Potential terrorist targets within the United States are not as well protected as one might assume. Ill-trained and low-paid private security guards stand by skyscrapers, unsure what to do in the event of a terrorist attack. Convicted criminals slip through the net, as background checks aren’t always enforced. Training for security guards is inadequate at best, the equipment insufficient, the directions vague and ludicrous.
After 9/11, the one industry which saw a great demand for its services in the wake of terror scares was the security guard industry. The men and women in uniform in the industry found themselves being “promoted” from rent-a-cops to protectors of the homeland.
Changes in the industry itself must have occurred simultaneously, from better training to increased enrollment and a bigger paycheck, right?
This is where business ethics and corporate rules come into play.
Remember that the men and women who work as security guards at sites designated as potential terrorist targets by the Bush Administration are not on the government payroll. They work for private security contractors, who battle with each other over government contracts to provide security for these locations.
As such, the security companies operate with typical business models.
Business rule #1: To save money, start with your employees.
Large corporations are always trying to cut costs to make more money, and a bigger bonus for the executives. And why not smaller companies too? It’s business, after all. Concerning employees, there are two ways to save money. Either you lay off “unnecessary” employees, or you pay them less. (read: minimum wage.)
Security guards are generally paid very little. Their median hourly pay in 2006 was $11.35, which is only slightly more than restaurant cooks ($10.11), janitors ($10.45) and laboratory animal caretakers ($10.13).
Security guards are typically assumed to belong to the same paygroup (because their jobs are similar in nature) as police patrol officers ($23.27), emergency management specialists ($24.26) and firefighters ($20.37).
Keep in mind that the numbers above are the median hourly income, not the industry minimum wage. There are security guards out there who make a lot less than $11.35/hour.
The middle ground pay for security guards in 2006 was $23,620/year, well below the national average income.
Business rule #2:Hire people who’ll work for less.
If there’s no law forbidding you from hiring just about anyone, why don’t you? There are a lot of people (criminals, ex-convicts, illegal immigrants, the mentally ill, etc…) who have a hard time finding jobs, due to their backgrounds or present status.
The differences in requirements for training and background checks differ vastly between states and the rules to provide for background checks within the security industry are conflicting.
Some states require FBI fingerprint checks for every applicant applying for a guard job, whilst others let the industry police itself. Some states don’t regulate the industry, such as Alabama, Colorado, Kansas, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, South Dakota, Kentucky, Wyoming and Idaho. Yet,the city of Boise and many Idaho communities do regulate guards. Some states require background checks for company owners but not guards, which kinda diffuses the purpose.
Security firms which go through background checks have found tens of thousands of guard applicants having criminal backgrounds, some 7.3% of applicants. This number does not include the applicants with criminal records who didn’t go through background checks.
Instead, they got jobs as security guards. I’m all for rehabilitating ex-cons and hiring them, but what about the ones who’ve been convicted of serious felonies, such as murder, arson, aggravated assault, armed robbery, and so on? What’s to stop them from continuing while on the clock?
In fact, there are reports of guards with criminal backgrounds having committed criminal offenses on and off duty in numerous cities.
Business rule #3:Cut corners at every turn to save that extra penny. Start with training and equipment.
The training of security guards is typically inadequate, usually performed by someone not trained for such a lesson. But hey, there’s plenty of manuals on the matter, just get someone to read the manual to the guards! That’ll work just as well…
Security and evacuation drills? Waste of money and time. Any more advice? “Look smart and if someone attacks the building, call the police.”
Does this seem like adequate training?:
Franklin Bullock, 51, a guard at the busy bus and rail commuter station in Kent, Wash., said he’s had no drills with police and fire responders despite terrorist bombings of trains and buses overseas. A supervisor once tested Bullock by walking him down the platform to see whether he would spot a package he could hardly miss. It had “BOM” written on it. That was the end of his useful hands-on training…
We know that “terrorists” can be idiots as is to judge from the planned attack on JFK airport, but come on, this is ridiculous.
The ineffectiveness of the guards, due to lack of training, is particularly evident in this event:
In fall 2005, an envelope with suspicious powder was opened by guards at the Washington headquarters of the Homeland Security Department. The guards carried the substance past the office of Secretary Michael Chertoff, took it outside and then shook it outside Chertoff’s window without evacuating people nearby. The powder turned out to be harmless.
Proper equipment? Private guards at military bases have complained that they were trained to use handguns and nightsticks to fight terrorists who might be equipped with assault rifles and grenade launchers.
Business rule #4: Business means money, nothing else. Make everything seem to be just fine, even when they’re not.
Security firm insiders have noted that when it is known that learn military inspectors are on the way, patrols are increased, and just about anyone in the corporate structure is made to play the part of a security guard.
The low pay of security guards reflects the cutthroat competition between private security companies, battling for the contracts by offering the lowest bids. Cheaper bids mean lower profit margins and less money for training and background checks for guards. You’d think they’d save some money by paying their employees less money, but hey, it’s business…
As the market for private security boomed after 9/11, companies which employ private guards began spending more on security, but, in the absence of further terrorist attacks, have began to cut back on spending.
There’s some hope for the security industry in the end as some companies have decided to conduct anti-terrorism training, regardless of whether their clients will cover the cost.
As the security guards and the whole industry seems to be in a bit of a pickle in the event of an actual terrorist attack, how’s about the TSA guards at the nation’s airports? Are they being paid better? It seems that there is a certain hierarchy in the whole anti-terrorism complex in the United States, dumping responsibility on those below one other.
If a terrorist attack occurs within the United States, the fingers start pointing in every direction. The Bush Administration is blamed for providing a cause celebre for the terrorists, the CIA and the FBI are blamed for not catching the bad guys before they attack, the TSA guards are blamed if the terrorists manage to get on the planes, and the private security guards get blamed if an attack occurs on their building.
You can’t expect the world of everyone individually, as the anti-terrorism game is one where everyone needs to work together.
How do you blame a private security guard for not protecting a skyscraper when someone flies a jumbo jet into it?
As a final final thought, as I was writing this post, a bit of related news popped into my RSS reader. Apparently, a private security guard at Walter Reed fired at his colleague, a whole ten shots, thankfully without injuring him. (Link: CNN.com) This is the level of training and the kind of people hired for these jobs. The two guards had been arguing and one of them started shooting at the other. Didn’t hit him though. But what if it had been terrorists? The guy fired 10 shots at his colleague without hitting him. How would he perform in the event that someone is shooting back at him?
Recent Comments