Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What works and what doesnt in my experience.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Bill Warnock
    replied
    Your observations are dead on!
    Management, in many instances, rings it collective hands, rent their garments and moan "woe is me." No sackcloth or ashes. They talk a good game. But management has a point in that in a majority of cases, these thieves will not face prosecution. One only need look at court dockets. They are jammed with serious cases. So unless we as a society are willing and able to add money to the criminal justice system it will remain as it is now.
    The petty thieves and low lives know this all too well.
    Look at some security programs: fake cameras, monitors that no one monitors or one person sitting there for hours, seeing nothing and then disciplined because someone carried away the whole place. The term "conditioned response" never entered management's mind.
    Enjoy the day,
    Bill

    Leave a comment:


  • Serpico
    replied
    Originally posted by FoxGhost
    The "seasoned thieves" dont care about anything much.They tend to be so far down the toilet that a little shoplifting charge doesnt even register.A good example of one of them is the first guy i busted.Stuffed cigarette packs into his pockets while on the cashier line with me almost right behind him.In uniform.The sad thing is these guys get away with enough for it to be worth getting caught once in a while.
    Working alone sucks.Having a detective or even another guard at my current post would net more thieves in a week than what i can collar in a month.But that would cost money.I guess thievery doesnt

    FoxGhost

    I see what you're saying, but I guess things were a little different when I was working in Illinois. $150 worth of merch stolen in Illinois is a felony. That's the lowest in the US. Point is, even the ones working for a fencing operation were shook.

    You're right about working solo, it's all about money. The excuse I got was "If we assign you a partner, we think you're gonna talk and not do any work." When I told them that I'm making an average 8 stops a month solo and would probably get 12-16 with a partner, they asked me, "You gonna pay his salary?"

    Leave a comment:


  • Mr. Security
    replied
    Originally posted by FoxGhost
    I guess some managers havent learned that it isnt the the volume of prosecution but the lack of crime that tells how good your security force is.
    -FoxGhost
    I like the way you think.

    Leave a comment:


  • FoxGhost
    replied
    The "seasoned thieves" dont care about anything much.They tend to be so far down the toilet that a little shoplifting charge doesnt even register.A good example of one of them is the first guy i busted.Stuffed cigarette packs into his pockets while on the cashier line with me almost right behind him.In uniform.The sad thing is these guys get away with enough for it to be worth getting caught once in a while.
    Working alone sucks.Having a detective or even another guard at my current post would net more thieves in a week than what i can collar in a month.But that would cost money.I guess thievery doesnt

    FoxGhost

    Leave a comment:


  • Serpico
    replied
    Originally posted by FoxGhost
    I guess some managers havent learned that it isnt the the volume of prosecution but the lack of crime that tells how good your security force is.
    Seriously, the best way that i know to curb shoplifting is creating the illusion of omnipresence with uniformed security officers.If the thieves cant find any secluded spot to do their deed,they most likely will not do it.So the one thing i have learned is allways to know the quiet corners of the store and be aware of the people who go there.
    The second is for the stores not to hire people who are deaf,dumb and blind as floor staff.Staff tip-offs are the second largest reason that leads to closer surveillance and eventual apprehension of the shoplifter around here,right after CCTV.

    -FoxGhost
    I agree on most of this. Thing is, when people don't steal, there isn't a chance they can be caught and hit with a $100 civil restitution.

    As for needing a secluded place to conceal, I've noticed that seasoned theives don't seem to care. They'll conceal a $300 Bosch drill in their pants with an employee standing 5 feet away as they stand under a PTV. From my experience, it's the soccer mom or the guy who drives a benz who is stealing for the rush of it that finds a spot to hide and conceal.

    I've never worked in a situation that gave me uniformed LPs to help. My store was crap. I was solo and plainclothes. Never had backup. I'm sure my tune would be different if I had a door guard.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mr. Security
    replied
    Originally posted by FoxGhost
    "Shoplifters Will Be Shot"
    -FoxGhost
    I like the sign that says: "Free ride in a police car for anyone caught shoplifting"

    Leave a comment:


  • FoxGhost
    replied
    I guess some managers havent learned that it isnt the the volume of prosecution but the lack of crime that tells how good your security force is.
    Seriously, the best way that i know to curb shoplifting is creating the illusion of omnipresence with uniformed security officers.If the thieves cant find any secluded spot to do their deed,they most likely will not do it.So the one thing i have learned is allways to know the quiet corners of the store and be aware of the people who go there.
    The second is for the stores not to hire people who are deaf,dumb and blind as floor staff.Staff tip-offs are the second largest reason that leads to closer surveillance and eventual apprehension of the shoplifter around here,right after CCTV.

    -FoxGhost

    Leave a comment:


  • Serpico
    replied
    People, people! Quotas are a bad word. They prefer "performance standard".

    Leave a comment:


  • N. A. Corbier
    replied
    The funny thing is that while a police department can get hit for having "quotas," in the corporate world, its simply a metric used to justify expenditure in the loss prevention area.

    As long as associates don't use protected status as criteria for profiling, there's no real issues with "quotas," "profiling," etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mr. Security
    replied
    Originally posted by Serpico
    ........ In fact, spooking a potential thief was frowned upon. The client wanted numbers and we had to produce them at any cost.
    And I thought cops were the only ones accused of having quotas.

    Leave a comment:


  • Serpico
    replied
    Originally posted by Mr. Security
    Wouldn't it be easier to prevent shoplifting rather than reacting after it has occurred? What I mean is this: You see a "customer" who is exhibiting all the classic behavior patterns for a shoplifter. You make sure this individual knows that you are on to him by shadowing him. The shoplifter realizes the game is up and leaves the store. No merchandise lost; no arrest and prosecution necessary. Maybe I'm missing something.
    I don't know how other companies do it, but our client required that we hand out civil restitution for every theft. It's a way to make up for the money that they had to pay us. In fact, spooking a potential thief was frowned upon. The client wanted numbers and we had to produce them at any cost.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mr. Security
    replied
    Originally posted by N. A. Corbier
    There's no quantifable results in that. Most LP departments are judged by dollar amount of shrink recovered (recovered profit), and number of prosecutions obtained.

    Not to mention that unless you have probable cause to make the stop, your "shadowing" the person could be intrepreted in court as "harassment," at worst, and "soft loss" as best. The soft loss would come from decreased purchasing due to people feeling that there is an "oppressive atmosphere" in the establishment.

    Ever notice that most stores don't have uniforms? And those that do, they don't do anything? Keeps the oppressive atmosphere down.
    Makes sense. A classic "catch 22."

    Leave a comment:


  • N. A. Corbier
    replied
    Originally posted by Mr. Security
    Wouldn't it be easier to prevent shoplifting rather than reacting after it has occurred? What I mean is this: You see a "customer" who is exhibiting all the classic behavior patterns for a shoplifter. You make sure this individual knows that you are on to him by shadowing him. The shoplifter realizes the game is up and leaves the store. No merchandise lost; no arrest and prosecution necessary. Maybe I'm missing something.
    There's no quantifable results in that. Most LP departments are judged by dollar amount of shrink recovered (recovered profit), and number of prosecutions obtained.

    Not to mention that unless you have probable cause to make the stop, your "shadowing" the person could be intrepreted in court as "harassment," at worst, and "soft loss" as best. The soft loss would come from decreased purchasing due to people feeling that there is an "oppressive atmosphere" in the establishment.

    Ever notice that most stores don't have uniforms? And those that do, they don't do anything? Keeps the oppressive atmosphere down.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mr. Security
    replied
    Wouldn't it be easier to prevent shoplifting rather than reacting after it has occurred? What I mean is this: You see a "customer" who is exhibiting all the classic behavior patterns for a shoplifter. You make sure this individual knows that you are on to him by shadowing him. The shoplifter realizes the game is up and leaves the store. No merchandise lost; no arrest and prosecution necessary. Maybe I'm missing something.

    Leave a comment:


  • N. A. Corbier
    replied
    Heh. At least you cought the idiot.

    One time, before I went for an LP interview at a large company, I read everything I could about their operations on the internet. It was amusing how many disgruntled LP managers wrote stuff down, and released it to fringe sites to teach children how to steal and "strike back at the man," because the disgruntled managers felt that the rules were stupid.

    We had some conversation, and the guy asked me if I'd ever worked for the chain before. I explained what I found, and he was amused - he had not known about these things. Unfortunately, I couldn't take the job he offered (I asked for associate in the local store, he said I was overqualified and offered manager 50 miles away. I had to decline after discussing it with my girlfriend. That's one hell of a commute.)

    The internet is a wonderful source of lots of information, if you can seperate the BS from the half-truths.

    Leave a comment:

Leaderboard

Collapse
Working...
X