that “note”. No web service to actually do this. I mean they could have just called the police department or something... I had to spend a good part of a day waiting there just to get it... </rant>

[filoleg]

Just a guess on my end: probably fill out some form at a local police station or court, submit it, and then they you receive the results later that list what you are being prosecuted for or a lack thereof.

[Const-me]

Not from BG, but my guess is you go to a police station where you live, show your ID and ask them to print and sign a paper that says so.

[ciberado]

I worked in the finantial industry 20 years ago in Andorra, a small independent country between France and Spain. You needed to present what in Spanish is called a "certificado de penales" (criminal certificate, I think is the expression in English).

Ironically, the country itself was at that time well-known for its opaque finantial practices.

[sbmthakur]

In India, it's like the US. There are dedicated firms which do that. I am not sure if it's a legal requirement.

[justatdotin]

my (aussie) hobbies include sabotage (mostly trespass and refuse to obey, but also a bit of criminal damage) - never been an issue finding the kind of (software) work I prefer. Corporate employers say they do a check: maybe they don't. I assume they google, so I guess they don't care.

obviously I don't pursue jobs that require a clearance level. I once got in an exchange with a recruiter:

"do you have [clearance]?"

"I wouldn't want to work anywhere that requires it"

"Oh, you wouldn't be able to work here without it"

"No, I wouldn't want to work with you if you require it"

"No, you wouldn't be able to work here without it"

...

- I guess we were both rite.

[JackFr]

> due to the fact they've often been used by wealthy individuals to hide their crimes.

due to the fact they've often been used by [anyone who commits a crime] to hide their crimes.