Volunteers do not pay now: I said specifically 'no cost to volunteers'. Employers pay for their employees. My niece has just graduated in radiography (with first class honours and student of the year prize; I'm so proud I have to boast, given the problems she had) and is having a background check done now. If she was expected to pay for it I would have heard all about it, believe me, as she is so hard up. Her employing Health Board is footing the bill.
In the early days of background checks my local council paid for them for teachers, assistants, dinner ladies and crossing patrol people as well as for us reading volunteers. I see no reason for that to have changed. I assume the self employed -e.g. private music teacher - pay for themselves. Patricia in Wales -----Original Message----- From: Sue Duckles <s...@duckles.co.uk> To: scotlace <scotl...@aol.com> CC: lace <lace@arachne.com> Sent: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 19:53 Subject: Re: [lace] Teaching lace - UK background checks That'd be about right.... volunteers would have to pay themselves.... I can foresee people not bothering to volunteer at all!! School crossing patrols for instance... only work 5 hours per week termtimes only.... and they'd have to pay for the check?? Can we really see that working? Back down off soapbox.... Sue (Lollipop Lady in North of UK) On 29 Jul 2013, at 18:45, scotl...@aol.com wrote: > I seem to remember it was said that people required a background check for > each class/group taught in different locations. This morning, in the church > coffee lounge I was told the system has changed. > You can find out about it on: > > > www.homeoffice.gov.uk/dbs - To unsubscribe send email to majord...@arachne.com containing the line: unsubscribe lace y...@address.here. For help, write to arachne.modera...@gmail.com. Photo site: http://www.flickr.com/photos/lacemaker/sets/
