Peter, Proshooter, you're both right…,
Management has or should have a lot to do with it. When a security company has so many employees that management cannot have access or ability to devote time to regularly inspect, monitor, and update it's employees, they need to have on site supervisors close enough to do just that. Those supervisors need to be busy, constantly, actively observing and evaluating his or her charges for a number of things. This is much easier said than accomplished.
I don't know how LEW & Associates is set up. Don't know their SOP's. Don't know VCU's SOP's. What I can say is this, I was ordered to attend a two day Unarmed Security Officer class, in accordance with Virginia DCJS (Department of Criminal Justice Services for those not familiar with the acronym) standards taught by Mr. Lloyd Woods. To his credit, Mr. Woods was very professional, covered the course material completely, and had in my opinion a complete understanding of the course and the ability to communicate the lesson plans properly, no subject was cut short, "glanced over", or diminished in any effort to "get out of class" early or take an extended "lunch".
With that said, it is sometimes very hard to determine just when an employee may suddenly go off of plan, ignore training, and defy good common sense…, not always impossible though. This is where the strength of management plays its most important part. To observe and identify behavior that is inconsistent with training, SOP's, or good common sense, and to bring it to the attention of both the employee and the employer for corrective action, which can be handled in a number of different ways. As I said, hard, not easy, but also not impossible, and I believe that's where the strength (or weakness) of such a company can be found, in their willingness to be vigilant and effective in their duties. I would also like to say that the character of the company should start from the top down.
I would also like to say that not all necessary training can be accomplished in a classroom. It is my opinion only that in order to become a professional Security Officer (not a Guard), one has to have training, but also a significant level of maturity and life experience and the ability to relate those types of lessons learned in order to follow training, observe SOP's, follow a safe course , and bring any situation to a peaceful, orderly, or favorable conclusion.
While I agree that the sooner we have transparency of a situation, the better, I also understand the desire to investigate thoroughly before "stating" anything "absolutely". I generally subscribe to the "two week" rule. That being my personal observance that an outsider generally has to wait about two weeks to start getting a clear picture of most situations where speculation and inaccurate, or biased reporting have had their run.
Just my 2 cents worth.
sidestreet
Jeremiah 29 vs. 11-13
we are not equal, we will never be equal, but we must be relentless.