Professional Security was there when two front-line SIA staff called on a Midlands guarding company on a mission to find – and pass on – facts.
It was a first-floor office – the usual office furniture and computers, a Dilbert calendar on the wall – where the guarding sector and the security industry regulator came face to face. On one side of the desk were Gary Lichfield, operations manager, and Neil Street-Bailey, national business development manager, of Firewalker Security; on the other side, Colin Braginton, Security Industry Authority investigator and Chris Sharp, the SIA’s head of investigation Midlands. And Professional Security.
About the men
Chris Sharp was 23 years in the Met Police; Colin Braginton 22 years in HM Prison Service. Chris said: “As a team we have been together since June.” The purpose of his visit to Firewalker, based in Cannock, Staffordshire, was to try to understand the guarding sector, to get a handle on it, as the SIA moves beyond regulation of the door and vehicle clamping sectors. Chris added: “And to try to understand some of the problems that these guys are likely to come up against, so hopefully we can head them off at the pass, before they happen. It’s about partnership working, really, and working with companies to improve and raise standards.”
How to get approved
First question from Firewalker was: how to get approved? (That is, to become a member of the Approved Contractors Scheme.) It’s still being worked out, Chris replied. Next: how to get private security industry regulation known among Joe Public, beyond the industry? Now the first cases are happening of pubs being shut because door staff do not have a SIA licence – or rather, because they could not prove they have applied for a licence. Chris said: “With the best will in the world, the budget is not bottomless.” So no TV ads starring Angela Rippon – unless the licence fee goes up. Earlier, Firewalker pointed out to Professional Security how it was difficult to get the local press interested in the SIA, or private security.
Guard firm view
Firewalker’s Neil Street-Bailey and Gary Lichfield gave the guard firm point of view; that security officers will hold back before paying £190 for a licence application; that the firm is taking 14 days from advertising for staff to someone finishing the training course; and Firewalker cannot afford to pay the new starter for perhaps six weeks while waiting for the licence. There is a fear that a guarding firm will not be able to fulfil a contract because it cannot get licenced staff through the door. Just as there is a price war on the doors, as employers compete for newly-badged door supervisers, so guarding companies may find recruitment their biggest nightmare; and might poach staff. Or guarding may go in-house, not covered by SIA licences (yet). Or larger guarding firms may buy smaller ones, purely for their staff. In reply Chris Sharp said he was sympathetic but added that staff had to be vetted, and checked; and he encouraged companies to get their staff through the process as quickly as possible. The Approved Contractors Scheme might make for more flexibility, he said.
Change over time
As for what the SIA can and will do on the enforcement side, Chris Sharp said that he has four staff to cover the Midlands: “We are an intelligence-led organisation.” The SIA has only the £190 licence to spend; resources are limited. Chris Sharp was quietly spoken and accepting of criticism, while pointing out that things will not change at the click of fingers; change will happen over time. And no, the SIA staff did not draw up the legislation that the authority is working to.
What next
What did the meeting achieve? Everyone saw that SIA staff do not have horns coming out of their head. They are approachable, and appreciate that one side cannot work without the other. The dilemma for the SIA is that until details of the licence for security officers and key-holders are decided – while the regulator consults – the guarding sector does not know where it stands. Chris Sharp, for instance, was simply unable to answer Neil Street-Bailey’s query about whether there are any additional costs to come, besides those already announced, the licence fee and the known, budgetable cost of training and trainers. At root was the unspoken answer that the market will even itself out: that if contract guarding firms are going after the cream of the labour pool, those with a licence, what will be left for in-house set-ups or those thinking of switching in-house? For the guarding firm, the ideal is contracts based not on a client price but on the going rate and the difficulty of the job. In a SIA-regulated market this will mean higher going rates. Something for the client to appreciate – a client who may not be familiar with the security industry (hence Firewalker’s question about wider awareness of the SIA). Where a would-be client requires officers with particular skills – schools with teenagers with behaviour problems, say – the guarding sector may simply not have the calibre of officer to take the contract.
