Writing Collaboration is a Great Experience

Let me first start off by saying that I have not blogged in a while. Truth be told, there is a lot that I'm working on which takes up much of the free time I have. Don't worry, it's a good thing!

 

As many of you may know, I'm a founding partner of my training firm, Sound Training Group LLP,  so you can imagine how my days are filled. However, I'm also an author of several books in the public safety and private security space. I enjoy writing. Sometimes getting the word out in book format is easier and can be referenced anytime.

My current writing endeavor is one of learning and collaboration as much as it is fun, although the topic is of a serious nature, that being the personal safety of real estate agents. What makes this project, and more importantly unique, is the collaboration of two experienced professionals from two countries, Canada and the United States.

 

My co-author is Canadian, more specifically from Toronto. He is a retired police detective and an author in his own right, having written a series of novels. He is well versed in in his experiences and it shows in his writing. I've enjoyed everything he's written thus far. I guess by now you've guessed that I am the American counter-part, more specifically from Connecticut. We met on Twitter and hit it off immediately. We have a lot in common and we both love our coffee! We continue to share  posts and our daily lives. I find that we are able to boost our morals and share information that may be pertinent to each other.

                                                        

 

Prior to publishing my most recent book. " Keep Yourself Safe: A Guide for Real Estate Agents in Connecticut, " I asked Des, my future co-author, if he would take a look at my draft before I put the final touches and published. As expected he gave me feedback that I took to heart. Thus my book was published. Shortly thereafter, we spoke about collaborating on a book. He liked my book and we decided to write a Canadian version of the book. It sounded like a great opportunity for both of us.

 

As we move along in our venture, I take notice there are fundamental differences in how safety and security are perceived. I have come to learn in Canadian life, security is not as aggressive whereas in the U.S. having uniformed armed security is not out of the norm. Word choice is also something of a challenge for me in this book because of how public safety is thought of. There are fundamental differences in how things are explained but the same message is conveyed. As we write each chapter, we continue to learn from each other about the cultural differences. I'm enjoying this venture and we're going to have a great and practical book for keeping real estate agents safe.

 

The adventure continues - stay tuned!

 

 

 

What Does it Really Mean to Train?

 

What does it really mean to train? The answer would appear obvious - that we attend classroom and/or practical training sessions to learn a new skill or work on current skills and knowledge. This is very true. We subscribe to the belief that training is ongoing no matter what position you hold or the number of years of experience one may possess.

 

Alan and I recently attended a 3 day MOAB (Management of Aggressive Behavior) training session in Windsor, CT. Alan became certified as an instructor and I was re-certified as an instructor. From the moment we entered the room to begin our training, we came to the realization that for three days, we were not instructors but students taking the time to learn something new and sharpen our skills. The make up of the class was diverse with about half being sworn law enforcement officers. Others came from healthcare security, parks security, and contract security. As diverse as the makeup was we were all students. A majority of us were there to be re-certified while the remainder were there for the first time.

 

The MOAB instructors were a former Pennsylvania State Trooper Lt. and a former Detective from Pennsylvania as well and the President of MOAB. Anyone attending this program for the first time will quickly realize that communication with other students is vital to succeed in the program.

As we progressed in the training, whether through group exercises or attentively listening to the instructors, we make the realization that we are all on the same page. The Law enforcement officers were more than willing to share their experiences and tips on how to apply the techniques being explained, not only to a few of us who were "shooting the breeze" during our short breaks, but to the entire class. What surprised me however was the attitude these officers took with their security counterparts. They asked these security professionals what was difficult about doing their jobs and how law enforcement can better assist them in performing their duties safely and effectively. It was refreshing to see security and law enforcement trade perspectives and perceptions and come to a positive outcome and mutual understanding.

During our practical sessions, these same law enforcement officers provided expert tips and explained correct procedures. many of the students had the opportunity to conduct "take-downs" on these officers to apply a technique that was just learned. I was impressed by their enthusiasm to help others in the training while they tried to get a better understanding of security's role in their  daily protection responsibilities.

 

Alan and I learned a lot during those three days as did everyone in our class. We learned the subject matter and passed the exam and practical. More importantly, we learned that we are humans that need to be understood and understand. We walked away from this training having learned a few things: regardless of perception, police-security relations are improving, communication is the heart of training - all opinions matter, respect is key to training- on the job and in real life, and that it's a small world - one of your fellow trainees, whether private security or law enforcement could very well back you up and even save your life!

We encourage you to continue your training while keeping these things in mind!

MOAB® is a registered trademark of MOAB® Training International, Inc.

Be Safe!

Dan Sinisi, CAPP1, CCSS
Partner - Sound Training Group LLP

Sometimes Plain Language is a Good Thing

 

 

In the security field, just like the rest of the emergency services, we have a certain industrial language. There are words that we use at work which are rarely if ever used off duty and would not be understood by the public if we did. That being said, overusing lingo just to show you know the words does not make you seem smarter or even more professional, in fact it usually ends up making you look less so.

 

One of my first security instructors had two great examples of this. First he picked a student and asked them how they got to class. The student said he drove. Then he asked the student what he did right after he parked his car. The student said he got out fo the car and walked into the building the class was in. The instructor asked again you got out of your car? The student said yes. The Instructor then asked you got out of the car, not exited your vehicle?

 

The second example was even more fun. He told us something and then asked us way he had done. It took a little prodding to get the answer he wanted but someone finally gave the answer that he had said something to us. Then he stood up on his chair, held out his arms and said the same thing louder. Getting down he told us that was the difference between saying something and stating something. The big loud dramatic version was making a statement.

 

The point of these exchanges was to illustrate too much lingo in report writing. Why if in conversation we say got out of the car would we write this down as exiting the vehicle? There is nothing wrong with writing that the witness said something, you do not have to write that the victim stated something, although both would be correct. Some people think that sounding more official and more formal makes you sound smarter. They are wrong.

 

In a recent case I had to talk to a security officer on the phone. I asked him where he was and his reply was "I have left the location". Now this case had been spread between two addresses so I had to ask him what he meant by the location as there were at least two locations involved in this case. He then said he had left town and was on his way home. There was no reason to not simply say he left and was on his way home. The end result was that he sounded like he was being evasive with his answers not sounding more professional like I am sure he thought.

 

There are certain words we do need to use in the course of our duties. Obviously we sometimes need to describe or designate the people we deal with by terms like victim, suspect, patient or complainant. Vehicles sometimes need to be numbered when dealing with multiple vehicle collisions.

 

Still we do not routinely refer to handcuffs as metal human restraint devices. Parking lots are not grade level exterior vehicle storage facilities. The clerk at the gas station is not a petroleum transferal technician.

 

We should try using as much plain language as possible, especially when talking with each other. Yes we will need to know our job related vocabulary and yes there will be times when no other word will do. However in most normal conversations, we can save time and effort by just talking like a normal person.

 

Alan F. Shaw

Partner - Sound Training Group LLP

Security - Law Enforcement Relations

For those of us who have been on the job as Private Security Officers for a while know that the duties and responsibilities of the position can often be difficult, be it an irate customer, ungrateful employee, or the disrespectful attitude toward those that are simply trying to keep some sense of order. It's not easy - I know this first hand having been in the industry nearly thirty years. We put on a uniform and a badge and we go in with high expectations that we will be respected - that people will listen to us when we tell them something - that we are law. From a public relations standpoint, this attitude will not work well. Realistically, we can't control everything while we're on duty, but there is one we can do to maintain our professionalism and not only add value to our employer/client as well as ourselves, but add value to another group of professionals who may have misperceptions about our industry - our law enforcement counterparts.

Having a great working relationship with law enforcement is perhaps one of the most important and strategic goals that private security officers can attain. Before I continue, we have to clarify something we should know already - Security is proactive and law enforcement (traditionally for the most part) are reactive. We have to understand that both have distinct roles and responsibilities. The average person looking at this from the outside sees the police as a well trained force and the people who respond when help is needed. On the other hand, security is traditionally seen as underpaid, untrained "wanna-be" force with no authority. What many people, including security officers, don't realize is that security and law enforcement must establish a working relationship built on trust and communication. It all starts with the front line security officers.

Granted, there are a few security officers out there who will don the uniform and badge and "act" like a cop - this is not the majority. However the perception is still there particularly through the eyes of police officers. If anything, private security officers are a valuable resource and should be cultivated in a manner to which a professional relationship is established with law enforcement patrol officers and detectives.

A law enforcement officer's job is not any easy one by any stretch. They have a lot on their plate and just like security officers they want to be safe at all times and go home to their families.
As a valuable resource, security officers can provide a wealth of information to police whether after an incident or reporting suspicious activity. Security Officers should understand their statutory limits of authority. This doesn't mean they can't be helpful. How do we do this?
First, don't be overly helpful by insisting on helping out. While this may not seem to make too much sense since we are trying to establish a relationship, police officers will however understand. Here is an example. Some years ago when I was employed as a hospital security officer, the local police brought in a suspect to be treated for an injury. The police officer had to "sit" with the suspect until the end of the treatment and he didn't look too happy with the assignment. As was customary, my partner and I briefly spoke with said police officer and politely asked if he needed our assistance. He answered "no" and we politely informed him that we would be in the security office if he needed us. There was no need for further interaction at that time. A few days later, the same police officer stopped by the security office. He wanted to thank us for letting him know we were available if he needed our help. He appreciated that we didn't needlessly interfere even if it was our "jurisdiction." We bought him a cup of coffee and to this day I still have a great professional relationship. I have been asked to assist him with several investigations in between. Rest assured there are similar stories like this out there.

Second, do not tell a police officer what to do even if it is your "jurisdiction" - that being private property. Instead offer assistance by asking them how you can be of service - if at all. This will go a long way. if assistance is requested be sure not to overstep your bounds - remember - security officers receive their authority from state statutes and employer policies. No matter how bad of a day police officers might be having, they will remember your helpfulness even if nothing was done. Security Officers should remember to stay out of the way unless called upon - allow the police officers to do their jobs. Security Officers may not know the answers to questions asked of them by police. Be honest and truthful. No one likes a show off. Don't try to speak the police jargon - you will lose any credibility up to that point.

Most important, be sure you have your valid security officer license/permit (if required) at all times. If asked for an ID, you should produce this license and/or other government ID so the police officer can properly document your information. Likewise obtain the police officer's name and badge number.

Trust and the flow of communication between police and security officers must be a two way street. Each have their own roles and responsibilities to ultimately achieve the same goals. Security officers can build bridges to law enforcement relations by being professional at all times, knowing their authoritative limitations and being a valuable resource the police would respect and gladly work with.

Dan Sinisi, CAPP, CCSS

Partner - Sound Training Group LLP

Bringing Half of Your Toolbox on Duty

 

 

In my community police officers work a variety of what are called extra duty jobs. These are hired through the police department but paid for by the client. Most of these fall into two categories, traffic control jobs and security jobs. This is the same in most towns in my area.

The traffic control jobs are usually at construction sites where roads are dug up or lanes are closed and the police officer is there to ensure vehicle and pedestrian safety. The security jobs are generally large events, like street fairs, concerts or sporting events and or private businesses like bars and a few retail stores. What all these jobs have in common is that the police officers are all required to be there in uniform and fully equipped. Even when the job is considered low risk, the officer still carries his firearm. Even when he is directing traffic he still carries hand cuffs. The regular police rules and regulations apply to these jobs just like they do to regular duty.

This got me to thinking about why the security industry allows such variance in how our officers are trained and what equipment we carry. Why we have a difference between armed sites and unarmed sites. Why we let the client dictate officer safety or the lack thereof. It is a bit like calling a plumber to fix you sink and telling him only to bring screwdrivers, as you don't think he will need a wrench inside your house. The more I think of it, we may be the only industry that does this. When POI came out with the Below 50 pledge, I remember the discussions about ballistic vests and how some clients don't want officers wearing them. Would they be allowed to tell a construction worker not to wear a hard hat on their site? Of course not, because in construction hard hats are recognized as safety equipment.

This does not even get into the lack of back up. However when someone hires a police officer for a site, the police department has formulas to tell them how many officers are needed and if on site supervision will be needed. So if the lanes being closed around that dig warrant two or three officers that is what they get. There is no bargaining involved. Imagine if we did that in private security. The only real difference is that in the public sector there is no competition waiting to undercut each other by shaving more and more off of our safety.

Despite the recent ruling about a security company being responsible for injuries to a resident of an apartment complex that they supposedly protected, little will change. Clients will still demand less and companies will cheerfully supply less. What will it take for us to wake up and see what needs to be done for our profession?

Alan F. Shaw

Partner - Sound Training Group LLP

A Unified Security Profession

 

 

According to latest statistics, security professionals outnumber their public counterparts by 3:1 and the security industry continues to grow exponentially. Yet in some ways, the industry is fragmented by high turnover, salary disparity, and lack of training standards.

 

Fortunately we don't see much of this with law enforcement, fire and EMS providers. Granted, most of these professionals belong to their respective unions as well as some security professionals. This post is not is not meant to debate whether all security professionals should be unionized but rather that we, as a profession, should be unified.

 

During the recent violent attacks on law enforcement here and abroad, our public protectors joined together and became one - a unified voice representing law enforcement agencies around the country and around the world. They all come together for a fallen brother or sister both physically and spiritually. The world sees their grief and tries to make sense of it all. In unity they grieve and we come to respect the "Thin Blue Line." They are one. Firefighters and EMS providers similarly have a unified voice. They too line the streets to pay respects to their fallen brothers and sisters. They grieve and the public grieves with them. There is a respect and a bond that only those in public safety can truly understand. In unity they all share the same foundations within their respective professions, namely training standards, cohesiveness, and the ability to support each other.

 

Security Officers, by the nature of their job responsibilities, are also protectors. They protect us on private and public property. They have given their lives in the protection of life and property and yet in many cases, we the public, don't here about it. According to Private Officer International, a security-law enforcement association (not a union), there have been seventy-five confirmed security officer line of duty deaths and perhaps more that have not been reported. Each of these officers sacrificed their own lives in the protection of others yet we don't see the security profession unify itself for the fallen like our public counterparts. We don't see the industry unification and support of one another both publicly and privately. There are no images where security professionals line the streets to pay respects for their fallen bothers and sisters. Security lives matter but we must become a unified voice.

 

Private Officer International is leading the way in unifying and giving a voice to the many security professionals out there. They are the only organization which dedicates one week in September as "Private Officer Memorial Week," which recognizes the sacrifices made by those in the security profession. POI has been leading the way in advancing the cause of higher training standards with state legislators and other professional organizations. However, security professionals must also become involved in their own profession if we wish to see a unity that is shared among other public safety professionals. It's easy to sit back, watch, and demand respect.

 

As the Musketeers would say, "All for one and one for all!" This quote embodies what our profession should be. Caring and respectful professionals who, through unity and strength, are one.

 

Dan Sinisi, CAPP, CCSS

 

Partner - Sound Training Group LLP

Security Officers are not Jacks of All Trades

We commonly hear from recruiters that candidates should be "well rounded" and possess the appropriate skills and knowledge necessary for a particular position. In theory, this is a no brainer and most of us applying believe we have those qualities. Sounds cut and dry, right?

As we continue to reiterate that private security and public safety continue to advance in their roles and responsibilities, security officers continue to multi-task on duty. Sometimes, multi-tasking is essential to the welfare of the security operation or position. However, many times, security officers are asked to perform a multitude of tasks that generally have nothing to do with the protection of life and property. In many security officer positions, some duties include signing and accepting packages, vehicle assists, etc. Tasks such as these do add service value to the position and employer. After all, it's about justifying the reason we are there in the first place.

 

However, many security officers are tasked (not asked) to perform other responsibilities that just do not fall under the protection of life and property mantra. I have observed first hand security officers leaving their assigned posts to water plants, mop floors, dust, pickup dry cleaning for the client, sweep floors and the list goes on. Service is everything and again it's about justifying our presence but what do theses tasks have to do with the protection of life and property? If security officers are fortunate enough to work in a location where these tasks are performed by non-security personnel, they are left to do the job they were hired to do: protect life and property.

 

A security officer employed at a site where he/she does everything including the above just does not make good protection and business sense. By asking a security officer to perform non- security related responsibilities, the employer or client is inviting risk. To perform these tasks, the security officer must leave their assigned posts which means the area of the post becomes vulnerable to unauthorized entry, loss, or criminal activity detection. Imagine a crime taking place where a security officer should have been posted but was instead mopping the cafeteria at the time. From a business point of view, an employer might see this as a savings expense in which a maintenance person would not have to be hired.

One common argument I hear from employers is that security officers do not have much to do, especially if they are working after hours and holidays. This argument in itself is not justifiable Some years ago as a newly minted security officer, I was employed by a security contracting agency and was assigned to a very small office building with multiple tenant companies. After a few months, I was approached by the property supervisor and asked to leave my post, lock the entrances and meet him on the 2nd floor. I complied and when I met with him, he proceeded to show me which office garbage bins to empty and how to clean the bathrooms. I knew at the time that the property supervisor was supposed to be doing this every night. I politely informed him that I was a security officer not a maintenance person, that leaving the post was risky, not to mention that unemployment could soon become a factor. He disagreed, said he was the boss and contact my boss. Fortunately, my boss saw my point of view and backed me up 100%. I was never bothered with that again. I'm not attempting to interfere with any operations, but merely pointing risks involved. This is not to say that security officers who observe a spill or boxes blocking an ingress or egress should not remove a safety hazard.

 

On the flip side, many employers use sanitary personnel, cleaners, or janitors in the complete opposite way. Many work during the off hours and are often treated like security personnel. Many of these individuals have not received any security or public safety training and therefore place themselves and employer at risk.

 

A properly trained security or public safety officer, by their very nature are tasked with great responsibilities including loss prevention, protection, fire safety, access control, patrol, etc. This demands the officer be vigilant at all times. We are security and public safety professionals. Our goal has been and continues to be the protection of life and property.

Dan Sinisi, CAPP

Partner - Sound Training Group LLP