I don't believe you

Posted: Sat Oct 23, 2004 11:21 am

Hi Spooky,

The point I was trying to make was:

a) We don't actually know who the members of the panel were. I understand your assumption that it would consist of certain representatives from the major players in the industry.
Fact is, that is pure supposition. We don't actually know.
It would make sense that at least a proportion of the panel would come from the major players. Sadly, many of those would only have the interests of their individual companies uppermost in their minds, NOT the interests of the Industry operatives or improvement in service provision and training etc.
Personally, I do not consider the large company "Moneymakers" to be experts in the industry. Profit making is their area of expertise.

So.....lets analyze the package thus far:
The SIA call in SITO (main aim to make money) who then call in "selected" represtentatives from "selected major companies" (main aim to make money). Everyone slaps each other on the back and the poor clueless SIA come away with what they have been told are "Good ideas".

Intended Result:
The initial formulation of a process supposedly to improve, oversee and regulate the security industry.

Actual Result:
A Pigs ear.

b) My quote: " they went out to the industry and got the input from the industry, Did they really !!!!!!!!!"

Your reply: "they would have had to. the SIA are not in a position knowledge wise to build the NOS for a job probably none of them have done.
everything was done alongside SITO, who drew the people in from the companies and had them decide on a generic all agreed appropriate NOS for the new BJT."

I appreciate your train of thought but, in a manner of speaking, the inclusion of the phrase "everything was done alongside SITO, who drew the people in from the companies and had them decide on a generic all agreed appropriate NOS for the new BJT." is in itself, ample proof that the right people for the job were not consulted.

SITO are a training provider. Their main aim is to make money.
This does not make them experts in the industry.

Just to give a little credit to certain individuals involved, I wonder which "expert" expected to get all the Door Supervisors licenced in a 12 month period?
Proof positive that the "experts" got that one wrong.
Extensions to the original dates are being made nationwide.

Finally, and on a personal note to Spooky.
My reply to your posting was never intended to contain any elements of sarcasm.
I read everyones postings and if I feel inclined to do so, I will post a reply.

MY postings are equally available for anyone to view and comment upon.

I do tend to call a spade a spade. If I have offended anyone, then I apologize unreservedly.
Whilst I may not agree with another persons point of view, I respect 100% their entitlement to air their opinions.

My sincerest of best wishes to ALL the guild members (especially spooky) Very Happy

This site IS the voice of the industry. Lets thrash out the difficulties we face and never lose sight of our aims.

Regards to all,

Mike.

Forum Addict Joined: Apr 28, 2004 Posts: 122

hey mike,

no worries with the contents of the posts, all taken in good spirits Smile

the supposition from how the NOS was built under sito and the representitives who made up the 'expert panel' is because this is how the industry consultations have gone in all the licensable sectors.
the training managers are put forward by the companies approached to put their heads together on the panel and arrive at a suitable(!) NOS for the BJT qualification.

the SIA would see this as the right people for the job because who else would common sence say knows what knowledge security staff need but training managers? its a fair assumption, though sadly in this case the wrong one.

sito would be considered experts by those who dont know because again, common sence says you'd have to be an expert in a field in order to manage training for it.

unfortunatly money is the order of the day, the companies that sat on the expert panel all had the same agenda (giving as little as possible to their employees) and so the outcome is very little has changed.

not the SIA's fault, they are a management/enforcement body, not an expert group.

PM in the post Smile

Posted: Sun Nov 21, 2004 4:40 pm

I personally attended three national forums on licensing and although my views might well have been ignored I still got the chance to have my say in front of my peers. Door licensing has only been delayed because Disclosure, the company that do the CRB checks, could not cope with the demand. The Door industry was the best advised and the best prepared as the person that lead the sub-committee is one of the best in the Industry. Likewise the Consultants committee was brillinatly led. It makes you wonder why the same did not happen in the guarding industry. No-one can realistically blame the SIA for lack of commitment as anyone who has met Molly can see but if ones hands are tied through Government they have to make the best of it. As I have said before, the system will be ever changing and we have to ensure that we continue to make our voices heard in the right way which is constructive and pratical.

Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:17 pm

we need better courses to go on ...not the sito where an old lady of about 80 tells you to check the handles on doors its about time they did away with the sito crap and get some GOOD training going :smt011

Posted: Fri Sep 09, 2005 6:16 pm

John, CorSec, Spooky, Leon, Crane.

Yes I totally agree with you all in your posts, it is the man on the ground who should have been consulted all along ie the security officer/door supervisor/close protection officer but we were not, I agree it is not the SIA,s fault but Sito and a lot of the big companies should take the blame for not consulting with their officers.

How many of the Guild have done all three jobs mentioned above and how many of the guild are still doing all three jobs.

it is really getting beyond a joke now as we are still not being listened to
by the powers that be the guild is the Security industry with the amount of knowledge in the Guild we should have been invited to the table but we were not Did we scare any of the major companies.
I bet we did
Ok Rant over
Regards Bigyin

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2005 12:22 pm

I heard that there is actually now a degree course for the security industry. Smile

Newbie Joined: Sep 20, 2005 Posts: 10

There are a couple you can take, one up to a Masters degree, I will post the info on it if anyone is interested. But even having that you still need to do one of the SIA approved courses in order to be granted a licence.

Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2005 1:41 pm

Yeah, I only wanted to do an SIA course but I need to save up to take that course. I am looking for jobs which offer that training on the job, really. Smile