BCTF President not happy about new fingerprinting requirement

Vancouver, BC, Canada / News Talk 980 CKNW | Vancouver's News. Vancouver's Talk
BCTF President not happy about new fingerprinting requirement

New requirements for criminal back ground check requirements has the head of the province’e teachers federation concerned.

Jim Iker says the new rules that took the BCTF by surprise mean anyone who’s name and birthdate match a person on the sex offender registry much get fingerprinted *and * they have to pay for it.

He says, “That affects approximately one out of four males and one out of seven females this year who require criminal record checks – that’s about 3,000 people that will have to get additional checks.”

Iker says they are looking at the issue with legal advisors to see what the next step will be.

He is clear the concern is NOT over background checks — teachers have them every five years — but the issue is there there is such a low threshold for additional screening with this new regulation.


Leave a Reply

    • Lets make this policy fair and extend to health care professionals (nurses, doctors, dentists along with their flu shot of course), police, day care/babysitters, youth sports, etc as they come in contact with children as well, no pun intended.

      The government has deemed these deviants fit for release to society but should be tracked. But since government has found it impossible to track these deviants at all times, the onus therefore falls on all citizens to be tracked. The charter of rights and freedoms is great in theory, but when it comes to flu shots and the safety of our children, the greater common good is ALWAYS the logical choice.

      “if they have nothing to hide then they shouldn’t have a problem being fingerprinted”

  1. I am a teacher, and I don’t mind getting fingerprinted. I’m not guilty, so I have nothing to hide. But if I’m not guilty, then why am I going to pay for it?

    To play devil’s advocate, why doesn’t everyone get fingerprinted? We could get it done at the Motor Vehicle Branch or at banks. If you have nothing to hide…

  2. Protection of children is obviously the paramount issue at play here. However, if you place yourself in the position of an INNOCENT person who now has to be fingerprinted, you can see how this might seem like a huge invasion of privacy. This is why I think people have their backs up a bit about this. It’s just one more piece of ones privacy chiseled away. And why? Because the government and the courts release sexual offenders back into our communities without adequate monitoring. The fact that the innocent party has to pay the fee just rubs salt in the wound. Should the parole boards not be covering this fee, given that it is their responsibility to track released offenders?

  3. There is a slight mis-statement in the article…it is not if the sex offender’s NAME matches the employees, it is only their BIRTHDATE and GENDER match, regardless of how long the teacher has worked in BC, or where the sex offender was arrested, or the height and ethnicity of the sex offender or any other evidence….and the employees have to pay about $80 for the privilege of being fingerprinted and analysed. Will this actually protect any children?