SIA licensing query

InNeedofAdvice

I have a question regarding whether an individual requires an SIA (Security Industry Authority) license for a particular job role. I have emailed the SIA but have yet to receive a response.

The scenario:

The person is a full-time in-house employee of an organisation. Their role is to oversee/manage all security functions for that organisation. Part of the role is to manage, direct and supervise several contracted security personnel. In other words - someone employed in-house, is responsible for contractors from a separate company.

Does this individual require an SIA license?

Having read the SIA website, it seems fairly contradictory. On one page, it states:

"If you act as a manager or supervisor of an individual where that individual is required to carry out designated licensable activities for the purposes of or in connection with a contract for the supply of services then you will require a licence even if you are an employee of the customer of the services."

But on the other hand, regarding who needs to be licensed:

"persons who manage or supervise security operatives supplied under contract by a security contractor (but not in-house supervisors of contractors)"


So, on first glance, two completely opposite statements. Perhaps I'm interpreting it the wrong way.

Anyone with knowledge of this able to interpret this better?

Many thanks.

ohreally

Seems perfectly clear to me, NO licence required.

InNeedofAdvice

ohreally wrote: »

Seems perfectly clear to me, NO licence required.

Perhaps I'm just stupid, but that first quote seems to suggest if you are acting as a manager of contractors, then you will require a license even if you are an employee of the client paying for the contracted services?

xapprenticex

Try not to think yourself out of the job. If you are 100% convinced you shouldn't have the job, then you wont be getting it, you'll make sure it goes that way.

Get the job then worry about getting the license.

[Deleted User]

My ex has gone into security work. He found a rottweiller who was part security trained. Finished the training with the help of a qualified security dog trainer, paid for a couple of training courses for himself and now he earns £10 an hour. Because there are more jobs than licensed security personnel, he has work coming out of his ears.

He was earning £7 an hour, take home of about £250. Last month he earned well over £4k. He worked the hours of course, but its not like most jobs where there's more employees than jobs.

He's been doing it for 8 months now and its the best change he's ever made.

Even if you don't need the licence, get it, make contacts and see what can happen.

paddedjohn

deannatrois wrote: »

My ex has gone into security work. He found a rottweiller who was part security trained. Finished the training with the help of a qualified security dog trainer, paid for a couple of training courses for himself and now he earns £10 an hour. Because there are more jobs than licensed security personnel, he has work coming out of his ears.

He was earning £7 an hour, take home of about £250. Last month he earned well over £4k. He worked the hours of course, but its not like most jobs where there's more employees than jobs.

He's been doing it for 8 months now and its the best change he's ever made.

Even if you don't need the licence, get it, make contacts and see what can happen.

13/14 hour days 7 days a week isn't good.

dharm999

InNeedofAdvice wrote: »

I have a question regarding whether an individual requires an SIA (Security Industry Authority) license for a particular job role. I have emailed the SIA but have yet to receive a response.

The scenario:

The person is a full-time in-house employee of an organisation. Their role is to oversee/manage all security functions for that organisation. Part of the role is to manage, direct and supervise several contracted security personnel. In other words - someone employed in-house, is responsible for contractors from a separate company.

Does this individual require an SIA license?

Having read the SIA website, it seems fairly contradictory. On one page, it states:

"If you act as a manager or supervisor of an individual where that individual is required to carry out designated licensable activities for the purposes of or in connection with a contract for the supply of services then you will require a licence even if you are an employee of the customer of the services."

But on the other hand, regarding who needs to be licensed:

"persons who manage or supervise security operatives supplied under contract by a security contractor (but not in-house supervisors of contractors)"


So, on first glance, two completely opposite statements. Perhaps I'm interpreting it the wrong way.

Anyone with knowledge of this able to interpret this better?

Many thanks.

In house staff don't need a licence, it's one of the strange current anomalies. However, if the company decided to outsource the role, then it would need a licence

xapprenticex

Good for him, obviously a grafter but it will be bad for his health if he keeps it up. If he is getting his 8 hours sleep though then maybe he can survive a while, i dont know what his position is like but many security i see are sitting down most of the time so that can help too. If he patrols constantly then yeah, it will take its toll.

deannatrois wrote: »

My ex has gone into security work. He found a rottweiller who was part security trained. Finished the training with the help of a qualified security dog trainer, paid for a couple of training courses for himself and now he earns £10 an hour. Because there are more jobs than licensed security personnel, he has work coming out of his ears.

He was earning £7 an hour, take home of about £250. Last month he earned well over £4k. He worked the hours of course, but its not like most jobs where there's more employees than jobs.

He's been doing it for 8 months now and its the best change he's ever made.

Even if you don't need the licence, get it, make contacts and see what can happen.