The Impact of Regulation on the Security Guard Sector

The Impact of Regulation

Page 1

Contents Management Summary ..................................................................... 2

Recommendations ............................................................................................................... 4

1 Introduction .................................................................................. 5

2 Background and Methodology .................................................. 7

3 Summary of Results – Suppliers Survey .................................. 9

4 Supplier Sample .......................................................................... 11

5 Detailed Findings – Suppliers Survey ..................................... 14 5.1 Payment of Licensing ............................................................................................. 14 5.2 Costs Associated with Licensing ........................................................................ 15 5.3 Impact of Licensing on Recruitment and Retention ....................................... 18 5.4 Skill Levels of Staff .................................................................................................. 23 5.5 Additional Training Required for Staff ............................................................... 24 5.6 Licensing’s Impact on Negotiations with Customers .................................... 25 5.7 Licensing’s impact on the Perception of Security Guards ............................ 27 5.8 Cost Savings Due to Licensing ............................................................................ 29 5.9 Whether Staff have been Subjected to Violence ............................................ 31 5.10 Change in Business Activity since January 2008 .............................................. 32 5.11 Change in Number of Employees since January 2008 ................................... 34 5.12 Impact Regulation has had on Attracting New Business ............................... 36

6 Summary of Results – Operatives Survey ............................ 38

7 Operatives Sample .................................................................... 39

8 Detailed findings – Operatives Survey .................................. 44 8.1 Payment of Licensing ............................................................................................. 44 8.2 Impact of Regulation .............................................................................................. 46 8.3 Impact licensing has had on Security Guards ................................................... 48 8.4 Impact of Licensing on Employment .................................................................. 51 8.5 Licensing’s Impact on Public Perception ........................................................... 52 8.6 Whether Staff have been Subjected to Violence ............................................ 54


Page 2

Management Summary This report details the findings of research into the impact of SIA licensing on the

Security Guard sector, conducted in March 2010 by FDS International. In total,

601 interviews were conducted with licensed individuals – 200 among Suppliers of

Security Guard services, and 401 among front line Security Guard Operatives.

The objective of the research was to measure the longer term impact SIA licensing

has had upon the Security Guard industry since its introduction in March 2006, and

to create an up-to-date picture of the state of the industry as a result of licensing,

and the associated training required. Results build on the findings of a similar study

carried out in 2007, shortly after the introduction of licensing.

SIA Licensing has had a mostly positive effect among Security Guards Suppliers’

perception of their staff, with many feeling that it has increased trust, particularly

due to the criminal record checks. A third of Suppliers also believed that their

Guards’ relationships with Police and/or other authorities have improved as a

result of licensing.

Similarly, the view among Operatives is also generally positive, with at least half of

Guards believing licensing has improved the range of skills they have, their overall

ability to do their job, and their future career options.

Opinion of the impact licensing has on the skill levels of staff is mixed however, as

half of Suppliers disagreed that licensing affects the skill levels of their staff, and the

majority required at least some of their Security Guards to undertake further

training beyond what is required to become SIA licensed (often for first aid or

physical intervention training).

There were areas that may need further consideration; a significant minority of

Guards felt that licensing has little positive effect on their pay and conditions, the

availability of work, and the treatment received from employers. There was a

feeling among many Operatives that whilst licensing improves levels trust and


Page 3

professionalism in their industry (and reduces criminality), it does not increase the

levels of respect they receive.

On balance, just under two-thirds of Suppliers felt that licensing had a positive

impact on staff recruitment, and around half felt it has had a positive effect on staff

retention, typically due to higher quality personnel applying for positions, or the

fact that individuals are already being trained to do the work. There were some

concerns with a shortage of licensed candidates available to Suppliers.

Whilst many Suppliers agree that end customers can see the benefits of having

licensed personnel, few can pass on any additional costs associated with licensing.

Equally, few Suppliers feel that there has been a cost reduction due to reduced

supervisory time, or that fewer staff are needed for the same jobs compared to

before licensing. Opinion of whether Suppliers have experienced a reduced staff

turnover as a result of licensing is also mixed.

A little over two in five Operatives claimed to have paid all of the costs of applying

for or renewing their Security Guard licence (and a quarter paid for their training),

although on balance, most felt the cost was worth it.

Over half of Suppliers believed that their organisation's turnover, or the amount of

business conducted, had increased since January 2008, whilst a little under two in

five reported an increase in the number of Guards they employ. Many Suppliers

felt that licensing has the ability to attract new money or investment from third

parties into a variety of industries where they currently operate.

Overall, just under half of Security Guard Operatives have been subjected to some

form of violence in the past, with two-thirds of Suppliers claiming that their staff

have been subjected to verbal or physical attack. Guards are more likely to have

been subjected to verbal assaults rather than physical attack, however many have

been subjected to both.


Page 4

Recommendations

• Consider reviewing the current training requirements for SIA licensing, particularly relating to the provision of first aid and/or physical intervention training, and whether this can be improved to avoid Suppliers requiring their staff to go on additional training in these areas

• Violence in the Security Guarding industry is high. SIA may want to identify training gaps to ensure Operatives can avoid these situations as much as possible

• It is difficult to gauge whether licensing has a large impact on the public’s perception of the industry. The SIA may wish to verify this with a public survey; this may lead to general concerns that could be addressed through a public information campaign

• The SIA may want to look further into the differences in the treatment of Security Guards of Black or Minority Ethnic background, or those who do not have English as their first language, particularly towards the cost of licensing and the training associated


Page 5

1 Introduction The SIA has two main duties. One is the compulsory licensing of individuals

undertaking designated activities within the private security industry; the other is

to manage the voluntary Approved Contractor Scheme (ACS), which measures

private security suppliers against independently assessed criteria.

Licensing is the responsibility of the individual; however suppliers also have a

responsibility to ensure that they only use staff in an area that they are licensed

for. Penalties for non compliance range from warning notices up to imprisonment.

Licensing is now required for all the following roles:

• All manned guarding, including: o Cash and Valuables in Transit o Close Protection o Door Supervision o Public Space Surveillance (CCTV) o Security Guarding

• Key Holding • Vehicle Immobilisation1

o Immobilisation , including:

o Restriction o Removal of vehicles

SIA licensing for Security Guards came into effect on the 20th March 2006 for

England and Wales, and on the 1st November 2007 for Scotland.

In 2007 research was conducted among Security Guard Suppliers and Operatives

licensed in England and Wales, to assess the impact of the introduction of licensing

upon the security guard industry. This study was able to benchmark levels of

recruitment and retention of guards, as well as the perceived change in attitudes

towards the industry following the introduction of licensing.

In 2010 the SIA commissioned further research to measure the longer term impact

of licensing upon the Security Guarding sector, and build an up-to-date picture of

the effect that licensing has had. 1 Excluding Scotland


Page 6

In this new wave of research, the SIA sought an effective review of the security

industry, specifically identifying the:

• long term effects of regulation, and how this has changed since the early evaluation in 2006/7

• impact of licensing on the recruitment and retention of security staff, and the drivers for staff turnover

• perceived impact of licensing in the skills and abilities of door supervisors and security guards from both the supplier and licensed individual perspective

• extent to which the door supervision and security guarding sectors feel that public attitudes towards them have changed since licensing

• nature of working relationships with the Police and local authorities and whether they have changed since regulation

• financial impact of licensing on suppliers and their customer relationships.

In parallel with the Security Guard research, a separate study of Door Supervisors

was undertaken; both studies covered the views of Suppliers and Operatives.

Detailed findings from the Door Supervisor research can be found in a separate

report, which this report draws comparisons with.


Page 7

2 Background and Methodology The SIA commissioned FDS International to carry out Computer Aided Telephone

Interviews (CATI) of Security Guard Suppliers and front line Operatives.

Interviews were conducted from FDS’s London and Newcastle telecentres

between the 8th and the 26th March 2010.

The same number of interviews were conducted in 2010 as in 2007, namely:

• 200 Security Guard Suppliers • 401 Security Guard Operatives

In order to obtain comparable results with the 2007 survey, the questionnaires

needed to remain the same. During review of the questionnaire however, it

became apparent that many of the questions were no longer appropriate and

needed to be updated.

For example, the 2007 survey asked respondents to give their opinion based on

the comparison since the introduction of licensing. As licensing was introduced a

number of years ago, and a significant proportion of the audience will have no

experience prior to the introduction of licensing, the 2010 survey needed to ask

questions that related to opinion as a result of licensing. Where differences over

time were required, the 2010 survey asks respondents to compare against the

situation in January 2008, rather than since the introduction of licensing as used in

the 2007 survey.

Due to the differences in the Supplier and Operative audience, two separate

surveys were conducted. The Operatives survey contained a region quota to

spread responses geographically, and slight weights were applied to make results in

line with Office for National Statistics population statistics geographically.

An initial pilot survey was conducted in order to test the questionnaires and assess

the ease of access to individual respondents before mainstage interviewing began.


Page 8

When Operatives claimed to employ staff at the beginning of the survey, they

were moved to the Suppliers survey. Similarly, if a Supplier did not employ any

staff, they were asked the Operative survey.

All respondents were written to before the fieldwork period alerting them to the

study, stressing the anonymity of their responses and giving them an opportunity

to opt out of participating.

Response rates were better than expected for both surveys and few respondents

refused to take part. Overall, 16% of the sample completed an interview in both

the Supplier and Operative surveys. Interview lengths were on average 15 minutes

for Operatives and 22 minutes for Suppliers.

Where applicable, results are compared with the 2007 survey as well as the 2010

Door Supervisor research.

At some points in the report, results are described as significantly different. These

are tested by standard statistical formulae at the 95% confidence level. Where

significant, we can be 95% confident that the differences are real and did not occur

by chance or sampling error.


Page 9

3 Summary of Results – Suppliers Survey Licensing clearly has a positive effect among Suppliers’ perception of Security

Guards, with many feeling that it has increased trust in their staff, particularly due

to the criminal record checks undertaken as part of granting a licence, with over

eight out of ten (82%) believing so. A third of Suppliers (33%) believed that their

Guards’ relationships with Police and or other authorities has improved as a result

of licensing.

Opinion of the impact licensing has on the skill levels of staff is mixed with half of

Suppliers feeling that licensing does not affect the skill levels of their staff. Also,

eight out of ten Suppliers (81%) require at least some of their Security Guards to

undertake further training beyond what is required to become SIA licensed (in half

of cases it is for first aid, whilst one in five require some additional form of physical

intervention training).

On balance, just under two-thirds of Suppliers (64%) felt that licensing has had a

positive impact on staff recruitment, and around half felt it has had a positive effect

on staff retention. Just over one in five (22%) believed that licensing resulted in

higher quality personnel applying for positions, whilst 15% saw the benefits of

individuals already being trained to do the work. Just under three in five Suppliers

(58%) could identify some form of negative impact licensing has had on staff

recruitment; the most common being a shortage of licensed candidates available to

them (with 23% believing so).

Whilst many Suppliers agree that end customers can see the benefits of having

licensed personnel, not many can pass on any additional costs associated with

licensing. Few Suppliers feel that there have been cost reductions due to reduced

supervisory time, or that less staff are needed for the same jobs. Opinion of

whether they have reduced staff turnover as a result of licensing is also mixed.


Page 10

Two-thirds of Suppliers (67%) claim that their staff have been subjected to some

form of violence whilst working, with 62% of organisations having staff that have

experienced verbal abuse in the past, and 53% experiencing physical abuse.

Over half of Suppliers (55%) believe that their organisation's turnover, or the

amount of business conducted, has increased since January 2008, whilst a little

under two in five (38%) report an increase in the number of Guards they employ.

However, almost a quarter (24%) have seen the number of guards they employ fall.

Almost three in five respondents have seen an increase in business activity since

January 2008, with a quarter (25%) having seen the number of clients increase

from within their current portfolio, and 31% seeing an increase from customers

with different requirements.

Many Suppliers feel that licensing has the ability to attract new money or

investment from third parties into a variety of industries where they currently

operate. In particular, over two in five Suppliers operating at live events, within the

public sector, or at schools and universities believe licensing has the ability to

attract new money or investment.


Page 11

4 Supplier Sample Over half of the Suppliers spoken to in the survey (57%) claim to have been

working in the industry of supplying Security Guards for more than 10 years, with

almost eight out of ten (78%) having done so for more than five years. By contrast,

only a third of Door Supervisor Suppliers have been working in their industry for

more than 10 years, and half have been doing so for less than five years.

Suppliers in larger organisations are significantly more likely to have been working

in the industry for a long time, with 72% of those in organisations with a turnover

of £1m or more having been in the industry for 10 or more years, compared to

only 35% of those with a turnover of less than £250,000. The majority of Suppliers

interviewed (94%) have been in the industry since before the introduction of

licensing in March 2006.

Chart 4.1: Length of time supplying Security Guards (Base: All 200 Suppliers)

Security Guard Suppliers operate in a wide variety of areas, with individual

organisations invariably operating in more than one area. The most common

sectors respondents operate in are in office environments (with 83% doing so), the

public sector (69%), and in business parks (67%). Larger organisations are

significantly more likely to be operating in each area listed, with the exception of

construction sites.

57%

21%

5%

6%

7%

5%

10+ years

5-10 years

4-5 years

3-4 years

1-2 years

<1 year

23%


Page 12

Chart 4.2: Industry sectors that Security Guard businesses operate (Base: All 200 Suppliers)

Suppliers’ annual turnover covers a wide range. A little less than one in ten

respondents (8%) had a turnover of less than £100,000 per annum, whilst 16%

claimed to have a turnover of greater than £50m. As may be expected, there is a

very clear trend between an organisation’s number of employees and their annual

turnover.

By comparison with the survey conducted in 2007, there has been an increase in

organisations interviewed with larger spends; in this report a third of those

interviewed (33%) claimed to have a turnover of £1m or less, compared to 51% of

those in 2007. Similarly, the proportion of organisations with a turnover of more

than £50m increases from just 1% to 16%, potentially affecting overall measures

when compared to 2007.

Door Supervisor organisations also typically have a lower annual turnover, with

47% of those interviewed in 2010 having a turnover of less than £1m.

12%

33%

48%

49%

51%

67%

69%

83%

Holiday / theme parks

Events

Construction

Retail

Schools and universities

Business parks

Public sector

Office entrance or reception


Page 13

Chart 4.3: Company turnover (Base: All 200 Suppliers)

Over three in ten organisations interviewed this year (31%) claim to employ more

than 250 Security Guards, while similar proportions (32%) employ 25 or fewer

guards. We observe a typically higher number of employees per organisation

compared to the 2007 survey, where 29% had five or less employees, whilst a

third of Door Supervisor Suppliers employ five or less staff.

Chart 4.4: Number of employees (Base: All 200 Suppliers)

The original research conducted in 2007 set additional sample quotas for Suppliers

based on which database the contact was taken from (either the SIA marketing

database or the Approved Contractor Scheme database). This distinction has not

been made in 2010.

8% 10% 10%5% 9% 8%

15%3%

16%

5%9% 8% 7%

3%

13%9% 7% 8%

2%

31%

32%

33%


Page 14

5 Detailed Findings – Suppliers Survey

5.1 Payment of Licensing Three in five Suppliers (63%) require their staff to be licensed before hiring them,

although this is more prevalent among smaller organisations. Three-quarters (76%)

of organisations with less than 250 employees (and 83% of those with 25 or fewer

employees) require their staff to be licensed before employing them, compared to

only 33% of those with more than 250 employees.

Similar trends are also observed by company turnover; 68% of organisations with a

turnover less than £250,000 require all staff to be licensed, compared to only 22%

of those with a turnover greater than £50m. Suppliers with experience of the

industry before the introduction of licensing are significantly less likely to need

their staff to be licensed prior to employment, with only 57% claiming so

(compared to 88% of others). The Door Supervisor industry is typically more

stringent with this requirement; with four out of five Door Supervisor Suppliers

(80%) requiring their staff to be licensed prior to recruiting them.

Approaching half of Security Guards Suppliers (45%) claim to pay all the licensing

costs for their staff, and 54% pay all the costs towards licence renewals. This

compares to only 26% of Door Supervisor Suppliers paying all the costs of applying

for a licence, and 32% paying all the cost of renewals.


Page 15

Chart 5.1: Payment made by Suppliers for their staff’s licenses (Base: All 200 Suppliers)

Whether the cost of licensing is met by employers is heavily dependent on the size

and turnover of the organisations. Suppliers employing more than 250 employees

are significantly more likely to pay all the costs of staff licences (with 59% claiming

to do so) compared to those employing 25 or fewer staff (with 34% paying all the

costs).

Organisations with a large annual turnover are also significantly more likely to pay

all the costs of licensing; three-quarters of Suppliers with an annual turnover of

more than £50m (75%) claim to pay all the costs, compared to only 29% of those

with a turnover of less than £250,000. When renewing licences, 78% of

organisations with a turnover of more than £50m meet all the costs of renewals,

compared to 44% of those with a turnover less than £5m.

5.2 Costs Associated with Licensing The vast majority of Suppliers (93%) have incurred some additional cost due to

licensing, for a variety of different reasons.

Eight out of ten Suppliers (81%) have incurred some additional costs relating to

increased management, administration and communication time. This is much

34%

10%

54%

42%

12%

45%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

None of the costs

Some of the costs

All of the costs

Applying for licence

Renewing licence


Page 16

more prevalent among organisations with large numbers of staff, with almost nine

out of ten Suppliers (87%) employing over 100 staff incurring additional cost in this

way, compared to 69% of Suppliers with 25 or fewer staff.

Over three-quarters of Suppliers (78%) claim to have incurred additional staff

training costs due to licensing. Again, significantly more so among those with large

numbers of employees (83% of those with over 100 employees, compared to 66%

of those with 25 or less). Suppliers with experience since before licensing was

introduced were also significantly more likely to have incurred staff training costs

with 80% claiming so, compared to 64% with no experience before licensing was

introduced.

Although three-quarters of all suppliers interviewed (74%) have incurred some

additional cost relating to the licence application fee, it is also more common

among larger organisations. Two-thirds of businesses with a turnover of less than

£250,000 incurred additional costs due to the application fee, compared to 86% of

those with a turnover of £5m-£50m, and 91% of those with a turnover greater

than £50m. Likewise, 64% of businesses with fewer than 25 employees incurred

additional costs for this reason, compared to 82% of those with more than 250

employees.


Page 17

Chart 5.2: Costs incurred due to licensing (Base: All 200 Suppliers)

Among those incurring increased wages as a result of licensing, only 56% have

been able to pass these costs on to the end client (and only 13% have been able to

pass the full cost on). Organisations employing large numbers of Guards are

significantly more likely to be able to pass these additional costs on, with 78% of

those employing over 250 staff being able to pass at least some of the cost on to

the end client, compared to only 45% of those employing 25 or fewer staff.

The additional costs incurred due to licensing appear to have reduced to some

extent when compared to the results of the 2007 survey; now, significantly fewer

Suppliers have incurred additional costs in four areas:

• Management, administration and communication time (down from 88% of Suppliers to 81%)

• Staff training costs (down from 93% to 78%) • Licence application fee for staff (down from 87% to 74%) • Increased wages (down from 69% to 54%).

There are also significant differences observed when comparing the additional

costs incurred due to licensing between the Security Guarding (SG) and Door

7%

11%

54%

55%

57%

74%

78%

81%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

No costs

Other costs

Increased wages

Short-term replacement of staff during training

Recruitment of licensed staff

Licence Application Fee for staff

Staff training costs

Management, administration and communication time


Page 18

Supervisor (DS) sectors, with three costs significantly more widespread among

Security Guard Suppliers:

• Staff training costs (occurring among 78% of SG Suppliers, but only 68% of DS Suppliers)

• Licence application fee for staff (74% of SG Suppliers, 61% of DS Suppliers) • Short term replacement of staff during training (55% of SG Suppliers, 46%

of DS Suppliers).

5.3 Impact of Licensing on Recruitment and Retention On balance, just under two-thirds of Suppliers (64%) felt that licensing has had a

positive impact on staff recruitment, and around half (51%) felt it has had a positive

effect on staff retention. Conversely, around one in six (17%) actually felt licensing

had a negative impact on recruitment, and one in ten (9%) on retention.

Suppliers in organisations with large annual turnovers are significantly more likely

to feel that licensing has had a positive impact on staff recruitment; eight out of ten

(81%) organisations with a turnover greater than £50m believe it has made a

positive impact on recruitment, compared to 59% of other sized Suppliers.

Whilst there is no significant difference in the perceived impact that licensing has

had on staff recruitment or retention by whether Suppliers have experience since

before licensing came in, there is a difference in opinion among Suppliers that have

been in the industry for 10 years or more. This audience are significantly less likely

to feel that licensing has made a positive impact on staff retention, with only 43%

believing so, compared to 61% of those with less than ten years’ experience.


Page 19

Chart 5.3: Impact licensing has on staff recruitment and retention (Base: All 200 Suppliers)

Security Guard Suppliers are slightly more positive about the impact licensing has

had on their industry as a result of licensing compared to Suppliers of Door

Supervision, however not by a significant margin.

All Suppliers were asked how licensing had improved staff recruitment, and three-

in-five (58%) could identify some way in which it had. Just over one in five (22%)

believed that licensing resulted in higher quality personnel applying for positions

(increasing to 34% of those with a turnover greater than £50m), whilst 15% saw

the benefits of individuals already being trained to do the work. Just over one in

ten (11%) saw the positive effect of the background checks required to become

licensed.

-9%

-17%

51%

64%

-50% 0% 50% 100%

Retention

Recruitment

Negative impact

Positive impact


Page 20

Chart 5.4: Positive impact licensing has on recruitment (Base: All 200 Suppliers)

The proportion of Suppliers feeling that licensing has made a positive impact on

Security Guarding due to the high standard of candidates applying for positions has

risen significantly since the 2007 survey, from 12% to the current level of 22%.

Equally, the proportion of Suppliers feeling that licensing has made no positive

impact on recruitment has fallen since 2007, from three-quarters (74%) to the

current level of 41%.

Door Supervisor Suppliers are also significantly less likely to feel licensing has made

a positive impact on recruitment due to the high standard of candidates applying

for positions, again with only 12% believing so.

Just under three in five Suppliers (58%) could identify some form of negative

impact licensing has had on staff recruitment; the most common being a shortage

of licensed candidates available to them (with 23% believing so). Other negative

issues related to a lack of candidates (12%) capable of becoming licensed, or the

time taken for an individual to become licensed (10%).

41%

6%

6%

7%

11%

15%

22%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%

No positive impact

Other positive effects

Licensed Security Guards are more committed to the industry

Confidence in skills of licensed staff

Fewer background checks necessary

People are already trained

High standard / quality of candidates applying


Page 21

Chart 5.5: Negative impact licensing has on recruitment (Base: All 200 Suppliers)

Compared to the 2007 study, there has been a significant increase in the

proportion of Suppliers believing that licensing has had no negative impact on staff

recruitment, up from 28% to 42%. The number of Suppliers believing that licensing

has had a negative impact on recruitment due to the time taken for staff to

become licensed falls from 18% to 10%, whilst the number feeling there is a

negative effect due to the competition with other companies for licensed

candidates falls from 10% to 2%.

Among those feeling that licensing has made a positive impact on staff retention, a

quarter (24%) claim it is to do with the career progression opportunities available

to licensed staff, whilst just under one in five (19%) believe it is to do with the

increased likelihood of employees staying within the sector now they have become

licensed. There has been a significant fall in the proportion of Suppliers feeing that

staff are less inclined to leave the industry due to licensing, down from 39%.

Other positive factors licensing has brought to staff retention relate to the

opportunity to offer improved pay and conditions to licensed staff (with 18% citing

42%

12%

3%

3%

3%

10%

12%

23%

0% 20% 40% 60%

No negative impact

Other negative effects

Slow process

Limited who we can employ

Costs of paying for their licence

Time taken to become licensed limits flexibility of employment

Lack of candidates capable of becoming licensed

Shortage of licensed candidates


Page 22

this), and staff commitment to stay with their employer in order to pay off the

costs of their licence (mentioned by a further 16%).

Chart 5.6: Positive impact licensing has on staff retention (Base: All 101 Suppliers who feel licensing has a positive impact)

Only 17 Suppliers felt that licensing made it difficult to keep staff, for a number of

reasons:

• Licensed staff are moving between employers in the Security Guarding sector for more pay (cited by 7 respondents)

• Licensed staff are not staying because Suppliers can't offer more pay and better conditions (3 respondents)

• Staff have not been able to get a licence (3 respondents) • Staff have left because Suppliers won't pay for their training/licence/renewal

fee (3 respondents) • Licensed staff are not staying because Suppliers can't offer career

progression opportunities (1 respondent) • Don't know/no particular reason (4 respondents).

14%

23%

16%

18%

19%

24%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Don't know

Other reasons

Licensed staff are required to stay for a pre-determined period to met the costs of their

licence

Able to offer improved pay and conditions to licensed staff

Licensed staff are less inclined to leave the Security Guarding sector for other, non-

security jobs

More willing to stay due to offer of career progression opportunities to licensed staff


Page 23

5.4 Skill Levels of Staff Opinion of the skill levels of staff is mixed; with half feeling that licensing does not

affect the skill levels of staff. Whilst three in five (62%) agreed that ‘Having licensed

staff means they are capable of carrying out job tasks satisfactorily’, over a quarter

disagreed with this statement. Similarly, three in five (60%) agree that ‘Having

licensed staff means they are trustworthy and reliable’, another 35% disagree.

There are no obvious trends in the opinion of Suppliers on the skill levels of staff

by business size, however those Suppliers with experience of the industry since

before the introduction of licensing were significantly less likely to agree that

‘Having licensed staff means they are capable of performing a wide range of tasks’.

Chart 5.7: Skill Levels of Staff (Base: All 200 Suppliers)

There is very little difference in Suppliers’ opinion of the skill levels of their staff

when comparing against the Door Supervision sector, with similar proportions

agreeing with all four statements in relation to their staff.

-21%

-23%

-20%

-15%

-24%

-16%

-15%

-13%

23%

22%

28%

33%

28%

31%

32%

29%

-60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Licensing does not affect the skill levels of staff

Having licensed staff means they are capable of performing a wide range of

tasks

Having licensed staff means they are trustworthy and reliable

Having licensed staff means they are capable of carrying out job tasks

satisfactorily

Strongly disagree Slightly disagree Slightly agree Strongly agree

(62%)

(60%)

(52%)

(50%)

% agree


Page 24

5.5 Additional Training Required for Staff Eight out of ten Suppliers (81%) require at least some of their Security Guards to

undertake further training beyond what is required to become SIA licensed, with

47% requiring this for all their Guards. Larger organisations are significantly more

likely to require their staff to undertake training, with 97% of organisations with a

turnover of £50m or more claiming so, compared to only 76% of those with a

turnover of less that £250,000.

Equally, only 77% of organisations with 25 or fewer staff require them to

undertake further training, compared to 92% of those employing over 250 staff.

Half of organisations requiring their Guards to go on further training beyond that

needed for licensing do so for first aid, with one in five (21%) requiring their staff

to undertake some additional form of physical intervention training. Other specific

training requirements mentioned by more than one in ten related to improving

supervisory skills, community safety skills and customer service training.

Chart 5.8: Additional training required for staff (Base: All 161 Suppliers who require Security Guards to undergo additional training)

50%

21%

20%

12%

12%

12%

10%

9%

8%

7%

42%

First aid

Physical intervention

Generic skills

Supervisory skills

Community safety training

Customer service

CCTV training

Qualifications (eg NVQs)

Fire training

Health and Safety

Other


Page 25

In the 2007 survey 73% of Suppliers required their staff to go on additional

training, with the same level as this study (51%) requiring first aid training. Other

training courses were required in similar levels in both 2007 and 2010 with the

exception on Health and Safety training, which has fallen from 24% in 2007 to 7%

now.

Additional training requirements of Door Supervisors in 2010 reflects that of

Security Guards, with half requiring first aid training, 23% physical intervention, and

17% for generic skills.

5.6 Licensing’s Impact on Negotiations with Customers

Whilst many Suppliers agree that the end customer can see the benefits of having

licensed personnel, few can pass on any additional costs associated with licensing.

For example, seven out of ten agree that ‘Customers recognise the value licensing has

on the industry’, and two-thirds (65%) agree that ‘Customers recognise that deploying

licensed staff improves their ability to deal with security threats’. However, almost three

in five 58% disagree with the statement ‘We are able to pass licensing costs on to

customers’.

Organisations with small turnover were significantly more likely to believe that

licensing has had no impact on contract negotiations with customers; almost half of

those with a turnover of less than £250,000 agreed with this statement (that it has

had no impact), whilst 78% of those with a turnover of greater than £50m disagreed

with the statement.


Page 26

Chart 5.9: Licensing’s impact on negotiations with customers (Base: All 200 Suppliers)

Whilst a number of measures remain unchanged since the 2007 study, agreement

has increased significantly in two cases, and decreased significantly in one.

Significantly more Suppliers now agree that ‘Customers recognise that deploying

licensed staff improves their ability to deal with security threats’ and that ‘We are able to

pass licensing costs on to customers’. However, there has been a significant fall in the

proportion agreeing that ‘Customers want to reduce security provision because of costs

associated in having licensed security guards’ (down from 70% in 2007 to 37% in

2010).

Opinion of Security Guard Suppliers is very much in line with that of Door

Supervisor Suppliers, with no significant difference in the level of agreements

across all statements.

-24%

-28%

-18%

-15%

-12%

-15%

-9%

-11%

-35%

-28%

-40%

-28%

-11%

-18%

-18%

-17%

14%

18%

20%

22%

27%

22%

33%

28%

23%

19%

17%

25%

32%

39%

32%

42%

-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Licensing has no impact on contract negotiations with customers

Customers want to reduce security provision because of costs associated in

having licensed security guards

We are able to pass licensing costs on to customers

Licensing means that we have ongoing communication in our relationships with

our customers

Customers think there are insurance benefits of deploying licensed staff

Customers are interested only in price, regardless of the fact that licensing exists

Customers recognise that deploying licensed staff improves their ability to deal

with security threats

Customers recognise the value licensing has on the industry


% agree

(70%)

(65%)

(60%)

(59%)

(47%)

(37%)

(37%)

(37%)


Page 27

5.7 Licensing’s impact on the Perception of Security Guards

Many Suppliers feel that there is trust in Security Guards due to licensing,

particularly due to the criminal record checks, with over eight out of ten (82%)

agreeing so. When comparing this against opinion of other potential impacts to the

sector however, greater numbers of respondents are inclined to disagree that

Security Guarding is regarded as a career due to licensing (with 34% disagreeing),

and that the public recognise the value of licensing has on the industry (with 43%

disagreeing).

Suppliers with experience of the industry since before the introduction of licensing

were significantly more likely to agree that ‘The public recognise the value licensing

has on the industry’ with 67% claiming so compared to 46% of others.


Page 28

Chart 5.10: Licensing’s impact on public perception (Base: All 200 Suppliers)

Exactly a third of Suppliers (33%) believed that their Guards’ relationships with

police and or other authorities has changed as a result of licensing; this is often due

to an improved rapport, improved partnerships, better information shared

between groups or more respect shown.

As seen with the perceived impact licensing has had on negotiations with

customers, there are no significant differences in the views of Security Guard

Suppliers compared to those in the Door Supervision industry.

-24%

-22%

-17%

-13%

-12%

-6%

-4%

-6%

-19%

-21%

-17%

-18%

-11%

-13%

-12%

-10%

23%

27%

31%

35%

38%

39%

37%

32%

28%

22%

29%

29%

35%

38%

42%

50%

-60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Licensing does not affect public perception of security guards

The public recognise the value licensing has on the industry

Security guarding is regarded as a career due to licensing

There is respect for staff because they hold a recognisable, national licence

There is greater awareness of the role that security guards can play in providing security

and community safety

The buyers of security guard services recognise the value licensing has on the

industry

The police recognise the value licensing has on the industry

There is trust in staff because of criminal records checks


% agree

(82%)

(79%)

(76%)

(72%)

(64%)

(59%)

(51%)

(49%)


Page 29

5.8 Cost Savings Due to Licensing Confidence in the ability of licensed personnel, and the confidence Suppliers have

in recruiting someone that is licensed is high. Many also feel that staff are

sufficiently trained to meet the requirements of their job, or Suppliers have at least

been able to save money as a result of licensing.

There are however, fewer Suppliers feeling that there have been cost reductions

due to reduced supervisory time, or that less staff are needed for the same jobs.

Opinion on a reduced turnover as a result of licensing is also mixed.


Page 30

Chart 5.11: Cost savings due to licensing (Base: All 200 Suppliers)

There has been a significant rise in the levels of agreement with a number of the

cost savings measures which may affect Suppliers as a result of licensing when

compared to the study undertaken in 2007. Agreement with five of the 11

statements has increased significantly since the last survey:

-27%

-23%

-28%

-26%

-22%

-23%

-17%

-16%

-14%

-13%

-7%

-31%

-40%

-30%

-31%

-36%

-25%

-25%

-17%

-19%

-21%

-9%

23%

21%

22%

22%

23%

27%

28%

36%

34%

39%

45%

9%

12%

12%

13%

13%

13%

19%

26%

29%

25%

29%

-80%-60%-40%-20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%100%

We have saved on recruitment because we have fewer people in better jobs

New staff need little supervision because of the training received when becoming licensed

We have saved on recruitment because staff are better equipped to take on additional

responsibilities

We have saved money because we have to recruit less people

We have saved supervisory and/or management time because licensed staff are

more capable and better skilled

We have saved money on new uniforms and equipment because of lower staff turnover

We have saved on training because of lower staff turnover

We have saved on training because we have been able to recruit staff who are already

trained

Licensed staff are sufficiently trained to meet the requirements of their job

If an individual holds a licence I can be confident in recruiting them

I have confidence in the ability of licensed personnel


% agree

(74%)

(64%)

(63%)

(62%)

(47%)

(36%)

(35%)

(34%)

(33%)

(32%)

(40%)


Page 31

• Saving on training because Suppliers have been able to recruit staff who are already trained (62% agreed with this statement in 2010, compared to 43% in 2007)

• Saving on training because of lower staff turnover (47% agreeing in 2010, compared to 26% in 2007)

• Saving money on new uniforms and equipment because of lower staff turnover (40% agreeing in 2010, compared to 25% in 2007)

• Saving supervisory and/or management time because licensed staff are more capable and better skilled (36% agreeing in 2010, compared to 19% in 2007)

• Saving on recruitment because Suppliers have fewer people in better jobs (32% agreeing in 2010, compared to 20% in 2007).

The views of the Door Supervision sector is similar to that of Security Guard

Operatives, with the exception of two statements; Door Supervisor Suppliers are

significantly less likely to agree that ‘If an individual holds a licence I can be confident

in recruiting them’ (with 51% of Door Supervisor Suppliers agreeing, compared to

64% of Security Guards Suppliers) and also that ‘We have saved money on new

uniforms and equipment because of lower staff turnover’ (with 27% of Door

Supervisor Suppliers agreeing, compared to 40% of Security Guards Suppliers).

5.9 Whether Staff have been Subjected to Violence Two-thirds of Suppliers (67%) claim that their staff have been subjected to violence

whilst working, rising to 72% of those with experience of the industry prior to the

introduction of licensing. This compares to less than half of Security Guard

Operatives (48%) claiming that they personally have been assaulted.

Larger organisations (by turnover), and those with greater numbers of employees

are also significantly more likely to have had experience of their staff being

subjected to assault. Eight out of ten organisations (80%) with more than 250

employees have experienced some form of violence, compared to 52% of those

with 25 or fewer staff. Similarly, 78% of organisations with a turnover of more than

£50m have experienced some form of violence, compared to only 53% of those

with a turnover of less that £250,000.


Page 32

The nature of the violence is almost evenly split by verbal and physical, with 62% of

organisations having staff that have experienced verbal abuse in the past, and 53%

experiencing physical abuse. Among those that have experienced physical violence,

seven out of ten (equating to 38% of the total sample) claim that the violence

resulted in an injury to their staff.

Chart 5.12: Whether staff have been subjected to violence (Base: All 200 Suppliers)

Levels of assault reported in the Security Guard sector is significantly less that that

reported in the Door Supervision sector, where over three-quarters of Suppliers’

staff (76%) have been subjected to some form of assault.

5.10 Change in Business Activity since January 2008 Over half of Suppliers (55%) believe that their organisation's turnover, or the

amount of business conducted, has increased since January 2008. This proportion

increases to 72% of those with more than 250 employees. Businesses with a small

turnover or few employees have been in a much less promising situation; 29% of

those with a turnover of less than £250,000 per year believe their turnover to

have decreased a lot. One in five businesses with 25 or fewer employees (20%)

believes the same.

33%

16%

62%

67%

38%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

None

Physical

Verbal

Overall

Assault

Resulting in injury


Page 33

Chart 5.13: Change in business activity since January 2008 (Base: All 200 Suppliers)

Few Suppliers attribute their change in turnover to be entirely linked to licensing;

in both cases, only 9% believe their increase or decrease to be a direct result of

licensing and a third see licensing to have had some effect (among 34% of those

whose company turnover/ business has increased, and among 32% of those whose

company turnover/ business has decreased).

In comparison to the situation just after the introduction of licensing in 2007, at

that point 17% of Suppliers attributed all their increase in turnover or business

activity to be as a result of licensing, whilst 38% placed at least some of the change

to be as a result of licensing.

25%

30%

-11%

-13%

-40%

-20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

Increased a lotIncreased a littleDecreased a little


Page 34

5.11 Change in Number of Employees since January 2008

The state of employment levels of Security Guard Suppliers over the past two

years differs quite considerably, with three in five (62%) reporting some change in

their number of employees since January 2008.

When organisations have changed the number of employees, significantly more

have increased in size than decreased; just under two in five Suppliers (38%) report

an increase in the number of Guards they employ, whilst almost a quarter (24%)

have seen the number fall.

Large organisations are significantly more likely to have seen their number of

employees grow over the past two years, with two-thirds of Suppliers with a

turnover greater than £50m per annum (66%) claiming this to be the case,

compared to 30% of those with a turnover less than £5m, and only 24% of those

with a turnover less than £250,000.

This trend is also observed in reverse; rather than smaller organisations remaining

the same size, they are significantly more likely to have reduced the number of

Guards they employ (with 38% having done so, compared to 6% of those with a

turnover greater than £50m).


Page 35

Chart 5.14: Change in number of employees since January 2008 (Base: All 200 Suppliers)

There is a corresponding trend in staff sizes by current number of employees;

those with large number of employees claim to have increased in number since

January 2008, whilst smaller organisations are significantly more likely to have

reduced.

Few Suppliers – only 10% – have seen their number of clients fall since January

2008 (down from 13% in the 2007 study). Almost three in five respondents have

seen an increase in business activity over this period, with a quarter (25%) having

seen the number of clients increase from within their current portfolio, and 31%

seeing an increase from customers with different requirements.

Whilst there is no difference in likelihood to expand within their current customer

base, larger organisations are significantly more likely to have expanded into areas

with new sorts of customers; three-quarters of businesses with a turnover of

more than £50m claim to have done so, compared to only 21% of smaller

9%

14%

14%

-12%

-5%-6%

-40%

-20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

Decreased significantly Decreased a fair amountDecreased a little Increased significantlyIncreased a fair amount Increased a little

38%

24%


Page 36

businesses. Equally, 49% of those with over 100 employees have expanded into

new areas, compared to only 15% of smaller businesses.

Chart 5.15: Change in business activity since January 2008 (Base: All 200 Suppliers)

5.12 Impact Regulation has had on Attracting New Business

Many Suppliers feel that licensing has the ability to attract new money or

investment from third parties into a variety of industries where they currently

operate. In particular, over two in five Suppliers operating at live events, within the

public sector, or at schools and universities believe licensing has the ability to

attract new money or investment. Few suppliers believe that licensing has a

detrimental effect.

-10%

33%

31%

25%

-50% 0% 50% 100%

Number of customers has fallen

The same number and type of customers

Increased with different sort of customers

Increased with the same sort of customers


Page 37

Chart 5.16: The effect licensing has ability to attract new money or investment from third parties (Base: All Suppliers operating in sector)

-6%

-4%

-4%

-4%

-3%

0%

-3%

-4%

-3%

48%

28%

28%

34%

36%

39%

42%

44%

46%

-20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Other areas (33)

Retail (98)

Business parks or industrial parks (134)

Construction (95)

Office entrance or reception (166)

Holiday parks and theme parks (23)

Schools and universities (102)

Public sector (137)

Events, including sports, music and other live events (65)

Is LESS attractive to investors because of licensing

Is MORE attractive to investors because of licensing


Page 38

6 Summary of Results – Operatives Survey Among all Security Guards, regardless of experience, opinion of the current

licensing situation is generally positive, with at least half of Guards believing

licensing has improved the range of skills they have, their overall ability to do their

job, and their future career options. A significant minority of Guards however felt

that licensing has little positive effect on pay and conditions, the availability of

work, and the treatment received from employers.

Most Operatives believe that the fact that there are criminal record checks means

they are viewed in a more positive light due to increased trust, however, many felt

that SIA licensing has not increased the public’s respect for them. On a positive

note however, many stated there was an increase in the professionalism of their

industry as a result of licensing, and also a decrease in criminality.

A little over two in five Operatives (43%) claimed to have paid all of the costs of

applying for (or renewing) their Security Guard licence, with a further quarter

paying all the costs of the training associated with becoming licensed. Many

Operatives paying at least some way towards their licence fee (or the training

associated with licensing) felt the cost was worth it, with 60% claiming it was

definitely or at least probably worth it.

Overall, just under half of security guards (48%) have been subjected to some form

of violence in the past, although this rises to two-thirds (66%) of guards that have

been in the industry for five or more years. Guards are more likely to have been

subjected to verbal assaults rather than physical attack, however many have been

subjected to both.


Page 39

7 Operatives Sample The age of respondents ranged from 18 to over 60, with half of respondents aged

over 50. Typically, those aged under 50 are more responsive to SIA licensing, and

significant differences between age groups are highlighted throughout this report.

Overall, two-thirds of Operatives (67%) had experience of working into the

industry prior to the introduction of licensing.

In comparison, the age distribution of the Door Supervisor industry is heavily

skewed towards younger staff, with 69% under 40 (and 22% under 24), and only

6% aged 50 or over. Only 23% of Door Supervisors interviewed had experience of

their industry prior to the introduction of Door Supervisor licensing (which was

phased in between June 2004 and April 2005).

Chart 7.1: Respondent age groups (Base: All 401 Operatives)

A little over three-quarters of Operatives (77%) were white, with a further one in

ten black or of Asian origin. Equally, 77% of those spoken to were born within the

UK, and approaching nine out of ten (86%) claimed than English was their first

language. Throughout this report, significant differences are observed by ethnicity,

and also place of birth and first language. Similarly, the vast majority of respondents

(92%) were male, and only 3% were registered disabled. Operatives within the

Door Supervisor industry are significantly less likely to be white, with 66% of

respondents claiming to be.

5% 7%18% 20% 24% 26%

18-24 25-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+

30%

50%


Page 40

Chart 7.2: Respondent background (Base: All 401 Operatives)

The Operatives interviewed work in a wide variety of situations, with approaching

half (48%) claiming to do Guarding work in offices, and four in ten working on

industrial parks. Operatives typically work in more than one area.

Chart 7.3: Area of work (Base: All 401 Operatives)

There are no significant trends in the type of work undertaken by the age or

nationality of security guards, however there are differences observed by

77%

10% 10%3%

77%86%

White Black Asian Other Born in UK English first language

9%

9%

9%

18%

25%

27%

39%

48%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Other areas

Events (sports/music/other live)

Schools and universities

Construction

Retail

Public sector

Business/industrial parks

Office entrance/reception


Page 41

geographic region; guards based in London are typically more likely to work in

offices compared to many other regions, whilst those in the West Midlands or

North West are often more likely to work in business parks. Those in the North

West are also more likely to work in retail or on construction sites.

Most respondents (74%) claimed to be earning between £5 and £8 per hour, with

a further 21% earning between £8 and £10. Only 4% of those interviewed claimed

to be earning more than £10 per hour. Hourly wages of Security Guards are

typically lower than those of Door Supervisors, where 50% of those interviewed

claim to be earning more than £10 an hour.

The vast majority of Security Guard Operatives interviewed (88%) claimed to be

currently employed as a Security Guard, with a small number actively seeking

employment within the sector. In comparison, the Door Supervisor sector has

significantly more Operatives out of work at the time of interview, with only 61%

working as a Door Supervisor, 23% actively seeking employment, and a further

13% not seeking employment at that time.

Chart 7.4: Current employment status (Base: All 401 Operatives)

Since the beginning of 2008, almost a third of respondents (30%) had changed

employer, with a further 18% considering doing so. In the 2007 study, 22% had

2%

4%

6%

88%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Would rather not say

Not currently working as a Security Guard, and not seeking

employment

Not currently working as a Security Guard, but actively

seeking employment

Currently working as a Security Guard


Page 42

changed employer as a result of licensing, with 23% having considered changing.

Likelihood of Door Supervisors changing employer since 2008 is at a similar,

although slightly lower proportion compared to Security Guards, with 24% having

changed, and 19% having considered doing so.

Security Guards that have been subjected to some form of physical or verbal

assault in the past are significantly more likely to have changed job, with 38% of

those suffering verbal assault, and 41% suffering physical violence having changed

employer since January 2008. Equally, those subjected to assault are also more

likely to have considered switching employer, if they had not done so already.

Chart 7.5: Employment status since January 2008 (Base: All 401 Operatives)

There is no overriding reason why Operatives left their last employer (or had

considered doing so), however for a third of cases it is outside the Operatives’

decision as their old company was either taken over or sold.

When an Operative has made the decision to leave (or at least considered it), the

main reasons are to earn more money, or due to having a bad experience with

their old company. In either case, around one in five Operatives gave this reason.

30%

18%

52%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Have not considered changing employer

Considered changing employer

Have changed employer


Page 43

Chart 7.6: Reason for changing employer (Base: All 194 Operatives that have changed employer/considered doing so since January 2008)

19%

4%

6%

7%

14%

21%

22%

32%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Other comments

Old company closed down

Was made redundant

Wanted a better location

Wanted more/better hours

Bad experience with old company

Wanted more money

No choice/old company taken over


Page 44

8 Detailed findings – Operatives Survey

8.1 Payment of Licensing A little over two in five Operatives (43%) claimed to have paid all of the costs of

applying for (or renewing) their Security Guard licence, with a further quarter

paying all the costs of the training associated with becoming licensed. This is at

very similar levels to the 2007 study, where 41% paid all the costs of their licence,

and 23% paid all the costs of their training.

The proportion of Guards having all the costs of their licence paid for differs

significantly by ethnicity and Operatives’ first language. Operatives where English is

their first language are significantly less likely to have to pay for the cost of their

licensing compared to others; 58% of those with English as their first language did

not have to pay anything towards the cost of licensing, compared to only 30% of

those where English is not their first language. Only 38% of those born outside the

UK had all their licence costs paid for them, and only 43% of BMEs had their costs

paid for.

Chart 8.1: Payment made by Operatives towards the cost of their license (Base: All 401 Operatives)

72%

2%

24%

54%

2%

43%

0% 50% 100%

None

Some of

All

Applying for/renewing licence

Training


Page 45

When regarding training costs, Security Guards with five or more years

experience are significantly less likely to having paid for training (only 21% did)

compared to those with less experience (35% had to pay at least something).

Again, we see significant differences by ethnicity and country of origin, with 22% of

white Security Guards having to pay for training, compared to 49% of BMEs, 50%

of those born outside the UK, and 53% where English is not their first language.

Security Guards based in London are the most likely to have to pay for their

training, with 41% having to do so, however this is likely to be due to there being a

significantly higher proportion of Guards born outside the UK, or being of a Black

or Minority Ethnic background.

Door Supervisors are significantly more likely than Security Guards to have to pay

all the costs of their licence, with 77% claiming to have done so. Door Supervisors

are also significantly more likely to have to pay all the costs towards their training,

with 66% claiming to have done so.

Many Operatives paying at least some way towards their licence fee (or the

training associated with licensing) felt the cost was worth it, with 60% claiming it

was definitely or at least probably worth it. Security Guards with experience of

working before licensing was introduced were significantly less likely to feel the

cost was worth it, with only 52% claiming so (compared to 79% of those with no

experience pre-licensing). Interestingly, there is no significant difference observed

in the proportion of Guards feeling the cost was worth it between those currently

employed, and those actively seeking employment.


Page 46

Chart 8.2: Whether cost of licence was worth it (Base: All 200 Operatives paying towards their licence or for training)

Door Supervisors that had to pay for at least some of their licence or training

were typically more positive that the cost was worth it, with significantly more

Operatives feeling the cost was definitely or probably worth it (72%), compared to

Security Guards (61%).

8.2 Impact of Regulation As highlighted in Section 5 of this report, two-thirds of Operatives (266

respondents) had experience of working as a Security Guard prior to the

introduction of licensing in March 2006. Door Supervisors were much less likely to

have had experience since before the introduction of licensing, with only 22%

claiming so.

When asked to think back to before the introduction of licensing, opinion of the

benefits of the introduction of licensing among this audience is generally positive,

23%

10%

6%

29%

31%

Definitely not worth it Probably not worth itNeither/nor Probably worth itDefinitely worth it

60% agreeCost was worth it


Page 47

although some aspects involve high levels of disagreement; whilst over three-

quarters (78%) believed that there is greater levels of trust in security guards due

to the criminal records checks needed for licensing, only half believed there is

greater respect among the general public due to licensing (and 40% actively

disagree with this statement).

Chart 8.3: Impact of regulation (Base: All 266 Operatives with experience since before licensing was introduced)

Interestingly, Guards who have not been subjected to verbal or physical attack

have a more positive view on licensing, which this group significantly more likely to

agree with all five key statements (i.e. excluding the statement ‘licensing has had no

impact on the public’s view of security guards’).

Security Guards born outside the UK are also significantly more likely to agree

with a number of statements, specifically:

-17%

-15%

-16%

-11%

-10%

-7%

-27%

-25%

-19%

-19%

-12%

-8%

17%

14%

16%

16%

23%

18%

32%

36%

43%

47%

49%

60%

-60%-40%-20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Licensing has had no impact on the public’s view of security guards

The public has greater respect for security guards now because we hold a recognisable, national licence

Security guard jobs are regarded more as careers than they were before licensing

The training has improved my ability to do my job

People are more aware now of how security guards can help security and

community safety

There is more trust in security guards because of criminal record checks


% agree2007(83%)

(73%)

(73%)

(68%)

(57%)

(47%)

% agree

(78%)

(72%)

(63%)

(59%)

(50%)

(49%)


Page 48

• There is more trust in security guards because of criminal record checks (89% vs. 75% when born in the UK)

• People are more aware now of how security guards can help security and community safety (87% vs. 67%)

• The training has improved their ability to do their jobs (84% vs. 58%) • The public has greater respect for security guards now because they hold a

recognisable, national licence (73% vs. 45%).

Opinion of the effect of licensing compared to the 2007 survey is similar in four

measures, however in 2010, significantly fewer Operatives agree with two

statements:

• that the training has improved their ability to do their jobs; and • that their job is regarded more as a career than before licensing.

Among the Door Supervision industry, opinion of the positive effects of licensing is

also similar to those found in the 2010 Security Guard research, with the

exception of one situation; Door Supervisors are significantly less likely to agree

that the training has improved their ability to do their jobs, with only 44% believing

so, compared to 63% of Security Guards.

8.3 Impact licensing has had on Security Guards Among all Security Guards, regardless of experience, opinion of the current

licensing situation is generally positive, with at least half of Guards believing

licensing has improved their situation in five of the nine areas put forward. The

three most common areas of perceived improvement are the range of skills

Guards have, their overall ability to do their job, and their future career options.


Page 49

Chart 8.4: Opinion of the current licensing situation (Base: All 401 Operatives)

There are three statements where respondents were significantly more likely to

feel that licensing has made the situation worse (albeit in relatively small

proportions):

• That licensing has improved pay and conditions (16% felt it was now worse) • That licensing has improved the availability of work (9%) • That licensing has improved the treatment received from employers and

managers (9%).

There are a number of areas where a specific sub-group has different views

compared to others; for example, Security Guards that earn less than £8 per hour

are significantly less likely to believe that licensing has improved pay and conditions

(with 29% seeing an improvement, compared to 41% of those earning over £8 per

-6%

-5%

-2%

-1%

-1%

-4%

-1%

-1%

-1%

-10%

-4%

-2%

-1%

-1%

-5%

-2%

-1%

-1%

17%

14%

16%

15%

20%

15%

23%

21%

21%

15%

24%

29%

31%

30%

35%

32%

36%

36%

-40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Pay and conditions

The treatment you receive from your employer or manager

The amount of responsibility you have

The treatment you receive from the Police

The treatment you receive from customers and the general public

The availability of work

Your future career options and opportunities

Your overall ability to do your job

The range of skills you have

A lot worse A little worse A little better Much better

% agree

(57%)

(57%)

(55%)

(50%)

(50%)

(46%)

(45%)

(38%)

(32%)


Page 50

hour). Security Guards in the West of England are also less likely to agree with this

statement, with only 9% doing so.

Respondents with less than a year’s guarding experience were significantly more

likely to believe licensing improved the treatment they received from their

employers or managers, (with 64% thinking licensing made this better).

There are a number of sub-groups where respondents are significantly more likely

to have seen an improvement in their situation due to licensing in a large number

of categories, and these can broadly be categorised as follows:

• Respondents with less than five year’s experience, or no experience pre-licensing (with the exception of a perceived improvement in pay and conditions)

• Those that have not been subjected to verbal of physical assault (for improved career opportunities, treatment from Police, the public and their managers, and the availability of work)

• Those aged under 50 (excluding improved treatment from the Police, the general public, and future career options)

• Those that are black or minority ethnic (for all statements) • Those born outside the UK (for all statements) • Those whose first language is not English (excluding improved future career

options and opportunities, treatment from Police, and the availability of work).

Compared to 2007, there has been a significant rise in the proportion of Guards

seeing an improvement in their situation in three cases, all relating to their

treatment from others:

• The treatment they receive from customers and the general public (50% now believe the situation is better, compared to only 37% in 2007)

• The treatment received from the Police (46% now thinking it is better because of licensing, compared to 33% in 2007)

• The treatment received from employers and mangers (38% now thinking it is better, compared to 31% in 2007).

Operatives in the Door Supervision sector are considerably more positive with

regards to the improvements as a result of licensing when compared to Security

Guards. Door Supervisors are significantly more likely to feel that licensing has

made their situation better in eight of the nine areas listed when compared to


Page 51

Security Guards, with the only exception being an improved treatment from the

general public (where 50% in both sectors believe it is now better).

8.4 Impact of Licensing on Employment Security Guards were generally positive with regards to the impact SIA licensing

has on their jobs, however at least a quarter of respondents disagreed with three

out of the five positive statements listed:

• That they get respect from their employer and colleagues due to licensing (31% disagreed)

• That they will get better pay and conditions in the long term (30%) • That they have confidence to do their job because it is licensed (29%).

Chart 8.5: The effect licensing has on Operatives’ jobs (Base: All 401 Operatives)

Guards who earn less than £8 per hour are significantly less likely to agree that

they will get better pay and conditions in the long-term due to licensing. Again,

-13%

-13%

-12%

-8%

-9%

-7%

-15%

-18%

-17%

-22%

-14%

-10%

25%

18%

16%

21%

22%

30%

40%

38%

46%

42%

50%

43%

-40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Having a licence does not affect the way I see my job

I get respect from my employer and colleagues because I have a licence to carry out my job

I have confidence to do my job because it is licensed

I will get better pay and conditions in the long-term because it is illegal to work as a security

guard without a licence

The training has improved my ability to do my job

My training means I will be able to take on more responsibility in the future


% agree

(73%)

(72%)

(65%)

(63%)

(62%)

(56%)


Page 52

respondents from certain sub-groups are more likely to agree with the five

positive comments listed:

• Respondents with less than five year’s experience, or no experience pre-licensing (significantly more likely to agree to all five positive statements)

• Those that have not been subjected to verbal of physical assault (for all statements)

• Those aged under 50 (excluding respect from their employers and colleagues because they have a licence to carry out their job)

• Those that are black or minority ethnic (for all statements) • Those born outside the UK (for all statements) • Those whose first language is not English (excluding respect from their

employers and colleagues because they have a licence to carry out their job).

On the whole, agreement with these aspects reflect the findings of the 2007

survey, however there are three significant changes observed when compared to

2010:

• The proportion agreeing that they will get better pay and conditions in the long-term, because it is illegal to work as a Security Guard without a licence increases from 54% in 2007 to 65% in 2010

• The proportion agreeing that they get respect from their employers and colleagues due to having a licence to do their job increases from 46% in 2007 to 56% in 2010

• The proportion feeling that licensing does not affect the way they see their job falls significantly, from 71% in 2007 to 62% in 2010.

As seen in other measures, Door Supervisors are typically more positive with

regards to the effects of licensing compared to Security Guards. Door Supervisors

are significantly more likely to agree with four out of five of the positive

statements listed when compared to the views of Security Guards (there are

similar levels of agreement that the training has improved their ability to do their

jobs).

8.5 Licensing’s Impact on Public Perception Most Operatives are positive about the impact licensing has on other people’s

perception of the Security Guarding industry. Specifically, the fact that there are


Page 53

criminal record checks means that Operatives feel they are viewed in a more

positive light due to increased trust. There is some feeling however, that SIA

licensing has not increased the public’s respect for Security Guards, with a third

disagreeing with this fact.

Chart 8.6: The public’s perception of Security Guards (Base: All 401 Operatives)

Again, respondents from certain sub-groups are more likely to agree with the five

positive comments listed:

• Respondents with less than five year’s experience, or no experience pre-licensing (significantly more likely to agree to all five positive statements)

• Those that have not been subjected to verbal of physical assault (for all statements)

• Those that are black or minority ethnic (for all statements)

-21%

-15%

-11%

-5%

-9%

-8%

-8%

-20%

-19%

-8%

-10%

-10%

-8%

-9%

23%

25%

26%

28%

25%

23%

20%

29%

35%

47%

49%

53%

55%

59%

-60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Being licensed has no impact on the public’s view of security guards

The public has respect for security guards because we hold a recognisable, national

licence

People are aware of how security guards can help security and community safety

SIA licensing has decreased criminality in the security guard sector

SIA licensing has increased the professionalism of those working in the

security guard sector

The criminal record checks required to become licensed increases the public's trust in security

guards

There is more trust in security guards because of criminal record checks


% agree

(79%)

(78%)

(78%)

(77%)

(73%)

(60%)

(52%)


Page 54

• Those born outside the UK (excluding a decrease in criminality) • Those whose first language is not English (excluding a decrease in

criminality).

There is no significant change in the opinion of Guards in this survey when

compared to the results in 2007, nor is there any difference when compared to

the views of Operatives in the Door Supervision industry.

8.6 Whether Staff have been Subjected to Violence Overall, just under half of Security Guards (48%) have been subjected to some

form of violence, although this rises to two-thirds (66%) of Guards that have been

in the industry for five or more years. Guards are more likely to have been

subjected to verbal assaults rather than physical attack, however many have often

been subjected to both (i.e. 83% of those who have been physically attacked have

also been verbally assaulted at some point in the past).

Proportions of Security Guards being subjected to assault appears high, however

according to recent British Crime Survey statistics, 9% of individuals working in the

protective service occupations are threatened every year. Coupling this with the

fact that 60% of Security Guards interviewed have been in the industry for five or

more years, our findings appear realistic.

When comparing Security Guarding against other sectors, the British Crime

Survey reports that 3% of health care professionals had been subjected to some

form of violence in the previous 12 months, and 2% of those working in the

transport sector.

There is no difference in levels of being assaulted by nationality or ethnicity;

however those in the South West and West Midlands appear more likely to have

been subjected to attack. Approaching a third of those being physically attached

(i.e. 9% of the total audience) sustained an injury.


Page 55

Chart 8.7: Incidence of violence on Security Guards (Base: All 401 Operatives)

The proportion of Security Guards being subjected to assault is significantly lower

than in the Door Supervision industry, where 61% have been verbally assaulted

and 54% physically assaulted.

There was a wide range of physical violence encountered by Security Guards, with

the most common being punched, with over a quarter of those subjected to

physical violence claiming to have experienced this. Door Supervisors were

significantly more likely to have been punched or kicked compared to Security

Guards, with 59% and 20% claiming so in their 2010 research.

52%

21%

43%

48%

9%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

None

Physical

Verbal

Overall

Assault

Resulting in injury


Page 56

Chart 8.8: Most common nature of violence Security Guards have been subjected to (Base: All 120 Operatives that had been subject to physical violence)

7%

9%

10%

12%

16%

28%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Spat on

Kicked

Bottles/objects thrown

Stabbed/shot

Pushed/shoved

Punched

Security Industry Authority P.O. Box 49768 London WC1V 6WY Phone 020 7025 4100 Fax 020 7025 4101 E-mail [email protected]

www.sia.homeoffice.gov.uk

GEN/10-11/15 (SG)

The Impact of Regulation on the Security Guard Sector · PDF file · 2011-07-19The...

Documents

Transcript of The Impact of Regulation on the Security Guard Sector · PDF file · 2011-07-19The...