Financial services firms’ recruitment drops significantly in response to the turmoil in the markets.
London, December 24th, 2008. Employment offers across financial services companies fell by 20% in November compared to the previous month. IT contractors working in financial services fell by 75% for the corresponding period, according to research carried out by Powerchex Limited, a pre-employment screening firm for financial institutions.
Investment Banks continued to cut back significantly on their new hires with a 55% drop in employment offers from October to November. Hedge funds and stock broking firms registered similar drops in offers made and accepted. Insurance firms bucked the trend with an increase of 10% in offers made in the past month.
“Recruitment is the financial sector is taking an unsurprising hit as companies are contracting in response to dramatically changing circumstances.” says Alexandra Kelly, Managing Director of Powerchex. “Applicants will need to adjust their expectation and take a more structured approach in their job search. Even though the temptation is there, applicants should not risk losing a good opportunity by exaggerating their credentials.”
Wednesday 24 December 2008
Friday 19 December 2008
FSA Signals Tougher Vetting Requirements For Approved Persons Warns Pre-Employment Screening Company Powerchex
The credit crunch and bank bailouts have resulted in a global enhancement (and enforcement) of regulation. Pre-employment screening, especially in the financial services sector has also gotten a good deal of attention with new directives and guidance coming from different regulatory bodies.
______________________________________
The Financial Services Authority (FSA) has today published a consultation paper (CP) that clarifies the FSA’s expectations of those within firms that perform a ‘significant influence’ functions. The CP proposes several significant amendments to the FSA handbook.
In a move reminiscent of the Sarbanes Oxley legislation in the US, the FSA vows to pursue cases against individuals who breach the FSA’s Principles and the Code of Practice for Approved Persons.
“The FSA has made a strategic decision to investigate more individuals” says Alexandra Kelly, MD of City pre-employment screening company Powerchex, “they (the FSA) believe that this increased scrutiny will discourage questionable individuals from applying for significant management roles within the industry.”
The FSA has already started to interview more applicants for 'significant influence’ posts at high impact firms and is planning enforcement action if an individual is offered a post and subsequently fails to meet the required standards.
“This represents a significant change for financial firms. By introducing fines the FSA is sending a clear sign to companies that they should focus on undertaking proper due diligence.” claims Kelly. “As a further safeguard, firms should keep proper documentation of their vetting process in case they need to justify their decision on a particular applicant. They also need to be aware that this new process will introduce delays to the deployment of senior managers and plan accordingly.”
The other significant amendment proposes to extend the rule obliging firms to provide references for applicants of the CF30 (customer function) to all controlled functions if requested to do so.
“With this amendment the FSA is closing a gap in the referencing for approved persons” states Kelly. “There are no good reasons why the rule should not be extended to significant management functions, in fact, there are very good reasons why it should.
“It is critical, not just for the firm, but for market confidence that our major institutions are soundly run by individuals who have clearly demonstrated that they have the necessary skills, experience and integrity” states Graeme Ashley-Fenn, director of permissions, decisions and reporting division at the FSA. “Our vetting process is not intended to be a substitute for a firm undertaking proper due diligence itself – responsibility for this still lies with a firm’s senior management. These proposals align with a shift in FSA focus: where a significant influence holder shows incompetence or dishonesty, we will consider enforcement action against him or her.”
The consultation period closes on 31 March 2009. The FSA will then finalise the proposals and publish revised rules in a policy statement during the second quarter of 2009.
____________________
CP 08/25: The approved persons regime – significant influence function review can be found on the FSA website.
______________________________________
The Financial Services Authority (FSA) has today published a consultation paper (CP) that clarifies the FSA’s expectations of those within firms that perform a ‘significant influence’ functions. The CP proposes several significant amendments to the FSA handbook.
In a move reminiscent of the Sarbanes Oxley legislation in the US, the FSA vows to pursue cases against individuals who breach the FSA’s Principles and the Code of Practice for Approved Persons.
“The FSA has made a strategic decision to investigate more individuals” says Alexandra Kelly, MD of City pre-employment screening company Powerchex, “they (the FSA) believe that this increased scrutiny will discourage questionable individuals from applying for significant management roles within the industry.”
The FSA has already started to interview more applicants for 'significant influence’ posts at high impact firms and is planning enforcement action if an individual is offered a post and subsequently fails to meet the required standards.
“This represents a significant change for financial firms. By introducing fines the FSA is sending a clear sign to companies that they should focus on undertaking proper due diligence.” claims Kelly. “As a further safeguard, firms should keep proper documentation of their vetting process in case they need to justify their decision on a particular applicant. They also need to be aware that this new process will introduce delays to the deployment of senior managers and plan accordingly.”
The other significant amendment proposes to extend the rule obliging firms to provide references for applicants of the CF30 (customer function) to all controlled functions if requested to do so.
“With this amendment the FSA is closing a gap in the referencing for approved persons” states Kelly. “There are no good reasons why the rule should not be extended to significant management functions, in fact, there are very good reasons why it should.
“It is critical, not just for the firm, but for market confidence that our major institutions are soundly run by individuals who have clearly demonstrated that they have the necessary skills, experience and integrity” states Graeme Ashley-Fenn, director of permissions, decisions and reporting division at the FSA. “Our vetting process is not intended to be a substitute for a firm undertaking proper due diligence itself – responsibility for this still lies with a firm’s senior management. These proposals align with a shift in FSA focus: where a significant influence holder shows incompetence or dishonesty, we will consider enforcement action against him or her.”
The consultation period closes on 31 March 2009. The FSA will then finalise the proposals and publish revised rules in a policy statement during the second quarter of 2009.
____________________
CP 08/25: The approved persons regime – significant influence function review can be found on the FSA website.
Friday 12 December 2008
HR Will See Increase In Corporate Fraud
Aliah D Wright, online editor for SHRM reports on a very disturbing trend which is emerging as the labour and financial markets become tighter. Our experience here at Powerchex, further re-enforces the results of this study, as we have seen a significant increase in application fraud.
_________________________________
Corporate fraud is on the rise, and, despite new laws to curb such abuse, this trend will significantly impact human resource professionals, says an expert in business intelligence. According to recently released Global Fraud Report, the average company loss to fraud has increased by 22 percent. The losses are largely driven by the credit crunch and troubled economic climate attributable to the subprime mortgage nightmare.
On average, businesses have lost $8.2 million to fraud in the past three years, compared with the 2007 figure, which stood at $7.6 million. The figures come from a study commissioned from the Economist Intelligence Unit based on a survey of 890 senior executives worldwide.What Types of Fraud?
The fastest-growing types of fraud were information theft (27 percent, up from 22 percent) and regulatory and compliance breaches (25 percent, up from 19 percent).
A closer look revealed that more than four out of five companies surveyed (85 percent) have suffered from corporate fraud in the past three years, up from 80 percent in the 2007 survey. For large companies, the proportion suffering from fraud rose to 90 percent, according to the study.
When it comes to breaches in compliance, HR is in the middle of the fray, having to manage compliance because of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which requires U.S. public companies and their independent auditors to show the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) that their financial numbers are accurate and that they have processes in place to ensure that accuracy.
And the cost of complying isn't cheap.
According to the Financial Executives International's seventh Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) compliance survey, the average 2007 SOX compliance cost was $1.7 million.
"Federal authorities--the SEC, Department of Justice and the U.S. attorney's office will apply regulations in new and unique ways in order to stem corporate improper activities and make sure there is more corporate accountability," Coppotelli said.
This might make HR's job even more challenging--especially given today's climate in which the federal government is willing to step in and aid those who might have committed corporate malfeasance in the subprime mortgage debacle.
"I think the whole subprime issue has yet to be fully addressed in terms of malfeasance," Coppotelli said.
$7.6M AMOUNT LOST BY BUSINESSES IN 2007 ATTRIBUTABLE TO CORPORATE FRAUD.
~~~~~~~~
By Aliah D. Wright
Aliah D. Wright, an online editor/manager for SHRM.
_________________________________
Corporate fraud is on the rise, and, despite new laws to curb such abuse, this trend will significantly impact human resource professionals, says an expert in business intelligence. According to recently released Global Fraud Report, the average company loss to fraud has increased by 22 percent. The losses are largely driven by the credit crunch and troubled economic climate attributable to the subprime mortgage nightmare.
On average, businesses have lost $8.2 million to fraud in the past three years, compared with the 2007 figure, which stood at $7.6 million. The figures come from a study commissioned from the Economist Intelligence Unit based on a survey of 890 senior executives worldwide.What Types of Fraud?
The fastest-growing types of fraud were information theft (27 percent, up from 22 percent) and regulatory and compliance breaches (25 percent, up from 19 percent).
A closer look revealed that more than four out of five companies surveyed (85 percent) have suffered from corporate fraud in the past three years, up from 80 percent in the 2007 survey. For large companies, the proportion suffering from fraud rose to 90 percent, according to the study.
When it comes to breaches in compliance, HR is in the middle of the fray, having to manage compliance because of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which requires U.S. public companies and their independent auditors to show the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) that their financial numbers are accurate and that they have processes in place to ensure that accuracy.
And the cost of complying isn't cheap.
According to the Financial Executives International's seventh Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) compliance survey, the average 2007 SOX compliance cost was $1.7 million.
"Federal authorities--the SEC, Department of Justice and the U.S. attorney's office will apply regulations in new and unique ways in order to stem corporate improper activities and make sure there is more corporate accountability," Coppotelli said.
This might make HR's job even more challenging--especially given today's climate in which the federal government is willing to step in and aid those who might have committed corporate malfeasance in the subprime mortgage debacle.
"I think the whole subprime issue has yet to be fully addressed in terms of malfeasance," Coppotelli said.
$7.6M AMOUNT LOST BY BUSINESSES IN 2007 ATTRIBUTABLE TO CORPORATE FRAUD.
~~~~~~~~
By Aliah D. Wright
Aliah D. Wright, an online editor/manager for SHRM.
Tuesday 9 December 2008
Festive scam alert
Scam-artists are more likely to target their victims during the festive period and in an economic downturn, the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has warned. From miracle slimming products which would be aimed at those hoping to lose weight after Christmas parties, to the threat of online identity theft, consumers should be extra careful with their identities and their money. Scam-artists offering swift cash rewards were likely to be more active during the economic downturn. Consumers should regularly monitor their bank accounts and alert their bank whenever they see transactions which they do not recognise.
Wednesday 26 November 2008
Powerchex wins the "NatWest Business of the Year 2008" Award
Six hundred people attended the NatWest Thames Gateway Business Awards last Friday, 21st November at the Excel, London in a celebration of entrepreneurship designed to recognise and honour the Thames Gateway’s top businesses.
Powerchex, the leader in pre-employment screening solutions for financial firms scooped the top award for the evening presented by TV chef and former star of Strictly Come Dancing James Martin. In addition to winning the Business of the Year Award, Powerchex was also highly commended in the Innovation category for its accredited graduate development programme “STARS”.
Powerchex has beaten off stiff competition to win Business of the Year in the 2008 NatWest Thames Gateway Awards – the region’s premier showcase for the most promising businesses and the inspirational entrepreneurs behind them.
Alexandra Kelly, the MD of Powerchex, originally asked the BBC dragons to invest in her idea for a company specialising in staff referencing for the financial services industry. But when they said no, she decided to go it alone – and four years later Powerchex is the fastest-growing vetting and job referencing service in the UK boasting an office in the city, 40 staff, and an impressive roster of first rate financial clients.
“Being recognised as the Business of the Year in these prestigious awards is the crowning achievement in a year that can only be described as incredible” said Alexandra. “Having doubled in size and revenues in the past year, Powerchex is now ready to start a new year of success and innovation.”
"The 11th Archant London Thames Gateway Business Awards was a huge success” added Enzo Testa, Executive Managing Director of Archant the event’s organisers.
“The calibre of entries from businesses and individuals was extremely high and the evening was recognition of the drive and determination within the community to ensure that the area thrives over the coming years."
In addition to winning the Thames Gateway Business of the Year Award, Powerchex participated in the Thames Valley Business Awards, where it was awarded a high commendation in the Small Business category. The award was presented by Rt Hon Margaret Beckett MP, former Foreign Secretary and deputy leader of the Labour Party and was sponsored by Regus.
Thursday 20 November 2008
Criminal records on sale for just £37
Employers have been found to abuse the system in obtaining CRB checks for roles which do not justify this type of in-depth criminal search. The Sunday Times investigated the allegations and came up with some very interesting findings (see article below). CRB criminal searches are different from Basic Criminal Searches (offered through Disclosure Scotland) which are available and legal for any level of employee.
Basic Criminal Searches only disclose unspent criminal convictions
...............................................................................................
Police files that were opened up with the aim of helping to protect children from sex offenders are being sold for as little as £37 to employers who simply want to find out more about job applicants.
The Criminal Records Bureau (CRB), an executive agency of the Home Office, was set up six years ago to carry out checks on prospective employees whose work would bring them into contact with children and vulnerable adults. Its declared aim is to identify those unsuitable for such work.
But a Sunday Times investigation has established that the CRB is passing files to more than 50 recruitment agencies and corporate investigators which check the background of people applying for jobs that may have nothing to do with children or other vulnerable groups.
Some offer unlawful checks of potential business partners and staff, ranging from web designers to clerical workers. The disclosures mean further questions for Jacqui Smith, the home secretary, already embroiled in a row over the loss of criminal data.
Last week Paul Cavadino, the chief executive of Nacro, a charity that works to reduce crime, called for an inquiry into the trade in CRB records. He said: “The law is clearly being flouted in some cases and it is outrageous that it has been allowed to happen.”
One of the agencies accredited by the CRB — the United Criminal Records Bureau — offers criminal record checks for potential employees for £37. For an extra £5 it can supply an enhanced check that may include unproven police intelligence.
Operating out of a detached house in Bexleyheath, Kent, it claims to scrutinise thousands of police records each year. When approached last week by an undercover reporter asking for information about medical sales staff, it offered checks on a range of employees “as long as you are willing to pay upfront”.
Meena Thiagarajan, a director of the company which operates United Criminal Records Bureau, recommended enhanced checks for administrative staff who were handling confidential company documents. “Whatever they’ve done in their entire life will come up on their enhanced disclosure,” she claimed.
She said an employee’s agreement should be obtained for a request for the file but admitted that she did not obtain original documentation, such as a passport, to check the validity of the application. The reporter did not follow up her offer by submitting an application.
When confronted by The Sunday Times, Thiagarajan said all applications were carefully checked and she would not have submitted an unlawful one. In some cases enhanced checks on administrative staff were justified, she said.
The CRB was established under the Police Act 1997, which stipulates that checks be confined to those working with children and vulnerable adults, and some specific jobs such as police officers, lawyers and accountants. It was launched in March 2002 with the objective of improving access to criminal records in the interests of public safety.
The owner of another CRB-accredited agency, who asked not to be identified, said legal checks on credit card ratings, mortgage details and driving records were routinely checked for job applicants. She said some companies were also offering unlawful checks on criminal records, with a complete background check costing as much as £100.
“It’s easy to abuse the system,” she said. “You can get almost anyone’s criminal record because there are no proper checks to ensure you’re complying with the law.”
At least some of the information held by the CRB appears to have been sent to companies overseas. The CRB lists one company on its website, Personnel Profile Specialists Ltd (PPSL), at a residential address in Upminster, Essex, but its head office is in Auckland, New Zealand.
The PPSL website states: “PPSL are unique in New Zealand as we are the only organisation with an office in the UK registered to access records from the Criminal Records Bureau . . . this has proven exceptionally useful to our clients.”
Richard Peach, who owns the company, said it was not currently accredited by the CRB but had always complied with rules when checking British criminal records.
The law was a “grey area”, he said. But he believed a criminal record, once in the public domain, should be accessible.
Many employees are worried by the ease with which dubious or borderline checks can be made because of the minor misdemeanours and unproven allegations that can be unearthed. In one case, the subject of a complaint to the information commissioner, a CRB search revealed the theft of a packet of meat worth 99p in 1984 when the person involved was 16.
Nacro now gets about 20,000 calls a year from people with concerns about the CRB system, including unlawful checks, compared to about 7,000 a year when it was first launched.
A CRB helpline offers little support. One caller who complained of an unlawful check last week was told there was little the CRB could do to help, even though it was accepted by the telephone operator that the rules appeared to have been broken. “If you don’t comply, obviously they will not employ you,” the caller was told.
In a landmark case Derek Howman, 46, from Weaverham, Cheshire, who was fired from his job as a gardener at a residential home after an enhanced CRB check, is taking legal action. He claims the check, which revealed two spent offences, was unlawful. He is seeking compensation.
His case is backed by the information commissioner, who concluded that the CRB check appeared to be unwarranted.
Nacro says it would prefer new a system where employees in the caring professions are vetted by a licensing authority without the criminal records being sent to employers.
The Home Office stated that agencies could have their accreditation removed if they carried out improper checks.
Basic Criminal Searches only disclose unspent criminal convictions
...............................................................................................
Police files that were opened up with the aim of helping to protect children from sex offenders are being sold for as little as £37 to employers who simply want to find out more about job applicants.
The Criminal Records Bureau (CRB), an executive agency of the Home Office, was set up six years ago to carry out checks on prospective employees whose work would bring them into contact with children and vulnerable adults. Its declared aim is to identify those unsuitable for such work.
But a Sunday Times investigation has established that the CRB is passing files to more than 50 recruitment agencies and corporate investigators which check the background of people applying for jobs that may have nothing to do with children or other vulnerable groups.
Some offer unlawful checks of potential business partners and staff, ranging from web designers to clerical workers. The disclosures mean further questions for Jacqui Smith, the home secretary, already embroiled in a row over the loss of criminal data.
Last week Paul Cavadino, the chief executive of Nacro, a charity that works to reduce crime, called for an inquiry into the trade in CRB records. He said: “The law is clearly being flouted in some cases and it is outrageous that it has been allowed to happen.”
One of the agencies accredited by the CRB — the United Criminal Records Bureau — offers criminal record checks for potential employees for £37. For an extra £5 it can supply an enhanced check that may include unproven police intelligence.
Operating out of a detached house in Bexleyheath, Kent, it claims to scrutinise thousands of police records each year. When approached last week by an undercover reporter asking for information about medical sales staff, it offered checks on a range of employees “as long as you are willing to pay upfront”.
Meena Thiagarajan, a director of the company which operates United Criminal Records Bureau, recommended enhanced checks for administrative staff who were handling confidential company documents. “Whatever they’ve done in their entire life will come up on their enhanced disclosure,” she claimed.
She said an employee’s agreement should be obtained for a request for the file but admitted that she did not obtain original documentation, such as a passport, to check the validity of the application. The reporter did not follow up her offer by submitting an application.
When confronted by The Sunday Times, Thiagarajan said all applications were carefully checked and she would not have submitted an unlawful one. In some cases enhanced checks on administrative staff were justified, she said.
The CRB was established under the Police Act 1997, which stipulates that checks be confined to those working with children and vulnerable adults, and some specific jobs such as police officers, lawyers and accountants. It was launched in March 2002 with the objective of improving access to criminal records in the interests of public safety.
The owner of another CRB-accredited agency, who asked not to be identified, said legal checks on credit card ratings, mortgage details and driving records were routinely checked for job applicants. She said some companies were also offering unlawful checks on criminal records, with a complete background check costing as much as £100.
“It’s easy to abuse the system,” she said. “You can get almost anyone’s criminal record because there are no proper checks to ensure you’re complying with the law.”
At least some of the information held by the CRB appears to have been sent to companies overseas. The CRB lists one company on its website, Personnel Profile Specialists Ltd (PPSL), at a residential address in Upminster, Essex, but its head office is in Auckland, New Zealand.
The PPSL website states: “PPSL are unique in New Zealand as we are the only organisation with an office in the UK registered to access records from the Criminal Records Bureau . . . this has proven exceptionally useful to our clients.”
Richard Peach, who owns the company, said it was not currently accredited by the CRB but had always complied with rules when checking British criminal records.
The law was a “grey area”, he said. But he believed a criminal record, once in the public domain, should be accessible.
Many employees are worried by the ease with which dubious or borderline checks can be made because of the minor misdemeanours and unproven allegations that can be unearthed. In one case, the subject of a complaint to the information commissioner, a CRB search revealed the theft of a packet of meat worth 99p in 1984 when the person involved was 16.
Nacro now gets about 20,000 calls a year from people with concerns about the CRB system, including unlawful checks, compared to about 7,000 a year when it was first launched.
A CRB helpline offers little support. One caller who complained of an unlawful check last week was told there was little the CRB could do to help, even though it was accepted by the telephone operator that the rules appeared to have been broken. “If you don’t comply, obviously they will not employ you,” the caller was told.
In a landmark case Derek Howman, 46, from Weaverham, Cheshire, who was fired from his job as a gardener at a residential home after an enhanced CRB check, is taking legal action. He claims the check, which revealed two spent offences, was unlawful. He is seeking compensation.
His case is backed by the information commissioner, who concluded that the CRB check appeared to be unwarranted.
Nacro says it would prefer new a system where employees in the caring professions are vetted by a licensing authority without the criminal records being sent to employers.
The Home Office stated that agencies could have their accreditation removed if they carried out improper checks.
Wednesday 19 November 2008
The 2007 International Privacy Ranking
We are often asked about data privacy and data protection globally. We hope that the country rankings of Privacy International together with the individual country comments will help answer some of your questions.
...................................
Each year since 1997, the US-based Electronic Privacy Information Center and the UK-based Privacy International have undertaken what has now become the most comprehensive survey of global privacy ever published. The Privacy & Human Rights Report surveys developments in 70 countries, assessing the state of surveillance and privacy protection.
The most recent report published in 2007, available at http://www.privacyinternational.org/phr , is probably the most comprehensive single volume report published in the human rights field. The report runs over 1,100 pages and includes 6,000 footnotes. More than 200 experts from around the world have provided materials and commentary. The participants range from eminent privacy scholars to high-level officials charged with safeguarding constitutional freedoms in their countries. Academics, human rights advocates, journalists and researchers provided reports, insight, documents and advice. In 2006 Privacy International took the decision to use this annual report as the basis for a ranking assessment of the state of privacy in all EU countries together with eleven non-EU benchmark countries (click here for the 2006 results). Follow this link for more details of last year's results.
The new 2007 global rankings extend the survey to 47 countries (from the original 37) and, for the first time, provide an opportunity to assess trends.
Summary of key findings
The 2007 rankings indicate an overall worsening of privacy protection across the world, reflecting an increase in surveillance and a declining performance o privacy safeguards.
Concern over immigration and border control dominated the world agenda in 2007. Countries have moved swiftly to implement database, identity and fingerprinting systems, often without regard to the privacy implications for their own citizens
The 2007 rankings show an increasing trend amongst governments to archive data on the geographic, communications and financial records of all their citizens and residents. This trend leads to the conclusion that all citizens, regardless of legal status, are under suspicion.
The privacy trends have been fueled by the emergence of a profitable surveillance industry dominated by global IT companies and the creation of numerous international treaties that frequently operate outside judicial or democratic processes.
Despite political shifts in the US Congress, surveillance initiatives in the US continue to expand, affecting visitors and citizens alike.
Surveillance initiatives initiated by Brussels have caused a substantial decline in privacy across Europe, eroding protections even in those countries that have shown a traditionally high regard for privacy.
The privacy performance of older democracies in Europe is generally failing, while the performance of newer democracies is becoming generally stronger.
The lowest ranking countries in the survey continue to be Malaysia, Russia and China. The highest-ranking countries in 2007 are Greece, Romania and Canada.
The 2006 leader, Germany, slipped significantly in the 2007 rankings, dropping from 1st to 7th place behind Portugal and Slovenia.
In terms of statutory protections and privacy enforcement, the US is the worst ranking country in the democratic world. In terms of overall privacy protection the United States has performed very poorly, being out-ranked by both India and the Philippines and falling into the "black" category, denoting endemic surveillance.
The worst ranking EU country is the United Kingdom, which again fell into the "black" category along with Russia and Singapore. However for the first time Scotland has been given its own ranking score and performed significantly better than England & Wales.
Argentina scored higher than 18 of the 27 EU countries.
Australia ranks higher than Slovakia but lower than South Africa and New Zealand.
...................................
Each year since 1997, the US-based Electronic Privacy Information Center and the UK-based Privacy International have undertaken what has now become the most comprehensive survey of global privacy ever published. The Privacy & Human Rights Report surveys developments in 70 countries, assessing the state of surveillance and privacy protection.
The most recent report published in 2007, available at http://www.privacyinternational.org/phr , is probably the most comprehensive single volume report published in the human rights field. The report runs over 1,100 pages and includes 6,000 footnotes. More than 200 experts from around the world have provided materials and commentary. The participants range from eminent privacy scholars to high-level officials charged with safeguarding constitutional freedoms in their countries. Academics, human rights advocates, journalists and researchers provided reports, insight, documents and advice. In 2006 Privacy International took the decision to use this annual report as the basis for a ranking assessment of the state of privacy in all EU countries together with eleven non-EU benchmark countries (click here for the 2006 results). Follow this link for more details of last year's results.
The new 2007 global rankings extend the survey to 47 countries (from the original 37) and, for the first time, provide an opportunity to assess trends.
Summary of key findings
The 2007 rankings indicate an overall worsening of privacy protection across the world, reflecting an increase in surveillance and a declining performance o privacy safeguards.
Concern over immigration and border control dominated the world agenda in 2007. Countries have moved swiftly to implement database, identity and fingerprinting systems, often without regard to the privacy implications for their own citizens
The 2007 rankings show an increasing trend amongst governments to archive data on the geographic, communications and financial records of all their citizens and residents. This trend leads to the conclusion that all citizens, regardless of legal status, are under suspicion.
The privacy trends have been fueled by the emergence of a profitable surveillance industry dominated by global IT companies and the creation of numerous international treaties that frequently operate outside judicial or democratic processes.
Despite political shifts in the US Congress, surveillance initiatives in the US continue to expand, affecting visitors and citizens alike.
Surveillance initiatives initiated by Brussels have caused a substantial decline in privacy across Europe, eroding protections even in those countries that have shown a traditionally high regard for privacy.
The privacy performance of older democracies in Europe is generally failing, while the performance of newer democracies is becoming generally stronger.
The lowest ranking countries in the survey continue to be Malaysia, Russia and China. The highest-ranking countries in 2007 are Greece, Romania and Canada.
The 2006 leader, Germany, slipped significantly in the 2007 rankings, dropping from 1st to 7th place behind Portugal and Slovenia.
In terms of statutory protections and privacy enforcement, the US is the worst ranking country in the democratic world. In terms of overall privacy protection the United States has performed very poorly, being out-ranked by both India and the Philippines and falling into the "black" category, denoting endemic surveillance.
The worst ranking EU country is the United Kingdom, which again fell into the "black" category along with Russia and Singapore. However for the first time Scotland has been given its own ranking score and performed significantly better than England & Wales.
Argentina scored higher than 18 of the 27 EU countries.
Australia ranks higher than Slovakia but lower than South Africa and New Zealand.
National Hunter: The secret credit agency
When we read this story in the Guardian we thought it was a hoax. All these years in the industry and we had never heard of it. Kind of an eye opener and how far off the beaten track personal information travels...
........................................................
It does not publicise its phone number or give an address beyond a PO box number belonging to a small office on a run-down street in Stoke-on-Trent.
Its name is unknown to the public. Yet it carries out around 100,000 credit checks every day, probing applications ranging from mortgages to car loans and store cards. Ask a bank or finance company why you've been rejected, and you will probably be told to contact one, or all, of the credit reference agencies - Callcredit, Equifax, and Experian - to see what they have on you. Send them £2 and you'll get a copy of your file by return.
Now Guardian Money can reveal there's a fourth agency, called "National Hunter", whose approval - or otherwise - can make or break an application. But, unlike the others, you won't find out the information it holds on you for £2, or be invited to apply online to check your data. Instead, National Hunter charges £10, the maximum allowed under the Data Protection Act.
Last year, 5m applications for credit were turned down across the industry, but how many were as a result of National Hunter is unknown. And, until now, the organisation's extremely low profile has meant that few individuals rejected for credit will have thought to check with National Hunter.
It was set up by a group of banks in 1993, but is now co-owned by 60 banks, building societies and specialist lenders. Its official headquarters are in Stoke-on-Trent though little of what it does takes place in the building. Although it's owned by the banks, National Hunter is managed and operated on a day-to-day basis by Experian, the giant of the credit agencies, based in Nottingham.
It does not assess creditworthiness in the same way as the other agencies - its sole purpose is fraud prevention. It is one of the most important weapons used by lenders in the continuing battle against financial crime.
National Hunter will warn a lender if its checks suggest that an application is "suspect". In turn, the lender's computer may then turn down an application, without informing the applicant precisely why, or which database was checked. The vast majority of its rejections are likely to be for entirely legitimate reasons.
But quite how many files National Hunter holds on individuals is unknown. And what if the "suspect indication" arises because of human or computer error - or because you presented the lender with facts that it cannot easily check?
"Suspect" or "inconsistent" facts, which may cause applications to be flagged as fraud risks, can include:
· Change of employer over a short period;
· Differences in spelling of a surname, initial, or date of birth;
· Change in driving licence number or a variation in other identification documentation;
· The same mobile phone number from more than one applicant;
· A substantial change in stated salary over a short period;
· Income which is difficult or impossible to verify;
· Applicants using details that are apparently from a deceased person.
Barclaycard is a major user of National Hunter. "Every night, we send it almost all our card applications. Next morning, its computers send them back, either with OK or showing a potential fraud," a spokesperson says. "If it's the latter, then we might decide to contact the applicant, although that may depend on other factors."
Mortgage lenders that we spoke to said they use the standard Experian and Equifax systems first, then decide whether to lend. Only then do they contact National Hunter to check it is not potentially dishonest.
But while the system weeds out many possibly fraudulent applications, legitimate applicants could fall foul of a check for innocent reasons - you might have had a big salary increase, or simply handed over an old mobile to a member of your family. According to a recent National Hunter presentation, to be "inconsistent" there has to be "a clear discrepancy between information provided by the consumer and information found, or not able to be found or verified elsewhere".
So the information you provide could be true, but it will be treated as potentially fraudulent if National Hunter cannot find enough information to check what you say. But if you question the rejection, banks will generally send a standard letter pointing you to one or more of the three credit agencies.
You won't be told about National Hunter - although you have a right under the Data Protection Act to demand a "subject access request" requiring a company to reveal what it holds on you.
The difficulty is, very few know about National Hunter's existence, let alone what it does. Managing director Tracy Wingrove told Guardian Money: "Any member of the public who wishes to obtain details of information we hold about themselves as individuals can request them under Section 7 of the Data Protection Act."
But she agrees that "sometimes it is not that easy to know about us".
She adds: "Our members are required to include certain key elements within the declaration/fair processing notices section of their application forms. The wording should indicate that applicants can find out which fraud prevention agencies are used and the method by which they can find this out.
"Our members must ensure that this information is made readily available to the applicant and preferably by means of a dedicated telephone contact number. If you ask your bank, it has to tell you about our existence."
Wingrove says banks should not turn someone down simply on the basis of one of its alerts. "Our rules say members can't make automated decisions. We would be concerned if banks did that."
The information commissioner, responsible for data protection issues, has expressed "strong views" on rejecting applications on fraud suspicion grounds alone, realising that no database is 100% foolproof.
Firms involved with fighting fraud recognise there is a clash between those who believe visibility harms fraud prevention and those who believe better knowledge of what can happen to a false application is a deterrent to potential fraudsters.
Wingrove accepts that National Hunter could be more visible. "We are providing a service to cut back on fraud and on identity theft. But we are happy to take Guardian Money's comments and concerns on board, and to address the issue of our low profile. We are moving to reveal more of our decision making over the next few months."
• National Hunter's website is nhunter.co.uk. Its address is N Hunter Limited, PO Box 2756, Stoke-on-Trent, ST6 9AQ. It has no telephone or email address for the public to use.
........................................................
It does not publicise its phone number or give an address beyond a PO box number belonging to a small office on a run-down street in Stoke-on-Trent.
Its name is unknown to the public. Yet it carries out around 100,000 credit checks every day, probing applications ranging from mortgages to car loans and store cards. Ask a bank or finance company why you've been rejected, and you will probably be told to contact one, or all, of the credit reference agencies - Callcredit, Equifax, and Experian - to see what they have on you. Send them £2 and you'll get a copy of your file by return.
Now Guardian Money can reveal there's a fourth agency, called "National Hunter", whose approval - or otherwise - can make or break an application. But, unlike the others, you won't find out the information it holds on you for £2, or be invited to apply online to check your data. Instead, National Hunter charges £10, the maximum allowed under the Data Protection Act.
Last year, 5m applications for credit were turned down across the industry, but how many were as a result of National Hunter is unknown. And, until now, the organisation's extremely low profile has meant that few individuals rejected for credit will have thought to check with National Hunter.
It was set up by a group of banks in 1993, but is now co-owned by 60 banks, building societies and specialist lenders. Its official headquarters are in Stoke-on-Trent though little of what it does takes place in the building. Although it's owned by the banks, National Hunter is managed and operated on a day-to-day basis by Experian, the giant of the credit agencies, based in Nottingham.
It does not assess creditworthiness in the same way as the other agencies - its sole purpose is fraud prevention. It is one of the most important weapons used by lenders in the continuing battle against financial crime.
National Hunter will warn a lender if its checks suggest that an application is "suspect". In turn, the lender's computer may then turn down an application, without informing the applicant precisely why, or which database was checked. The vast majority of its rejections are likely to be for entirely legitimate reasons.
But quite how many files National Hunter holds on individuals is unknown. And what if the "suspect indication" arises because of human or computer error - or because you presented the lender with facts that it cannot easily check?
"Suspect" or "inconsistent" facts, which may cause applications to be flagged as fraud risks, can include:
· Change of employer over a short period;
· Differences in spelling of a surname, initial, or date of birth;
· Change in driving licence number or a variation in other identification documentation;
· The same mobile phone number from more than one applicant;
· A substantial change in stated salary over a short period;
· Income which is difficult or impossible to verify;
· Applicants using details that are apparently from a deceased person.
Barclaycard is a major user of National Hunter. "Every night, we send it almost all our card applications. Next morning, its computers send them back, either with OK or showing a potential fraud," a spokesperson says. "If it's the latter, then we might decide to contact the applicant, although that may depend on other factors."
Mortgage lenders that we spoke to said they use the standard Experian and Equifax systems first, then decide whether to lend. Only then do they contact National Hunter to check it is not potentially dishonest.
But while the system weeds out many possibly fraudulent applications, legitimate applicants could fall foul of a check for innocent reasons - you might have had a big salary increase, or simply handed over an old mobile to a member of your family. According to a recent National Hunter presentation, to be "inconsistent" there has to be "a clear discrepancy between information provided by the consumer and information found, or not able to be found or verified elsewhere".
So the information you provide could be true, but it will be treated as potentially fraudulent if National Hunter cannot find enough information to check what you say. But if you question the rejection, banks will generally send a standard letter pointing you to one or more of the three credit agencies.
You won't be told about National Hunter - although you have a right under the Data Protection Act to demand a "subject access request" requiring a company to reveal what it holds on you.
The difficulty is, very few know about National Hunter's existence, let alone what it does. Managing director Tracy Wingrove told Guardian Money: "Any member of the public who wishes to obtain details of information we hold about themselves as individuals can request them under Section 7 of the Data Protection Act."
But she agrees that "sometimes it is not that easy to know about us".
She adds: "Our members are required to include certain key elements within the declaration/fair processing notices section of their application forms. The wording should indicate that applicants can find out which fraud prevention agencies are used and the method by which they can find this out.
"Our members must ensure that this information is made readily available to the applicant and preferably by means of a dedicated telephone contact number. If you ask your bank, it has to tell you about our existence."
Wingrove says banks should not turn someone down simply on the basis of one of its alerts. "Our rules say members can't make automated decisions. We would be concerned if banks did that."
The information commissioner, responsible for data protection issues, has expressed "strong views" on rejecting applications on fraud suspicion grounds alone, realising that no database is 100% foolproof.
Firms involved with fighting fraud recognise there is a clash between those who believe visibility harms fraud prevention and those who believe better knowledge of what can happen to a false application is a deterrent to potential fraudsters.
Wingrove accepts that National Hunter could be more visible. "We are providing a service to cut back on fraud and on identity theft. But we are happy to take Guardian Money's comments and concerns on board, and to address the issue of our low profile. We are moving to reveal more of our decision making over the next few months."
• National Hunter's website is nhunter.co.uk. Its address is N Hunter Limited, PO Box 2756, Stoke-on-Trent, ST6 9AQ. It has no telephone or email address for the public to use.
Senior Directors & Inflated Academic Credentials
From the WSJ: Inflated Credentials Surface in Executive Suite
Chris MacDonald, Ph.D - Business Ethics St Mary's University Canada
Inflated academic credentials in the nation's executive suites may be more common than generally thought.A survey of 358 senior executives and directors at 53 publicly traded companies has turned up at least seven instances of claims that individuals had academic degrees they don't have. In some cases, the slip-ups don't appear to have been intentional, and may have been caused by misunderstandings.Among the executives whose credentials don't check out: Dennis Workman, chief technical officer at Trimble Navigation Ltd., a big maker of global-positioning-system devices; and James DeHoniesto, until Wednesday the chief information officer at Cabot Microelectronics Corp., a supplier of chemicals and pads used to polish microchips.The details are not exactly eye-popping. A few execs said they completed degrees they only started, one said he got a Bachelor's degree when all he really got is an Associate's degree. But still. Their information was inaccurate, and that's bad. It's dishonest (though the WSJ acknowledges that some cases might best be chalked up to misunderstandings) and it sets a lousy example for people lower down the corporate ladder.Perhaps this story speaks some combination of the following things:
People's general willingness to exaggerate on their CV's. (Note that it's not a scientific survey, and only 1.9% of execs had exaggerated.)
The willingness of people at the executive level to exaggerate on their CV's.
The willingness to exaggerate on education in particular. Is that a sign that education matters ("It matters enough to lie about!") or a sign that it's held in low esteem ("Oh, it's just a college degree!")
............................................
We have to agree with the professor. Our experience at Powerchex also indicates that academic qualifications are frequently falsified. What is interesting is that applicants do not consider this to be a major "faux pas", and are usually very surprised when an offer is withdrawn.
Chris MacDonald, Ph.D - Business Ethics St Mary's University Canada
Inflated academic credentials in the nation's executive suites may be more common than generally thought.A survey of 358 senior executives and directors at 53 publicly traded companies has turned up at least seven instances of claims that individuals had academic degrees they don't have. In some cases, the slip-ups don't appear to have been intentional, and may have been caused by misunderstandings.Among the executives whose credentials don't check out: Dennis Workman, chief technical officer at Trimble Navigation Ltd., a big maker of global-positioning-system devices; and James DeHoniesto, until Wednesday the chief information officer at Cabot Microelectronics Corp., a supplier of chemicals and pads used to polish microchips.The details are not exactly eye-popping. A few execs said they completed degrees they only started, one said he got a Bachelor's degree when all he really got is an Associate's degree. But still. Their information was inaccurate, and that's bad. It's dishonest (though the WSJ acknowledges that some cases might best be chalked up to misunderstandings) and it sets a lousy example for people lower down the corporate ladder.Perhaps this story speaks some combination of the following things:
People's general willingness to exaggerate on their CV's. (Note that it's not a scientific survey, and only 1.9% of execs had exaggerated.)
The willingness of people at the executive level to exaggerate on their CV's.
The willingness to exaggerate on education in particular. Is that a sign that education matters ("It matters enough to lie about!") or a sign that it's held in low esteem ("Oh, it's just a college degree!")
............................................
We have to agree with the professor. Our experience at Powerchex also indicates that academic qualifications are frequently falsified. What is interesting is that applicants do not consider this to be a major "faux pas", and are usually very surprised when an offer is withdrawn.
Prepare for more information access requests
Compliance firm Shoosmiths raises awareness on the possibility of an increase in Subject Access Requests (see article below):
Companies should be prepared for an increase in the use of subject access requests (SARs) by individuals affected by the economic downturn.
This should not present a problem as long as businesses follow basic rules for identifying and dealing with the requests.
Individual employees facing redundancy or disciplinary action, or debtors being chased for repayment, are increasingly seeking to use their rights under the Data Protection Act 1998 to request the personal information held about them by their employers.
Often, the request will be deliberately broadly framed to cause maximum inconvenience, and may cover information considered by the business to be commercially sensitive, contain information about other individuals, or cover legal advice that has been obtained.
Fortunately for businesses, data protection legislation contains a number of exemptions from disclosure, which balance the rights of the individual against the interests of the business.
Nevertheless, businesses need to respond formally to any subject access request within the permitted time frame. To avoid the SAR gaining its own momentum, steps should be taken early on to clarify and contain the scope of the request, and identify the location of information that needs to be disclosed.
The fact that a business may be in litigation or potential litigation with an individual does not relieve that business from its obligations to comply with a valid SAR.
The individual is not required to give a reason for seeking the information, and, indeed, the individual’s motive for making the request has no bearing on the business’ obligations. Where litigation has been commenced care needs to be taken not to disclose documents that are subject to legal privilege and which are exempt from disclosure.
Golden rules
appoint someone within the organisation responsible for responding to SARs, and train staff to recognise a SAR
the response from the business must be prompt, and in any event within 40 days of the date on which a SAR was received
establish quickly if it is a valid SAR if the scope of the request is unclear, or if the fee is missing write back promptly, and do not wait until the deadline for a response
check that the information requested relates to the individual making the request, and that the request is genuine (seek further verification if in doubt)
create a process for dealing with retrieval of information in response to a SAR that allows a full response within the time allowed
Where a SAR is made by a representative on behalf of an individual, businesses should satisfy themselves that the representative is indeed authorised to make the SAR. If in doubt, documentary proof of such authorisation should be sought.
An analysis of the exemptions from disclosure available to a business in response to a SAR is outside the scope of this note. However, be aware that they broadly cover:
information which includes other people’s personal information
confidential references given by the business
information covered by legal profession privilege
management forecast information
information relevant to negotiation with the requester
information relevant to crime prevention and detection
..........................
At Powerchex we often receive calls from applicants who have either been rejected or who are curious to see what their referees have to say about them. We aim to comply with all formal SARs requests that we receive in a timely manner, however from our experience most applicants lose interest after a few days and rarely follow up with a written request. As the economic outlook deteriorates we are preparing for more formal requests and we are urging HR departments to do likewise and establish a formal process that everyone is aware of.
Companies should be prepared for an increase in the use of subject access requests (SARs) by individuals affected by the economic downturn.
This should not present a problem as long as businesses follow basic rules for identifying and dealing with the requests.
Individual employees facing redundancy or disciplinary action, or debtors being chased for repayment, are increasingly seeking to use their rights under the Data Protection Act 1998 to request the personal information held about them by their employers.
Often, the request will be deliberately broadly framed to cause maximum inconvenience, and may cover information considered by the business to be commercially sensitive, contain information about other individuals, or cover legal advice that has been obtained.
Fortunately for businesses, data protection legislation contains a number of exemptions from disclosure, which balance the rights of the individual against the interests of the business.
Nevertheless, businesses need to respond formally to any subject access request within the permitted time frame. To avoid the SAR gaining its own momentum, steps should be taken early on to clarify and contain the scope of the request, and identify the location of information that needs to be disclosed.
The fact that a business may be in litigation or potential litigation with an individual does not relieve that business from its obligations to comply with a valid SAR.
The individual is not required to give a reason for seeking the information, and, indeed, the individual’s motive for making the request has no bearing on the business’ obligations. Where litigation has been commenced care needs to be taken not to disclose documents that are subject to legal privilege and which are exempt from disclosure.
Golden rules
appoint someone within the organisation responsible for responding to SARs, and train staff to recognise a SAR
the response from the business must be prompt, and in any event within 40 days of the date on which a SAR was received
establish quickly if it is a valid SAR if the scope of the request is unclear, or if the fee is missing write back promptly, and do not wait until the deadline for a response
check that the information requested relates to the individual making the request, and that the request is genuine (seek further verification if in doubt)
create a process for dealing with retrieval of information in response to a SAR that allows a full response within the time allowed
Where a SAR is made by a representative on behalf of an individual, businesses should satisfy themselves that the representative is indeed authorised to make the SAR. If in doubt, documentary proof of such authorisation should be sought.
An analysis of the exemptions from disclosure available to a business in response to a SAR is outside the scope of this note. However, be aware that they broadly cover:
information which includes other people’s personal information
confidential references given by the business
information covered by legal profession privilege
management forecast information
information relevant to negotiation with the requester
information relevant to crime prevention and detection
..........................
At Powerchex we often receive calls from applicants who have either been rejected or who are curious to see what their referees have to say about them. We aim to comply with all formal SARs requests that we receive in a timely manner, however from our experience most applicants lose interest after a few days and rarely follow up with a written request. As the economic outlook deteriorates we are preparing for more formal requests and we are urging HR departments to do likewise and establish a formal process that everyone is aware of.
SAFER
Recruiter Magazine
Paul Wilson, who appears in, writes and produces the BBC Three TV programme “The Real Hustle”, kicked off the official launch on Tuesday of the Recruitment Industry’s Counter-Fraud Forum with sage counsel: “A con only works if the market doesn’t know what’s happening.”
Recruiters and the Metropolitan Police have joined forces to alert employers, their fellow recruiters and jobseekers to fraud and other criminal activities taking place within the recruitment marketplace. Founder members include Adecco, executivesontheweb.com, fish4jobs, Guardian Jobs, Hays, Impellam, Jobsite, Kelly Services, Monster, Reed and Totaljobs, together with the Recruitment and Employment Confederation.
“It is clear that the key to combating and keeping one step ahead of the ever-evolving nature of fraud is by working together in partnership,” said Nigel Mawer, Detective Chief Superintendent of the Met’s Economic and Specialist Crime Command. “The best protected organisations and individuals are those who recognise the threat and share best practice.”
The forum has set up a dedicated, publicly accessible website, to raise awareness and to offer impartial advice: http://www.safer-jobs.com/
..................................
Recent fraud cases have included information stolen by fraudster from legitimate sites where applicants have been uploading their CVs. When applicants are uploading their CVs they should ensure that the site is secure and can only be accessed by authorised individuals. If in doubt, applicants should specify to the recruiting organisation how their data should be handled. Organisations that solicit CVs over the internet, have to also treat this personal information with respect and ensure that it remains confidential and secure.
Paul Wilson, who appears in, writes and produces the BBC Three TV programme “The Real Hustle”, kicked off the official launch on Tuesday of the Recruitment Industry’s Counter-Fraud Forum with sage counsel: “A con only works if the market doesn’t know what’s happening.”
Recruiters and the Metropolitan Police have joined forces to alert employers, their fellow recruiters and jobseekers to fraud and other criminal activities taking place within the recruitment marketplace. Founder members include Adecco, executivesontheweb.com, fish4jobs, Guardian Jobs, Hays, Impellam, Jobsite, Kelly Services, Monster, Reed and Totaljobs, together with the Recruitment and Employment Confederation.
“It is clear that the key to combating and keeping one step ahead of the ever-evolving nature of fraud is by working together in partnership,” said Nigel Mawer, Detective Chief Superintendent of the Met’s Economic and Specialist Crime Command. “The best protected organisations and individuals are those who recognise the threat and share best practice.”
The forum has set up a dedicated, publicly accessible website, to raise awareness and to offer impartial advice: http://www.safer-jobs.com/
..................................
Recent fraud cases have included information stolen by fraudster from legitimate sites where applicants have been uploading their CVs. When applicants are uploading their CVs they should ensure that the site is secure and can only be accessed by authorised individuals. If in doubt, applicants should specify to the recruiting organisation how their data should be handled. Organisations that solicit CVs over the internet, have to also treat this personal information with respect and ensure that it remains confidential and secure.
Data Security and Pre-employment Screening
BARELY a day passes, it seems, without a new headline appearing about how our personal information has been lost from yet another database. This month, the Information Commissioner, Richard Thomas, revealed that the number of reported data breaches in the UK has soared to 277 since HMRC lost 25 million child benefit records nearly a year ago. "Information can be a toxic liability," he commented.
Such data losses are bad news on many fronts. Not just for us, when it's our personal information that is lost or misplaced, but because it also undermines trust in modern technology (Jerry Fishenden reporting for the Scotsman).
...............................................................
In terms of pre-employment screening firms need to understand the security pitfalls when they transmit personal data across the internet. Such data has to traced both in terms of the form of transmisssion but also in terms of the security at the recipient's site. Applicants who are asked to fill out forms on line have to question the security of the website prior to disclosing their personal information. Using encrypted emails or password protected PDFs is a more secure way to transmit this type of information.
.................................................................
Read more:
http://www.out-law.com/page-9540
https://www.eversheds.com/uk/home/articles/index.page?ArticleID=templatedataEvershedsarticlesdataenLocal_governmentLocal_Government_briefing_note_44_2008
Such data losses are bad news on many fronts. Not just for us, when it's our personal information that is lost or misplaced, but because it also undermines trust in modern technology (Jerry Fishenden reporting for the Scotsman).
...............................................................
In terms of pre-employment screening firms need to understand the security pitfalls when they transmit personal data across the internet. Such data has to traced both in terms of the form of transmisssion but also in terms of the security at the recipient's site. Applicants who are asked to fill out forms on line have to question the security of the website prior to disclosing their personal information. Using encrypted emails or password protected PDFs is a more secure way to transmit this type of information.
.................................................................
Read more:
http://www.out-law.com/page-9540
https://www.eversheds.com/uk/home/articles/index.page?ArticleID=templatedataEvershedsarticlesdataenLocal_governmentLocal_Government_briefing_note_44_2008
An extensive membership list of the far-right British National Party (BNP) has been stolen and leaked online
Yahoo News
The BNP has confirmed that the list from November 2007 has been leaked, but said that some addresses have been added since then.
The list contains 10,000-12,000 names, addresses, phone numbers, email adresses and additional information, and was posted on a Google blog for a short while before being taken down.
"Detailed analysis by our membership department proves conclusively that the core list dates from between 30 November and 2 December 2007," said BNP leader Nick Griffin.
"We have already sent formal demands to the web hosts to remove the list, pointing out to them that the publication of this year-old list constitutes contempt of court because a court order preventing its release or use was made and consented to by the group of disgraced former employees who first misappropriated it."
Analysis of the members, all of whom have to be 'indigenous Caucasians' under party rules, has reportedly found 16 serving and more than 50 former soldiers, several police officers (who are barred from joining by law) and overseas members in California, Ireland and Saudi Arabia.
The publication of the names has sent the membership into a panic, according to postings on the NorthWestNationalists blog.
"I've just had a call, I'm on it too," wrote one anonymous poster. "I want my f****** member money back, like has been mentioned here, I could lose my f****** job. I'm bloody angry."
A serving soldier also expressed disbelief and called for Nick Griffin to stand down. "Me too, I'm on the list, I could be chucked out of the army. What is going on? Piss up in a brewery comes to mind. I want some answers, NOW," he wrote.
The leak is almost certainly the work of an insider, and highlights the dangers of not protecting important data from prying employees. While there are numerous technologies to do this, very few organisations implement them.
The BNP has confirmed that the list from November 2007 has been leaked, but said that some addresses have been added since then.
The list contains 10,000-12,000 names, addresses, phone numbers, email adresses and additional information, and was posted on a Google blog for a short while before being taken down.
"Detailed analysis by our membership department proves conclusively that the core list dates from between 30 November and 2 December 2007," said BNP leader Nick Griffin.
"We have already sent formal demands to the web hosts to remove the list, pointing out to them that the publication of this year-old list constitutes contempt of court because a court order preventing its release or use was made and consented to by the group of disgraced former employees who first misappropriated it."
Analysis of the members, all of whom have to be 'indigenous Caucasians' under party rules, has reportedly found 16 serving and more than 50 former soldiers, several police officers (who are barred from joining by law) and overseas members in California, Ireland and Saudi Arabia.
The publication of the names has sent the membership into a panic, according to postings on the NorthWestNationalists blog.
"I've just had a call, I'm on it too," wrote one anonymous poster. "I want my f****** member money back, like has been mentioned here, I could lose my f****** job. I'm bloody angry."
A serving soldier also expressed disbelief and called for Nick Griffin to stand down. "Me too, I'm on the list, I could be chucked out of the army. What is going on? Piss up in a brewery comes to mind. I want some answers, NOW," he wrote.
The leak is almost certainly the work of an insider, and highlights the dangers of not protecting important data from prying employees. While there are numerous technologies to do this, very few organisations implement them.
Friday 14 November 2008
Insider Fraud - Should you be worried? by Arjun Medhi, Staff Fraud Adviser, CIFAS
While it goes without saying that most staff in any organisation are honest and trustworthy, there is a growing awareness and concern about the very real threat posed by the few who act dishonestly to defraud their employer. Fraud in the workplace can lead to an organisation experiencing a substantial internal impact, financial losses and unquantifiable damage to reputation. Most importantly, insider fraud is increasingly one of the biggest concerns for employers: Deloitte’s 2007 Global Financial Services Security Survey found that 91% of the respondents (from a range of 169 major global financial institutions) were concerned about the risks arising internally.
Insider fraud can take many forms: from deception through to stealing customer data and selling it on to organised criminals. Even at recruitment stage, fraud can be a problem, with lies included in application forms or on CVs.
click below for the full article
http://www.powerchex.co.uk/articles/detail/insider-fraud-should-you-be-worried/
While it goes without saying that most staff in any organisation are honest and trustworthy, there is a growing awareness and concern about the very real threat posed by the few who act dishonestly to defraud their employer. Fraud in the workplace can lead to an organisation experiencing a substantial internal impact, financial losses and unquantifiable damage to reputation. Most importantly, insider fraud is increasingly one of the biggest concerns for employers: Deloitte’s 2007 Global Financial Services Security Survey found that 91% of the respondents (from a range of 169 major global financial institutions) were concerned about the risks arising internally.
Insider fraud can take many forms: from deception through to stealing customer data and selling it on to organised criminals. Even at recruitment stage, fraud can be a problem, with lies included in application forms or on CVs.
click below for the full article
http://www.powerchex.co.uk/articles/detail/insider-fraud-should-you-be-worried/
The credit crunch and bank bailouts are forcing an "about turn" by the FSA from principles to rule‐based regulation.
FSA chairman Lord Adair Turner warned the City that the days of soft touch regulation are over. Turner admitted that the regulator ‘had been doing supervision on the cheap’ and said banks and insurance companies would have to pay higher fees as the FSA brings its supervision teams up to scratch.
‘We are going to have to do supervision at the quality that is required to do it really well. If that means the total cost has to go up somewhat then it has to go up,’ he told the FT. "There will be more people asking more questions and getting more information than we were getting before" Turner said. "There is no doubt the touch will be heavier. We have to make sure it is intelligent and focused on where the risks really are."
As part of a thematic review on financial crime, the FSA is currently in the process of visiting some 200 firms, both large and small, to assess the adequacy of their procedures. They expect to see comprehensive crime prevention procedures in place.
Findings from previous visits has showed that many firms allow new recruits to access customer data before vetting has been completed and it is common practice for temporary staff to receive less vigorous vetting than permanently employed colleagues.
Click below for the full press release:
http://www.powerchex.co.uk/interface/files/news/regulatory-tsunami.pdf
FSA chairman Lord Adair Turner warned the City that the days of soft touch regulation are over. Turner admitted that the regulator ‘had been doing supervision on the cheap’ and said banks and insurance companies would have to pay higher fees as the FSA brings its supervision teams up to scratch.
‘We are going to have to do supervision at the quality that is required to do it really well. If that means the total cost has to go up somewhat then it has to go up,’ he told the FT. "There will be more people asking more questions and getting more information than we were getting before" Turner said. "There is no doubt the touch will be heavier. We have to make sure it is intelligent and focused on where the risks really are."
As part of a thematic review on financial crime, the FSA is currently in the process of visiting some 200 firms, both large and small, to assess the adequacy of their procedures. They expect to see comprehensive crime prevention procedures in place.
Findings from previous visits has showed that many firms allow new recruits to access customer data before vetting has been completed and it is common practice for temporary staff to receive less vigorous vetting than permanently employed colleagues.
Click below for the full press release:
http://www.powerchex.co.uk/interface/files/news/regulatory-tsunami.pdf
Tuesday 11 November 2008
DATA SECURITY IN FINANCIAL SERVICES
The FSA has published one of their most comprehensive and easy to read consultations on Data Security. A topical subject, it remains widely misunderstood and is generally applied badly. Recent blunders by the Home Office and other organisations have brought it to the forefront and organisations far an wide are encouranged to pay attention.
http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/other/data_security.pdf
The FSA has published one of their most comprehensive and easy to read consultations on Data Security. A topical subject, it remains widely misunderstood and is generally applied badly. Recent blunders by the Home Office and other organisations have brought it to the forefront and organisations far an wide are encouranged to pay attention.
http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/other/data_security.pdf
Illegal checks jeopardising jobs
Bosses in England and Wales are making illegal criminal record checks on staff, learning about spent convictions that should not be disclosed. Sensitive work, such as with children or vulnerable adults, is eligible for Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) checks.
But BBC Radio 4's Face the Facts has found requests to CRB for jobs such as train driver, gardener and bricklayer.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7548467.stm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/facethefacts/transcript_20080808.shtml
Bosses in England and Wales are making illegal criminal record checks on staff, learning about spent convictions that should not be disclosed. Sensitive work, such as with children or vulnerable adults, is eligible for Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) checks.
But BBC Radio 4's Face the Facts has found requests to CRB for jobs such as train driver, gardener and bricklayer.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7548467.stm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/facethefacts/transcript_20080808.shtml
Who is cutting jobs in financial services?
Research by Powerchex showed that Investment Banks made the biggest cutback with 52% less jobs being offered in September compared to 6 months ago. Uncertainty about the world economy heightened with the collapse of U.S investment bank Lehman Brothers, meaning that investment banks are reluctant to hire with the fear they may be the next to falter.
http://www.powerchex.co.uk/interface/files/news/investment-banks-make-52-percent-less-employment-offers.pdf
Research by Powerchex showed that Investment Banks made the biggest cutback with 52% less jobs being offered in September compared to 6 months ago. Uncertainty about the world economy heightened with the collapse of U.S investment bank Lehman Brothers, meaning that investment banks are reluctant to hire with the fear they may be the next to falter.
http://www.powerchex.co.uk/interface/files/news/investment-banks-make-52-percent-less-employment-offers.pdf
On the lighter side of referencing...
FIRMS NOT ALLOWED TO ASK WHY YOUR CV IS FILLED WITH LIES
POTENTIAL employers are to be barred from asking interviewees why their CVs are filled with rubbish from beginning to end.
'So, did you enjoy being an astronaut?'
A recent CBI study suggested that if workers were forced to tell the truth on their resumés, Britain's employment rate would drop to roughly zero.The government has now expanded the list of 'no-go' interview questions, allowing candidates to portray themselves as hard-working and intelligent, rather than lazy fantasists who spend all day playing Facebook Scrabble.
John Hutton, the secretary of state for business, said: "The last thing we need is to lift up this particular rock.
"Far better to carry on believing that everything is true and that everyone is just great." Mr Hutton added: "When I look at my own CV it says that I am a good team player, I use my initiative and that I have a triple first in maths, sculpture and heart surgery from Yale. Bollocks, the lot of it. "I'm actually profoundly under-qualified and unable to dress myself, but do you want to be the business secretary? Let me assure you, it's absolutely f***** tedious."
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/business/firms-not-allowed-to-ask-why-your-cv-is-filled-with-lies-20080115659/
FIRMS NOT ALLOWED TO ASK WHY YOUR CV IS FILLED WITH LIES
POTENTIAL employers are to be barred from asking interviewees why their CVs are filled with rubbish from beginning to end.
'So, did you enjoy being an astronaut?'
A recent CBI study suggested that if workers were forced to tell the truth on their resumés, Britain's employment rate would drop to roughly zero.The government has now expanded the list of 'no-go' interview questions, allowing candidates to portray themselves as hard-working and intelligent, rather than lazy fantasists who spend all day playing Facebook Scrabble.
John Hutton, the secretary of state for business, said: "The last thing we need is to lift up this particular rock.
"Far better to carry on believing that everything is true and that everyone is just great." Mr Hutton added: "When I look at my own CV it says that I am a good team player, I use my initiative and that I have a triple first in maths, sculpture and heart surgery from Yale. Bollocks, the lot of it. "I'm actually profoundly under-qualified and unable to dress myself, but do you want to be the business secretary? Let me assure you, it's absolutely f***** tedious."
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/business/firms-not-allowed-to-ask-why-your-cv-is-filled-with-lies-20080115659/
CPNI - Pre-employment screening best practices
The centre for the protection of National Infrastructure has developed a very detailed document on best practices in the provision of background checks and other pre-employment screening practices. The link below focuses on the verification of identity documents and what to look out for.
http://www.cpni.gov.uk/Docs/Document_verification_guidance_-_July_2007.pdf
The centre has also produced an excellent guide on personel security.
http://www.cpni.gov.uk/Docs/Pers_Sec_TCM_v2.pdf
The centre for the protection of National Infrastructure has developed a very detailed document on best practices in the provision of background checks and other pre-employment screening practices. The link below focuses on the verification of identity documents and what to look out for.
http://www.cpni.gov.uk/Docs/Document_verification_guidance_-_July_2007.pdf
The centre has also produced an excellent guide on personel security.
http://www.cpni.gov.uk/Docs/Pers_Sec_TCM_v2.pdf
Redundancies - References
I am sure that you are all aware of the increased number of redundancies especially in financial services firms. Here at Powerchex we have seen a significant increase in the number of bad references that we have been receiving. Several of the references state that the employee was dismissed, although a reason is seldomly disclosed. Employment references and the results of pre-employment screening checks certainly provide an interesting view of the state of the employment market. More on this as the crisis unfolds.
http://www.lawpack.co.uk/Knowledge/Business/HumanResources/article864.asp
I am sure that you are all aware of the increased number of redundancies especially in financial services firms. Here at Powerchex we have seen a significant increase in the number of bad references that we have been receiving. Several of the references state that the employee was dismissed, although a reason is seldomly disclosed. Employment references and the results of pre-employment screening checks certainly provide an interesting view of the state of the employment market. More on this as the crisis unfolds.
http://www.lawpack.co.uk/Knowledge/Business/HumanResources/article864.asp
Data Protection, Subject Access Requests and Employment References
Data Protection, subject access requests and employment references are often the topic of conversation in human resources circles. As a result, I am listing a few links which you may find useful when you are deciding how to respond to an inquiry:
http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/data_protection/practical_application/references_v1.0_final.pdf
You may also find the following articles of interest:
http://www.personneltoday.com/articles/2007/01/29/39053/information-commissioner-orders-tinies-nanny-agency-to-disclose-job.html
http://www.personneltoday.com/articles/2003/06/01/19189/courts-rule-against-data-access-requests.html
http://www.personneltoday.com/articles/2008/07/15/45177/how-to-spot-lying-on-application-forms.html
Data Protection, subject access requests and employment references are often the topic of conversation in human resources circles. As a result, I am listing a few links which you may find useful when you are deciding how to respond to an inquiry:
http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/data_protection/practical_application/references_v1.0_final.pdf
You may also find the following articles of interest:
http://www.personneltoday.com/articles/2007/01/29/39053/information-commissioner-orders-tinies-nanny-agency-to-disclose-job.html
http://www.personneltoday.com/articles/2003/06/01/19189/courts-rule-against-data-access-requests.html
http://www.personneltoday.com/articles/2008/07/15/45177/how-to-spot-lying-on-application-forms.html
Annual Pre-employment Screening Survey
Powerchex conducts an annual pre-employment screening survey analysing the trends in terms of CV discrepances. These surveys have been widely reported in the press including the FT http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f5112740-56bb-11dd-8686-000077b07658.html, BBC http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7517918.stm, and others.
The 2008 survey, reported widely on how the ranking of the university attended, influences the amount of discrepancies on CVs
Here is the press release that accompanied the survey:
NEWS RELEASE July 18th 2008
Grads from top-ranked universities less likely to lie on CVs.
If you graduated from one of the nation’s top 20 universities, you are less likely to lie on your CV to get a good job; a recent survey shows. On the contrary, if you graduated from one of the UK’s lowest ranked schools, you are more likely to embellish your background.
The survey, which was conducted by pre-employment screening firm Powerchex, reveals that 43% of applicants from the UK’s lowest ranking universities have some form of major embellishment hidden in their application, compared to just 14% of applicants from the Top 20 rated schools.
“What this survey says is that graduates from lesser-known universities may feel they need to alter their background to compete”, says Powerchex managing director Alexandra Kelly. “There appears to be a trend that the lower ranked the university, the higher the likelihood of discrepancies on a CV”, she added.
Kai Peters, Chief Executive at Ashridge Business School agrees with Kelly: "The survey suggests that individuals with the discipline to get into good universities are proud of their performance and see no need to embellish their CVs"
The survey also revealed a link between the subject area studied at university and the frequency of falsifications. More specifically, graduates in the subjects of arts and humanities had the highest rate of discrepancies (22%) whilst maths based students tend to have the lowest (6%). Contrary to popular opinion, graduates in finance also had a low rate of falsifications (13%), second only to maths when it comes to being honest on job applications.
It is not good news for some graduates: "The survey suggests that those who pursue creative writing degrees extend fiction writing to their CVs" continues Kai Peters.
This is however good news for business schools that have placed an emphasis on ethical behaviour and integrity. Mark Zupan, Dean of the Simon Graduate School of Business at the University of Rochester (recently ranked 3rd in the world for finance by the FT) commented, “Contrary to the common-held belief that finance students are less inclined to behave ethically, these results indicate that the exact opposite may be true.”
Here is a link to the actual survey.
http://www.powerchex.co.uk/interface/files/surveys/powerchex-annual-survey-2008.pdf
Powerchex conducts an annual pre-employment screening survey analysing the trends in terms of CV discrepances. These surveys have been widely reported in the press including the FT http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f5112740-56bb-11dd-8686-000077b07658.html, BBC http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7517918.stm, and others.
The 2008 survey, reported widely on how the ranking of the university attended, influences the amount of discrepancies on CVs
Here is the press release that accompanied the survey:
NEWS RELEASE July 18th 2008
Grads from top-ranked universities less likely to lie on CVs.
If you graduated from one of the nation’s top 20 universities, you are less likely to lie on your CV to get a good job; a recent survey shows. On the contrary, if you graduated from one of the UK’s lowest ranked schools, you are more likely to embellish your background.
The survey, which was conducted by pre-employment screening firm Powerchex, reveals that 43% of applicants from the UK’s lowest ranking universities have some form of major embellishment hidden in their application, compared to just 14% of applicants from the Top 20 rated schools.
“What this survey says is that graduates from lesser-known universities may feel they need to alter their background to compete”, says Powerchex managing director Alexandra Kelly. “There appears to be a trend that the lower ranked the university, the higher the likelihood of discrepancies on a CV”, she added.
Kai Peters, Chief Executive at Ashridge Business School agrees with Kelly: "The survey suggests that individuals with the discipline to get into good universities are proud of their performance and see no need to embellish their CVs"
The survey also revealed a link between the subject area studied at university and the frequency of falsifications. More specifically, graduates in the subjects of arts and humanities had the highest rate of discrepancies (22%) whilst maths based students tend to have the lowest (6%). Contrary to popular opinion, graduates in finance also had a low rate of falsifications (13%), second only to maths when it comes to being honest on job applications.
It is not good news for some graduates: "The survey suggests that those who pursue creative writing degrees extend fiction writing to their CVs" continues Kai Peters.
This is however good news for business schools that have placed an emphasis on ethical behaviour and integrity. Mark Zupan, Dean of the Simon Graduate School of Business at the University of Rochester (recently ranked 3rd in the world for finance by the FT) commented, “Contrary to the common-held belief that finance students are less inclined to behave ethically, these results indicate that the exact opposite may be true.”
Here is a link to the actual survey.
http://www.powerchex.co.uk/interface/files/surveys/powerchex-annual-survey-2008.pdf
As the MD in a company that specialises in pre-employment screening, I have often found that a great deal of information on the subject is either misunderstood or misinterpreted. I plan to use this blog as a central point of "all things pre-employment screening" and "all things referencing". This blog will obviously much more useful with input from other people with an interest and expertise on the subject, so please, contribute. There are also loads or resources on our website at www.powerchex.co.uk.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
