Feral Jundi

Saturday, July 14, 2012

Industry Talk: London Olympics–Britain Adjusts Security Plans As G4S Fails In Recruitment Effort

Filed under: Industry Talk,United Kingdom — Tags: , , , , , , — Matt @ 3:19 AM

This is a really bad deal. lol I mean G4S really screwed up on this one, and this is one of those deals where all other PMSC’s and contractors are watching and wincing. I know I am.…

As to why this was such a screwed up deal probably rests upon a poorly written contract, and poorly managed recruitment/vetting effort–because of a poorly written contract. Everything from the appropriate amount of time to do this, to resources, and anything else that could have and should have been included in this contract.  And pay is the one thing that the company should not have played games with.  Check out this quote:

A former police sergeant who signed up to work for G4S at the Olympics has told how he withdrew his application over fears the recruitment process was “totally chaotic” and the firm was simply looking for cheap labour.
Robert Brown, who served for 30 years with Kent police, claimed he knew many other retired officers who had decided against working at the Games for the same reasons.
He said he had been given verbal commitments that staff would be paid £14 an hour, but that the contract he received said he would be entitled to £6.05 an hour for working outside the venues, and £8.50 for working inside the stadium.
“It is actually very sad,” Brown said. “I was looking forward to working at this historic event, but it would have been a waste of my time. The public needs to be aware of this.”

All I have to say is that if you mess with pay and break promises like that, then of course no one is going to sign up.  When the final report comes out as to what exactly happened, I would be curious as to how many experienced security guys said no thanks to this one because of pay?

What is equally sad is that in one breath they attracted former police officers like the one in the quote and yet jerked him around on pay, and in another breath they sent this memo out looking for other police officers to help save the contract. Unreal….

G4S has got a £284m contract to provide 13,700 guards, but only has 4,000 in place. It says a further 9,000 are in the pipeline.
G4S sent an urgent request on Thursday to retired police asking them to help. A memo to the National Association of Retired Police Officers said: “G4S Policing Solutions are currently and urgently recruiting for extra support for the Olympics. These are immediate starts with this Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday available. We require ex-police officers ideally with some level of security clearance and with a Security Industry Association [accreditation], however neither is compulsory.”

The other one that came out was the vetting and recruitment of folks with no security background, and how chaotic and dumb that process has been. How embarrassing? I guess the G4S Facebook Page on this deal is littered with complaints from applicants on how terrible and inefficient the process has been.  Like I said, the devil will be in the details of the contract signed and how this was managed, and the report that comes out on this will be very revealing. I understand G4S’s share price has been negatively impacted, and their reputation will take a huge hit because of all of this. How they deal with this crisis and the impact on the company will be interesting to watch.

If anyone from the company, or anyone that has experienced the recruitment process described has any insight as to ‘why’ this might have went so wrong is invited to share their comments below. –Matt

Edit: 07/12/2012– Apparently G4S had some issues with the computer program running the show. Kind of weak if you ask me, and that sounds like management trying to blame technology for their poor leadership and organizational skills. That and they under bid everyone else by %25.  Here is the quote:

* An insider said the root cause of the problem with G4S was its internal computer system which had failed to calculate staff rostering.

* G4S won the security contract with Locog after submitting a tender at least 25 per cent lower than any other, which would have been hugely attractive to a British Olympic movement paranoid about going over budget.

 

Britain Adjusts Security Plans in Tense Countdown to the Olympics
By JOHN F. BURNS
July 12, 2012
With 14 days to go before the opening of the Olympic Games — and more than 2,500 days since the Games were awarded to London in 2005 — the British government acknowledged on Thursday that it had been forced to deploy an additional brigade of troops to save its security plan from falling apart.
To cries of “shambles” and “international embarrassment” in the House of Commons, the government of Prime Minister David Cameron said it had issued an emergency draft for an additional 3,500 troops, many of them just returned from Afghanistan — on top of 13,500 already committed for the Games — after broken commitments by a private security company. The government will now field a total military force of 17,000, who will outnumber civilian security details at Olympics venues by more than 2 to 1.
The government move came after what some infuriated Olympics officials described as overly hopeful and ultimately misleading exchanges involving organizers, the government and the G4S security company in recent months. This week, G4S officials finally conceded that the company was far behind — by a head count of several thousand — in its contract under the Olympics’ billion-dollar security plan to produce more than 10,000 fully trained, security-cleared guards.

(more…)

Wednesday, July 11, 2012

Publications: Stability Operations Magazine, July-August 2012

Filed under: Industry Talk,Publications — Tags: , , , , — Matt @ 11:24 AM

Check it out. A new name for the magazine (the old one was called JIPO). –Matt

 

Publications: GPF Report On Private Military And Security Companies And The UN

Filed under: Industry Talk — Tags: , , , , , , , , — Matt @ 3:03 AM

This one is a hard read, just because it is filled with bias against this industry. lol But if you can look beyond that junk and check out some of the details in the back of paper, they list some interesting stuff. Especially what companies the UN has used and currently uses, and how much money all of the UN programs have been spending on private security. Each year, it has been going up.

Now I agree with the authors that the UN should do everything in it’s power to hire quality companies that are vetted, and that these companies have appropriate rules and regulations guiding their use of force and whatnot. All of that is very important.

But I disagree with the authors view that companies are questionable in their ability to ‘help the U.N. promote democracy, the rule of law and human rights’. Especially when some of the military units that the UN has used has only hurt their image and their ability to promote democracy, the rule of law and human rights. It is disgraceful how poorly some of the military units that the UN has used in the past have acted–or not acted.

Either way, I believe private industry can and will do a far more superior job for the UN, and the UN will continue to contract the services of these companies. The amount of money they have spent on security has only increased from year to year, and the world is not getting any more safer. The UN does have a duty to responsibly contract these services–and god forbid, learn from their mistakes and the mistakes of others. lol It is all about actually caring about getting a good value for the money given to them by donor nations, and exercising their right as the client to actually fire bad companies. Pure principal-agent problem stuff here.

Also, I think as ISO standards come onto the scene, this will only help the UN in determining qualified vendors. We have had 10 plus years of war time contracting, and these companies are pretty experienced in providing a service in poor and unstable environments throughout the world. These companies are willing and able to enter into these risky jobs and that says a lot as well. I think the UN would be dumb to not tap into this resource, and especially as money becomes tighter and the world continues to have conflict. –Matt

 

Dangerous Partnership – Private Military and Security Companies and the UN
( GPF Policy Papers, Articles and Statements )
GPF’s report on the use of Private Military and Security Companies by the United Nations is out! This investigative report reveals that the UN has dramatically increased its use of these companies in recent years, hiring them for a wide array of “security services” and giving them considerable influence over its security policies. It also reveals that the UN has no process to vet these companies and that UN leadership has been closing its eyes to company misconduct for more than twenty years. GPF calls on the UN to reform this out-of-control system and to critically examine whether these companies really make the UN safer, or whether they might achieve the opposite effect. You can read the executive summary and the full report.

—————————————————————

UN criticized for using private security companies
July 11, 2012
By EDITH M. LEDERER
A non-profit organization that monitors the United Nations published a report Tuesday criticizing the U.N.’s growing use of private military and security companies.
The Global Policy Forum said the U.N.’s increasing use of these companies is “dangerous,” may increase rather than reduce threats and attacks on U.N. buildings and personnel, and suggests a system that is “unaccountable and out of control.”

(more…)

Monday, July 9, 2012

Industry Talk: Concern Mounts Over Potential Shortage Of Security Guards For London Olympics

Filed under: Industry Talk,United Kingdom — Tags: , , , , — Matt @ 11:25 AM

“We have had some challenges on workforce scheduling this week, which we have discussed with Locog [the organising committee] and expect to resolve soon,” said the spokesman. “At no time was security at the Olympic Park or other venues under threat.”
G4S said the problems related to scheduling issues and getting people in the right place at the right time, but the firm said it was confident it would have sufficient trained and accredited guards by the time the games begin.
The company said it was always part of the contract that the security workforce would be in training until the last week of preparations. The Guardian understands that this was an issue that emerged during contract negotiations. It would have cost more to train the guards earlier. Under pressure not to further increase a security budget that has doubled to £533m, the government agreed to the “just-in-time” approach.

This is one of those classic cases where a company is approached to deliver a service that is right on the line of ‘possible/but difficult’. And of course the client wants to pay £284m and have the guards trained and delivered the last minute, versus paying the £533m and doing this right. Not a lot of room for error in this deal.

Now what has to happen is G4S has to deliver or they will be getting a black eye on this one. The client will be sweating this thing all the way up until the end, and will certainly get a black eye if this security is not delivered. I certainly hope it works out for all the parties involved, but usually when you compromise because of cost, you end up paying some kind of price in the end…. –Matt

 

London 2012: concern mounts over potential shortage of security guards
Private security firm G4S still needs to train and accredit 9,000 more guards, according to security sources.
Robert Booth
8 July 2012
G4S is contracted to supply 13,700 guards to protect Olympic venues.
The private security company being paid nearly £300m to guard the London 2012 Olympics has yet to fully train or accredit thousands of security guards needed to protect the games from terrorist attack, it has emerged.
Ministers are anxious that with three weeks left until the opening ceremony, only half the guards needed to guarantee fully staffed patrols of the entrances to venues and carry out other security duties are ready to start work.
The home secretary, Theresa May, has stepped in amid growing concern that additional military personnel may be needed to make up the shortfall. It is understood May called senior G4S executives on Friday after the firm failed to supply enough staff for patrols last week at venues in the Olympic park in east London.
G4S, the private security contractor hired to supply 13,700 guards, still needs to train and accredit about 9,000 guards, according to a security source familiar with preparations. Organisers believe G4S needs at least 19,000 security guards to fulfil its £284m contract, which requires 10,400 licenced guards and 3,300 students. The extra guards are needed as a buffer when staff fail to turn up or fail security screening. G4S will also manage 7,500 military personnel and 2,500 volunteers.

(more…)

Sunday, July 8, 2012

Building Snowmobiles: How A Cabling-Installation Tool Is Being Used To Disable IED’s In Afghanistan

Filed under: Afghanistan,Building Snowmobiles — Tags: , , , , , , — Matt @ 3:17 AM

This is a neat little deal that I wanted to put up as a Building Snowmobiles post. Partly because it is an innovation, and partly because it is a cheap solution used to defeat a cheap weapon. I also wanted to give some kudos to the troops who are out there and innovating and creating their own ‘snowmobiles’ to defeat the enemy.

With this tool, they can probe for wires in the ground from 26 ft away with a telescoping rod and a hook attached to the end.  So for those scenarios where an IED emplacement is possible because the area is suspicious, an EOD specialist could probe for wires. When wires are found, he could cut them, and then the squad could follow both ends to the bomb and then to the IED team location. (please consult EOD or ‘those in the field’ first before using this tool, just so you know exactly how things are done!)

Now what would really be cool is for the innovator that thought this thing up, to come forward and claim some credit. Or at least give their invention a catchy name?

I also wanted to point out that innovations like this is something that happens out in the field due to analysis and synthesis, trial and error, and just plain old luck. This was not a solution that came from thousands of miles away, developed in some office by a company paid millions of dollars or by some government think tank. Nor was this innovation ‘ordered’ by some officer or higher command. Nope. Innovations like this come from individuals who are trying to survive and gain an edge on the battlefield. Their lives depend upon ‘finding the better way’, all so they can defeat the enemy and get back home alive. And this solution was cheap, simple, and effective…..perfect.

This is also the kind of thing that should be encouraged and rewarded by command and by today’s military. It should also be something that squad leaders and small unit leadership should encourage and seek out. The problem solvers of a squad should not be shut out, and a leader should do all they can to encourage innovations and discussions about innovations. A solution could come at any time, and from anybody, and leaders should be quick to jump on that gold and give that individual credit.

Ego or whatever you want to call it, has no place in this process (doom on those leaders that shut everyone out and propose that only ‘their’ ideas are the best) Use the creative juices of the entire team, include everyone in the process, and cheer that on as a leader. That is if you want to win, and in some cases, keep everyone alive and in one piece.

This particular innovation is just one example of how important ‘building snowmobiles’ can be to individuals who risk life and limb out there. Find the solution, no matter how crazy, how ridiculous, how radical, how funny, or whatever. Open your mind to the problem, and saturate/incubate/illuminate to find a solution. Get feedback and borrow brilliance. Avoid group think and confirmation bias. Question authority and the status quo. Use mimicry strategy. Stay focused and work on your Kaizen. Seek to destroy dogma and create a better plan/idea. (destruction and creation a la Boyd) Etc….

Pretty cool and bravo to the guy(s) who thought up this battlefield innovation. –Matt

 

 

Pikes Defeat Bombs
July 6, 2012: Given the incentives (life or death) it should come as no surprise that combat troops are very innovative in coming up with new battlefield tools.. One recent example was the development of an improvised “spear” for exposing and cutting wires the Taliban would use to set off roadside bombs. Three years ago, some soldier or marine (most likely the latter) figured out that one could take long (up to 8.4 meter/26 foot) fiberglass poles (normally used to help install communications or electrical wires), tape a sharp, curved blade to them and then use it to poke around an area possibly containing a roadside bomb detonating wire, without getting shot by the Taliban team waiting to set off the bomb. Once you found the wire, and cut it, you could find and disable the bomb itself. The Taliban detonation team would, by then either have run away, been captured or killed.
The manufacturer of the fiberglass poles, which come in three sections, became curious after more and more orders for the poles came from army and marine combat units in Afghanistan. These outfits normally did not do a lot of cable installation, and when asked what they were doing, the troops explained their innovative use of the poles.
As a bonus, the captured Taliban expressed great anger at their cleverly concealed bombs having been defeated by some poles with knives taped to one end. They expect more high tech from the American and don’t like being defeated by weapons any Afghan tribesman could build.
Story here.
—————————————————————
US troops score win against IEDs in Afghanistan
KIMBERLY DOZIER
July 6, 2012
Almost afraid to say it out loud, lest they jinx their record, U.S. troops in Afghanistan achieved one small but important victory over the past year: They found and avoided more homemade bombs meant to kill and maim them than a year ago, thanks to a surge in training, equipment and intelligence.

(more…)

« Newer Posts — Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress