Taxi Driver Online

I see there is a debate currently taking place about indecent exposure in relation to relieving oneself in a place other than at a designated public toilet. Here is an interesting article from the year 2000 regarding the type of offences some councils would allow for prospective employees. Some may see a disparity in what is allowed in this article and the misdemeanours carried out by some cab drivers that has resulted in the revocation or suspension of their license?
................................................................

DAILY MAIL (London)

January 12, 2000

HEADLINE: How pests can slip social services net

By STEVE DOUGHTY Social Affairs Correspondent SOCIAL services chiefs are still willing to hire sex offenders to work with children, according to research published yesterday.

Put to the test by academic Joanne Smith, the majority of local authorities said they would employ family social workers who had criminal records for indecent exposure, violent assault or burglary.

Most alarmingly, six social services departments were even ready to offer a man with a conviction for indecently assaulting a child a job with children.

Miss Smith, a senior lecturer in social work at the University of Plymouth, asked 118 social services departments from almost every council in England and Wales how they would treat job applications from ten fictitious candidates for jobs as child and family social workers.

She provided full CVs and included details of their supposed criminal records. One hundred of the departments said they would hire, as a social worker, someone who had been convicted of house burglary.

And 87 said they would give the job to a man convicted of indecent exposure Miss Smith's pretend candidate was said to have been arrested for urinating in a public place more than 20 years ago.

Another 100 said they would employ a man with a conviction for actual bodily harm.

Some 115 of the 118 councils were prepared to give a social workers' job to someone with a conviction for possession of cannabis.

The study showed 84 would employ someone convicted of burglary connected with an animal rights protest while only 67 would give a job to a candidate with a drink-drive conviction. Some 64 councils would hire a woman with shoplifting convictions but only 38 would employ a social worker who had a conviction for fiddling expenses.

Hugh McKinney of the National Family Campaign said: 'These are staggering findings and there must now be an investigation into what is going on by the Health Minister.

Miss Smith said: 'This is a worrying conclusion, and one which deserves immediate attention from both Government and social services.'
......................................................

A list of councils would be nice, aint had a row with ours for a month or so!
Gotta keep em on their toe's