Required to provide fingerprints.

Required to provide fingerprints.

Author
Discussion

Some Gump

12,671 posts

185 months

Friday 18th July 2014
quotequote all
Why are you humouring him? The only options are troll, nutter or paranoid survivalist type. He's already collected together his lack of understanding, found the worst outcome available (judgement day, in orwellian 1981 society), and concluded that's the logical outcome.
Do you honestly think posting oin an automotive forum will change that? You probably don't even realise that the matrix could be real....

FunkyGibbon

3,781 posts

263 months

Friday 18th July 2014
quotequote all
Some Gump said:
Why are you humouring him?
Slow day at work...

MissChief

7,095 posts

167 months

Saturday 19th July 2014
quotequote all
Fotic said:
This is absurd. You're worried that by giving your fingerprints over, they will somehow uncover your shady past and presumably fire you? So you're solution is to leave your first proper job? Amazing.

A) they won't/can't check your fingerprints against the police records without your permission.

B) They won't anyway.

C) EVEN if they did, the worst that happens is you lose your job which is what you're doing pre-emptively anyway.

The only way this thread makes sense is if your shady past was actually something much more sinister. NB I am NOT accusing you of being a kiddy fiddler.
This TBH. Worst result by staying? You get the sack. Which you're effectively doing.

PorkInsider

5,877 posts

140 months

Sunday 20th July 2014
quotequote all
So we've got to the bottom of the issue: you've done something in the past which you don't want your employer to know about.

Instead of starting the thread by telling us this, you set off with a diatribe about how your employer is some sort biometric data trawling Bond villain with sinister intentions.

You're the one who has done wrong, not your employer.

Suck it up or run away.

Oh, I see you've decided to run away...

elster

17,517 posts

209 months

Sunday 20th July 2014
quotequote all
Most sites where people get paid hourly are implementing the fingerprint system.

One place I do some work for implemented a fingerprint time clock to replace the manual version. Surprisingly the overtime bill was less than 1/4 of when it was the manual system.

As has been said the fingerprints given to the police aren't going to be cross checked on a timeclock. For them to do that and then find out about your past would break a whole host of laws. For you to jack it in, then I think in the long run the company will do well to get rid of you.


Pothole

34,367 posts

281 months

Sunday 20th July 2014
quotequote all
Some Gump said:
in orwellian 1981 society
erm...

Some Gump

12,671 posts

185 months

Monday 21st July 2014
quotequote all
It's like 1984, but with fewer rats. smile

Tannedbaldhead

2,952 posts

131 months

Monday 21st July 2014
quotequote all
elster said:
Most sites where people get paid hourly are implementing the fingerprint system.
Yup and you can tell you are in an establishment that uses said systems by the relentless repetition of "Not recognised. Please try again", swearing and half of conversations such as "Try wiping your finger on your trousers. No? Suck your finger and wipe it. Why not? EEEEEEEWWWWW!!! Seriously? Well wash and dry your hand in the toilet and try. No? fk it!!!! Just sign in then"

Mark-C

5,007 posts

204 months

Monday 21st July 2014
quotequote all
SpeedDontMatter said:
pilbeam_mp62 said:
Did you provide your prints to the police, or not ? Had you done something wrong ? Were you convicted of any crime ?
I had somewhat of a misspent youth.
This sort of stuff is likely to show up through a fairly basic criminal records check rather than some complicated matching of the metric data from your fingerprint scanning against police records by our lizard overlords.

Get a grip

KaraK

13,177 posts

208 months

Monday 21st July 2014
quotequote all
SpeedDontMatter said:
I have recently become employed by a company that undertake work on behalf of a large corporate asset holder. At the end of last year before I was employed, the asset holder used the guise of safety to implement the fingerprinting of all workers that are involved with project delivery, as the company claims the system is used to manage staff attendance which stops workers working multiple shifts. For the sake of the thread, I believe the system is referred to as a 'fingerprint time clock' - which appears to be unobtrusive.

Whilst there's no dispute that the work is potentially dangerous, every safety precaution under the sun is implemented to minimise risk, and there are other less intrusive methods of monitoring staff attendance. Understandably I am questioning the usage of these fingerprint systems, plus I have concerns of lax data and/or system security.
It's not an uncommon measure and safety isn't necessarily a "guise" - without knowing what the work entails exactly I'm guessing here but in quite a few work environments I can think of that would fall under the category of "dangerous" then it is invaluable to know from a safety perspective just who is present in the building or not. Also add in other benefits (improved access control, managing absence, protecting assets etc) and it's easy to see why a company would have something like this in place. Lax security is potentially always a concern I suppose but why would it be more of a concern with your fingerprints then any other data the company has about you?

SpeedDontMatter said:
So, as I am unwilling to provide my biometric data willy nilly, I am left with a difficult decision to make regarding my future with my new employer. Additionally I may have provided my prints with the local police in my youth - which adds to my reluctance, however it is against my ethic to comply with such systems in any case.
The fact that you provided the police with your prints is completely and utterly irrelevant - if they wanted to do any kind of criminal records check against you it would be a CRB check most likely which they have to have your consent to carry out anyway. Any Police force giving out this sort of information outside the proper channels would likely be dragged over hot coals. Any identity theft worries are a bit specious really - the info you have to provide to an employer to pay you (assuming PAYE) would be much more useful in that regard. When was the last time you were asked for your fingerprints to open a bank account or get a phone contract? Even if they were somehow to find some nefarious use for your fingerprints that has escaped me then unless you are wearing gloves everywhere your fingerprints will be all over the place and fairly trivial to obtain - and probably easier to obtain in their actual from then they would be from that sort of system. What are your ethical concerns?


SpeedDontMatter said:
So what is the best way to deal with this scenario? I have identified 4 options:

1) Register with the system, provide prints - accepting there may be negative consequences in the future.
2) Hand in my resignation without fuss - thank them for the opportunity but explain the work's not my thing.
3) Get to the point where I am required to register and refuse to do so.
4) State to my manager that I am unwilling to provide sensitive biometric data.

Unfortunately the job is decent, it's my first 'career' type job following university and I am new to the industry which is somewhat of a niche with respect to project delivery..

Edited by SpeedDontMatter on Monday 14th July 22:13
You missed option 5 - realise that you are being a silly fool , register on the system and enjoy your career.

I'm not sure how much it has a bearing on this issue for you but honestly if you don't plan on ever revealing your "misspent" youth to any employer you are going to struggle, many "career" type jobs will do some form of CRB check and an Enhanced one will show up everything including juvenile ones. To be honest a lot of employers won't really care about previous convictions unless they are relevant to what you are being employed to do (if you have a conviction for fraud you might struggle to get work in an accounts department for example), what they often care about more is if you don't declare them.

Pothole

34,367 posts

281 months

Monday 21st July 2014
quotequote all
Some Gump said:
It's like 1984, but with fewer rats. smile
I couldn't get the maths to work...1984 - 101 = 1883

Some Gump

12,671 posts

185 months

Monday 21st July 2014
quotequote all
Ahh, that's where you've made a goof in your calculations - i didn't say NO rats, only fewer smile

My fault for ambiguity of course, but you could have asked for clarification.

0000

13,812 posts

190 months

Monday 21st July 2014
quotequote all
I don't like these systems either, I'm not sure why others seem so keen on them. I've written iris recognition systems and use various biometric scanners to access secure systems regularly.

That said, keep it in perspective.

Vaud

50,283 posts

154 months

Sunday 7th September 2014
quotequote all
Any update OP?