Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Waiting for backup?
Collapse
X
-
Bravo!!! You did a great job and I am a true fan of following the chain of command. Keep up the good work.
-
I would say you handled things well. It's particularly difficult to have to deal with a situation AND worry about your partner losing his head. For someone who supposedly worked in security for 13 years and had some of the experiences you passed along one would think (or hope) he was capable of handling the incident just as professionally.
It makes one wonder how many of those other situations he speaks about he a) merely heard about from someone else, b) was really there and was in an assisting role versus leading the handling of the siutation, or c) an outright lying braggart? Two of the three could easily cause his partners to get hurt.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by kingsmanHis reaction was very confusing, because he had no problem getting in a rumble with the guy the previous night, and he has worked security for 13 years, as a bouncer in a bar and as a private guard for strippers. (at least thats what he said.)
Leave a comment:
-
sounds to me like you did an excellent job, took a potential volitile situation and de-escalated it, didn't waiver from orders issued by your Supervisor and kept your partner from wetting on himself, and got the individual to park where he was informed to. Good job.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Mr. SecurityWhat was your plan if things went south?
Leave a comment:
-
Histfan71 is correct.He doesn't "have" to let you search. But you don't "have" to let him in. His choice.
Leave a comment:
-
Guest repliedOriginally posted by kingsmanYes, he was hiding in the van.
Originally posted by kingsmanWhat right would I have to search the van? I am a security officer, not the police. I have no right to search private property.
Leave a comment:
-
Yes, he was hiding in the van. The driver was the nephew of the owner of the van, and the owner of the van is a resident. But I was instructed NOT to let the van in. As the van is not registered on the property, I do not need to let it in for any reason. they have been trying to sneak him in various ways ever since he was evicted last month. his homeboys still reside on the property.
What right would I have to search the van? I am a security officer, not the police. I have no right to search private property.
My understanding is that my ex-partner no longer works for the company. His reaction was very confusing, because he had no problem getting in a rumble with the guy the previous night, and he has worked security for 13 years, as a bouncer in a bar and as a private guard for strippers. (at least thats what he said.)
I had only worked with him for a week as he was replacing a guard who was transfered.
Leave a comment:
-
3 hour wait for police backup is "normal"? Maybe in the woods, but not in a major city. Do you pay taxes? I'd be at the next city council meeting screaming!!
Leave a comment:
-
It sounds like the supervisor did not want the van on site either. You would be giving the owner good reason to come on site to collect his property. Although, if people began to pelt rocks at me, I might just let it go.
Leave a comment:
-
Guest repliedIf you're worried the banned person may have been hidden inside the van there are two things to do:
1. Ask the driver if the banned person is inside the van.
2. If you think the driver was untruthful, then search the van before you allow it to enter.
There is some missing information to this story. Kingman says the driver is a known associate of the banned person, but is the driver a resident of the complex? Kingman says he spoke with the van's owner, who is a resident, it appears. Did the van's owner say the driver was the owner's guest?
Either way it was not appropriate for Kingman to deny the van entry if the banned person was not inside the van. I think he handled the situation poorly and unnecessarily put himself and his partner in a bad situation. Kingman's supervisor is also partly to blame for giving such a bad order in the first place.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by kingsmanWe had been informed by the shift supervisor not to let a specific van onto the property
Leave a comment:
-
Guest repliedOriginally posted by kingsmanStopping the van, I refused to let it on to the property. The driver was a known associate of the banned person, not the owner of the van. The owner showed up and I still refused to allow the van onto the property.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by histfan71Kingsman,
Was the banned person inside the van? If not, why did you not allow the van and driver (who was not the banned person) inside?
Keep in mind that if you allow the van on, then they have a legal reason to enter the property to recover their property.
Leave a comment:
-
Guest repliedKingsman,
Was the banned person inside the van? If not, why did you not allow the van and driver (who was not the banned person) inside?
Leave a comment:
300x250
Collapse
Channels
Collapse
Mid 300x250
Collapse
Leaderboard
Collapse
Leave a comment: