Has anyone else noticed how spotty the clearances are at this place? I had a colleague from a background that would raise some questions for clearance vetting who was allowed to work on one of the defence accounts without actually being cleared, and speaking with vetting myself it looks like they never actually bothered clearing me despite getting told otherwise. Get out guys, before they do you one over
8 replies (most recent on top)
If what the OP is saying is true, then DXC are in breach of the contracts as it seems that they are not applying for clearance for some people who would require it.
Probably due to "the $500M cost savings"
If this is happening, then the clients NEED to be informed of the possible security breach.
SC isn’t that difficult if you have 5 years residency and continuous employment and a U.K. passport. DV is a whole world of pain. I know people who have done that… Depends what you mean by a ‘dodgy’ background and FYI DXC don’t do vetting themselves of you look at yours it’s done by the MOD/Home office etc
A security clearance is about whether the Government office that the clearance refers to ie MOJ. Home Office MOD etc the Gov vetting team believe you can be trusted, So for eg, if you have a record say for Bankruptcy and you don't declare it, when they do a deep dive into you and see you haven't reported it then they might decline the clearance, however, the reverse of this is that if you have declared it then they might well give you clearance.
Also in Some circumstances, people can work without clearance so long as they are escorted by somebody who is cleared.
And finally, it is also up to the site security they are working on to check clearance also
I guess that root cause of this problem is the same as most DXC problems. I'm going to guess that DXC has WFR'd most of the staff from the vetting office and now has someone just randomly 'confirming' that staff have the necessary clearances.
Bro-Just do the work and move on. Are you a Shakespeare?
in my experience here - any joe and jane can work on clients sites with minimal vetting and if you do land on such a client or any client don't expect any support and help from your co workers or line and project managers. If any thing goes wrong and it can be credited to a worker on the ground then they will roast that guy rather than blame themselves.
This was more the case of a guy with a background that would raise eyebrows to UK SV (maybe prompt one or 2 questions) being allowed on the account, on a customer site without clearance
Clearance can still be successful for those with a criminal record, as long as it is not a serious crime and will be assessed on your age at time of offence, how long ago and the seriousness of it. DXC owns the clearance (not the individual and DXC should revoke it and require you to destroy any ID cards once you leave.
As for putting staff in list x sites without clearance, The DXC sponsor the line manager and security controller are culpable and there are penalties in place if the supplier is found to be complicit in breaking the terms of the contract. I am surprised DXC has allowed this to slip, as they used to be quite strict on these processes.