Published on July 30th, 2012 | by Anonymous
Image © [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="566"] © Photonquantique[/caption]   With the London 2012 games now well underway, we should try to forget about all the problems with its preparation and enjoy the feast of sport on offer. There were many controversies during the build up, but at least this isn’t Greece 2004, when workers were still bolting together stadiums when the games began. For all our woes, at least we’re not Greece 2012 either. I for one have been enjoying the opening days of the games from my own home, rather than from the Olympic village itself, where I was expecting to be working for G4S. Significantly, the shambolic performance of G4S in the run up to London 2012 has focused the spotlight on broader questions of public sector outsourcing, and whilst I am glad to see that steps towards a G4S-led privatisation of the police force have taken a knock, wider conclusions over outsourcing should not be so hastily drawn. Having worked in the security industry for three years I am actually unsurprised to be in this position. I was interviewed for G4S back in March and was told that I would hear all details of my training and work schedule by the end of April. As May turned to June I heard little from G4S other than an occasional email to notify me that I had cleared screening, but that I had still not been allocated for training. Considering my experience, I would have thought it would have been easy for G4S to fit me in; the job, after all, consists of little more than guarding a position for twelve hours at a time, talking to customers and checking bags where needed. Very simple indeed, but the job is relatively well paid and I desperately need the money: Others may have had many more responsibilities resting on their Olympic employment. I am unsurprised as well at arguably the more serious scandal that G4S were not training staff properly; repeating tests until applicants passed etc. Having completed my SIA training to receive my security license (that involved three ten-hour days watching different Powerpoint presentations) I have received no on-the-job training from any of my security employers. Both problems are synoptic of the way that G4S handles its staff and its approach to contracts in general. Competition in the security sector is fierce and G4S has established a hegemonic position under its chief executive Nick Buckles; costs have to be cut, in both training and administration, and staff work standard 12-hours shifts to this end. As a result, employee and customer satisfaction are a low priority; labour liquidity is high and ‘desertions’, especially in the night shift, are common. An internal report from Former Metropolitan police detective Peter Bleksley to G4S found staff asleep at Wimbledon, and that they lacked even “the most basic security knowledge.” Such findings are unremarkable: A large portion of the workforce is recruited from job centres, who push candidates, many of whom cannot speak English well, through the inadequate SIA training and into the security industry. When G4S value their employees so little, and pay no extra wage for a night shift (still 12 hours,) is it any wonder they fell asleep? Buckles was recently forced to admit in front of MPs that his company’s performance was shambolic and humiliating. Having known of these problems for longer than the wider population, I am glad that his contention to lead the privatisation of the UK’s police force has been shot down. Some critics, such as the strongly left wing author Owen Jones have argued that such incompetency makes a wider case against public sector outsourcing. In a radio interview, Jones attempted to make cross-the board conclusions that included the need to re-publicise the rail network. However we should not over emphasise the G4S experience; public humiliation, the fall in share price and loss of future contracts for G4S is perhaps evidence that the market is correcting itself. For a commercial event like the Olympics that is funded by the public purse, it makes sense for a private contractor to perform this role in order to keep the costs down. Rail fares are currently spiralling, but Jones ignores the fact that British rail ran a completely ineffective service and was controlled by a militant union. On the other hand however the G4S experience indicates the caution needed when approaching public sector outsourcing. Essential services that the public rely upon need to be run responsibly, and a market approach does not necessarily lend itself towards accountability, customer satisfaction and ease of access because these aims may be compromised by the bottom line. Bleksley’s prediction that G4S’s practices could “eventually prove catastrophic” has been proven right, and the market will punish them: My personal prognosis of their failure is that they simply tried to cut corners and did not hire enough back room staff to do what needed to be done to screen, train and deploy over ten thousand recruits. This does not bode well for their private policing objectives. Despite the consistent mishaps and controversies surrounding the UK police force, it is a service too valuable and important to be ruled by market profit margins. With an eye-watering state deficit however, public sector outsourcing will continue to be a highly contested issue for decades.