The private security industry has gone through a marked transformation from an under-regulated industry over the past decade to an industry with different self-regulatory systems. These regulatory programs were shaped by the necessity to clarify the legal model that the private security industry could use. The private security industry plays a vital role in support of existing security agencies. Given the prominence of the private security industry today, there is a consensus to formulate standards to govern the behaviour of the industry (Richemond-Barak, 2011). The expanding activity scope and customer base in the private security industry make regulation a top priority (Richemond-Barak, 2011). The private security industry has created a complex self-regulatory model within a few years that it uses to guide its activities (Abrahamsen & Williams, 2010). The model is characterized by corporate conduct codes, industry associations and multi-stakeholder programs.
Self-regulation in the private security industry is established both for protective and reputational reasons. Protectively, the private security industry seeks to prevent further government regulation or to minimize new regulations (Abrahamsen & Williams, 2010). Regarding reputation, the private security industry seeks to reserve a positive appearance or to reinstate public trust (Abrahamsen & Williams, 2010).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The way a self-regulatory model use the five components (rewards, sanctions, monitoring and standards) determines the effectiveness of a self-regulatory model in transforming corporate conduct and easing public concerns (Haufler, 2013).
Regarding a situation in which a security guard is in police custody accused of applying excessive force and fatally wounding two men while working at a mall, sanctions would be applied to the guard for non-complying with the established standards and norms. The sanctions would include a three-month suspension with the condition that the guard re-certifies regarding the use of force before reapplying for a new license. The guard would also be fined due to the damages caused and may be expelled if investigations prove that the guard had other options but chose to apply deadly force. A security guard does not possess the same power as a police officer, even though he or she can enforce many things enforced by the police (Abrahamsen & Williams, 2010). However, this depends on specific cases and if the guard follows specific procedures. All security guards undergo training that deals with the application of force. Thus, the application of the aforementioned sanctions will protect the company from possible governmental sanctions and reinstate public trust by demonstrating that the guard broke the established rules.
I will ensure that other officers learn from this case by applying informal sanctions in which shaming and peer pressure are used. For example, I will inform officers that following the case, I was compelled to develop a ranking mechanism in which officers will be ranked based on their performance. Besides ranking, I will caution officers that any officer who does not operate by following the established standards will face possible arrest in which he or she will face litigation, fines, suspension, or expulsion from the company or both expulsion, fines and litigation. The intention of these informal sanctions will be to ensure that officers are careful not to break rules and none of them will desire to work outside the established standards. Thus, officers will be pushed to comply with the established regulations and standards and will learn from the case.
I will ensure that other officers do not repeat the same mistake by developing an ethics training program that deals with the application of force, which will be mandatory for all guards. The training program will entail components that include how to enforce rules in the place of work and the application of reasonable force. Regarding the enforcement of rules, the training will highlight the power of security guards to enforce rules that owners of the property they guard have established as long as the rules are legal. For instance, in a shopping mall, a security guard may enforce rules such as those related to loitering restrictions and if only employees are allowed to use the bathroom or if customers can also use it. When enforcing these rules, the guards must be fair to all people involved and if any rule is broken, the guard can ask the involved individual to leave the building. The guard can apply reasonable force and if the individual resists the instructions, the guard should call the police.
Regarding the application of reasonable force, the training will emphasize that guards can use reasonable force, which entails the consideration of the seriousness of the incident, the danger of harm both to the guard and to other people, and how dire the case is. While the guard can contact the police who would confront the individual and attempt an arrest, this is not mostly possible. Thus, the guard may be compelled to apply force. Nevertheless, the use of deadly force should not be considered and a guard should attempt to verbally communicate and search for other options before using force.
In conclusion, sanctions and self-regulation in the private security industry are vital as they ensure that the industry and its personnel operate systematically. They also protect the industry from additional governmental regulations and enhance the reputation of the industry to the general public.
References
Abrahamsen, R., & Williams, M. C. (2010). Security beyond the state: Private security in international politics . Cambridge University Press.
Haufler, V. (2013). A public role for the private sector: Industry self-regulation in a global economy . Carnegie Endowment.
Richemond-Barak, D. (2011). Regulating War: A Taxonomy in Global Administrative Law. European Journal of International Law , 22 (4), 1027-1069.
