Why My Hearts In Tipperary

AA Security

Have you ever wondered why Irish people always seem so jolly? asks a guarding contractor and regular writer in these pages, Wilson Chowdhry, of Ilford-based guarding company AA Security.

I have, and perhaps it is down to a spirit that has had to overcome so much adversity over centuries of change and political turbulence and still persists or perhaps it is just their strong sense of community that means every person is looked after in some way? I don’t know but what I have learnt is that their security companies are enjoying a licensing scheme that is valuable and productive.

The Private Security Authority of Ireland was formed in the same year as the Private Security Services Act was published in 2004. Their vision is a clear one:

“Our purpose is to instil customer and public confidence in this multi-stranded, multi-faceted business with the introduction, control and management of a comprehensive, standard driven, licensing system for all individuals and companies involved in the industry and to do so in a manner that is sensitive to the needs of the market.”

Despite having been created during the same period as the UK’s SIA they seem to have innovative practices that overcome some of the weaker points of the system deployed in Britain. For instance, the scheme operated in Ireland requires in-house security outfits to be licensed. This stance has proved to be a productive one and ensures that fairness is philosophically enmeshed in their licensing process. Moreover, it creates a simple formula of training and criminality checks that is found as a base level for all officers. This has not reduced the efforts for wider training initiatives from organisations with a stronger focus on life long learning, but has meant that at point of call any security operative found without license, is immediately penalised. Moreover, wider licensing of this nature has had the profound effect of reducing the overall costs of the licensing scheme:

COST OF AN EMPLOYEE LICENCE

Door Supervisor (licensed premises) licence – 130 euros
Security Guard (static) licence – 80 euros
Both Sectors (applied for at the same time) – 190 euros

This compares rather favourably when you consider the SIA charge £245. They do, however and all credit due (literally), reduce the cost of a second license for another security field to just £122.50 (half of original cost). This means the average officer with two licenses will be charged £367.50 for a dual purpose license as opposed to the 190 euros an Irish equivalent would pay. This does not take into account that the SIA have created a prescriptive multi-disciplined framework of licenses, within the UK security sector. This ensures some officers could be stung with even higher licensing costs.

The PSA have also created a gold carat licensing scheme for contractors. The detailed qualification rights have ensured that many of the former rogues in the industry have disappeared. Ill-equipped to cope with the demands of the contractor licensing scheme and with a managerial vacuum that makes the notion one of high impossibilities, they have been forced out of the equation. This has meant that cash in hand, unlicensed officers from companies working out of the spare bedroom of the director’s home have become a thing of the past. Here in the UK early assurances that membership to the SIA approved contractor scheme would be of valuable benefit, have proved worthless.

More and more companies are waking up the reality, realising that the cost of membership has no real incentive and that the initial benefit of the license dispensation scheme is no longer required. Most companies on the ACS scheme will have few LDNs. My own firm AA Security has none and when in discussion with our auditors, we were not surprised that others were in a similar position. With the passage of time Contractors on the ACS have been able to reduce their dependency on LDN’s through good management process. Yet there is no reward or discount? We are still are required to pay the automatic charge of the facility, for the entirety of our workforce as part of a contemptuous disregard of our professional achievement? The scheme is not marketed as well as it should be and has become over burdensome with its particular drive on paper based evidence.

AA Security is within the top 10 per cent of achievers based on performance within the SIA ACS scheme. Yet like others who have committed to best quality standards no outward recognition is forthcoming from the SIA. If we truly want the industry to improve then surely we need to highlight and promote best practice? The ACS Pacesetters scheme devised by the Security Watchdog is an innovative scheme designed to promote this achievement. We subscribe to it as we recognise the potential benefit, but surely reward for good behaviour from the SIA would hold more sway?

Many organisations and individuals in the industry are concerned about whether the SIA will continue, after the Coalition decision to remove certain quangos. The SIA have confirmed that the licensing of the industry will continue and that the SIA if abolished, will reform with a similar structure and a ‘same old’ strategy and process. For some that might be comforting, however, I am concerned that retaining the service status quo will be a regressive step? The SIA have been in operation for in excess of five years the normal bedding in period for many organisations. Now is the most appropriate time for them to consider the needs of their stake-holders, especially whilst we drag our way out the economic quagmire that is no fault of our own.

Neither the licensing nor the ACS scheme set up by the SIA, have removed the rogue organisations or the cash in hand philosophy that has tarnished our industry reputation pre-SIA. My research would suggest that adoption of a licensing of security organisations working in the industry would be the best way forward for our sector. It may seem spurious or biased but most sectors work in the same way and Ireland through the PSA have shown the way!

The long term argument regarding in-house security is one that should be addressed, as it would have an economic benefit (in addition to the fairness and uniformity agenda) and any cost saving in the current climate will bring much needed succour.

It might be a long way to Tipperary but my heart is right there!

*You can read this article on Professional Security Magazine [Here]

To top