This is a theme which many of us have seen for years, and as a Violence Reduction Trainer it’s something I deal with on a weekly basis. We still see and hear the inconsistencies of basic SIA training throughout the security industry and in some cases it is fueling workplace violence.12 reports of neck and throat holds, 3 unconscious, 6 ground restraints, 4 weapon uses (note this included a use of handcuffs, but I want to be clear that they were used as a weapon and don’t constitute a weapon when used lawfully as a use of force option). These were brief statistics given by the SIA at yesterday’s violence reduction workshop in Glasgow. Overall a very productive and informative day which created good discussion and brought together a lot of industry professionals.
Steven Morrison has written a very good blog which covers most of the key issues https://www.facebook.com/notes/scottish-security-industry/violence-reduction-workshop/828610983967537/ but I wanted to focus mainly on one point of discussion which was present throughout the day. Why is the regulators position that we only train once?
We all know there seems to be an issue but where is the gap? One point of view is that the SIA should step in and regulate refresher raining so that at the very least when you come to re-apply after 3 years you should be asked to do refresher training. Others in the room felt that this would not be sufficient and that the SIA should regulate refresher training on a yearly basis. This was not without reaction.
Would it help?
I’m reminded of Doug Melia’s (safer handling) post on this a while back, in which he compared SIA training to a driving licence I.e it allows your to drive legally, but does that make you a Formula One driver? With the respect to the SIA, do we really want them to regulate more? ‘Why should I re-train my staff regularly, they’ve got an SIA licence don’t they?’
This is the main problem – in my opinion, employers are adhering to The Private Security Industry Act, but are largely ignoring the law that states they should re-train their staff. I would state that this is not true of all employers/venue operators.
The legal position
Let’s be clear, regardless of what the SIA state, under the Health and Safety at Work Act, Employers are legally bound to do suitable and sufficient risk assessments for each site, and then provide information, instruction, training and supervision for all their staff. They have to provide safe working practices and environments and reporting procedures to pick up on trends.
So, the legal requirement for refresher training already exists. It would seem to me that this is the way forward – employers risk assess, work out what their individual site needs, engage a competent training provider, and monitor progress and trends.
This would eradicate the need for the SIA to step in, ensure that teams were being trained specifically for their site, stop a ‘blanket’ approach to training which can be dangerous, and may also deal with another issue that came up yesterday – safeguarding.
Safeguarding
We heard from Bernardo’s who spoke about sexual exploitation and the signs, and we also spoke extensively about under – reporting in the night time economy. A suitable risk assessment would ensure that a nominated person would be on site to deal with all safeguarding issues and also ensure that reports were being done effectively.
A question for Local Authority and Police – can licence condition powers be used more? i.e could we make it a Condition of your licence that to sell alcohol you have to have a nominated safeguard onsite? Just a thought.
Stuart Nicoll