A rather frustrating article this week in the Guardian Newspaper was the story of Abdul Bakhsh. Like many outsourced workers in the country, Abdul feels exploited by outsourcing companies who provide the legal minimum in terms of working conditions and benefits.
Abdul believes there is a subtle apartheid at work that divides the staff and discriminates against himself and his colleagues, despite their longevity of service. Academics and administrators who work directly for the University of London, get holiday, sick pay, a substantial employer contribution to a good pension and an incremental salary scale; however, outsourced workers do no. This discrimination, in his opinion stems from the practice of outsourcing.
Abdul and his fellow outsourced colleagues are demanding the same rights as the directly employed University of London employees in terms of equality of sick pay, holidays and pensions, as part of the 3 Cosas Campaign. And who could blame him?
IS THE PRACTICE OF OUTSOURCING THE ROOT CAUSE?
Abdul seems pretty convinced and we accept that the majority outsourcing companies provide the vast majority of their employees with the legal minimum in terms of working conditions and benefits. However, not all companies are the same. When we started Tatry Group, we took out mission seriously:
…ensures a fair deal and excellent experience for all our stakeholders
We are advocates of treating our employees well and they will treat the client well thought process. Our solution to this industry wide problem is legislation that will force clients and contractors to offer the same benefits for outsourced staff as they do their own.
IT’S JUST BUSINESS
This is the usual answer from many agencies. The typical excuse for offering minimum wage, working conditions and benefits is that the clients do not pay enough. However, these contractor’s all aim to undercut to win business. While it may bring short term financial benefits to these companies. It’s the service and the employees that will suffer. Long term, its unstainable and bad for the reputation of the agency. That’s why at Tatry Group, we remain competitive whilst prioritising service quality.
Contact us today for a free no obligation meeting to discuss how we can add value to your organisation with our range of commercial cleaning and manned guarding services.
Guardian Newspaper: link to story
Widely reported in national media is another incident of a fatality involving a security officer and a suspected shoplifter.
The BBC reports:
‘a security guard was arrested on suspicion of manslaughter after an alleged shoplifter was tackled to the ground and bled to death when bottles he was carrying smashed’.
People in the security industry on all social media channels have been giving their opinions on the subject. However, most of these so-called professionals and security ‘experts’ are totally wrong when it comes to use of force. Therefore, please enjoy this post on use of force in security by Tatry Group.
Security staff should not leave the premises
Unlike other providers, Tatry Group has the view that leaving the premises to engage in the pursuit of a shoplifter is gross misconduct. This is because by leaving the premises, they are entering an uncontrolled environment which greatly increases the risks – to themselves, the shoplifter and the company. The pursuit will increase stress on the cardiovascular system, and, if followed by a lengthy struggle, can and has led to deaths in the past.
Best practice is not to arrest
Many security staff are not properly trained on arresting in the absents of police. Best practice, therefore, is to ensure security staff do not make arrests – unless, of course, the security supplier takes the time to ensure proper training; which is highly unlikely. If done incorrectly, it may be considered unlawful and a breach of the suspect’s rights.
In most cases, reputational damage will be costlier than whatever would have been stolen. Generally due to lack of facilities, restraint situations can quickly become viral on social media.
Flawed key performance indicators
Many retailers request in house or contract security suppliers to subscribe to their key performance indicators which worrying create arrest targets. This creates pressure to meet those targets against the best interests of security or the public. In addition, this encourages reactions to situations rather than proactive deterrence.
Good security is proactive not reactive
Of course, there must be contingency plans and procedures for security personnel to respond effectively to incidents. However, at first instance, security personnel should be a proactive deterrent. There are many studies which prove this theory but it is ignored by management with little expertise in risk management.
Most retail security personnel work alone due budgets, to poor security strategies and unprofessional security contractors just doing the bare minimum that is asked of them. Security personnel working alone are lone workers, regardless of whether they have sales assistants around them – there is legislation protecting them that needs to be adhered to.
No to ‘no touch policies’
Some people suggest that a ‘no touch’ policy would have avoided such incidents. This can lead to criminal and civil litigation for the policy makers. As a policy, this is in breach of the Criminal Law Act 1967 which states that people have a right to use reasonable force in certain situations, and a breach of the common law right to self-defence.
Root cause – organisational risk management
This is an organisational risk management problem. If we take any similar case and perform both a root cause analysis, we can see that, as usual, the causes are poor management, poor understanding of security and risk management, poor training and, lastly, some poor individuals either losing their lives or losing their future for minimum wage. Mistakes made by staff are reflections of mistakes made by management.
Contact us today for a free no obligation meeting to discuss how we can add value to your organisation with our range of security consultancy and manned guarding services.
BBC link: Here is a link for a BBC article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-38932180
So many of you liked our picture of our Polish Easter Basket (pictured on the left). But what has this go to do with Tatry Group?
Well, as some of you may know we were founded by a husband and wife team. The husband is from Ireland, hence the green. And the wife is from South Poland, hence the name Tatry.
The Tatry (Tatra in Polish) mountains are the highest in Poland and cover the southern border with Slovakia. But anyway, that’s enough about our Polish connections – lets talk more about these Easter Baskets of Food.
These baskets usually contain bread, eggs, ham, lamb-shaped cake, sausages, salt, horseradish, and chocolate. The baskets are decorated with white serviettes and flowers or willow branches and taken to church to be blessed by the priest.
The tradition of food blessing at Easter, which has, possibly originated from a pagan ritual with early-medieval roots in Christian society is said to date from the 7th century in its basic form.
After the blessing, the food is usually set aside until Easter morning when the head of the house shares the blessed egg – symbol of life – with family and friends.
Stay updated with our fortnightly vision and insights on – Leadership, Facility Management, Future of Work, and Service Management topics.