CivCom Fundraising Communications

[themajor]

@NCO-MD

BPSS is only required if the Civ Comm member has a Bader account.

Which now every civ comm member gets/has

[themajor]

@Anton

wait for the next WSO visit for an ID Check

In SW the OC can complete the ID check providing they hold SC.

Same for DBS ID checks, so no needless delay

[Anton]

In my Wing (within C&E) , they can do the DBS ID Checks but not the BPSS ones - doesn’t make sense.

[willow]

Depends on Wing as I am also SW and our OCs are not authorised to do the ID checks for BPSS, only DBS. It needs to be a WSO.

[AlexCorbin]

HIOW OC Sqns can pretty much do it all…its called empowerment

[themajor]

Checkin with SO2 Pers

[willow]

Can you share please, it would make life a lot easier

[Giminion]

I will be doing this also

[Chief_Tech]

@Anton

they can do the DBS ID Checks but not the BPSS ones - doesn’t make sense.

With BPSS it’s meant to be a paid person within the organisation & someone who has been trained in the ACT document ID checking course (& been issued a little UV torch)

This is what limits it a bit. It does make sense - it’s just that you need to have an understanding of the HR policy first before you can figure out why they are doing it that way (& then the best way to challenge it)

[Giminion]

@Chief_Tech

With BPSS it’s meant to be a paid person within the organisation & someone who has been trained in the ACT document ID checking course

Never seen anything like that in policy, never known it be paid only, and never seen anyone light up an ID doc.

[Chief_Tech]

@Giminion

Never seen anything like that in policy, never known it be paid only,

It seems to have been the policy or the very least the required process when the switch was mandated. I imagine the policy itself is likly stated in a HR onboarding documents on somewhere which we don’t have access to as pure volunteers.

@daws1159

We have been told that all persons going through BPSS must be interviewed by an employed member of staff as part of the process and that they must attend WHQ for this to take place

[Giminion]

I think policy has always allowed delegation of checks to “SC-cleared personnel that have viewed the guidance”, with an approval caveat. Just that some places limited who they would approve.

Initially when we had the big BSVR > BPSS conversion push, we had a big thing with the WExO doing the rounds to get through everyone, but that was just while it was brand new.

There is one reference to UV light in the document checking guidance that I’m aware of, as a possible but not stated as mandatory method for checking Birth Certificates.

[MacRox]

I searched the forum to find any content in Civ Com about BPSS.

I think it’s absolutely ridiculous that we have to provide all this information. I realise the importance of security (I’m ex-military of a different flavour) BUT what if I don’t want my employer knowing I’m volunteering with this organisation? What about data minimisation?

I honestly think it will put potential volunteers off.

Surely there is a way to influence those who decide and create some sort of cut off?

i.e. You can have an email address and access to Bader but not access to the cadet database (I don’t want access to the cadet database!).

Volunteers will start doing things they probably shouldn’t to avoid this.

Ugh.

[JoeBloggs]

@MacRox

i.e. You can have an email address and access to Bader but not access to the cadet database (I don’t want access to the cadet database!).

AFAIK you won’t have access to cadet details anyway. Not directly at least.

But with an email will come access to Sharepoint and, obviously, emails. Both contain data at Official-Sensitive level, thus the BPSS requirement*.

I honestly do completely agree with you though. It appears to be overkill for CWC members. They could keep you off mailing lists so you don’t see any mass emails etc and block access to anything other than the email. That would negate the need for anything.

Our previous Commandant was also on a mission to make sure the civilian pillar was obviously separate from the others. This combining of access seems to be a step backwards on that front. For emails, it surely would have made more sense to work with the Air Cadet Charity to get CWC members a XXXX@aircadetcharity.org.uk email address.

*I do actually wonder if this is why it’s needed .AFAIk they are not making CWC members do the protecting information course, which would be needed for any access to OS materal.

[Chief_Tech]

@MacRox

I realise the importance of security (I’m ex-military of a different flavour) BUT what if I don’t want my employer knowing I’m volunteering with this organisation? What about data minimisation?

This goes for both CFAVs & civcoms. You can use two personal references instead.

[themajor]

@MacRox

what if I don’t want my employer knowing I’m volunteering with this organisation? What about data minimisation?

I’m yet to be aware of anyone’s reference being contacted…

[JoeBloggs]

Same here, I’ve always wondered what’s the point. Everyone I’ve spoken to has not had their references spoken to.

[Cadet04]

Both of mine were

[JoeBloggs]

Hmm, interesting. I know of none that were checked. I’ve also been a reference a couple of times my self and never had a phone call to check.

[Giminion]

@JoeBloggs

previous Commandant was also on a mission to make sure the civilian pillar was obviously separate from the others. This combining of access seems to be a step backwards on that front

You don’t realise that was a smokescreen for cost cutting on license fees?

Cost was even mentioned in the announcement.

That said, under the old licence system, cutting their licenses was an act of separation of the pillars considering the funding source. Don’t think that applies under the new scheme.