Security Association: Expectations, Dues, Etc...

[N. A. Corbier]

Remember when there was talk of making a security association on SIW? Then there was NAPSOA, and Histfan71 throwing fits about how he's a federal law enforcement officer and security guards should only observe and report... And that NAPSOA is evil because they want guards to do more than that...

Anyway... This is me asking, not an Advisor of NAPSOA or a manager at NAPSOA Incorporated. But, you know, me. The one who rarely advertises NAPSOA on this forum, or even really talks about it.

Throw NAPSOA, IFPO, ASIS, and the rest of the acronyms out of the picture for a minute, and I'd like to know a few things.

1. What do you expect a security association, organization, or fraternal order to do for you? Especially in exchange for paying dues to belong to it. (Are we talking politicking, or the cool credit cards and stuff FOP has, or just comradere?)

2. What would you consider a "bearable" dues for the individual officer? We don't make much. Not at all. Some of you know I'm going back into the rat race soon as a uniform. Yearly? Bi-Yearly? Monthly?

3. What do you think the mission of a security association should be?

4. How large of a scope do you think it should be? International, National, State, or Local? Or a combination of those, in a tiered arrangement, like Eagles and Elks and FOP, etc.

Nobody take this as a suggestion that I'm plotting anything, please.

[Mr. Security]

Boy, where to start..

Scope: National
Mission: Decent wage; Competent Officers; Safe Working Conditions; Public Relations Department w/ LE Liason
Dues: Annual; based on wage and type of security

Just as a start.

[Eric]

Perhaps start national, then move to Canada etc.

Different levels of membership, based on salary or position.

Raise awareness/importance of security roles to us, general public and government, and then push for a training basic/advanced standard.

Not to take HotelSecurity's thunder, but he is right on about the Insurance companies taking a lead on standards.

[tlangsr]

Boy, where to start..

Scope: National
Mission: Decent wage; Competent Officers; Safe Working Conditions; Public Relations Department w/ LE Liason
Dues: Annual; based on wage and type of security

Just as a start.

I 100% agree

[OccamsRazor]

Boy, where to start..
Dues: Annual; based on wage and type of security

I would agree more on the wage and less on the "type". I know some armed guards making $12.50 less an hour than I am. There are in-house guards around here making less than contract guards.

Etc.

[SecTrainer]

It's interesting to read the history of the FOP. The FOP started out as a small local organization (two or three guys on a local PD) to address one central issue of concern to that particular department, and they did so successfully. Then, and only over time, it became what it is today.

This is the path that most successful organizations follow - businesses, religions, nonprofits, political movements, etc. They start small, start local, and they succeed in doing one thing. Only then do they think about growing and expanding their focus. There are many, many reasons why this model is the one that works best.

The age of the Internet can create the illusion that this "growth" pathway is no longer necessary. We can create organizations, throw up websites and sign up members, all seemingly in the blink of an eye...and that's sufficient for some things, like discussion forums and a very small set of business models. Most organizations that involve real projects and real human effort that must be directed and managed should not try to leapfrog over the initial local-growth stages.

My point is that babies aren't born as adults and I think the FOP is a good model to think about - not just as they are today, but also in the way they began and became successful.

[N. A. Corbier]

This is one of the requirements I have set for FOPSO. There must be enough people in one geographical area to support a lodge. The lodge must work independently, within the framework set up, and support itself.

Large "national organizations" from scratch are prone to fail. Too many things to cover, not enough people to cover them, not enough influence.

One lodge could (and from what I understand, will shortly) cover a city, a county, or even a site. It is that small level that allows people to associate themselves together for whatever purpose they wish. Be it change a law, work towards a goal, or simply hang out with those who work in the industry but may never meet due to other company affiliations.

[Dam Guard]

I will add my 2 cents for what it's worth. The WWW changed things so I see no reason an organisation couldn't start out National or maybe even North American. Such an organisation could indeed exist as a sort of security lobbyist so to speak. As far as dues maybe start at $5 or 10 monthly for individuals?

[N. A. Corbier]

I will add my 2 cents for what it's worth. The WWW changed things so I see no reason an organisation couldn't start out National or maybe even North American. Such an organisation could indeed exist as a sort of security lobbyist so to speak. As far as dues maybe start at $5 or 10 monthly for individuals?

Here are some reasons why national or international don't work. I know this, because I watched an organization fail on this scope, NAPSOA.

1. No local voice. A senator in Florida really could give less care if an organization has people who aren't even in the state he is elected to is writing him talking about something. Now, 200 people IN Florida, he cares.

2. No face time. I've built several sites for organizations. But, when it comes down to it, there's no face time between members, and this translates into lack of force to do things and effect change.

3. Lack of Return on Investment. So, you pay $10 bucks a month, and you get what, exactly? Access to a forum? Guess what, we have a forum ,its free, its right here. An ID card? Big whoop. A badge? That you can't wear, may be illegal in your state to possess, etc. Where' the ROI on an organization that's "on the internet?"

An organizational website should support its organization, but not be the actual organization itself.

[SecTrainer]

Yes, but you're still trying to address "what other lodges might be" or how they might work. I'm being much more specific than that and saying start your own local organization and address some particular issue(s). When you have a healthy, thriving local organization that has some solid accomplishments on behalf of its members - and only then - do you think about whether the model might be replicated elsewhere.

This seems to fly in the face of the idea that we should plan, but actually it does not. What it does is to focus your planning on the immediate issues, and prevents you from diffusing time and energy on issues that are much less immediate.

My advice would be to get your local organization going and focus every bit of your attention on that. Think of the local organization as your pilot model, and one that must show proof-of-concept before it even thinks about moving out. There's something marvelously energizing about stopping down your lens. Just finding and then organizing enough officers in your local area who will actually work for the organization in order to first agree upon and then accomplish even the smallest real objective (except serving tea and swapping war stories) will prove to be a very significant challenge, and one that is quite different from "starting lodges" over the Internet.

Having done that, you can then come back and say "We've done this", and the rest of us will have a working model to emulate.

[SecTrainer]

I will add my 2 cents for what it's worth. The WWW changed things so I see no reason an organisation couldn't start out National or maybe even North American. Such an organisation could indeed exist as a sort of security lobbyist so to speak. As far as dues maybe start at $5 or 10 monthly for individuals?

Some things, yes, especially if all they are is "social" or "informational", but not this kind of organization (unless that's all it intends to be). This type of organization needs a local model and local proof-of-concept first and then it can think about something more.

[james2go30]

yup

Boy, where to start..

Scope: National
Mission: Decent wage; Competent Officers; Safe Working Conditions; Public Relations Department w/ LE Liason
Dues: Annual; based on wage and type of security

Just as a start.

What he said.

[james2go30]

yup

This is one of the requirements I have set for FOPSO. There must be enough people in one geographical area to support a lodge. The lodge must work independently, within the framework set up, and support itself.

Large "national organizations" from scratch are prone to fail. Too many things to cover, not enough people to cover them, not enough influence.

One lodge could (and from what I understand, will shortly) cover a city, a county, or even a site. It is that small level that allows people to associate themselves together for whatever purpose they wish. Be it change a law, work towards a goal, or simply hang out with those who work in the industry but may never meet due to other company affiliations.

what he said

[james2go30]

Seriously

You all raise good points...as well as point out quite clearly the negative results. I have to agree the points raised and voiced by both Nathan and Trainer. I do think we need some type of orginazation to help and protect us and overall benifit not only but the profession have chosen to work. The hard part is getting enough s/o's to take it serious enough to get it off the ground. Let's face...and I know you have all encountered this...a lot of s/o's are not even serious about their jobs as it is and only see it as check and not as the field that I have come to respect and enjoy. Too s/o's though don't care enough about security to give us a foot hold....true dedicated s/o's are thinly spread out. Well thats been my experiance...feel free to disagree.

[ACP01]

I agree that a national orginazation would not get very far to begin with.

I say go for locals with a national association to start with.
To clear up the mud...

Where there are enough interested to form a local, start at that level.
All dues would be paid to the local and the local would be the main funtioning body. Local problems and business would be addressed by that local.

The national association (Fraternaty) would set guidelines and standards to keep all locals on a similar functioning network. A portion of the local dues recieved would go to the national to offset costs. Also, if there isn't enough interest to form a local then individual officers could join the national to at least get the foot in the door.

This way if a local fails it wouldn't take the national with it.

One question I have is in regards to a member or local that has a contract where another union is striking....As an IAFF member I can tell you the other unions would not stand for us calling ourselves an Association, Fraternaty or anything resembling a union and crossing a picket line. You could forget ANY AFL-CIO or Canadian (CLA?) support on any issues.