G4S

Actually, dim, G4S does not pay all it's Security Guards the minimum wage rate. When they take on new business they either negotiate the highest rate they can get, or in accordance with the Industrial Law they inherit the rate and conditions of the previous contractor which could be better, the same, or worse i.e. the minimum rate. They know by experience that should they pay minimum wage rates employees will leave to go to other companies who pay a higher rate, and in even in these hard times there is a high turn over of staff in all Security Companies.
All Security Officers have to pass an exam, [quite easy], be security vetted by the SIA, and then pay several hundred pounds to be issued a licence which permits them to be employed within the Security Industry. All Security Companies and employees are licensed by the SIA and cannot operate legally without one on pain of fines and imprisonment.
Recruiting, vetting takes time and training takes more and I think G4S over reached themselves believing that as a huge company already with thousands of Security Officers, running Prisons, providing cell accommodation and transport for those on serious charges before the courts etc, that they could handle such a big contract. I was a consultant to both of them [NorthWest] during the 90's when they were then 2 companies [Securicor and Group 4]. They had recruiting troubles then although at that time the SIA did not exist and Security employees and Companies did not require a licence to be employed in the Security Industry. They should not have accepted the second contract vastly increasing the number of Security Officers needed to be recruited, but over confidence by the Senior Management has dropped them in the Doo Doo!!!
Security wise I don't think the alternative of handing out contracts to the other Security Companies would have worked successfully for various reasons. Taking all sorts of people off the streets, employing them after possibly 6 days of "training", thrusting them into the public domain into a high profile, high security situation, working in 12 hour shifts where they become tired and "brain dead" in a few hours, is unbelievably irresponsible not only to the employees but to the security situation of the Olympic Games. Private Security Companies such as G4S are not able to provide proper high security. Would you like to stake your life against a bomb threat on a person in uniform who just been employed fresh off the streets?? Their main business is providing Security to the Industrial Clients, uniformed receptionists, mobile patrols, and now BIG contracts to Government organisations.
But the Government is just as guilty in shrinking our Defence Forces, reducing the Police Force, and trying to do things supposedly on the cheap via the Private Industries

 

It still stands, dim, they don't take over new business and pay minimum pay rates unless, as previously said, they inherited it and the client won't pay more, otherwise they have to pay the rate they inherited from the previous contractor.
I have no idea what they are paying the short term Security Officers in the case of the Olympic Games. But since the Cleaners in Parliament Building are only paid minimum wages by our own Government and have approached MPs for a higher wage it wouldn't surprise me that the Government will not insist on higher than minimum wage.
However, I would suggest that you step into the real world, instead of relying on conspiracy, Whistle Blowers Blogs etc [I mean that kindly] ............and ask a few G4S Security Guards about their conditions and their paid rate and you will find it differs from site to site depending on what the client is prepared to pay and not what G4S is prepared to pay, and I think you would then get a better realistic understanding of the Security Industry..

 

No, dim, I do not list those who frequent conspiracy and alien blogs as "crackpots and alien lovers" [never made love to an alien...but always willing to try something new!].
Points of view are one thing, however, FACTS are another. and the real bug bear for most people is that points of view get converted to facts just to bolster a discussion.
My real point, dim, with all real respect to you is that a reliance on blogs and other peoples published opinions as being fact is a "dangerous" thing. I sincerely advise that you actually talk to a permanently employed member of G4S, in this case, to get the true wage and pay conditions. Conditions and wages do differ from company to company and site to site of that there is no doubt. I do know for instance that outside Middlewich in Cheshire there's a underground natural gas storage site where the client insists on paying well above the minimum wage and, no, the Security Company is not G4S.
So please take the time and energy to talk to a real Security Officer employed by G4S and while you might say "I wouldn't do that job" you might acquire a little respect for the long hours and working conditions that a Security Officer has to put up with.

 

No, you're right, dim, I did not read the 144 pages. At the moment I'm semi retired but got hauled out of full retirement to work for the Judiciary as a Consultant for the next 18 months. I have, like I said, been employed as a Consultant to Securicor and Group 4 back in the 90's. I have also been brought in to run the organisation of a High Court department for six months which had had organisational problems and help turn it around. I have given my services in recent years to a number of Security Companies who wanted help on understanding the complexities of the SIA rules, regulations and requirements.
The Security Companies are now under rigid controls by the Government and now recruiting is much more difficult as the vetting by the SIA, a separate Government Agency not answerable to the Security Industry, can take up to six weeks or more. What person, desperate for a job, will wait around for six weeks or more after being told they've got the job but can't have it even though they've been hired, taken an exam, been trained [and had to wait possibly weeks for that], and then be told they still can't be employed because the SIA hasn't completed the vetting and won't be until it has.......and on top of that be asked to pay for the SIA licence for the privilege of working long hours, unsocial hours, night shifts, which even if above the minimum wage is still too low?? To get to know the real working problems of firms you have to actually undergo the working conditions of the employees and I have done that to get to the facts and solve the problems in every company I've been a Consultant to, it makes you respect the person doing the job.
So I still have many contacts within the Security Industry and other Industries where I did Consulting services. Working for the Judiciary at the moment brings me into contact with Security Officers [G4S staff] every working day and it's impossible not to get an exchange of views and opinions from them so I am still up to date on their pay and conditions.
Talk to a permanently employed G4S Security Officer and get the real facts

 

I agree totally with you, GG. Private Security should not be employed in the Police or Emergency Organisations in any shape or form.