It really is all in the definition, Sir!

First is the definition of ‘in-house’. “If you perform licensable security duties on premises that are managed and operated by your employer (and your services are not contracted out to a third party or customer of your employer), you are termed an ‘employee’ for the purpose of these definitions.”

Then there is that for a ‘contractor’. The SIA’s definition here states: “If you perform licensable security duties under the terms of a supply contract or service agreement that exists (written or verbal) between your employer and a third party (a customer of your employer), you are termed a ‘contractor’ for the purpose of these definitions. This is regardless of the nature of your employment, or the terms between you and your employer.”

That all seems clear enough, but consider the following. If your employer provides your services to other companies within your group on a contract or service agreement, this would seem to imply that you will require a licence. Therefore, if you work for ABC plc and your employers provide a security function for ABC (London) Ltd, then your services will be contracted out to a third party. ABC (London) Ltd is a separate legal entity from ABC plc.

In my experience, those companies that have their own guarding force are quite sizeable and have other companies within their group who share the benefits of this guarding force. They also seem to occupy very large buildings with other, non-related companies as tenants (who, in turn, derive benefits from this guarding force). This, I would suggest, means that in these circumstances those individual security officers must be licensed.

‘Get Licensed’ also poses the question: “Whose responsibility is it to get your licence?” The answer is quite categorical. “You, the operative, are responsible for obtaining a licence to work legally within the private security industry.”

Doesn’t this then raise the possibility that a security operative – in the circumstances I have described above – could be advised by his or her company that he or she doesn’t require a licence (and, if I’m correct in my submission, end up being prosecuted by the SIA with the possible loss of that licence and loss of income)? Where would that leave the employing company? Could we see the Board of Directors of a major blue chip organisation being sued for using unlicensed security personnel? Could we even see the company being sued by the unfortunate security officer?

In conclusion, let me remind all of you in-house people of the penalties for operating without an SIA licence: summary conviction at a Magistrates Court with a maximum penalty of six months’ imprisonment and/or a fine of up to £5,000, or trial on indictment at the Crown Court (which could result in an unlimited fine and/or up to five years’ imprisonment).

Chris Brogan FSyI, Director, Security International