So you're paying for security and still getting robbed...

[hydroep]

...kidnapped, murdered etc.

An acquaintance who owns a grocery recently terminated his contract with a security firm because despite the "big money" being spent he was still getting robbed. In his mind the money saved will offset some of his losses. Some have told him that having guards is at the very least a deterrent and getting rid of them will only make his establishment an easier target. Time will tell.

But the scenario does raise some interesting questions:

*Does it make sense to pay for a service that isn't being delivered (i.e. protection of life and property)?

*Can Security Companies be held liable in some way for "non-performance" (refund/rebates, compensation for the value of the theft etc.)?

[paid_influencer]

security is there to stop loitering, petty theft and hooliganism. Security is not there to prevent a robbery.

[redmanjp]

the guards were armed? cause if not they can't do a thing when faced with armed bandits

[16 cycles]

sometimes is the guards that doing the reconnaissance...

[shake d livin wake d dead]

Is d type ah security you paying for

[Ben_spanna]

Invest in a Proper high quality camera system. and have offsite recording saved!

[Rovin]

security are human like all of us & want to go home at d end of d day to their spouses , kids , pets etc so they really not gonna risk too much of their own safety for any business , unless u paying them really really high & even still $ cyar buy back life ...

[Chimera]

Invest in a Proper high quality camera system. and have offsite recording saved!

not helping at all when they come in wearing masks

[thelem-again]

Its like Insurance. Pay for something that you may or may not use, UNTIL you need it.

[Moobs]

Who want to get killed for 16/hr???

[pugboy]

They wear caps pulled low

[rebound]

You can have the best video footage of the bandit using no mask or caps, with a copy of their ID Card, Drivers Permit and Passport and the Police would be unable to find them.......just sayin.

[Redman]

...kidnapped, murdered etc.

An acquaintance who owns a grocery recently terminated his contract with a security firm because despite the "big money" being spent he was still getting robbed. In his mind the money saved will offset some of his losses. Some have told him that having guards is at the very least a deterrent and getting rid of them will only make his establishment an easier target. Time will tell.

But the scenario does raise some interesting questions:

*Does it make sense to pay for a service that isn't being delivered (i.e. protection of life and property)?

*Can Security Companies be held liable in some way for "non-performance" (refund/rebates, compensation for the value of the theft etc.)?

We actually has this conversation today...at a grocery.
with the owner

The truth is that the Sec Co public liability is there for a reason.
The challenge is that the client has to PROVE negligence on the officers part.


That said.

Very few customers will accept the recommendations of the sec co to properly secure the location and manage the risk.

They want Rambo style combat capability wrapped in James Bond demeanor for beetle bailey salary.
They want him to stand to for 12 hrs....and NOT PAY for his half hr lunch.
And handle Ice,LPG and the door.
Treat them like crap ......but expect Rambo appear to stop 3 men.

What a customer should be doing is managing his risk by internal practices,cameras and physical layout in conjunction with a solid security co.

That cost money. As does a diligent Sec service.

Customers view Security as a barely necessary evil.. and as such want to pay the Co just above minimum wage.

[desifemlove]

there is no regulation of these firms.

there was a case of a worker getting hit in some inside sting. and they get people off the boat (literally) to do wuk, when none ofithem are trained. it all inside job, so no, the firms don't help.

[ruffneck_12]

security are human like all of us & want to go home at d end of d day to their spouses , kids , pets etc so they really not gonna risk too much of their own safety for any business , unless u paying them really really high & even still $ cyar buy back life ...

security is there to stop loitering, petty theft and hooliganism. Security is not there to prevent a robbery.

[/thread]

[No_Name]

sometimes is the guards that doing the reconnaissance...

Not to mention great amt of the Officers are outsiders, especially for most fly-by-night Security Firms...

[desifemlove]

security are human like all of us & want to go home at d end of d day to their spouses , kids , pets etc so they really not gonna risk too much of their own safety for any business , unless u paying them really really high & even still $ cyar buy back life ...

because that's their job. the firms should have the requisite training involved to do this.

[Redman]

Customers do not want to bear the true cost of a trained guard.

[Rovin]

^^^what is d cost\hr to have someone like that , armed & unarmed ? ....

[Redman]

50+armed and 28-30 unarmed are about market ....

More officers on a shift and rates come down somewhat.

[88sins]

50+armed and 28-30 unarmed are about market ....

More officers on a shift and rates come down somewhat.

Sounds about right
Also ppl, read those contracts CAREFULLY. Most of them have a provision that in the event of theft, loss of property or damage to property while their officer is on active duty at the location, that the company accepts no liability or responsibility for such events & that the company shall not be expected by the client or any third party to reimburse the client for any damages incurred as such. Even if their officer was the only person on the premises at the point in time.

Basically, ah go send a man to watch yuh place but if he robs you blind or set you up or mash up everything in yuh place, yuh still hadda pay me & I eh responsible for what he do.

[Redman]

I am not sure that a co can negate its liability where their product (security service) is defective.

but defining negligence or defective product is a real challenge.

That said-in this context....the place gets rob....armed fellas.
You have a guard.

Is he negligent if he -was on a break or in the bathroom or helping a customer....walking the owner to the car...etc.???

He is un armed-but in their face-but the robbery happens-is that negligent or defective product

its a series of greyer areas within a grey area.

And again-The co reccs one armed and one baton-the customer elects to have 2 unarmed....where does the liability reside?

[88sins]

I am not sure that a co can negate its liability where their product (security service) is defective.

Thing is, they can & they do. The second you sign that contract with such a clause in it they have effectively been granted total indemnification by the client.
I understand why the security firms actually need to safeguard themselves, but the way they do it leaves the client open to additional risks.

Plenty clients do the smart thing & poach EC's from security firms to work for them full time. Saves on clients costs, officer gets a steady job for the same or better pay but with better hours, company gets someone to take the shaft when things go sideways. Only downside is they'll likely have no firearm, so if armed bandits hit yuh know what gonna happen

[Average]

Offer the security workers 40% off monthly groceries. Watch performance after.

[88sins]

Offer the security workers 40% off monthly groceries. Watch performance after.

some trini security guards so wutless the grocery owner go give dem a 40% discount & they still eh go perform, go ketch dem sleeping & all kinda kaka

[toyota2nr]

One popular security firm in central hires a lot of Jamaicans. You really feel they have any training?

[Redman]

Well if the customer paying 20 per hr....what do they expect?

[88sins]

Well if the customer paying 20 per hr....what do they expect?

that's another thing
aome of these security company owners so dutty & cheap, they will actually LIE to the employees & say things like "the client only paying $20/hr" or "the client hasn't paid in months, so allyuh hadda hold strain", so the officers then feel their meager wages are directly the client's doing. Not knowing the client paying thru the nose & they working for a cheapskate.
& don't get me started on the "charge" tactics these a--holes use to actually rob their employees. One company would "charge" employees for "fraternization". Basically, 2 officers on a shift, if they talk to each other, they are both charged $100. Or if they are handing over duties, & one is off the clock while the other now start, if the outgoing officer stops to talk to his colleague, they both get "charges". Or if the officer is on a large expansive location at night & some jackass of a supervisor jumps the gate & can't find them, they get "charged" for going AWOL, even if they made & can show a cell phone video of the supervisor jumping the gate & all that happened prior & post visit. Or if they 15 minutes late for a shift, they get charged $50. So you making $20/hr, & being 15 minutes late causes you to lose 2.5 hrs pay.


Very few security companies truly treat their employees well. & that's really a damn shame, considering these ppl actually risking their lives trying to make an honest dollar.

[pugboy]

that central security firm not easy
they capitalized years ago on the nigerian influx at the time
but the nigerians smart and have moved elsewhere so is only jamaicans now

[maxtech]

Simple solution this issue. Invest in one way glass for all businesses. Instruct the security, that should a robbery occurr be sure to shoot bandit in the head or heads. No excuses. At least you'll be sure those dead bandit can't Rob you again. If you leave them alive then you'll have to deal with the waste of time legal system.
If all businesses do this well be on our way to peaceful T&T