[Frank]

Originally Posted by Virgin Salesman

What I would like to see is VM change their current recruitment policy and CRB check all new F2F recruits.

I would also like to see all our current face to face staff complete a CRB, VM could then make a decision on whether they would continue to allow these people to sell (based on how severe (or not) the check was on the individual).

Okay well I thought people had pointed out that the CRB is not for that kind of of purpose, and is more aimed at checking people that have contact with children?

If you actually are aiming for that, then I would suggest taking Russ up on his offer as that is probably the best chance you have of seeing that happen. Or perhaps raising this issue with VM's compliance department by pointing out what kind of problems this is having in specific detail so they are able to do something about it. They need enough detail to be able to justify action.

Originally Posted by Virgin Salesman

VM wants to be a big player in the market but with our current recruitment policies we are only leaving ourselves open to abuse from customers and the media regarding the calibre of our staff.

At the end of the day, VM is pretty much the same company as ntl Telewest was, just with a nice consumer-friendly rebranding using a brand that someone else built up. If you don't get any joy after raising the issue through either of methods above, I would suggest jumping ship to a company that cares more about its reputation, the quality of it's direct sales channel and the staff that work in that channel. Simple as that.

Originally Posted by Virgin Salesman

Direct sales already has a bad reputation, I would like to see it cleaned up - other companies (including Sky - working in the same market) are doing their bit so why shouldnt we? Lets make F2F selling a better place with better people who are not just looking after their own interests.

Well other companies are managed by other execs that perhaps think differently and have different priorities. We've been through various CEOs since this site was around in its various incarnations, and the current CEO seems to be a bit of a p**k to be honest. That said, I doubt that something like you are proposing is going to be given the priority it deserves, so see my suggestions above. Also, you say that Sky is better, but the grass is not always greener. How sure are you that Sky is actually "doing their bit", or is it just they better manage public perception?

Also consider that from a management perspective, they are trying to run the company under a large debt load (usual these days ), and there is a balancing act between costs and profits. In other words, if the amount being spent on vetting new employees is serving their needs well enough (complaints about employees with criminal records are stastically acceptable) then why would they spend more money of further vetting the employees?

There are two schools of management imho.

Management that truly values and embraces customers and make the organisation customer focussed as much as possible - while controlling costs - in order to make a profit. This group of management would embrace you, sit down and talk about how they could improve their recruitment process, and actually seriously believe that they have a duty to their customers to protect them from people with criminal records. They would look to industry best practise in terms of recruitment policies, and take strides to change their policy so that people with convictions are screened out, however they go about doing it. Perhaps it would include CRB for F2F sales, perhaps not. Regardless, it's not a small change you are looking for in a company of VM's size.

The other group of management doesn't care about customers, they are more interested in growing sales through snazzy product launches overlooking Buckingham palace and reducing costs through traffic shaping internet service . Old school, non Cluetrain outlook. They would look at the statistics of complaints under the current structure and conclude that even though the VM sales force includes people with unspent convictions, the effect of this is acceptable, and would therefore do nothing.

Sadly the direction comes from the top. 1 guess which group Berkett is in.

---------- Post added at 17:29 ---------- Previous post was at 17:22 ----------

Originally Posted by hokkers999

If you are *that* concerned then why on earth *wouldn't* you speak to HR. It's your duty man, so get on with it.

Come on, let's face it, HR are useless in situations such as this. Speaking to HR about something like this is not going to help. What are they going to do about it?

Originally Posted by hokkers999

In fact if you believe what you are saying is true and you don't report it, then if anything does happen you will be liable for the results.

Erm how did you figure that?