Regulator of the Private Security Industry in the UK
Author: Security Industry Authority (SIA UK) Blog
The Security Industry Authority (SIA) is the organisation responsible for regulating the private security industry in the UK.
This blog aims to give a deeper insight into the Private Security Industry within the UK.
An update from Pete Easterbrook, Director of Inspections and Enforcement. Pete leads the SIA’s drive against training malpractice and qualification fraud.
Training malpractice and qualification fraud are not simply shortcuts – they have real-world public safety consequences. That’s why we continue to take decisive action under Operation RESOLUTE to protect the integrity of SIA licence-linked qualifications and ensure the public can have confidence that security operatives are properly trained and genuinely qualified.
Coordinated nationwide action
In October 2025, our teams conducted a series of targeted inspections across the UK, visiting 9 training centres in a single week. While standards were generally high, we found that three training centres we visited were delivering training below our expectations. In one of the cases, we witnessed malpractice taking place. As a result, the centre is being investigated by the awarding organisation, and any further training will be scrutinised and monitored.
In November 2025, our teams conducted a major series of targeted inspections. More than twenty officers from the SIA’s Inspections and Enforcement Directorate, working closely with our partners at Ofqual, carried out simultaneous unannounced inspections across London, Manchester, Bradford, and Liverpool.
In a single day, we visited 8 venues: 5 approved training centres, 2 security companies, and 1 non-approved training centre. We took this targeted action in direct response to intelligence we received. It was necessary to disrupt an organised network we believe has been engaging in serious malpractice and fraud.
The results speak for themselves. The training centres we visited are now under investigation and close scrutiny from the awarding bodies. One of these centres has been further sanctioned, meaning the awarding organisation will not authorise the release of any further qualifications until it is satisfied the quality of training can be met.
Operation Resolute: our commitment to rooting out malpractice
These operations are part of Operation Resolute, our comprehensive initiative to identify, pursue, and root out anyone who undermines the system. We are determined to ensure the public have confidence that SIA licence holders have been properly trained, are genuinely qualified, and are fully capable of doing the job required of them.
We’re now receiving intelligence from a wider range of sources. As these recent operations demonstrate, we’re using that intelligence, our UK-wide resources, and those of our partners to track down individuals who falsely believe they won’t be caught.
Since the start of 2025
19 training centres have been closed down
242 SIA licences have been suspended
Report your concerns
If you have concerns about the integrity of SIA licence-linked training, please report them. Every piece of intelligence helps us protect the public and support the majority of training providers who operate to good standards.
We will continue to provide updates on our progress as appropriate.
Tim Archer, Director of Licensing and Standards explains why we’re updating our criminality criteria and how the changes will impact our licensing decisions.
We are introducing important changes to our criminality criteria for licensing decisions, which will come into effect on 1 December 2025. These changes will affect how we assess criminality when making decisions about granting, renewing, suspending or revoking SIA licences.
With just days remaining until the new criteria take effect, it’s important that licence holders, applicants, and employers in the industry understand what’s changing and how it may impact them. Whether you’re applying for a new licence, seeking to renew an existing one, or employing licensed security operatives, these changes represent a significant update to our approach to assessing criminality.
In this blog, I want to explain what’s changing, why we’re making these changes, and what they mean for you.
The criteria we use to assess applications for SIA licences is set out in the document Get Licensed. We use this statutory guidance to determine whether someone is fit and proper to hold an SIA licence.
We consulted on proposed changes to the criteria in March 2025, and following that consultation, these changes have now been approved by our minister. They take effect on 1st December 2025.
The changes we’re making:
Adding new, additional offences to the list of offences that the SIA considers relevant for licencing decisions, including modern slavery, people trafficking and ‘upskirting’ offences.
Tightening up the rules around refusing a licence where an applicant has any criminal record that includes a sexual offence, child abuse or neglect offence, or a prison sentence of more than 48 months. We already look closely at the risks of applications involving these offences, and we’re going to refuse all such applications in future unless the applicant can convince us that they are not a public protection risk.
Taking a tougher approach to custodial sentences of more than 12 months, where additional checks and mitigation will be required to demonstrate that the applicant is fit and proper to hold a licence. This process is known as Consider Additional Factors and is currently used when an applicant has certain criminality, including a custodial sentence of more than 48 months.
Requiring applicants who have lived overseas for more than 6 continuous months in the last ten years to provide an overseas criminal record check when they apply for an SIA licence. At present, this requirement only covers the last five years. This brings us into line with criminality checks for issuing UK visas where someone will be working in education, health or social care.
Making clearer the broad range of information we may take into account when deciding whether someone is ‘fit and proper’ to be granted a licence – for example domestic violence orders or being subject to misconduct or other disciplinary proceedings.
These changes will bring our criteria up to date, with the inclusion of new relevant offences whilst also further toughening and tightening our approach to criminality and providing greater transparency for applicants and licence holders on our wider fit and proper test that they must meet.
Our consultation earlier in the year received over 3,000 responses and demonstrated very strong support for these enhancements to our licensing criteria. Following the consultation the SIA board agreed the changes which were then subject to, and received, ministerial approval.
Our current robust licensing processes help ensure public trust and confidence in the private security industry. These changes will further strengthen our licensing processes and support our drive to improve standards within the industry.
All licence applications decided from 1st December 2025 will be subject to these new criteria. Whilst only a small number of applicants will be directly affected by these changes, they will have a positive impact on the trust and confidence that members of the public and other stakeholders can have in the standards of security operatives as they go about their work of protecting people, property and premises.
Of course, the criminality checks as set out in Get Licensed are just one part of the checks that we conduct in deciding whether to grant a licence or not. Before applicants can apply they need to complete the required licence linked qualification and provide relevant evidence that they have an up to date first aid qualification and have undergone terror threat awareness training. Security operatives are very often the first person on the scene in the event of an incident, so ensuring that they have the appropriate skills to be able to respond to emergencies is essential.
Making sure that all these requirements are met, alongside identity checks and confirmation of right to work status, is important to provide assurance that there is appropriate rigour in the licensing regime. This in turn means that we can all have confidence in the integrity, ability and knowledge of those that are there to protect people, property and premises.
An update from Pete Easterbrook, interim SIA Director of Inspections and Enforcement. Pete leads our drive against training malpractice.
We will not hesitate to act if we believe that an operative has not been trained to the standards we require as a result of training malpractice or qualification fraud.
In the last 24 hours we have suspended the SIA licences of more than 60 people who undertook training at two separate centres in Glasgow and Manchester that were operated by the same company. This came as a result of information provided to us.
We are continuing our enquiries. In the meantime, the responsible awarding organisation has prevented the centre from delivering any further training.
We will continue our work under Operation RESOLUTE, acting swiftly and decisively to root out abuse, detect and disrupt criminality, and make the private security industry a hostile environment for those who seek to exploit it.
We will provide updates on our progress as appropriate.
Pete Easterbrook, Interim Director of Inspections and Enforcement talks about a new phase to our approach to tackle training malpractice or mismanagement.
Those working within the private security hold positions of trust and responsibility. It is essential that the public, customers and stakeholders have confidence and trust that security operatives are properly trained, qualified, and capable of keeping people, property and premises safe. A key component of ensuring this trust and confidence is assuring the validity of the qualifications that operatives receive before they can apply for an SIA licence. The majority of providers who deliver SIA licence linked training are professionals who share our commitment to high standards, however where this is not the case, poor standards and training malpractice can, at its worst, put the public at risk.
While we play a central role in setting the minimum standards for licence-linked training, we’re not the only players in the game. We define the core skills and knowledge required for operatives to qualify for a licence. However, the delivery of that training is conducted by around 650 training providers who are in turn approved by six Awarding Organisations (AOs), each regulated by Ofqual (England and Wales), SQA (Scotland), CCEA (Northern Ireland), which oversees quality assurance across the sector.
Qualifications’ regulation is a well-established model that is in use in other sectors across the UK, but having multiple organisations involved in the process doesn’t always make things straightforward. Regardless of who is responsible for which part of the process, where a qualification leads to a licence being granted, then our role is to ensure that the individual we have granted a licence to is fit and proper – and that includes possessing the safety critical skills and knowledge to undertake their role effectively.
In 2024, we began to focus greater attention on training malpractice, which at it’s most serious can constitute fraud – a criminal offence. As part of this, we undertook work to improve strategic relationships with key partners such as Awarding Organisations and qualification regulators such as Ofqual. An enhanced communications campaign resulted in an increase in the intelligence we received relating to training malpractice – essential for us to be able to take the appropriate action.
Since April 2025, we’ve built on the foundations of this work, and we are now moving into a new phase under Operation RESOLUTE. RESOLUTE has been designed as a high impact initiative with a strong operational focus on intelligence led, unannounced inspections to training providers, as well as a deeper collaboration with partners.
We are realigning our resources and ensuring we leverage the considerable expertise of our people. By way of an example, we’ve now brought specialist training integrity resources into our Inspections and Enforcement directorate. This shift has unlocked wider investigative expertise and enabled a more proactive, intelligence-led approach to tackling training abuse. In addition, we’ve invested in nationally accredited training to sharpen the investigative skills of our frontline teams to ensure they are equipped to tackle training malpractice head on.
Our robust and decisive approach is already having an impact.
Since the 1st April 2025;
we’ve increased the number of unannounced training centre visits by 120% compared to the same period last year. Those visits have resulted in 10 training centres having their approval to deliver training withdrawn, and one centre suspended from delivering training until the Awarding Body is satisfied the appropriate standard can be met.
we’ve commenced a criminal investigation in one case due to the serious nature of the offending. As part of this investigation 17 individual SIA licences have been revoked where our enquiries have brought into question whether the training an individual has received has been up to the required standard.
In July 2025 my teams conducted a series of targeted inspections across the UK, visiting 15 training centres in a single week. Whilst standards were generally high, four training centres we visited were found to be delivering training below our expectations. In two cases the issues were so serious the centres were sanctioned by Awarding Bodies and any further training will be scrutinised and monitored. One of these centres was further sanctioned, and the Awarding Body will not authorise the release of any further qualifications until it is satisfied the quality of training can be met
We are about to undertake a strategic review of the licence linked qualifications, within which we will seek to further reduce opportunities for abuse of the training system. Naturally, this will involve us taking a close look at how assessments are conducted and administered. In the meantime we are working closely with partners, will continue our work under Operation RESOLUTE, acting swiftly and decisively to root out abuse, detect and disrupt criminality, and make the private security industry a hostile environment for those who seek to exploit it.
We will continue to provide updates on our progress as appropriate.
Ronnie Megaughin, Head of Compliance and Inspections, Security Industry Authority
In August this year Paul Fullwood, the SIA Director of Inspections & Enforcement, published an article on our response to labour exploitation in the private security industry. This is an update on our operational response to the issue, which we are calling Operation EMPOWER.
The issues that Paul highlighted in his article are most prevalent in extended supply chains involving sub-contracting labour provision to service contracts.
EMPOWER, which has been running for about four months, combines a number of approaches. These include an intensive media campaign, primarily on social media platforms, and an operational response driven by a dedicated team of SIA Compliance and Inspections (C&I) Investigators working closely with partners in HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) and Home Office Immigration Enforcement (HOIE).
We have raised around 150 investigation cases under the EMPOWER criteria. These relate to tax evasion through bogus self-employment, failure to pay National Insurance, breaches of National Minimum Wage legislation, and abuse of student and skilled worker visas.
Whist some cases are relatively straightforward and can result in a referral to HMRC Fraud Investigation Service, others are far more complex and will require time to work through and gather evidence. One such investigation resulted in Operation JACKFRUIT. This was a UK-wide day of action, led by SIA C&I and Criminal Enforcement investigators in partnership with HMRC and HOIE teams.
The main themes which JACKFRUIT aimed to address were NMW breaches, benefit fraud, abuse of visas, and bogus self-employment. We visited 35 separate sites, with two business inspections included in the plan. HOIE arrested one individual for visa abuse (working on a skilled worker visa in front line security). HOIE have the power to apply significant fines on the offending business in such circumstances. We and our partners are progressing other lines of investigation as a result of the information we obtained on the day.
We adapted our approach to inspections at summer festivals and events this year to include engagement with operatives to establish their employment status and who they were employed by. That work identified 283 individual cases with concerns about employment status. HMRC will follow those up with a view to addressing the companies responsible for their deployment.
We launched our social media campaign on 27 August 2024, using a newly-designed campaign identity based on our brand. Since then we’ve shared more than 50 posts across Twitter (X), LinkedIn and Facebook. We have written messaging to target four specific audiences: general licence-holders, businesses, buyers of security, and potential victims of labour exploitation. Our messages have been seen more than 100,000 times, with a good deal of positive engagement.
A significant challenge we face is the use of closed WhatsApp groups to recruit and arrange deployment of security operatives. At one time many of these groups would post hourly rates well below National Minimum Wage. However, the actions of well-intentioned members of the security industry, who sought to expose them on social media platforms, have driven their activities further underground. Many will now only offer an hourly rate over the telephone. Intelligence indicates that some groups are being operated entirely in foreign languages to further frustrate any attempts to infiltrate them.
Anecdotal evidence and feedback from all our public engagement indicates overwhelming support for our work under Operation EMPOWER. We are under no illusion that there is a quick fix. However there is no doubt that more robust contract management and greater due diligence in supply chains by the larger companies in the private security industry could have a significant positive impact.
We will continue to work under Operation EMPOWER, in partnership with all interested parties, to reduce the harm.
We’ve set up a dedicated multi-disciplinary team across the SIA, headed by Paul Fullwood, our Director of Inspections and Enforcement, to address labour exploitation under the name Operation EMPOWER. The aim of this operation is to seek to reduce labour exploitation across the UK private security industry, working in collaboration with the industry itself, key partners, and government. Our plan begins with the launch of a communications campaign to raise awareness of the signs of potential labour exploitation and encourage reporting. Paul explains more here:
We know that labour exploitation exists within the private security industry. The harm to individuals is unacceptable. The consequent injury to standards and public safety, to law-abiding businesses who are undercut by criminal enterprises, and to the reputation of the industry, demand a response.
We’re confident that most private security suppliers meet high standards and provide fair working conditions, which contributes to public safety. However, we know from our intelligence and stakeholder engagement that the industry has concerns that some companies are undermining quality businesses through alleged poor practices.
We’ve set up a dedicated multi-disciplinary team across the SIA, headed at director level, to address labour exploitation under the name Operation EMPOWER. This project team includes intelligence specialists and criminal investigators, as well as representatives from Individual and Business Standards, Legal, Policy, and Communications.
The aim of this operation is to seek to reduce labour exploitation across the UK private security industry, working in collaboration with the industry itself, key partners, and government. We need the commitment and support of departments and agencies with relevant powers, such as HM Revenue and Customs and the Home Office. This is because our current powers under the Private Security Industry Act 2001 provide us with limited opportunities to tackle this issue on our own.
People who are being exploited can be hard to reach. They may be vulnerable due to their immigration status. They may not even realise that they’re being exploited. We want security operatives to understand what labour exploitation looks like. For example, they may not be being paid the National Minimum Wage. For some individuals, particularly those who are being used by organised crime, their situation may be far worse. We need these individuals to be able to identify when they’re being exploited, and to know that they can report their situation in confidence to the SIA and other agencies. The expectation must be that action will follow.
We are also talking to security businesses to make sure they’re aware of their responsibilities to the people they employ. We want buyers of security to be vigilant as well, as we know that labour exploitation – particularly low pay – can be a feature of sub-contracting chains. If buyers are sourcing cheap security, say for an event, they may be paying an amount that guarantees that operatives themselves are not being paid National Minimum Wage.
A private security company supplier, which is under contract to a buyer, must make sure that their employees are paid correctly and contribute the correct amount of national insurance and tax. They must also make sure that this is being done throughout their supply chain.
No employer is exempt from paying their workers the statutory minimum wage. Employers must pay their employees the National Minimum Wage (to apprentices or people aged under 21) or the National Living Wage (to people aged 21 or over). There are also minimum unavoidable costs for basic employment matters such as national insurance.
This should be of special interest to legitimate security businesses, as unscrupulous operators can undercut those who treat their staff fairly and pay them properly.
Our plan begins with a communications strategy aiming to raise awareness of the signs of potential labour exploitation, and encourage reporting, with the support of key communications partners. We’re directing people to a new guidance and reporting page on our GOV.UK site. We will follow this first phase with a programme of engagement on the actions we are collectively taking to address labour exploitation.
In this way we are embarking on a multi-partnership operation intended to disrupt and dissuade the individuals and businesses that direct or facilitate labour exploitation. Keep an eye out for our messages, and if you come across exploitation in the private security industry – please report it.
We spoke with our Regional Investigation Manager & Tactical Events Lead Lucia Howland about our approach to compliance checks this busy summer.
We seem to be visiting lots of festivals lately, what has our approach been for previous years?
We’ve always had an interest in festivals and events. Typically, these tend to be high risk events by nature; there’s a demand for lots of security personnel for a limited time. This can lead to pressures on both the quality of staff provision and the due diligence needed to ensure compliance with regulations. Non-compliance might include unlicensed operatives, the presence of cloned or counterfeit licences or the use of stewards in place of security staff for designated roles. This can introduce risks to protecting the public.
How does the industry cope with demands?
Generally, the primary security provider that holds a contract with an event organiser will enter into contracts with other providers or use labour from others. Whilst this is acceptable if done correctly, it can dilute due diligence. We accept that this method of working must happen, so our interest is in making sure this is working as it should.
How do we get intelligence and how does that inform our compliance and inspections activity?
A lot of the intelligence we get is from the public where someone reports something they’ve seen. This tends to be after an event so the moment has often passed. The challenge is about getting the best intelligence so that it can properly inform our approach. We only have so many investigators so we can’t be present at every event, but we work hard on this and gather as much intelligence as possible. The intelligence team combines this with other information we gather from our own inspections and interactions with those in the industry to form a picture of the threats faced. These are then prioritised and tasked to the Compliance & Inspections teams.
We need to be mindful that where we have rich intelligence on particular events or providers, we don’t place that on a pedestal; it doesn’t tell us what’s happening at other events we’ve not been to – sometimes we don’t know what we don’t know.
How do you mitigate lack of organisers’ awareness?
We start work months before an event happens. We work with organisers and other partners at meetings known as ‘safety advisory groups’. In addition to ensuring security plans are sound, these meetings exist to address any issues in relation to the event for example, health and safety, the environment and logistics and transport issues. At these meetings, a number of partners attend to give opinions and expertise. Sometimes we attend at the request of partners such as the local authority or the event organiser, sometimes we invite ourselves.
We also work with providers of security beforehand to advise on compliance. We build a good relationship and work with them to make sure their own plans meet the standards required.
What’s the main difference for us between big and smaller festivals?
Our processes are the same whether big or small, so it’s a matter of scale really. I think smaller events are easier; there’s less to inspect on the ground and a smaller geography means not trapsing over quite as many fields to inspect security provision and liaise with control stations.
But the challenge with smaller events is there tends to be less wiggle room to deal with any issues. For example, having fewer security personnel means less flexibility to deploy an alternative operative if an issue relating to a licence is found.
Venue size and security provision is not a linear relationship. I was at a festival last week with a capacity of 5,000 with 29 security operatives on duty. However, a recent festival with a capacity of 10,000 required 200 operatives. Numbers vary massively and are dictated by the type of event, location, make-up of the venue, geography, entry/control points, demographics, etc.
What’s the team up to just now?
The season is now underway, and events are happening so we’re moving to an operational phase. We’re out inspecting festivals regularly now.
Even though we’ve had pre-meetings with organisers and security providers already, we still inspect. We don’t leave them to it as we need to ensure the assurances, we’re given are accurate.
What’s the reaction to our presence?
Generally, we are well received. Good quality security providers which are there to do a good job are pleased to see us and work with us. Some event organisers can see us as presenting ‘yet another hoop to jump through’. But when they see how little we disrupt things and appreciate the value we bring to make their events safer they welcome us being on board.
by Lisa Shaw, Investigations Officer, SIA Southeast
The BBC Radio 1’s Big Weekend Festival took place this year in Luton from 24-26 May. As a popular event with a great line up, the numbers were expected to reach over 100,000 which meant a large security presence. My team at the SIA covers counties in the Southeast including Sussex, Essex, Surrey, Hertfordshire, Hampshire, Kent, Bedfordshire and Thames Valley. As the event was in my patch, my team and I planned a visit to ensure SIA compliance at the event.
Our team checked 155 licences and spent time engaging with licence holders and security suppliers at the BBC Radio 1 Big Weekend Festival in Luton.
We spent three days making checks at the event. The first two days involved us attending the site before the event opened to inspect licences of the security operatives on duty. At the inspection planning stage, all suppliers provided me with a list of documents they had seen to verify identity of the licence holders. We then attended the first day of the event on Friday 24th May to inspect any licence holders we missed on the first two days. We also observed security procedures and process to ensure that there was no crossover between licensable roles and actions of safety marshals present at the event.
Sarah Runchman, our Head of Intelligence, joined the inspection to observe how an inspection unfolds, what obstacles we may face when out in the field and what improvements can be made in the process. I also spent time walking around the site with local licensing officers working jointly to check security at the venue.
On the day the event opened we were able to observe the security teams carrying out their duties. This included bag searches at the gates and drug detection dogs being used amongst the crowds. We observed how successfully the dogs detected illegal substances with members of the public removed from the queue as a result.
From left to right: SIA Compliance and Inspections team – Ariarna Moore, Lisa Shaw, Alison Hughes and Elise Winnett
The inspection was successful with high levels of compliance found from security officers. We inspected 155 licences over the three days. We issued 13 warnings for failure to update address and a further 5 verbal warnings to security officers for failing to display their SIA licences.
Conducting much of the inspection prior to the opening of the event allowed us to really engage with security officers and marshals and get a feel for how the industry is for them. Our presence at the event was welcomed, with many security officers expressing gladness to see us there. We met a very talented event marshal who is now training to become an SIA licensed security operative. We also witnessed an unprovoked attack by an aggressive member of the public on a door supervisor. The door supervisor handled the situation with restraint and calmness, preventing any escalation. Watching the incident unfold in front of us highlighted just how difficult a door supervisor’s job can be.
Overall, it was a rewarding experience to be part of the event and to ensure levels of compliance were met by the security present. I am grateful for the positive interactions and the opportunity to witness the dedication of everyone involved in ensuring safety of the public and property at the event.
Michelle Russell, Chief Executive, Security Industry Authority
The Security Industry Authority’s core purpose is protecting the public through effectively regulating the private security industry. As we mark 20 years since the start of our licensing regime, we want to make sure that the industry and its regulation is keeping pace with public expectations. It’s important that people can have trust and confidence in licence holders, the wider industry, and us as a regulator.
Research shows there are high levels of trust and confidence
It’s encouraging that most people trust security operatives, are confident that they do the right thing and carry out their duties competently. The public recognise the important role security operatives do. SIA licence holders can feel proud that most people feel safer due to their presence in settings like music concerts, sporting events, banks, hospitals, nighttime venues and retail premises.
There are high levels of consistency between the 2022 and 2023 results. This indicates that these findings are not a ‘one-off’. However, it also means that it will likely take time to change some of the more negative perceptions and stereotypes that some of the public hold about the security operatives they come across.
Personal encounters have a significant influence on views
It is not unexpected that attitudes and personal experiences play a strong role in driving levels of trust. Those with a positive recent personal experience with a security operative were much more likely to have greater levels of trust and confidence overall in private security.
We set the entry level requirements for training content and standards of conduct required to get and keep a licence. The research findings show that operatives who display positive, customer-focused traits help to drive trust. People said they wanted the security staff they meet to be more professional, reliable and helpful. This highlights how important it is for individuals to take responsibility for their conduct and behaviour once they have a licence, putting their communication and conflict resolution skills into practice.
Employers also have a part to play, as they take responsibility for on the job training suitable for the role their employees are deployed to. Employers can encourage recruitment for desired skills and traits, and promote positive values.
Security businesses and leaders also have an important role – both in driving long-term improvements to standards, and in helping to change public perceptions. I’d like to recognise the impact of initiatives which are good examples of this such as the British Security Industry Association (BSIA)’s ‘People, Property, Places: Professionally Protected’ campaign and the work of the industry-led Skills Board which is made up of leaders from security businesses both small and large.
Our regulation also has a part to play in building trust
Though personal experience is a stronger driver, as the regulator we also play our part in building trust and confidence by setting requirements and standards, and acting swiftly against those who fall short of them. Whether that’s providing formal advice, or suspending or revoking licences. In the most serious cases, we will prosecute illegal activity that risks public safety, the integrity of the licensing regime or undermines the work of those that do comply with the rules.
Members of the public that took part in focus groups were mostly positive about regulation and felt reassured by knowing the industry is regulated. However, it is clear there is more that we can do to explain what licensing means and how SIA licence holders support public safety, given that 3 in 10 survey respondents were aware of us and our role. We’re acting on this and have built improving public understanding into our communications strategy for the next few years.
The focus group conversations also revealed that routine independent licensing checks will help to drive up trust. We have increased our inspection footprint and visibility across the UK over the last few years to help detect issues early and deter wrongdoing. We will continue to act against individuals and companies who put the public at risk.
Together we can change perceptions about careers
It is good news that 7 in 10 people agree that private security is a career to be proud of. However, most of the survey respondents saw working in security as a good secondary job, rather than a first-choice career.
The SIA is already working in partnership with the industry to change perceptions so that more people can see private security as a role for them. Employers are responsible for attracting and retaining their staff. We act and use our voice where practices compromise public safety, including working with HMRC to address ‘cash in hand’ practices which are often linked to poor standards.
We are also pleased to support the specialist work of bodies such as the Security Institute, The International Professional Security Association (IPSA) and Security Commonwealth, and industry-led initiatives such as the Private Security Industry Apprenticeship Trailblazer Group, which work to open pathways into security and formalise frameworks for further developing skills and expertise, post entry level.
Long-term improvements to working conditions must continue to be driven by the industry. Employers are responsible for ensuring people are paid fairly and well for what they do and the skills they have, treated respectfully in the workplace and invested in with opportunities to develop and progress. Buyers also have a role to play in not letting pricing compromise public safety and quality.
This is just a flavour of some of the key findings and learnings from the full research document. We have used the results to inform our own strategy. I encourage those working in the private security industry, those in positions of leadership and influence in security businesses, and employers, to reflect on and use these insights to inform your own activities.
One of our Investigations Officers, Jo, takes us through two days on site at the Reading Festival, as part of our SIA team ensuring licence holder compliance.
The famous music event attracts over 105,000 festivalgoers each year, while the security provision numbers around 2,000 operatives.
Walking to the festival
Tuesday 22 August
10.45am I arrive at the festival command centre for the event. It’s home to control teams from the police, ambulance and fire services, as well as event control and security. There’s already an impressive buzz to the place. Communication equipment, monitors and displays are arranged in the centre’s multi use courts.
11.00am I meet the rest of our inspection team who are supporting me today. We meet the Safety Manager for the Reading Festival, and he takes us to the site.
Before we’re allowed in, we must go through a site induction and be given our access wrist bands. This was one of the smoothest processes we’ve encountered to access an event. We were impressed by the improvements to the accreditation process implemented since last year.
The weather was glorious – so no festival mud to traipse through.
When operatives arrive, they must scan in a QR code, which amongst other details includes emergency contact details, then they move to accreditation desk.
Our inspection team splits into groups to do the same with the other two companies supplying security.
Firstly, we are assured of how their accreditation is set up. When operatives arrive, they must scan in a QR code, which amongst other details includes emergency contact details, then they move to the accreditation desk.
Each operative is checked against a staff list, their SIA licence is checked against additional photo identity and against the SIA register of licence holders, as well as a physical check of the card itself using an ultraviolet light to test security features.
It is a good set up and well run. We see people being taken out of the line to undergo further clarification on their accreditation, which shows due diligence on behalf of the security company.
Operatives then move through to pick up their uniforms, any equipment they need and a tabard, different colours for security staff and stewards.
Before they leave, they attend an initial briefing and one final SIA licence check.
It was a good set up and well run.
Next to the main stage
12.00pm Within the accreditation area, we undertake our own further checks on SIA licences and contact our operation control to confirm all is well.
By the time we finish, our team has checked 85 licence holders – all good.
It’s worth a note, that the total security provision numbers around 2,000 individuals across the whole weekend, less today as the event is still setting up. But the number of operatives on duty will increase when the festival opens to the public.
1.30pm We man the gatepost where operatives enter to undertake initial checks before they get to the accreditation gate.
2.00pm We return to the main security compound and meet back up with our team who have been doing similar checks with the other companies.
After a brief break, we go to see the deployed security staff. There’s security staff at three gates to the site and more dotted around arena and stages. We go to the main site gate then walk into the arena, checking staff as we go.
On our way back to the security compound, we hitch a ride on a buggy. We are held at a junction to make way for a convoy of 12 ice cream vans!
5.00pm We meet our team and make our way to the exit performing a few more checks along the way.
6.00pm We’re signed out of the site, and I can make my way back home. I endure the M25 again and when I get home, spend a little time catching up on emails and messages before signing off the day.
Thursday 24 August
Jo, Elsie, Dawn and Michelle on site
11.00am We arrive back at the command centre and meet with our team including our Chief Executive, Michelle Russell who is joining us today.
Despite threats of rain, and taking heavy coats and stout shoes, it was another glorious day.
By now, the festival is functioning rather than being set up. The campsites are filling up fast, there are already tents cheek by jowl. Concessions stands are open and the festival feels like it’s getting into full swing.
There are lots of people walking around, sitting about, enjoying the atmosphere, and getting to know where things are. Metal roadways along the main routes save these from turning into mud baths if it rains.
We can see a constant stream of people arriving, some with some strange luggage solutions; chairs strapped to backs, tents being dragged, sleeping bags hanging from rucksacks, things being dropped.
Security staff are now doing their job rather than being accredited.
Operatives are deployed walking around the camps, keeping an eye on concessions, undertaking access controls and deploying searches for main access areas.
There are eight camps in total; white, brown, orange, purple, blue, yellow, orange and eco.
Our team splits into a separate group.
11:30am We head off for ‘white’ camp, the furthest away, about a 30-minute walk. It was a good day for steps. I clocked up around 15,000 during the day.
White camp is over a temporary bridge built over a river. At each of the camps is a camp manager, store and security manager. We make further checks as the Security Manager radios his team one-by-one to come in for a check.
On the way back we check a further two camps. In addition, we sweep up any security operatives we meet as we walk through and carry out further licensing checks.
1.45pm We stop for lunch sitting down for a well-deserved break. After which, we walk on a bit further to a site access point and carry out some more checks. We don’t interfere with the search area, as this is very busy.
2.30pm We visit the brown and purple campsites on the way back carrying out more licence checks.
4.15pm As we sweep our areas the other team does the same with theirs. We meet up at the main arena where another security company is providing service for the main arena with the huge stage. We introduce ourselves. The manager is helpful but very busy, so we carry out checks as efficiently as possible and let them get on.
“It was good to have our Chief Executive, Michelle Russell along to share our experiences and talk to her about the little things that can help make our jobs easier.”
4.45pm We decide to call it a day and sit in the command centre for a de-brief.
Overall, the team undertook a total of 85 checks during the day.
It was good to have our Chief Executive, Michelle Russell along to share our experiences and talk to her about the little things that can help make our jobs easier.
5.50pm Michelle thanks the event controller and we leave the site.
8.30pm I get home. A quick check in to catch up on emails and messages before logging off for the day.
Overall, the team completed 170 checks during the two-day operation. In addition, I created 14 watchlists and checked 637 licences prior to the event. So quite an achievement.
This was the first festival operation that I was leading on, and I was pleased with how it went. Everything was well planned and everyone in the team, both (literally) in the field and at control did a marvellous job.
It was good to see the security provision being deployed to a very high standard. All the checks we undertook were positive, testimony to the work we do with security suppliers long before events take place.
Thank you to the SIA team, the security and events management companies and security operatives who all did a fantastic job in keeping the public safe over the two days.
“Everything was well planned and everyone in the team, both (literally) in the field and at control did a marvellous job.”
