Feral Jundi

Tuesday, October 4, 2011

Industry Talk: So What Is Going On With The ICoC?

Filed under: Industry Talk — Tags: , , , , , , — Matt @ 4:30 PM

Ever since the news of all of these companies signing on to this International Code of Conduct, there hasn’t been much else reported. So I figured I would do a little research and see where they are at.

Low and behold, there is actually some interesting movement going on with the group. First, they have a website.  Excellent move and it sounds like they are getting organized. Below, I listed all of the members of the steering committee, and these are the folks that will decide how this thing is to work.

I thought it was interesting that they found representatives from all over. Here is a quote:

Michael Clarke, G4S
Mark DeWitt, Triple Canopy
Estelle Meyer, Saracen International
Sylvia White, Aegis

Yep, that list says it all. G4S is the largest security company in the world. Triple Canopy is a large US based company. Aegis is another huge company with offices all over. But Saracen International….Now that is interesting. I guess they are the largest company representing Africa?

The other news with the ICoC is that there are now 211 members!  Up top, I even started a page dedicated to ICoC members, and as more folks sign on, I will update. The list is in a Scribd format, and I think that makes very easy to scroll through and use.

But the real story here that I wanted to talk about, was the discussion in their latest minutes about the grievance process. My number one concern with groups like SAMI, ISOA, and now this ICoC group….as always….is what will they do about members who violate the standards? What is the crime, and what is the punishment?

It is one thing to get everyone to sign on to these codes of conduct, but if you have no disciplinary policy with teeth to back them up, then what’s the point? lol Seriously. Why make laws, if you plan not to enforcement or punish folks for doing bad things?

Now I am not saying that the ICoC is not going to punish members that screw up, but according to these minutes, it sounds like they are going to put the onus of punishment on the companies themselves first. Which is fine, but what if the company does not want to clean house, or maybe they just want to drag it out until everyone forgets about the grievance.

Of course companies should all strive to take care of business so that they are in accordance to the ICoC, as well as doing all they can to take care of their people and clients.  But if they have no fear of punishment, because the ICoC is not aggressive or is unwilling to get tough with members that pay dues, then you can kind of see the potential problems here. Which really boils down the question to this. Is the ICoC just words, or do those words actually mean something?

As you read through the minutes, the ICoC committee also mentioned the good offices concept and creating an incentive of some type for companies to actually do something about this stuff.  I had to look up good offices in the dictionary, and here is a quote:

Third-party influence that facilitates one party’s dealings with another.

So basically they will act as a mediator between the aggrieved and that company?  Interesting, and yet again, what interest would this office have to fight for the aggrieved?  Isn’t it a conflict of interest if a mediator is getting payment by one group in the form of dues/membership fees, and then claiming to help out the other side (the aggrieved) who does not pay dues?

Finally, I would really like to see the incentive(s) that the committee comes up with in future discussions, that will actually get companies to abide by the standards. Are we talking fines, or membership loss or suspension. How about a black list of bad companies?  What are we talking about here?

The big picture is pretty simple to spell out. Members get value when they sign on to this document, by enjoying the benefits of a gold seal of approval. Clients want to believe in that standard, and trust that they are actually doing business with a good company. Contractors want to believe that they are working for a company that actually cares about treating them properly, and this ICoC is a symbol of a companies desire to do good.

But with weak to non-existent enforcement of those standards, that gold seal of approval will turn into lead and clients, the public, and contractors will have no respect for what it stands for. Those are my thoughts on the matter…. –Matt

Edit: 10/12/2011- Here is a snippet from a recent article on the ICoC:

Motzouris says the ICoC does not dismiss the efforts of the Montreux Document, rather it builds upon the base developed by the Montreux Document in order to develop a more comprehensive regulatory mechanism. While the Montreux Document was primarily aimed at states, the ICoC takes on a multi-stakeholder approach that includes governments, PMSC, industry associations, experts and academics and civil society. The ICoC outlines principles for the conduct of PMSC personnel, including rules on the use of force, detainee treatment, prohibition of sexual misconduct, etcetera.

“The reason the ICoC is different from any other regulatory mechanisms is that it appeals to governments and non-state clients to adhere to the Code whilst drawing up contracts with PMSCs. If a PMSC is a signatory of the Code, and the government or non-state actor whom they are contracting to has also committed to implementing the Code, then it moves from a voluntary regulatory standard, to one that can be upheld in a court of law. The British Government has already expressed its commitment to making adherence to the ICoC a requirement for any of its contracted PMSCs, and the US Government is contemplating a move in the same direction,” Motzouris added.

 

International Code of Conduct for Private Security Service Providers

There was consensus that if a complaint is made it should be dealt with by the company first. In some circumstance that won’t be appropriate (internal grievance mechanism exhaustion requirement, with well defined exceptions). There was consensus that the grievance mechanism should include something like a referral function.
A summary of the grievance mechanism functions would be:
A  complaint triggers two avenues:
1. Compliance review,
2. Notice advisory/referral with options for the claimants. Afterwards facilitation of the IGOM for remedy.

(more…)

Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Industry Talk: Security Firms’ Future Looks Bright

Filed under: Industry Talk,Switzerland — Tags: , , , , , , — Matt @ 11:12 AM

     While it may seem strange for powerful countries to hand over to the private sector their monopoly on legitimate violence, Chaliand says it should be seen as a private-public partnership.

     Good little article here, and it helped to bring into perspective what this code means and what it could lead too. The only thing I would disagree with here is the cost of contractors versus military. No one ever mentions the whole pension thing or lifetime medical benefits that the military retiree receives, and contractors will not(unless a company provides that).  Nor is the cost of maintaining a large standing army during times of peace ever mentioned as being politically impossible, thus making the idea of an ‘instant support force’ of contractors during times of war a good idea. Or politicians can raise an army through the means of a draft and see how that works……Or not.

     Which takes us back to this code and the possible benefits of such a thing.  Militaries and countries around the world could really stand to benefit from an industry that is well regulated and ready to go.  Most importantly, an industry/temporary work force that is willing and able to serve in a war for that country. Hmmmm–‘willing’ versus ‘forced’, ‘temporary’ versus ‘long term’. –Matt

Security firms’ future looks bright

Nov 22, 2010

by Frédéric Burnand

Private security contractors, 60 of whom recently signed an international code of conduct in Geneva, could see their growth legitimised by this document.

But specialists are warning that without a planned control mechanism the code, which pledges respect of human rights and humanitarian law, could be nothing but an empty shell.

Private security firms have been very active in Afghanistan and Iraq in recent years. Before that it was Africa. But everywhere they operate, these companies have a reputation for carrying out uncontrolled mercenary activities.Today, they want to clean up their image through regulation, according to Alexandre Vautravers, head of international relations at Geneva’s Webster University.“Since the beginning of the decade, the Washington-based International Stability Operation Association has been working on the code of conduct,” he said.

Blackwater a signatory

The document signed in Geneva under the auspices of the Swiss authorities is therefore a response to demands from within the industry. Even Blackwater, best known for its activities in Iraq and since rebranded Xe Services, is one of the signatories.For French author Gérard Chaliand, who has written extensively about the mercenary business, companies like Blackwater have always found ways of surviving and expanding despite the criticism they face.“Regulating this industry seems indispensable to me with extended activities requiring new rules,” he told swissinfo.ch. “But it shouldn’t just be declarations of intention: there should also be sanctions.” (more…)

Wednesday, November 10, 2010

Industry Talk: Private Security Companies Sign Landmark Code Of Conduct In Switzerland

Filed under: Industry Talk,Switzerland — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , — Matt @ 7:39 AM

     This is great news and a big round of applause to all involved for all the hard work they put into this over the years. I think it is very significant that so many of the big name companies have signed on to this thing from around the world, and that there has been such wide support from outside organizations.

     Below I posted the DoS statements on the signing, as well as press releases from Triple Canopy and AEGIS. Now what will really be interesting is how this will be implemented, and how it will help to get companies to do the right thing.

     And like what the article below has stated, this Code of Conduct does not mean that the customer does not have to do anything anymore in terms of regulation or oversight. This just gives them a tool to work off of. So hopefully the efforts of the US government will continue down that path of creating a strong and effective contracting corps.

     Especially as the DoS enters into the new phase of these wars, and they become more dependent on the services of security contractors to continue the mission. Or as the shipping companies continues to look more towards armed private security for their boats.  –Matt

ISOA Applauds the Signing of a Landmark Code of Conduct

Trade Association Endorses a Voluntary Code to Address Responsible Oversight and Accountability of Private Security Companies

Washington, DC – The International Stability Operations Association (“ISOA”), a trade association that promotes high operational and ethical standards among its membership including more than twenty private security firms, today strongly endorsed the first-ever International Code of Conduct to ensure better transparency and accountability within the stability operations industry. The code was signed earlier today in Geneva, Switzerland, by more than fifty private security companies, including many ISOA Member companies. Among the speakers at the event were Swiss State Secretary Peter Maurer, Triple Canopy CEO Ingacio Balderas, G4S Director of Public Affairs Michael Clarke, Legal Advisor to the U.S. Department of State Harold Honju Koh, and Devon Chaffee of Human Rights First.In particular, this voluntary Code of Conduct highlights private security contractors’ commitment to respecting human rights and the rule of law in conflict zones, such as Iraq and Afghanistan. For example, it offers guidelines for the rules for the use of force and requires standards for recruitment, vetting, training, management of weapons, and internal control mechanisms. It also requires companies to ensure their employees “take all necessary steps to avoid the use of force” and explicitly bans mistreatment of detainees, forced labor, and sexual exploitation. (more…)

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

Legal News: The ‘Bait And Switch Game’ Companies Play With Independent Contractors

Filed under: Industry Talk,Legal News — Tags: , , , , , — Matt @ 4:45 PM

     Ok, for those that know me, you will understand that I absolutely despise companies that screw over their contractors.  Partly because I have been the victim of unscrupulous companies, and the other reason is that I get oodles of emails from guys who are getting screwed over by companies.  I shake my head and wonder why is it so tough for these companies to do the right thing? Where is the courage to do good or what happened to taking care of your people?  The funny part, is that the companies that actually do take care of their people, are the ones that usually attract the best of the best, and have more contract stability.  I am a firm believer in this, and I also think that in the long run, companies will make more money if they focus on taking care of their people, because it will minimize turnover and keep contracts stable. 

     I also think that the companies are staffed with guys who apply too much of their war fighting ‘cheat at all costs’ and ‘ big boy rules’ concepts to managing the contractors and contracts.  Which is fine, if you guys want to keep getting contracts and out compete the other guy.  But if you are screwing over your people in your vain attempt to obtain these contracts, then what price glory?  Or if you implement the ‘rob Peter, to pay Paul’ business practice, then what sense does that make?  Focus on being straight with your contractors and stop playing these unethical stupid games with their pay.  Contractors don’t like it, and we will just leave your company hanging when you treat us like that. Worse yet, we won’t care about doing a good job for you, because you don’t care about us. 

     So with that said, lets discuss some of the latest scummy tactics that I am hearing about out there, when it comes to unethical company practices.  Let’s call this one, the ‘bait and switch’ game.  I have heard of this happening with several companies, and it pisses me off to no end. 

    The way it works is that a company signs a contract with a independent contractor for a specific salary. They fly that contractor to the war zone, and then once they are on the ground, the company then creates some excuse to lower the contractor’s salary.  Companies like to say things like ‘things have changed, and the position we hired you for no longer exists…..but if you would like to stay in Iraq and keep working, we will pay you this lower salary with this new position’? I will argue that this was the tactic all along, to bait a contractor with one salary, get them in country, and then switch their salary to a lower one. When a contractor has made it all the way over to that war zone, and they are finally settled in, and then this is thrown at them, it psychologically makes it very hard for a guy to say no. Lesser salary, versus no money and a trip home, is usually what comes to mind.  

     And because of the practice of implementing ‘at will’ contracts with ‘non-disclosure agreements’ attached, companies really don’t care if the contractor is pissed off by the practice.  The contractor also has little hope of forcing the company to abide by any labor laws, perceived or real.  There is also no labor unions to protect contractors and force companies to do the right thing.  The whistleblower stuff is a joke, because the actual success rate and pay off for being a whistleblower on anything to do with these companies, is dismal. Or if you do succeed in getting attention for your case, it still won’t equate to you getting more money or being treated better at your job site.  If anything, reprisal will happen, and your reputation will be torn apart by the company and those that you turned in.  

     Besides, your one of those despicable civilian contractors that the media loves to crap on, so who is going to stand up for you? POGO doesn’t care about contract disputes between contractors and their companies. So what can you do, if you are the victim of a ‘bait and switch’ game?

   For one, I say stay on the contract as long as possible, and look for another gig. That is the financially sound way to play it.  As soon as another contract comes up, leave your current contract pronto. While you are on that current contract, I would also suggest submitting as many anonymous tips to as many hotlines as you can, in order to force the company to get ethical and treat their people correctly. Remember, if you are reporting fraud, waste and abuse, it is not a violation of the non-disclosure agreement.  The law trumps this little agreement we all sign, but the law won’t protect your reputation or your career–reprisal sucks and it will find you.  So anonymously is the best way to go in my book.  It protects you, and the acts of bad companies makes it to those that  need to know that stuff.

   The companies will also get screwed by mass exoduses from contracts.  The more folks just leave, the better, and companies will get a default on contract because they do not have the required individuals for that contract.  I know of several companies that just use ‘floaters’ to cover for these kinds of situations.  But turnover is certainly expensive, and certainly brings negative attention to the company. Defaults on contract have really screwed over companies in the past. So if you and your crew that are displeased with the company your in, all put in a two week or whatever notice, all on the same day, then that would be an expensive shock to the company system.  Just leaving without notice, is an even bigger shock to the company, but it also puts your reputation as a contractor at risk. I recommend just putting in a notice, unless things are so bad that your life is in danger, family problems, or something like that.  

    If you are the victim of the bait and switch game, deal with it smartly and really think out your options.  Do not act out of emotion, act out of practicality. This is a business, so act like a shrewd businessman.  Some guys are willing to deal with the bait and switch, and just chalk it up as ‘getting screwed over by the company’. Money might be a big factor for these folks, and they did not have the luxury of having ‘saved their pennies’ so they could leave.  

     For most though, when a company plays this game with them, they will instantly switch into ‘jaded contractor’ mode, and do all they can to get the hell off of there. I see this over and over again, and jaded contractors are not good for a company.  They provide poor customer service, and really don’t care about the company’s reputation at that point.  Why should they?  

    When you are in this mode, I sympathize and empathize with you, and I am here to say that there is a right way to leave and a wrong way to leave. But leave none the less if you can swing it, because turnover and defaulting on contracts is not good for companies, and that is how you really hurt their bottom line. You could also bring in a lawyer, if you have the time and money.  Be forewarned though.  If you go the legal way, companies have lawyers too, and they are very schooled at dealing with this stuff. Legal action is a tough game to play, and you better be mentally prepared for that, because it can be very taxing. You sometimes end up with little to show for all that time and money expenditure, and legal action is a difficult road to go down.   

     The other way, is to submit all the bad practices that you can to all the groups I have listed below. Start with the IPOA, because if the company you are working for is on their list, then they need to pay the price for what they did to you.  Hopefully the IPOA will actually do something about it, but most importantly, it is a symbolic act, and it puts you in the right frame of mind for dealing with a company.  After all, the company signed on to that code of conduct, and if they don’t want to abide by that code of conduct, then I say do all you can to right the wrongs. You should also try to use the chain of command with a company, but if that has fallen short, and you are getting nowhere with that, then you need to take matters into your own hands. Be smart with your actions and good luck. –Matt

——————————————————————   

From the IPOA Code of Conduct 12

6.6. Signatories shall act responsibly and ethically toward their personnel, including ensuring personnel are treated with respect and dignity, and responding appropriately if allegations of personnel misconduct arise.

Submit a complaint to IPOA here.

Check list of IPOA member companies here.

——————————————————————

Submit a tip to the DoD hotline.

Mr. Leonard Trahan, Jr., Director,Defense Hotline

Anyone, whether a service member, civilian employee, defense contractor, or private citizen, who witnesses what he or she believes to be a violation of ethical standards and/or the law, including but not limited to fraud, waste, or abuse of authority, potential leaks of classified information, or potential acts of terrorism, should report such conduct through his or her chain of command, respective service Inspector General, or directly to his or her respective service Inspector General or directly to the Inspector General of the Department of Defense Hotline at 800-424-9098 (e-mail: hotline@dodig.mil)

——————————————————————

Special Inspector General For Iraq Reconstruction

Report fraud, waste and abuse

The mission of the Hotline for the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR) is to facilitate the reporting of fraud, waste, abuse, mismanagement, and reprisal in all programs associated with Iraq reconstruction efforts funded by the U.S. taxpayer. Cases received by the SIGIR Hotline that are not related to programs and operations funded with amounts appropriated or otherwise made available for the reconstruction of Iraq are transferred to the appropriate entity. The SIGIR Hotline receives walk-in, telephone, mail, fax, and online complaints from people in Iraq, the United States, and throughout the world.

Click here to submit a complaint.

The SIGIR Hotline office serves as a clearing house for complaints by maintaining an audit trail of all complaints received and the complaint file records until they are sent to the SIGIR Records Management Office. When a Hotline complaint is received, the Hotline Analyst will evaluate the complaint to determine if the complaint is within SIGIR’s purview to investigate. This evaluation includes a screening to eliminate unacceptable complaints and to determine if the complaint involves funds appropriated or otherwise made available for the reconstruction of Iraq. If the source of funding identified in the complaint is not apparent or identified, a check of the SIRIS database will be conducted. If this check meets with negative results, the SIGIR Hotline Analyst will complete a thorough inquiry with contracting points of contact in Iraq provided to our office by the Investigations, Audits, and Administrative offices in Baghdad.

(more…)

Saturday, January 2, 2010

Industry Talk: Peter Moore Reunited With Family As Argument Rages Over Deaths

Filed under: Industry Talk,Iraq,Kidnap And Ransom — Tags: , , , , — Matt @ 8:38 AM

   You know, the way these security contractors were just killed and thrown away by these captors is just deplorable. It is just like how they did the guys at Crescent, and with Nick Berg. The enemy didn’t sign on to the Geneva Convention, and they could care less about your life.  Fighting to your death is probably your best option……if you even can fight to the death.  If not, and for whatever reason you do get captured, may god have mercy on your soul.  I think in that case, hope and constant dedication to any means of escape are things that will get you through.  The Code of Conduct could be somewhat of a guide, along with the industry best practice for surviving hostage situations.  Other than that, just don’t get captured. –Matt

——————————————————————

Peter Moore reunited with family as argument rages over deaths

January 2, 2010

Sean O’Neill, Crime and Security Editor

Peter Moore arrived back in Britain last night as criticism continued to grow of the Government’s handling of the Iraq hostage crisis.

A chartered aircraft carrying Mr Moore landed at RAF Brize Norton, Oxfordshire, shortly after 5pm. He was later reunited with his stepparents, Fran and Pauline Sweeney, at an undisclosed location.

Mr and Mrs Sweeney, from Lincoln, said that they were “thrilled to have Peter back safely”. They asked for the chance to spend some time with him.

“We have a lot of catching up to do and would like to have time with Peter on our own,” the couple said.

Mr Moore, 36, was flown from Baghdad to the Jordanian capital Amman yesterday morning, then transferred to an aircraft operated by the security company International SOS for his return to Britain. He was accompanied by consular staff from the British Embassy in Baghdad and was met at the RAF base by an official from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

(more…)

Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress