Over 2 million unemployed people in the UK and they cant get the staff Have they trusted one company with the entire security of the olympics or am i missing something? Ive never had to arrange security for such an event myself but i would have thought it safer to spread the security tasks out to a number of different companies or does the defence secretary have a friend that owns a lot of shraes in G4S maybe?
it's because they pay minimum wage .... give a decent hourly rate and people will queue up for the jobs
I just read this on wikipedia - they sound like gangsters 2010 to present Death of Jimmy Mubenga In October 2010, three G4S-guards heavily restrained and held down 46-year old Angolan deportee Jimmy Mubenga on departing British Airways flight 77, at Heathrow Airport. Security guards kept him restrained in his seat as he began shouting and seeking to resist his deportation. Police and paramedics were called when Mubenga lost consciousness. The aircraft, which had been due to lift off, then returned to the terminal.[30] Mubenga was pronounced dead later that evening at Hillingdon hospital.[31] Passengers reported hearing cries of "don't do this" and "they are trying to kill me." Scotland Yard's homicide unit began an investigation after the death became categorized as "unexplained". Three private security guards, contracted to escort deportees for the Home Office, were released on bail, after having been interviewed about the incident.[30] Nobody was charged for the death of Mubenga. In February of 2011, The Guardian reported that G4S guards in the United Kingdom had been repeatedly warned about the use of potentially lethal force on detainees and asylum seekers. Confidential informants and several employees released the information to reporters after G4S's practices allegedly led to the death of Jimmy Mubenga. An internal document urged management to "meet this problem head on before the worst happens" and that G4S was "playing Russian roulette with detainees' lives."[32] The following autumn, the company once again faced allegations of abuse. G4S guards were accused of verbally harassing and intimidating detainees with offensive and racist language
its the same with the US TSA (the guys who pat and probe you when you take a flight in the US) .... some guys say it's better than having a swedish massage (and it's free)
It's absolute lunacy to put a contract that size and with such huge risk potential through one contractor. We're not talking financial risk - without any exaggeration, there could potentially be thousands of lives at stake. I can't believe the Government didn't know at least six months ago that they were having problems recruiting. Either they did and someone kept their mouth shut or else nobody was keeping an eye on it, in which case they should be fired. Someone should have been micro managing G4S all the way through and they obviously didn't do their job. Alex
I'm afraid its because not enough people are willing to do it, simple. And the reason for that is that here in Britain, as a society, we have become lazy snobs. Its nothing to do with pay or hours. Where I work we've recently advertised for a new programmer to join our team. The hours are good, the work is interesting, the pay is good, the location is easy to get to. Guess how many people have applied? One. This isn't a one off. At my last work we advertised a brilliant opportunity for a graduate. We advertised at 3 local universities. We had 6 applicants. We invited them all to interview. Only 3 bothered to turn up at all, and they were all late. At my company before that we needed about 100 new staff for fairly unskilled work but way better than minimum wage, flexitime, training, bonus package. After advertising in all the local recruitment agencies and not getting anywhere near enough staff, we actually had to select our most outgoing team leader level staff and send them out at lunch time into the city centre to literally stop people in the street to offer them a job.
perhaps this was all planned .... perhaps they wanted the army to be used, thats why they are planning on installing missiles on rooftops? ... etc etc they are not as stupid as what we think they are .... the security must be a nightmare, as this would be a perfect occasion to cause major mayhem am just saying
It s probably a good thing, I heard these recruits only had 5 days training for the job and I don't expect they were scrutinised very much before getting the job, so half the security team could be racist, agresive, sex fiends
My thoughts exactly, and the number of troops taking over the role of security is still far below that of what G4S said they were going to employ.
I work closely with personnel from G4S at Newmarket races and I must say the ones I have met are some of the nicest intelligent people you could meet. I can only speak as I find. They are devastated by this bad publicity and I quote one "We have no chance of a pay rise now.I guess he is proberbly right.
But its highly trained soldiers as opposed to ordinary people with the most basic training who can barely pass a basic health check. I mean no disrespect to security guards, on the contrary I've known a fair few over the years and they work very hard and are generally good people, but they're (mostly) not anything like as well trained or physically fit as a soldier.
they would have saved millions if they just used the military in the 1st place .... there are thousands of military personel just lazing around the various army camps waiting for active service
There is always a lot of public resistance to the idea of using military personnel in civilian roles. That's why, for example, the army didn't go and sort out the riots last year. I've never understood the logic of this. People say you don't want trained killers in a potentially hostile situation because they are trained to kill rather than police, I'm sure they must be very disciplined, otherwise our armed forces wouldn't be held in the high esteem that they are. Besides, it is not unusual for there to be some overlap between civvy and military. In Spain for example, they have different 'types' of police. If I understand it correctly (and I may not), they have the local plod, who are just like our beat bobbies. Then when things get too intense, another section of the police are actually military. I believe France are the same. It just makes sense to me. If they're not at war, and are not off duty, then it kind of makes financial sense to give them civvy security roles.
