Exemption from Core Competency Training

Forum Addict Joined: Apr 28, 2004 Posts: 122

nice to see some input Stefan,

will be even nicer to see more input on some of the other issues raised here!

what irks me is ive still got to go and do the bone conflict resolution course when ive a wealth of experience with that, and i know full and well that what looks pretty on paper rarely has a shred of practical use.

let me know how it goes should (and i hope you dont) you have to tell a known HIV+ heroin addict not to try and stab you with a hypodermic, following the CR course content.

"please stop trying to stab me with your syringe mr socially disadvantaged, controlled substance dependant angry person."

stab!

"oh you've stabbed me. now maybe i can justify in court after my arrest for assaulting you; having had touch you in order to defend myself."

note: my example is based on an experience i had, where i managed to avoid getting stabbed.

Posted: Sat Oct 23, 2004 9:21 am

I have just scanned through this thread again quickly but yes, some 'joined up thinking' will certainly make a refreshing change.

My personal perception is that the SIA should have spent some considerable additional time in thinking the whole licencing/training issue through a lot more thoroughly.

Obviously there was a need to keep the momentum going after the introduction of the PSIA but one cannot help thinking that it will take even longer to iron out the pigs-ear that the issue has become.

There is certainly a need for skills transferability and its nice to know someone is taking the bull by the horns and doing something positive with it - one point for SITO me thinks!

Please keep us informed of progress as I know there are many here who might not have the qualifications on paper but could show any one of todays security officers an eye opener or two.

Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2004 3:11 am

STEFAN
What would you call recognised certifications personally I would recommend that any former police officer /military person could use the qualifications they hold towards a trainers qualification by applied prior learning would that not help them gain atrainers qualification yes I recognise there will be more work to do towards such a qualification but it would surely bring in experienced personnel.
I hold a lot of qualifications such as first aid trainer/assessor, firearms trainer, baton trainer, taser trainer, etc etc. and as it is hard to get onto a SITO Trainers course if you are paying for it yourself as a lot of companies wont put anyone on the course no matter what experience you have and it beggers belief that its only the company favourites that get anything as john pointed out earlier an inspector from securiplan asked for courses to benifit him and his team and was refused as securiplan considered that the BJT WAS SUFFICIANT for the inspector they deserve to lose all there contracts as I would certainly deem there staff insufficiantly trained with JUST THE BJT under there belt what is the securiplan training manager thinking ,

any comments
BIGYIN

Forum Addict Joined: Apr 28, 2004 Posts: 122

probably about his profits bigyin Rolling Eyes

Posted: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:14 pm

Just for clarification re Securiplan - the Inspector felt that First Aid training would be a useful as Insepctors are the first point of contact during incidents on site. Obviously the emergency services would be used in an emergency but this particular Inspector has attended two incidents were the duty security officer was suffering from shock and had one team member that was a little lapse in taking his insulin.

The Inspector was also responsible for risk assessments on site and felt adequate training would have been useful as well as a number of other area's that I won't go into.

My post was made to highlight, in a generic manner, the short-comings of the industry not as a swipe at Securiplan specifically - they were used purely as an example.
Laughing

Well that will boost the ranking for Securiplan in google, wonder if we are on the first page yet.

Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2004 7:38 am

John
Apologies if i got the guild into trouble with my last message RE Securiplan.
I quite like trouble but no, I just didnt want anyone to think I was picking on Securiplan specifically Very Happy

.

AND I do feel it is vital that all security officers are professionally trained by the company they work for point in question First aid training every officer in the company that I work for is first aid trained (F.A.W) AND now the company I work for are offering more advanced training than the BJT
THEY ARE also offering Control & restraint Courses as well as Conflict Management, AND I also heard that they were offering door supervisors courses but will confirm that and post it on the website, I have just had an interview with them for a Training Managers position I have a 2nd Interview next thursday when I have to give a 15 minute presentation on the subject of my choice so will wait to see what happens
will let you all know the results of the interview and presentation.
Regards to All
Bigyin

Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2004 7:45 am

JOHN,LEON,SPOOKY,CORSEC AND THE REST OF THE GUILD MEMBERS

Remember a while back I was having trouble whith a manager employed by this company, I think that they have taken our suggestions for further training to HEART.
WILL LET ALL OF YOU KNOW HOW IT GOES
Regards to all
Bigyin

Posted: Sun Nov 21, 2004 4:55 pm

Let's all remember something here. Training needs should be identified by one of two ways. Site Inspection (risk assesments etc.) or individual appraisal systems.

In my old job, on one station all my staff had full first aid. On another my staff just had the appointed person. Reason being the second site had a 24 hour nurse who was highly trained. Same as the wardens, all had appointed persons. They were working on the street and could dial 999. There was not need for them to do the full course.

Basic Guarding is that. Basic. Surely it is up to the company to provide any site specific training that is required. My new team that I will be setting up will all do a one week intensive course. This is not exactly security related apart from conflic management as they are working on the street. It will include a lot of equipment training though. Anything additional can be taught at a later date of the situation arises.

I am one of the biggest complaintants of SITO but even I have noticed thay have raised their game. I still think there is a long way to go but there are a number of people workign on this. I personally shop around for all my training needs and vett the companies as to what they can provide. One of my arguments against warden training was only Sito were allowed to provide this. This how now changed due to the threat of legal challenge. This was not becuase SITO did a bad job but just because I believed I should have a choice.

Posted: Sat Dec 17, 2005 5:50 pm

Evening Guys
I hope everyone is well, I have just completed my conflict management
course with the company I work for and what a load of twaddle it was
there were 12 of us on the course and 3 left and went home during the first 20 mins. The Trainer said to me why are you here you are a trainer in this I replied the contracts manager does not recognise my qualification (it is American Management of Agressive Behavior)which is a 7 day course Sito have recognised it as it covers more than the 1 day course that we get over here. I have also qualified as an EMT I paid half and the company paid half
Regards
Bigyin

Posted: Wed Jan 04, 2006 12:59 pm

I just wanted to bring some of the things mentioned in this thread up to date a little.

The SIA has now said that an inital license will be £190 and subsequent licenses (for another licensable activity) will be half price and not the £190 PER LICENSE as mentioned in this thread - though that information was correct when it was posted.

Despite our meeting with Bob Doyle (SITO Southern Region Training Director) in December of 2003 and later reassurances by Stefan Hay (Director - SITO) in 2005 that the Guild would be invited on to the Steering Committe we have yet to recieve any official invitation or further communication in respect of that.

However, I am pleased to report that, in respect of our greivance that some employers undertaking in-house SITO training were *assisting* their employees to pass the SITO BJT we acknowledge that SITO have now taken some steps in an effort to eliminate this specific problem.