Protecting the workplace from violence during termination or layof

Posted by Ross Arrowsmith on Monday, August 30th 2010 under Workplace violence   

Click HERE for article:

By James L, Griffin II, progress-index.com

While our nation’s economic and employment conditions remain unstable, workplace violence tragedies continue to lead news headlines. The recent tragedy in Connecticut is further evidence that we are not giving Workplace violence the appropriate attention. Without the necessary preparation and attention from company management, these incidents will likely continue with increased frequency.
Experts agree that violence in the workplace is almost always preceded by indicators. Identifying these indicators is part of a multi-faceted approach that involves employees, management, family members, and a comprehensive workplace violence program. The need for a comprehensive workplace violence strategy is paramount and is rarely given the suitable attention before a crisis. Unfortunately some companies fail to provide the appropriate workplace environment, much less the adequate security needed.

Every company is obligated to create and maintain a proactive comprehensive workplace violence program. Organizationally, this may differ from company to company with respect to size, mission, and stress levels. However, each program should involve employee assistance, human resources, conflict resolution specialists, and a mental health professional, at the very least. Obviously, management’s rules and procedures should protect all employees from harassment, aggression, and a negative workplace environment. Program managers should be able to systematically identify weakness, make rectifications, and assess responses to individual incidents. Program managers are also responsible for educating employees on identifying behavior that is suspect and also creating an appropriate system of reporting such behavior.

Traditional security measures, such as the roving or stationary security officer, are outdated and are now seen as a mere symbolic gesture to provide peace of mind to employees and management. In the past, we have seen companies post an officer and rely on physical presence to deter criminal or mischievous activity; however, there is little evidence to support that this alone deters violence. Physical security measures, such as access control cards, in conjunction with highly trained security officers are far more effective for overall personnel and facility security. These cards act as company identification and they allow access to sensitive areas, all while monitoring employee activity. High-tech cameras are also being utilized to provide an additional layer of protection.
Bridging the gap between corporate earnings, appropriate security measures, and ensuring a safe and harmonious workplace is the key. Security costs are usually associated with a negative outlook because the company cannot use those costs to increase earnings. Investing in a workplace violence program, as well contracting additional security for terminations, should not conflict with corporate mission statements. More and more companies are now being held liable for their lack of proper security after a violent episode. After all, the facility management has the distinct responsibility to provide safety and security to the employees and the facility.

Russia intros self-service passport control

Click HERE for article:

Test-period to be introduced next year at airports and some sea ports, according to the border control authorities.

Most frequent travelers to Russia have some bad experiences queuing up-front of the airports immigration control-desks waiting for ages. Imagine a new desk, where you place your passport in the scanner yourself, cross-check the biometric with a finger-print or face-camera, and then;  a gate door that opens after a few seconds and a voice saying “Welcome to Russia.”
Such scenario can become reality sooner than you can imagine. Already in 2011 the automatic biometric passport control system will be tested.
After last week’s board meeting in Rosgranitsa, Russia’s border control service headed by FSB, it was announced that the system will be tested in 2011 and can be taken into permanent use at several border crossing points already from 2012.
Head of Rosgranitsa, Vladimir Mochalov, told RIA Novosti that that Russia is just following what Finland, England and Portugal are already doing at their airports in Helsinki, London and Lisbon.
Read also: The Norwegian Barents Secretariat's view on border-crossings between Norway and Russia in the publication Barents Review (pdf).
Interviewed by Rossiskaya Gazeta, the head of FSB Frontier service, Vladimir Pronichev said people crossing into Russia can go through such passport control within some 10 to 15 seconds.
Similar automatic biometric passport control systems are in use at Helsinki-Vantaa airport in Finland. By the end of the year Finland is planning to test the system also at its land border to Russia at Vaalimaa.
The system will only work for people holding a biometric passport. Other passports will still have to be checked manually, and the passport control authorities will still have the option to do random manual controls of everyone using the automatic system.
It is not said when the automatic passport control checks will be introduced at any of Russia’s border to Finland and Norway within the Barents Region, or if the system will be introduced at the airports in Murmansk or Arkhangelsk.
In 2008, Russia started to issue biometric passports. Biometric passports contain a microchip for digital finger or retina prints in addition to a special photograph of the holder.

Air travellers want more self-service, study finds

Passengers line up to be checked with a full body scanner at Departure Gate 2 at Hamburg Airport in Hamburg September 27, 2010.

Credit: Reuters/Christian Charisius

Click HERE for Reuters article:

By Robert Evans

GENEVA | Wed Oct 6, 2010 6:56pm IST

GENEVA (Reuters Life!) - International airline passengers want self-service extended from online booking and kiosk check-in to security and passport control and boarding their flights, an industry report said on Wednesday. The report, based on surveys taken at seven major airports on five continents, said most travellers also want more automation for handing in baggage and paying excess fees, reporting missing luggage and switching flights.
The surveys found that on-line booking and check-in have well overtaken the traditional methods of visiting an airline office or travel agent and collecting boarding passes from registration desks at the airport.
"People just want more self-service at every step of their journey," said Quentin Browell, spokesman for the airline industry's leading information technology supplier SITA which issues the report annually.
The report said an average of 71 percent of passengers surveyed at the seven hubs had booked in online or at automated airport kiosks for their flights, and many more would be ready to do so if they understood the process better.
But checking in on mobile phones was much less common, with only 3 percent of those questioned on the day of the survey having used the method.
The Geneva-based SITA recorded a sharp growth in passengers using airline websites to book hotels -- up from 21 percent of those surveyed in 2009 to 38 percent this year -- and to rent cars -- up from 19 to 35 percent.
There were similar increases in use of carriers' websites for other services like buying travel insurance, bus and train tickets and for ordering duty-free items in advance, SITA said.
The surveys were carried out on a single day among what SITA said was a representative sample of the millions of travellers using the seven airports -- Atlanta, Beijing, Frankfurt, Johannesburg-Tambo, Mumbai, Moscow Domodedovo and Sao Paulo.
The report did not identify exactly how passengers saw automation working in security and passport control, or in baggage check-in, but methods of easing these processes are understood to be under study at SITA.
The survey also found that travellers in North America and Asia were increasingly willing to pay a small extra fee to offset the carbon footprint of their flight.
Some 44 percent of those questioned at Mumbai already did so, 35 percent at Beijing and 27 percent at Atlanta said they already did so, according to SITA. But at Frankfurt, one of Europe's largest hubs, the figure was only 6 percent.

Click for Alvarado Intelligent Scanning Devices:

TAS - INTERACTIVE GUEST SCANNER Designed to work with Alvarado’s GateLink Validation and ParkAdmission systems, the TAS is generally used for guest self-scanning.  It combines an image scanner, a controller that communicates with system server, and a full color TFT display that shows user created custom color graphics. TAS scanners can be attached to turnstiles, to pedestals, or for gate entry control, they can be installed as a desktop scanner in ticket offices. Engineered for outdoor environments, the TAS locks/unlocks turnstiles and gates. The TAS scans 1D, 2D, print-at-home and cell phone tickets and communicates with the GateLink Validation or ParkAdmission server via wired or wireless Ethernet. Key Features & Benefits Attaches to turnstiles or pedestals Patron scanning of 1D, 2D, print-at-home, and cell phone tickets Outdoor readable TFT display Displays user defined custom graphics Locks/unlocks Alvarado (or third party) turnstiles and gates Engineered to operate in outdoor environments Networks with server via wired or wireless (802.11b) Ethernet Microsoft CE operating system

TAS II Building on the platform of the TAS, the TAS II adds a weatherized touch screen, creating the TAS II Interactive Operator Console. The TAS II allows operators to enter the actual number of children, adults and seniors arriving on a group ticket, providing reliable group ticket entry data. Once the actual number of arriving patrons is entered, the TAS II unlocks the associated turnstile for the correct number of entries. Other common uses of the TAS II include reviewing ticket history, enabling operator sign on and off, logging operator actions, enabling supervisor approval of operator actions and validating promotional or special event coupons. The TAS II also supports customized data input. The TAS II allows three scanning options: Guest Scanning – Guests scan using a front scanner. Guest & Operator Scanning – Guests scan most tickets, but operators can scan tickets at the TAS II if required to assist guests. Operator Scanning – Guests hand all tickets and passes to operators for scanning. Key Features & Benefits Attaches to turnstiles or pedestals Operator touch screen interface Standard and user defined touch screens Locks/unlocks Alvarado (or third party) turnstiles and gates Engineered to operate in outdoor environments Networks with server via wired or wireless (802.11b) Ethernet Microsoft CE operating system

POCKETGATE MOBILE SCANNING

Alvarado is a leader in mobile scanning applications with over 2,000 wireless handhelds deployed in venues around the world. Our Pocketgate application runs on handheld wireless scanners and integrates with the Gatelink Validation and ParkAdmission systems. Handheld devices enable venues to provide guest admission at special or temporary entrances, easily validate tickets for disabled patrons and provide guest exit scan and reentry. Wireless handhelds are also used for paperless ticket entry. Alvarado provided paperless ticket entry for its clients at events such as Miley Cyrus concerts. Key Features & Benefits Online, real-time ticket validation and administrative lookups Guest admission for special events Guest exit scanning for re-entry Paperless ticket entry / digital ticketing fulfillment Networks with server via wired or wireless (802.11b) Ethernet Option for communication over cell phone network Microsoft CE operating system

The Human Side of Security

Tim Prenzler^a

^aSchool of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Griffith University, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 

Click HERE for article:

What is the most important thing we have learned in the last 20 years of the study and practice of security

The need for "guardianship". The most critical factor in crime causation, within a security frame, is the separation of guardians from targets. This simple and obvious – almost laughably obvious – point is still largely ignored in planning and design, and is often not adequately applied in security plans. Closely associated with this is the question of the capacity of guardians that are attached to targets.

The idea of guardianship was crystallized in 1979 in a seminal article by Lawrence Cohen and Marcus Felson, titled "Social Change and Crime Rate Trends: A Routine Activity Approach". The authors demonstrated how the flood of crime in the 1970s was less the result of moral decay or poverty than prosperity and the freer lifestyles that went with the post-War economic boom. There was much more to steal – more light-weight high-value easily transportable goods. People were out and about much more, exposing themselves to robbery and assault, and leaving their homes and workplaces vulnerable to burglary, vandalism and graffiti. In my view, Cohen and Felson (1979) underestimated the influence of relative inequality within prosperous welfare states with high crime rates. Nonetheless, they made the vital point: in rich egalitarian free societies, opportunity frequently "makes" the criminal. If crime opportunities arise out of the changed routine activities of people, then we need to develop routine precautions that close down those opportunities. However, this need not entail simply contracting in a security firm to install an alarm system or conduct security checks during the night. Guardianship is a much broader concept.

In his book "Crime and Everyday Life," Marcus Felson (2002) contrasted modern societies that have high opportunity structures for crime with communities in the "Foxfire era". "Foxfire" refers to an American television series about close rural communities where people knew and looked out for each other, young people were fully occupied, and there was little scope for people with criminal inclinations to act outside community surveillance. Such societies can, of course, be stifling; but there are important lessons from the Foxfire model, especially in terms of the closer integration of accommodation, leisure and work. I saw something of this in my own childhood, where the local school principal lived on the school grounds; the local pastor and his family lived on the church grounds; and the grocer lived at the back of the store. There were obvious benefits from these arrangements in natural surveillance, territoriality, deterrence, the capacity to challenge strangers, rapid response and denial of benefits. However, one downside was reduced privacy, which is one reason such practices fell out of favour.

The obvious implication then is that guardianship needs to be restored – but in a more conscious, informed, proactive and organized manner. And what really needs to be emphasized is the human factor in guardianship. Technological substitutes have not lived up to the hype associated with them. We need more human guardians to deter offenders, to call for help and to intervene – subject to safety and capability considerations. In learning from the Foxfire era, one option is to reinvent forms of 24 hour occupation of premises. This can be done in various ways. Consider the enormous problem of theft, vandalism and arson against schools out-of-hours. There are no simple solutions, but strategies could include discounted accommodation on school grounds for teachers or janitors, who provide a guardianship role in return. In such cases, the location and structure of the accommodation should maximize natural surveillance. Similarly, problems of domestic trespass and burglaries can be addressed in part by creating larger housing complexes where residents can each pay a small amount of money to employ a permanent on-site caretaker with security responsibilities. This need not entail outright rejection of alarms, CCTV and other security devices, or even security patrol services; however, these are likely to work better in concert with a first-response presence on location. "Place management" is a good term to cover standard facilities management integrated with CPTED (crime prevention through environmental design), strategic use of security hardware and a human presence. Of course, reinstating people at the centre of security has its own risks. When human guardians substitute for the owners of property, the owners need means of reassurance that the guardians can be trusted!

What are the most important trends or innovations that are influencing, have influenced, or will influence the future of the study and practice of security?

The most important trend is a shift in consciousness away from reliance on police, human nature or luck for protection from crime; towards self-provision of crime prevention through the management of tailor-made, site-specific security. One source of evidence for this continuing shift in consciousness is the continuing growth of security services despite declining official crime rates in many places since the late 1990s. The repeated shocks of upward crime rates might no longer be with us, but lessons from that period have been learnt. Public police would always be spread too thin and would be unable to respond with sufficient speed to provide an adequate deterrent to crime. One effect is that police are then hamstrung even further by the need to put resources into painstaking investigations and prosecutions after crimes have been committed. This was not understood in the 1960s when the dream of police-based prevention still dominated the thinking about crime.

Furthermore, while big increases in crime may be behind us, crime rates remain at very high levels in many countries. The possibility of crime is a constant for most people, except those lucky few who live in close harmonious communities. The rest of us need to take measures to defend our person and property. If we manage a business or an institution, then we also need to ensure that we are protecting our workers and visitors, as well as the facilities and merchandise.

This shift in responsibility is exemplified in motor vehicle security. Early motor vehicles were fairly much free for the taking. It was the job of police to deter and detect car thieves. Manufacturers were slow to take responsibility for built-in security because of the additional costs. High volumes of motor vehicle theft obliged governments to step in to mandate built-in security, partly because it was unfair for taxpayers to pay for dealing with the problem. However, greater coordination between government and business is still required to remove or upgrade older vehicles in order to drive down motor vehicle theft even further, and to develop better systems for identifying and tracking stolen parts.

If security providers and governments can work more cooperatively to establish comprehensive mandated site-specific security systems that reduce volume crimes like motor vehicle theft and burglary, then public sector policing resources can be focused more appropriately on crimes that are more difficult to prevent through security measures, such as domestic violence, sexual assault and murder.

If you were setting the research agenda for the next 10 years, what would be your priority and why?

Again, my focus would be the human side of security, rather than the technical side. And my agenda would be summed up in one word: "Professionalization". This picks up on the earlier point about how to trust substitute guardians. Readers will know the basic facts about the size and growth of the industry: the fact that in their everyday lives people are much more likely to encounter security providers (and security devices) than police. However, police training, accountability and remuneration are generally at much higher levels than those for security providers. Not that the security industry lacks sophistication. The big problem is the unevenness of standards. How can clients reliably pick the good from the bad without government intervention; and how can third parties be protected from incompetent, corrupt or violent security staff, if governments do not intervene in the market? Sure, we need to keep pushing ahead with research and development in security technology – in finding better identity screening devices or making computer systems impenetrable to raiders – but what about the quality of personnel who manage and operate these systems?

There are two key areas that I would like to see developed under the heading of professionalization. The first is to see security operatives involved in raising standards. The main players in professionalization have been security firms through their professional associations. We need more input from the personnel side of the industry. Take the huge problem of violence associated with crowd controllers. Where is the leadership from the smart responsible crowd controllers? We need to find out how to get these people involved, and we need to do research that uses their experience and knowledge to improve training and management.

The second area is closely related to the first and concerns the development of "smart co-regulation". How can governments, professional associations and operatives work together to create the highest possible standards in security work? This requires regulatory agencies with a standing research capacity. And it can only be done by establishing a research agenda that uses innovative methods to address the following types of questions:

1. Is much of the work in security inevitably boring, low paid and transient? Can anything be done to improve job satisfaction and retention among front-line security personnel?
2. What is the extent of harm associated with security work? What can be done to reduce conflict, injuries and deaths among security officers, offenders and the public as a result of security work?
3. Are current legislated training systems and testing standards adequate to ensure entry-level competencies for security providers? Should regulators also develop in-service professional development opportunities or even require on-the-job testing for maintenance of skills and knowledge – or is this overly interventionist?
4. Will higher skill levels and other entry controls adversely affect the cost of labour and ease of entry into security work? Will it undermine one of the chief attractions of security personnel – the relative cheapness of labour vis-a-vis police?
5. Should licensed security providers be given additional powers to better service the legitimate requests of clients? Is existing law adequate to both restrain security providers from infringements of civil liberties, while empowering them to provide protection and justice for clients?
6. Should enlarged powers be linked to a larger public service role for security providers? For example, should move-on powers adjacent to private property entail a responsibi-lity to assist crime victims or injured persons outside premises?
7. Do on-going problems with security provider conduct require a higher level of regulatory control that includes such relatively intrusive measures as fingerprinting, drug and alcohol tests, psychological tests, surprise inspections and covert surveillance?
8. What is happening in the field in terms of compliance with legal and ethical standards? Are the occasional media scandals over security provider conduct simply unavoidable aberrations, or are they the "tip of the iceberg" of larger systemic problems that need to be addressed by tighter regulation?
9. Does effective security require greater regulation of general managers with security responsibilities? For example, should hotel and nightclub managers undertake compulsory courses in alcohol-related violence reduction and management of crowd controllers? Should managers of major facilities, such as airports and railways, be required to hold qualifications in security?
10. Are systems of complaints investigation and discipline adequate to remedy misconduct by security personnel and deter further misconduct? Are they reasonably fair and satisfactory to all parties involved?
11. Are licensed security providers receiving value for licence fees in terms of the standing of the industry and exclusion of unfair competition? Should licence fees be a form of tax that goes into general revenue or should fees match the cost of regulation?
12. How does the provision of security match the rhetoric of advertising by security firms? Are clients receiving value for money?

These are the types of questions that should be addressed by a dynamic regulator working closely with industry partners and other stakeholder groups. Findings should feed into policy development and refinement of regulatory strategies; and detailed reporting in annual reports that are publicly available will facilitate democratic accountability. Strategies like these should help make guardianship a much more informed, widespread and effective practice.

At Alvarado Manufacturing, our consultants are highly knowledgable in regards to security and risk management.  Alvarado is the largest U.S. manufacturer of full height turnstiles, optical turnstiles, waist high turnstiles, security turnstiles and pedestrian gates.

Bullying Victims Files Lawsuit Against School

Bullying Victim Files Lawsuit Against School

Sara Clark spoke with Local 12 in May, 2010 about the incident and showed us photos of her injuries. (WKRC-TV)

Published: 9/29 11:41 am

Click HERE for article:

Updated: 9/29 2:05 pm

The parents of a Fairfield High School student have filed a lawsuit against the school, another girl, and her parents accusing the girl of bullying their daughter and the school of failing to protect her.

Sara Clark and her parents filed the lawsuit today asking for compensatory and punitive damages.

Clark spoke with Local 12 in May about the bullying she endured at the hands of a fellow student, who got mad at her for going out with her boyfriend. She told Local 12, "Junior year it was all over a boy --it was because he cheated on her with me, but I was unaware that they were together still, so it was all over a boy -- stupid high school drama."

Clark says the girl confronted her at a Halloween party last year. "And I said well --you need to talk to your boyfriend because he told me you guys were broken up --and right in the middle of saying broken she just punched me right in the face."

Clark had to have nine stitches in her forehead. The other girl was criminally charged and sentenced to community service.

But today's lawsuit claims a temporary protection order, filed by the court to protect Clark, was not followed and that the assaulting girl was allowed to come into her classes and threatened her and also threatened her in the school's lunchroom, parking lot and at sporting events. Clark's parents say they met with the school and provided a copy of her TPO but the school said it was under no obligation to take action because the initial assault occurred off school property.

The lawsuit names the school district, the high school's principal assistant principal, the assaulting student and her parents as co-defendants.

Randy Oppenheiner, Community Relations Director of Fairfield Schools says the school's policy is not to comment on pending lawsuits and they had not received a copy of it as of this morning.  He adds, "We have an anti-bullying policy and we work hard to stop it whenever it is going on." 

 

 

Student Stabbing: Schools to Hire Uniformed Guards

After student stabbing, Mobile public schools to hire uniformed guards

Published: Monday, October 04, 2010, 7:05 AM     Updated: Monday, October 04, 2010, 8:38 AM

Rena Havner Philips, Press-Register
Click to Follow this Story

 
(Press-Register/Kate Mercer)Mobile County public schools superintendent Roy Nichols says he expects to hire 17 to 19 uniformed guards after several security incidents, including a stabbing at Blount High School last week.

MOBILE, Ala. -- The Mobile County school system plans to beef up security at select schools in light of incidents, such as last week’s stabbing at Blount High.
Schools Superintendent Roy Nichols said he expects to hire 17-19 uniformed guards to work full-time at various middle and high schools. He said that the schools would be chosen based on their layouts and discipline problems.
He said he also wants the guards to conduct random checks of students using hand-held metal detectors that high schools and middle schools already possess.
The hirings through a contracting firm will cost about $275,400 a year.
“People think of schools as being places where the No. 1 priority is education,” Nichols said. “Certainly, education is important. But, in actuality, our No. 1 priority is keeping kids safe. So, it’s worth the money.”
At 6:55 a.m. Tuesday, a female sophomore at Blount was stabbed in the back during a fight involving seven girls. Officials recovered three knives.
Two weeks earlier, a student was arrested at B.C. Rain High for bringing a loaded handgun to school.
Nichols said that schools are seeing an increase in fights among large groups of students. He said that the presence of security guards could curtail fighting and give students second thoughts about carrying any weapons.
School board member Reginald Crenshaw, whose district includes Blount, asked Nichols during a public meeting last week to consider installing permanent metal detectors at the doors of certain schools.
Nichols said he met with his head of security to talk about such detectors, but doubts that those are the answer. He said the detectors could slow the start of school in the mornings, even up to a hour, as students slowly filed in.
Also, he said, students might still find ways to sneak weapons in.
Crenshaw said he’s glad Nichols is doing something about the issue, and will support his recommendations.
“Let’s see how it works and, if a particular school gets worse, then we may have to look at other measures,” Crenshaw said.
At present, the Mobile County Public School System, which has 64,000 students at 93 schools, has 12 resource officers. They investigate incidents that have already occurred, write reports and interact with police officers called to campuses, Nichols said.
For those reasons, the officers have little time to deter students from misbehaving.
Some schools have used their own money to bring in uniformed guards to patrol parking lots or perform other duties. Also, security guards patrol campuses at night.
While the middle and high schools have hand-held metal detectors, some principals are reluctant to use them because random searches of students intrude on class time.
Nichols said he wants schools to do more searches, which might include, for example, checking every seventh student who walks down the hallway, or going into a classroom to check students in a particular row.
“We need more adults milling around and making sure the kids are doing what they’re supposed to be doing,” Nichols said. “All of our campuses don’t need this. Some need it more than others.”
Mobile police officers regularly visit campuses in their jurisdiction, said spokesman Officer Chris Levy. Also, principals have cell phone numbers of police officers who work their neighborhoods.
“Just the presence of a uniformed officer is always a deterrent,” Levy said upon hearing of Nichols’ plan.

In addition to security guards, there are other passive yet effective deterants like Security Turnstile.  Visit Alvarado Entry Control Gates to read more.