Biased stereotype.

I was shocked to receive my recent issue of Security Management (June) and see the photo of an alleged "security guard" on the cover with the headline "The High Cost of Cheap Guards." Your photo is exactly the type of biased stereotype that our professional organization should be disavowing! Instead, you openly lampoon me--and every member of the private security industry that spends our membership dollars working within ASIS International to standardize and professionalize our businesses. Why would ASIS support this representation?

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

I was further dismayed when I turned inside to read the actual cover story itself. In "Guarding Against Poor Performance," author Ronald D. Heil, CPP, writes a thoughtful article on a tired subject and adds some excellent points. Your cheap-shot caption and photo are not in any way carried forward in the author's article. I would imagine that Mr. Heil would be concerned that your photo and your insinuation are not in any way connected to the piece that he has submitted.

As the chairman of one of the largest ASIS chapters, I am both personally and professionally insulted by your depiction.

George W. Guilfoy

Partner, United Security, Inc.

(Chairman, ASIS Boston Chapter)

THE AUTHOR REPLIES:

I'm sorry I can't agree with Mr. Guilfoy's assessment of the cover art that accompanied my article. The marked-down price tag clearly shows that this version of a security guard is what a client may get if the lowest price is the only deciding factor in selecting a contractor, which is a major point of my article.

Sadly, the guard portrayed on the cover looks pretty good compared to some "discount" private security officers I've observed in the course of serving my clients. This officer at least has a uniform hat, not the local baseball team's cap; his belt is black, not half brown from where the finish has flaked off; his uniform is relatively clean, free of food stains, and not overly wrinkled; and although his shoes are not visible in the photo, I would hope they are not white sneakers dyed black. I have seen all this and more at many of my clients' facilities, before my firm guided the clients through a "best fit" selection process.

It is definitely not my position that the parody guard portrays the entire private security industry, but contrary to the appreciated efforts of security professionals like Mr. Guilfoy, there are still too many guards out there who look as bad or worse.

As an independent consultant, it is my responsibility to protect my clients and work toward contracts that are in their best interests. ASIS International is working hard to set standards in the industry, which is helping, as is a realization by many private security companies that it is not in their best interest to participate in low-bid contracts that push them to lower standards. Together, we can change the perception by changing the reality.

Ronald D. Heil, CPP, CSC 

Director of Consulting

SecuraComm Consulting Inc.

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 

The article "Guarding Against Poor Performance" does a thorough job of illustrating best hiring practices for a security force; it fails, however, to address a critical liability issue that should be included on the contractor scoresheet: security guards as independent contractors versus employees.

Does the guard service provider consider its workers as employees or independent contractors? Some companies consider them the latter to avoid their liability and to avoid withholding federal income tax as well as contributing Social Security, Medicare, and unemployment. It also limits their insurance premiums. This has been going on for more than 10 years and has become commonplace.

Companies that use guard agencies that employ their guard force as independent contractors rather than as employees should be aware that in some rare cases they may inherit the liability for the independent-contractor guard's general liability and worker's compensation.

Most of the nation's 1 million-plus guards are unlicensed, untrained, and not subject to background checks. The burgeoning $12 billion-a-year industry is marked by high turnover, low pay, few benefits, and scant oversight. And according to government officials and industry experts, little has changed since 9-11.

Overall improvement of practices is necessary to professionalize and change an industry that historically was a low-income position and have it evolve to a middle-income position in which qualified individuals can make a living, support a family, and use their skills to supply our first line of defense at home.

Joseph Sordi

CEO 

Strategic Security Corp

New York, New York

Letters to the editor are welcomed and encouraged on all matters pertinent to security professionals. Letters should be mailed with your address, title, company affiliation, and daytime phone number to: Letters, Security Management, 1625 Prince St., Alexandria, VA 22314; letters can also be e-mailed to: [e-mail]. Submissions may be edited for length and clarity.