Current News:
To Protect & Serve @ $10 An-Hour
The terror alerts announced by the Department of
Homeland Security since 911 in the US and Canada have reinforced a crucial
reality: There are clear and present threats against a variety of private sector
targets. Many of our country’s financial institutions, chemical plants, oil
refineries, and nuclear facilities are owned and/or operated by private
enterprises.
Although during these times of heightened security these high risk targets’
safekeeping may be enhanced by law enforcement, many times the front line safety
of these important parts of nation’s infrastructure is the primary
responsibility of private security.
Lets look at many of the difficulties, troubles and challenges facing the
private security industry today. It spotlighted, for example, the alarming fact
that many of our country’s security officers are unlicensed, untrained (or
poorly trained) and not subject to background checks.
Also the distressing reality that the private security officer business is
hallmarked, in general, by high turnover, low pay and few benefits.
With the increasing demand for private security, some firms are just looking for
“warm bodies” to fill their uniforms. Especially in this day and age, with
the many threats we must face, this is utterly outrageous.
What steps can be reasonably taken to help professionalize and improve our
nation’s current state of private security?
Here are some thoughts:
Rent-A-Cops: I abhor that unfounded term to describe security guards.
Security officers should be a well-trained deterrent with enhanced skills to
observe, report, and when possible, prevent improper activity at their assigned
posts within the limits of the law. A security officer is not a law enforcement
officer, and they are surely not a “rent-a-cop.”
Image: A related issue is the public’s image of security officers. How
many of us have seen security guards portrayed on TV and in movies as stupid,
lazy and even criminals themselves? The stereotype of a sleeping security guard
wearing a grubby uniform, with an opened lunchbox by his side, has become
ubiquitous in our society. This dubious image could change by attracting the
right people into the private security business, and by having them set the
example of professionalism and integrity.
Career: Being a professional security officer, especially in our post
September 11, 2001 world, should be a viable career choice. The job of security
officer should not just be the purview of the semi-retired, part-timers and
students. With proper compensation, adequate benefits, sufficient training and
stimulating advancement prospects, many individuals may find job of a security
officer a highly attractive career option.
Pay: According the USATODAY.com article, in the year 2000, private
security guards earned an average of $17,570 annually, and many leave within
months of being hired. And, don’t forget that a security guard is considered a
high risk job for workplace violence according to government statistics. Sadly,
each and every year, a few security officers make the ultimate sacrifice by
being murdered in the line of duty. Being a security guard for eight bucks or so
an hour doesn’t sound like such a great deal, does it?
Background Checks: The proper background checks should be fully completed
before a security officer is assigned to their post. I believe this is just
common sense, and the right thing to do.
Training: Training ought to be in two parts. First, all security guards
should be given a standardized training course, a sort of “security academy”
in which all the basics are covered such as security procedures, emergency
drills, first-aid, report writing, etc. Second, training should additionally
cover areas specific to the security guard’s post. Periodic updates and
retraining should be integrated into the security officer’s work schedule.
Equipment: Having the right equipment to do one’s job is essential. I
have observed, regrettably, many security guards wearing uniforms that are a
size or two too small or large, carrying broken flashlights, and using
malfunctioning radios. How can a security officer be expected to have dignity in
his job when his employer does not even care enough to issue the proper and
functioning equipment and supplies? All security guards should be issued the
suitable equipment to do their intrinsically risky jobs in as safe and
proficient a manner as reasonably possible. In addition, the issuing of body
armor should be carefully considered, especially to those security guards
working “higher risk” details.
Professionalism: Security officers should be professionals in their
field, and therefore, treated as such. Unfortunately, I have seen - especially
in certain industries - managers who viewed a security guard as an extra pair of
hands to do non-security duties, such as maintenance and housekeeping.
How would that manager explain that while a security officer was busy unplugging
a toilet, a trespasser entered the property and assaulted a visitor or employee?
Simply put, security guards should be limited to security-related duties.
Pride: I think the word “pride” sums it all up. If pride was shared
by all involved in private security, from the security officer to the employer,
the level of professionalism would immediately be enhanced. If one has pride in
what they do, they will do a better job.
My Final Thoughts: There are already many proficient and capable people
in the security industry. We must find the proper ways to retain and motivate
these fine folks, while at the same time, working to attract additional
qualified people to their ranks.
Like they say in the movie “A Field Of Dreams,” if you build it, they will
come. I believe the same theory will hold true for the private security
industry.
If security management makes the effort in time, resources and funds to
“build” a better security officer, the public will come to demand this new
breed of skilled security guard. Only then, in time, will private security shift
from being an industry of many contracts being awarded to the “lowest
bidder,” to one which is a viable and appealing career option for the
well-trained, well-paid and respected security professional.
What
do you want to accomplish
with the security patrol service?
PURPOSE
Drive-through security patrols in MY Opinion is a waste of money but beneficial
to the insurer. Having been in law enforcement and patrolling myself for many
years I am in a position to opinionate on this subject. These patrols serve a
limited but useful purpose. By definition, the drive-through patrol service does
not remain on-site and generally uses a vehicle to make the rounds. This
type of patrol is less expensive then an on-site security guard because of the
limited time spent on the property. Highly visible, drive-through security
services are ideal for the patrol of commercial properties after business hours
or on properties not open to the public. One purpose of this type of patrol is
to observe (or test) all accessible gates, doors, and windows and make
sure they are secured, and to report the conditions found on the property
to the business owner or the police. Another purpose is to make sure no
unauthorized persons are trespassing on private property. Some drive-through
security services may also respond to alarm signals but this requires a more
specialized guard force. The primary goal of a drive-through security patrol
service is to deter property loss and vandalism after business hours because of
their random presence. This presence is normally supported by signage that
states the property will be patrolled by "ABC Security Service."
Drive-through security patrols are not good at catching criminals in the act. By
design, drive-through security patrols should be highly visible and therefore
should be incapable is sneaking up on a perpetrator. The best patrol vehicles
are high profile, and distinctive in appearance. The most visible
security vehicles are well marked and equipped with a light bar on the roof and
high-powered spotlights. This high visibility maximizes the deterrent effect as
long as the security officer is patrolling competently and according to post
orders.
Random drive-through security patrols are less effective on commercial
properties while open to the public. This is because the drive-through security
officer probably has 6-10 other commercial accounts to patrol each hour. Random
and infrequent patrol does not allow the security officer enough time to observe
loiterers or differentiate between the customers, the residents, and the
criminals. Many drive-through patrols consist of only a high-speed pass and
offer little in the way of observation or scrutiny of suspicious activity.
Because of the nature of the drive-through patrol, customer contacts are infrequent
and suspicious groups are not likely to be confronted. Drive-through is better
than not doing anything, but understand the limitations of infrequent and
non-confrontation security services. Due to fear from prior litigation claims,
signs supporting the random drive-through security patrol are not always used on
retail and rental housing settings for fear of misrepresenting to a consumer
that security guards are always on-site.
POST ORDERS
Any contract security services must have clearly defined and articulated
"post orders". Post orders are written instructions for how the
security officer is to patrol a site and should be incorporated as part of the
contract. These written instructions need to be detailed and reflect the expectations
of the property manager and the responsibility of the security patrol
service. Post orders are necessary for drive-through accounts because the same
security officer will not always patrol the site and each property will have
specific requirements. Written post orders allow for consistency in patrol and
reporting and set forth the obligations for fulfilling the service contract.
Post instructions should specify if drive-through security officers are to get
out of their vehicle to "shake" doors or walk behind buildings. If you
don't require it...it won't occur. Well-written post order acts like a checklist
for the security officer while on-site and helps them fill out their daily
activity reports and logs.
REPORTING
It is the custom and practice of all contract security patrol industry to
complete daily activity reports and incident reports for each site they patrol.
Despite this practice, it is important to require written incident reports as
part of the contract for service. This is usually one of the items specified in
the post orders. As a rule of thumb, if you don’t receive a written report,
assume the patrol did not occur and don’t pay for the service until you
receive one. This practice will ensure that reports are written and submitted in
a timely manner.
Detailed daily activity and incident reports are crucial to a property owner. It
is a form of supervision and holds the security service accountable for
patrolling the property as agreed. In addition to communicating what was
observed in the parking lot, the reports provide important documentation in case
of a lawsuit alleging inadequate security.
Daily activity reports are designed to report routine things like when and where
the security officer was on your property and what they observed. DARs should be
detailed and informative. Each entry should list the date, time,
location, and activity. Don’t accept activity logs that merely state,
"10:00 PM or 11:00 PM – All Quiet". A proper daily activity report
of an apartment property might state, "9/29/99 -10:06 PM – Completed
patrol of the south parking lot, one light burned out over parking space #256 or
"9/29/99 - 10:14 PM – Checked the mail room, pool gate, laundry room, and
restroom door locks. All were secure." These reports notify the landlord to
repair burned out lights or to resolve hazardous conditions. Daily activity
reports should document the patrol of all roadways on a property even if no
unusual activity is observed.
Incident reports are only written when something unusual happens that
requires a more detailed account. Incident reports are not limited to crime.
Incident reports should notify the client of an unlocked door, a large group
loitering, a flooded parking lot, safety hazards, and of course all crimes or
property damage. All contacts with persons on a client’s property should be
reported as well. Incident reports should be more detailed than DARs because
they chronicle one specific event. Incident reports that say "see police
report" are not acceptable. Incident reports should note everything
the security officer observed, what they did, and what they were doing at the
time of the incident. They must contain the basics of reporting like who, what,
where, when, why, and how.
SUPERVISION
One inherent flaw in contracting for drive-through security patrol service is
supervision of the officers. Unless someone is checking, the drive-through
patrol may not occur or the service may be insufficient. A common problem for
some security patrol services is that they overbook, and assign too many
accounts to their officers. It is impossible for patrol officers to properly
inspect a site if they must make a high-speed pass to keep on schedule. It is
important at the beginning of the contract to establish the quality and timing
of the patrols and then follow up if you suspect that the service is inadequate.
Worse yet, is when officers falsify reports indicating that they
patrolled when they had not. To avoid these problems, security patrol officers
need to know that they are being supervised in some manner. This can be
accomplished by a patrol supervisor but will usually involve additional costs.
Other methods are to incorporate a mechanical or electrical check in device.
Common systems include logging in on strategically placed watchman clocks,
dropping patrol slips through the mail slot (hopefully in view of a video
camera) or punching in on a time clock. On occupied commercial properties, the
guard service should check in or sign off on a log in presence of a site
employee.
Go
to Top
