Guarding company director Wilson Chowdhry tells how his firm – AA Security – has put in the hours before Security Industry Authority licences come into his sector.
In regards to the forthcoming SIA licensing requirements we have followed a systematic and very pragmatic approach. Initially I attended various training courses allowing myself to become a qualified instructor approved by SITO. Following this I had sourced a training room which I have had approved by SITO and I now operate a SITO-approved City and Guilds training and examination centre.
Sourcing contracts with the Employment Centre and the Learning and skills Council, I have recieved funding from the government to not only train my own staff via the ‘profit for learning scheme’ but also unemployed individuals under the Job Plus initiative with the Employment Service. [The company has recently gained the Employment Service’s ‘Positive about disabled people’ logo.]
I now have a team of three qualified and mobile trainers able to train in any location providing all costs are met. I would like to offer these services to other companies. All our officers as a standard are put through the relevant BJT [basic job training]; we are qualified to train for the following SITO BJTs: door supervising, retail security, static and patrol guarding; and conflict management (SITO-Maybo). Furthermore all officers follow our career development plan and complete the ‘Professional Security Officer’ NVQ level two equivalent City and Guilds
examination. During this time we also train all staff to ‘appointed person’ level which is the one-day first aid course.
We have kept ourselves up to date with all the SIA information that comes via their website; in fact we applied to be part of their Approved Contractor Scheme proposed standard review team.
Link Up is an organisation which approves companies that work for the rail industry. To register requires a stringent background search, financial search a review of your health and safety practices and procedures, accreditations, and training strategies to list a few criteria. We have been members for over four years now.
This prompted Professional Security to ask: clearly licensing requires a lot of work by you – but that you have gone to such trouble suggests you feel it’s worthwhile? Is part of the reason you do it, to recruit and retain good staff? It’s often said that it’s difficult to recruit in London and the south east (and the SIA licence requirements might make it even harder); is that your experience? AA offers door superviser and guarding BJTs – do you find any cross-over between the two? Bearing in mind that last year the SIA said a door staff licence could allow someone to work as a security guard, but not the other way around. And finally – how do you see SIA licences affecting guarding in your part of the world?
Our staff turnover is less than 10 per cent for the last five years it has ranged from 13 per cent to 10 per cent and seems to be dropping rather than increasing as we grow.
The reasons for this are the fact that we dedicate so much time to enhancing the work environment and conditions of our staff. we have attained the Investors in People Logo. During the attaining of this accreditation we developed procedures such as a newsletter, appraisals, monthly meetings at our offices and on site, improvements within the remit of our supervisors and their procedures during site visits, quarterly general meetings (as opposed to AGMs), Christmas parties with commendations given and
incentives such as employee of the season (quarterly). During our QGM we select different staff from the security officers to attend so that all members understand the ethos behind the company and feel not only an integral part but realise that their input is valued. Our sites all have an agenda book which allows all staff to recommend topics for discussion within each QGM.
We have found this communication cycle and good vetting procedures such as the 10 year vet, criminal record check (only required for sensitive sites such as schools currently, however we have enforced this since inception), passport and address proof verification and all necessary examination and health documentation (medical test and eye tests for those working with computers, overnight, or lone workers) have enabled us to gain the respect and committment from our employees. This is coupled with the fact that we pay rates of renumeration above the national mnimum wage and keep employees in constant work. We are fully compliant with BS 7499 and BS 7858 and have put ourselves forward for NSI Inspection. We are also accredited to BS EN ISO 9001 2000 and comply fully with the requirements of this standard.
I do believe the SIA Legislation should help in reducing the amount of rogue security companies and improve the professionalism of other companies. I believe that rogue elements that underpay their staff will not be able to cope with the increase in pay rates within the industry due to the change in view that security officers are semi-professional individuals rather than unskilled labour. With the strict penalties for non-compliance and the fact that many rogue compaies have not addressed the issue in a positive or pragmatic way we should find many of these terminating business operations. I am disdainful regrding the fact that in-house security individuals are not being included/ subjected to the licensing and fear that the extra cost to security companies, could mean that we price ourselves out of the market, with a growing number of in-house initiatives commencing in the security market.
My view on the the fact that door supervisors are able to carry out static work is that this is a travesty. When carrying out conflict management training it becomes aware that door supervisors view conflict and its resolution in a completly different way. I am not sure how suited a door supervisor would be at a reception where decorum and patience is required. Don’t get me wrong, door supervisors are full of good manners, when they want to be; however the nature of their work and patrons to their work places gives them a harder edge that would not be entirely conducive with reception work. Further training I feel would be a must. The conflict management unit for door supervisors is two days with a two-day course for the BJT. The retail security and static security training includes a three-day BJT with one day conflict mangement training unit. The important issues that are missing are the use of notebooks, specifics on patrolling and the importance of customer service. I believe individual training courses should be provided for each different type of work and I can tell you that officers trained in retail security find it hard to understand static and patrol guarding and vice versa.
In the east of London where there are a large number of rogue security officers I believe we should see an improvement of the image of security services. Our industry has attained a very poor image due to these elements, however the improved training and specific research into individuals hired for work should slowly eradicate this undesirable reputation. We should see a growth in the professional organisations including ourselves hopefully and non-uniformed security officers that cannot speak English should finally become an extinct breed (much like the dodo!).
About AA Security
AA Security based in Ilford, Essex, are gold award members of on-site guarding audit body The Security Watchdog; and, on the dog-handling side, members of the British Institite of Professional Dog Trainers and the National Association of Security Dog Users.
