POST TOPIC bjt TRAINING

Posted: Sat Sep 04, 2004 3:01 pm

WHY has the SIA allowed the bjt training to stand as part of the criteria for security officers, I have always thought the bjt was for new starters to the industry to give them a look inside to see if they wanted to stay and advance through the industry ie advanced security officer then professsional security officer etc, there should be a tiered licencing system for the industry as a lot of the members of the guild have said
and the more exams you do /certification that is awarded to you then you should pay a little bit more.
any comments
bigyin

Posted: Sat Sep 04, 2004 7:52 pm

I second all of Bigyins comments!

Posted: Sat Sep 04, 2004 9:31 pm

I would have to concur also.
Basic Job Training is exactly what is says on the tin and to my way of thinking is merely an 'induction' to manned guarding.
Granted it covers a wide diversity of subjects but not in the depth needed and is, in my opinion, carried out in far too short a time span to allow all the information to be mentally retained for any length of time.

One of the remits of the SIA is to 'improve' the training standard, one might even say, the Governement introduced the SIA to increase the standard as it was seen as 'not good enough' - so including any courses which amount to basic job training defeats the whole purpose of trying to increase the standard.
Now if they had said, BJT was fine for the first year but further education was needed to retain the initial licence after the first year, things would have been better.

As for tiered licencing, I cannot see how they can avoid going this route eventually if they intend to issue multiple licences to individuals on a cost effective basis - for them and the licence holder.
Having seperate licences, requiring a £190 fee each time is not just ludicrous but forces individuals to try and circumvent the licencing system because they simply cannot afford it.

All we need to do now is formulate some appropriate wording for a petition.
My own concensus is that there should be two seperate petitions to cover this;
1 Increasing the training standard
2 Introduction of a tiered licencing system

Posted: Sun Sep 05, 2004 7:09 am

Dave/John
is it possible to get the SIAto use the IFPO BOOK as the basic training in future as you said the sito bjt does not cover a lot it is a basic introductory course to the Security industry
And I personally feel that the IFPO MANUAL is a lot more better suited to the BJT training as it covers alot more and is more informative and a lot better suited to the bjt
any comments
bigyin

Posted: Sun Sep 05, 2004 10:58 am

We are trying to get this excepted as a recognised course for Part 1 exception of the licencing criteria for security officers - but a Petition singed by many members might help it along. I'll work out the wording later and post it to the site.

Posted: Sun Sep 05, 2004 11:10 am

That would be good to see John
Alot of the members would like to see this done I hope I know I certainly would like to see it as it is a lot better than the sito bjt
bigyin

Posted: Sun Sep 05, 2004 11:44 am

It has been done.
The petition can be accessed from the left hand column block titled 'Petitions'

Posted: Sun Sep 05, 2004 8:35 pm

Great!

Its good to see the guild will continue to fight for what is fair to all employed within this industry! Twisted Evil

Posted: Sun Sep 05, 2004 8:41 pm

Quote:

The petition can be accessed from the left hand column block titled 'Petitions'

Sorry Boss, can you say where this section is?

Posted: Sun Sep 05, 2004 8:47 pm

I have now put it in the main menu.

Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2004 10:50 pm

At one of the early SIA fact finding seminars I attended I brought up tiered licensing. There was consensus throughout the whole room (he says proudly) that this was a good way forward. I do believe it is still on the SIA's master plan as a future development.

Newbie Joined: Dec 19, 2005 Posts: 10 Location: Kabul

SIA master plan or not........nothing will happen all the time they have company's such as Skills for Security, Edexel, to name but a few....running courses that are at the very basic level.

If you are aware, when SITO cut away from the BSIA and became a stand alone company. everythign started to change....i was on the Steering group which made up to date changes to ProfSec.............then they binned it.only to say that it would be coming back in a new format in the future.....(how long is a piece of string)

ProfSec, AdSec, and the Supervisors courses should have stayed where they were.....................I was the last trainer in the UK to deliver the Supervisors course before they binned it officialy.

I know there are still supervisors courses out there but my point remains.
Seems to me the standard of training in the Uk has dropped slightly!

The head sheds should get together, talk to the people who deliver the training.....and the guys on the ground....and find out what works.

Any one agree.
John walton
Country Training and Standards Manager (Afghanistan)

Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2007 10:11 am

Yes John
I agree with what you have said the standard of training has dropped not slightly but has dropped
enormously, especially with all the eu workers coming in to the industry, a lot of them cannot even speak english, and they are still getting there licences, I thought that one of the requirements was to speak and understand english before you did the exam, and what about the conflict management portion of the exam, if the candidate cannot even speak basic english then they will not understand what conflict management is all about
especially the written component of the exams
the SIA Head shed should come and talk to the guys on the ground before anything else is disscussed, because the security training in the UK is very very basic compared to America, yes I know some states in America do not require any training at all for security officers but in other states the requirement is very very high, the Requirement in the UK should be the same Very very high.
regards
Bigyin

Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:47 pm

I was very suprised about an article that appeared on the TV recently about immigrant workers managing to obtain licences.
How the heck did they manage that?

Are they not supposed to provide proof of identity and their work permits as well as everything else?

The next thing you know, any Tom, Dick or Ahmed will be able to get a licence on the grounds that to refuse them might be considered racially unacceptable.
And people wonder why I couldn't get out of the UK fast enough!