Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
Australian Security Worker
 
  Return to Website Recent Posts HomeHelpSearchLoginRegisterBroadcast Message to Admin(s)  
 
 
Poll Poll
Question: Are you being employed as:



« Last Modified by: Administrator on: 01. Jun 2009 at 13:18 »

Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print
Employment Status (Read 13008 times)
Reply #15 - 14. Sep 2019 at 10:41

Steven   Offline
Casual Contributor
New guard since August
2018
Gold Coast

Gender: male
Posts: 11
**
Alert Board Moderator about this Post! 
I'm tired of working for dodgy operators. desperate for a job. but taken advantage of, then expected to be Professional.
Threatened with being sued if i say the wrong thing on forums.
 

Current Class 1 Security Officer
Current Employer Constant Security.
IP Logged
 
Reply #14 - 15. Nov 2012 at 14:08

whiteshirt   Offline
High Level Contributor

Posts: 51
****
Alert Board Moderator about this Post! 
Loki wrote on 13. Nov 2012 at 18:52:
Just adding on from what Arthur said ... SNP has actually increased it's airport contracts.  Melbourne (Tullamarine), Coffs Harbour and another area in Sydney as well are all new additions to their existing portfolio. 


SNP have also advertised in BNE for CBD  positions in a variety of roles over the last three months.
 

"Abandon all hope,ye  who enter here"
"I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6"
IP Logged
 
Reply #13 - 15. Nov 2012 at 07:30

Arthur   Offline
High Level Contributor
Workers Unite

Posts: 80
****
Alert Board Moderator about this Post! 
Hi Major Function,

Sorry to hear SNP (more likely one of their dodgy sub contractors) lost the contract. Regarding your current work: is there a section of the Award that stipulates when a guard working 36 hours or more must be offered full-time work. Or, was that the old award?

Probably not relevant if you're on an EBA, though.
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #12 - 14. Nov 2012 at 20:17

Major Function   Offline
High Level Contributor
Workers Unite
Newcastle NSW

Gender: male
Posts: 366
****
Alert Board Moderator about this Post! 
Back to the poll. I am a Part timer working 37 hours a week but I say I am a Permanent employee.

37 hours so I am not a Full time employee. At the company I work for there are approximatelt 70 guard doing static work and patrols from Newcastle to Maitland and only 22 Full time employees.

The poll may not be reflecting the real employment
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #11 - 14. Nov 2012 at 20:09

Major Function   Offline
High Level Contributor
Workers Unite
Newcastle NSW

Gender: male
Posts: 366
****
Alert Board Moderator about this Post! 
SNP were a subcontractor to the company I work for but they or their subcontractor was not servicing the site so they lost it.
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #10 - 13. Nov 2012 at 18:52

Loki   Offline
High Level Contributor
Part of the Solution
Newcastle

Gender: male
Posts: 57
****
Alert Board Moderator about this Post! 
Just adding on from what Arthur said ... SNP has actually increased it's airport contracts.  Melbourne (Tullamarine), Coffs Harbour and another area in Sydney as well are all new additions to their existing portfolio.
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #9 - 12. Nov 2012 at 09:38

Arthur   Offline
High Level Contributor
Workers Unite

Posts: 80
****
Alert Board Moderator about this Post! 
Chubb was too big to let fail. I remember the events well and the fallout was immense. Companies all across Australia were concerned as to who would provide their security services in the absence of Chubb- there simply wasn't enough of them to go around. There was also the matter of 11,000 jobs.

The mess that would have followed had Chubb been stripped of its operating license would have left many private and public organisations without a service provider.

The gradual sale of Chubb's guarding to SIS and Southern Cross meant that no security company in Australia is too big to fail.

I do think that Kings Security and /or SNP Security are both in the sites of the legislators. Personally, I think the bloodletting involved would be an ideal shakeup to help the needed change of culture in the industry. As we all know, the only way to create a change in any business culture is to introduce a shake-up prior to new standards and targets. 

SNP in particular concerns me, as this organisation controls security at many of Australia's airports. They also control security at a large number of key infrastructure sites like State Rail and Liddel Bayswater power stations that deliver the majority of NSW electricity. For that organisation to be involved with corruption is a massive blow to its credibility and the public should be concened.
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #8 - 11. Nov 2012 at 06:41

Loki   Offline
High Level Contributor
Part of the Solution
Newcastle

Gender: male
Posts: 57
****
Alert Board Moderator about this Post! 
Spectre wrote on 09. Nov 2012 at 09:01:
selling off the less profitable manpower arm of the company


Arthur wrote on 10. Nov 2012 at 16:21:
Chubb had been fined $1.5 million for contravening the Trade Practices Act.



That is exactly why they sold it off.  They went from having hundreds of calls a night on a patrol run to being able to have less than 100.  They also had to meet standards of proof that other companies were not meeting and the cost to prove those standards were being met just made them unable to be viable in a lot of markets.  I am curious as to why the Dept Fair Trading/ACCC did not go after other large companies with patrol divisions because they would have found all of them lacking exactly like Chubb.
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #7 - 10. Nov 2012 at 16:21

Arthur   Offline
High Level Contributor
Workers Unite

Posts: 80
****
Alert Board Moderator about this Post! 
The sale of Chubb was about more than just money and everyone in the industry knows that. Chubb had been fined $1.5 million for contravening the Trade Practices Act. The brand was damaged, and had the organisation stepped out of line again its operating licence may have been canceled. It made sense to sell it off to SIS and Southern Cross Protection. ..call it a risk managed.

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2004/s1232452.htm
http://www.findlaw.com.au/news/4372/no-security-chubb-fined-for-failing-to-perfo...
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #6 - 09. Nov 2012 at 09:01

Spectre   Offline
High Level Contributor
Unarmed Security
Victoria

Posts: 355
****
Alert Board Moderator about this Post! 
Loki wrote on 09. Nov 2012 at 01:02:
It's a service based industry.  Without the guards, the companies have nothing to sell unless they want to only focus on non manpower avenues and lets face it, all the money in the market for security right now is in manpower.



Oh really?

That's not what the owners of Chubb (UTC Fire & Security) thought selling off the less profitable manpower arm of the company (2008) to concentrate on armed transit, fire protective systems and monitoring...
 

"Folks who think profiling has no place in the world we live and believe that all folks have good intentions are called victims of violent crimes." - David Burnell
IP Logged
 
Reply #5 - 09. Nov 2012 at 01:02

Loki   Offline
High Level Contributor
Part of the Solution
Newcastle

Gender: male
Posts: 57
****
Alert Board Moderator about this Post! 
Quote:
Rather then companies going in and winning contracts purely on price perhaps they should all get together and set a minimum standard


This is actually illegal.  It's goes against the principles of a competitive market place and install a monopoly like situation.  Dept of Fair Trading would tear the companies apart that tried to do this. 

The companies need to make a stance as to what they're going to be.  Are they going to be legit, and quote accordingly or are they going to be shifty and play on the ignorance of a lot of security guards who are prepared to accept their illegal wages. 

The companies that choose to be legit, pay correctly would then naturally look after their guards that provide their product (service) to the best possible level.  This would allow said company to be slightly more expensive, but a more appealing option as they can go ahead and guarantee their standard of service confident they have the guards to back it up. 

Companies like SNP right now are complaining they need to quote so low and it's a cut throat market, but then they sub contract to the illegal contractors who then put sub standard guards who simply cannot provide the service their tender alluded to.  As such, customers get disillusioned, their name which they trade on becomes worth mud and guards move to work somewhere else where they can feel they are part of something legitimate. 

The companies are not going to break this cycle however without the pressure from the guards being put on them to increase wages and simply avoid the companies who pay the illegal wages. 

It's a service based industry.  Without the guards, the companies have nothing to sell unless they want to only focus on non manpower avenues and lets face it, all the money in the market for security right now is in manpower.  It's recurring, it's not a one off charge with small chance of continuing patronage. 

Join a union.  Contact the FWO.  Make a noise and change it rather than just complain about it.
« Last Edit: 09. Nov 2012 at 01:03 by Loki »  
IP Logged
 
Reply #4 - 07. May 2012 at 21:47

Welsh   Offline
High Level Contributor
Gimp King
Brisbane

Gender: male
Posts: 218
****
Alert Board Moderator about this Post! 
Midnight NT wrote on 04. Apr 2011 at 16:23:
Guess SecOps has hit the nail on the head, Security wages are shite and desperately need to be raised, continue paying peanuts and continue to get students on visas!  Angry


Couldn't agree with this more, Rather then companies going in and winning contracts purely on price perhaps they should all get together and set a minimum standard to be able to better train their Guards etc not to mention this would also become the new basis for better working conditions etc.

I've not yet seen any other industry where you have to maintain your license so much with refresher courses etc yet the pay is so average / low - I feel this is the highest reason why good guards get jack with it and bail from working in Security.

As soon as you leave the Capital cities the pay doesn't go anywhere BUT UP
 

-Welsh
IP Logged
 
Reply #3 - 04. Apr 2011 at 16:23

Midnight NT   Offline
Casual Contributor
Workers Unite

Posts: 18
**
Alert Board Moderator about this Post! 
Guess SecOps has hit the nail on the head, Security wages are shite and desperately need to be raised, continue paying peanuts and continue to get students on visas!  Angry
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #2 - 13. Oct 2009 at 13:15

SecOps   Offline
High Level Contributor
Licensed Security Officer
NSW Australia

Gender: male
Posts: 116
****
Alert Board Moderator about this Post! 
Permanent here, I would probably prefer casual too considering its laughable for my company to cover me for a sick day and base rate time off is not worth it either, I'd rather save.

Don't have an option of going back to casual, employer won't let me Sad
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #1 - 09. Mar 2009 at 13:19

Administrator   Offline
Administrator
Dob in a Dodgy Operator
Australia

Gender: male
Posts: 1002
*****
Alert Board Moderator about this Post! 
Preferred to be employed as a casual as your entitlements are received in the hand as cash.
 

Ah! Working in Security where finding the real thief could be your employer. Now is the time to check your super account.
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print