odyssey06 wrote: » You weren't notified of this change, so is there anything to be said for all staff together need to stop complying with it and just leave the office? Or you can only leave when buzzed out?
Richard Hillman wrote: » Female staff members feel extremely uncomfortable with an all male security team asking them to remove clothing.
Pronto63 wrote: » If all staff refuse to open jackets etc and just stand there have you been kidnapped/detained against your will? Have you clocked out? Everyone could run up an hour or two overtime by not opening your jackets!
Thoie wrote: » As a generally sensitive female when it comes to this kind of thing, even I wouldn't get my knickers in a twist about being asked to take off my jacket. The overall situation is a bit ****. Is there an recent employee handbook that talks about searches? http://www.workplacerelations.ie/ have an enquiry form that you could start with to see if there are any guidelines around personal searches.
jmreire wrote: » If this is a new requirement, and it come's from the management, I'd presume that it's in response to an increase in theft ?
Richard Hillman wrote: » I spoke to somebody at Mandate. They said they tried to introduce this at other outlets but it was resisted. They had to reintroduce the old random search system.
Deleted User wrote: » It's obviously in response to theft. Blame the thieves not the management or security.
Strumms wrote: » Blame the management... That their hiring procedures and checks are not robust preventing thieves being hired.. That their security is not adequate enough that instead of covert surveillance and other techniques identifying the ACTUAL culprit they are demanding to search all employees on leaving the building... by doing so they are casting suspicion on each and every victim of the search.. unsatisfactory, Personally I’d walk out , refusing to be searched and see what happens...if they lay a glove on you defend yourself...you don’t need to be working in that environment.
Deleted User wrote: » I worked in retail back in the 90’s. After some stock went missing it was normal procedure for every bag to be searched as we left the store. It was summer time so coats weren’t worn much, but if they were, they were to be removed before bag search. This search was just a brief glance into the bag. Unfortunately, you get chancers in every large organisation. Once the culprit was identified searches were reduced.
Strumms wrote: » All I can say is, if I worked in a company who requested me to empty my pockets via a search or open a bag as I left the building I’d simply refuse. My personal property is contained on my person and in my bag. It’s fûck all of anyone else’s business what I have with me. If they tried to initiate a disciplinary I’d refuse to cooperate. If they attempted to fire me I’d sue them... I’ve worked in retail all be it some years ago and never had that requested of me despite having access to tens of thousands of euros to hundreds of thousands of euros of valuable goods on a daily basis, both in the shop stores and shop floor...there was security and cctv all over the place that seemed to prove adequate and deter as well as verify nothing was going awol..
punisher5112 wrote: » Some places will have it in ones contract and as some things maybe case sensitive they may have to to protect themselves. If theft has increased this is a way to prevent. More CCTV and better protocols are most likely needed.
Strumms wrote: » Just refuse, if you believe your staff are on the nick you need to invest in better background checks as regards two or three verifiable good reference checks.. and as for the act of theft it needs to be witnessed either in person or by CCTV. I’m not going to be working for anyone of such a lazy bastárd unscrupulous nature seeking to check my person or bag routinely on the way out of a job... “ Mr Strumms, before you leave we need to examine your bag and person “ “ ehhh no, I do not consent to that, I’m leaving goodbye “ If at any point your employer would attempt to block your exit as an intimidatory method of you opening up your bag and or person to be checked...without your consent... the first thing is that you call your local Garda station on your mobile and advise that you are being held against your will. After the call film the subsequent interactions on your mobile. This will worry and antagonize. Don’t try and leave. They won’t be thinking clearly, it might be that the security (rarely the brightest anyway) having their back put up against the wall will attempt to get hold of your device...that will escalate to assault, on camera and verifiable. Mention on the arrival of the Gardai that once the footage has been shown to them it will be published on social media and you will seek a solicitor , that WILL get heads rolling...
jmreire wrote: » Strumms..I have worked for company's where checking bag's coats etc were carried out, and I never had a problem with it. One reason was that I was never reduced to stealing, and for me, at any rate, if some one has an objection to being searched then I would have my suspicions about that person. ( bags coats etc. we are not talking strip search's here ) One company I did work for became insolvent and closed. One of the reasons it closed was due to wholesale theft. There were other reasons too of course, but the theft was the straw that broke the camel's back. So go ahead, and insist on your right's. But before you do that, I'd recommend reading the small print in your contract. Be a shame after calling the Police and accusing the security staff of all kinds of wrong doing, that they were within their right's in searching their staff. I have no time for thieves of any kind, big or small, if the store security catch them, well done !!!
Strumms wrote: » If a company closed due to theft then the issue is... Why are they hiring thieves ? What sort of lazy assed hiring process can lead to a situation where people are getting passed checks, into a company and as well as getting in are actively stealing without being found out to the extent that the company are forced to close ? Madness. I’ve worked in companies where a Garda background check was required to be passed before you could start work. I wouldn’t be against this.
jmreire wrote: » The Company I speak about did not close solely because of theft,,but for sure it did not help either. Believe me, thieve's do not advertise their thieving abilities on the CV. They can play along, and get well established, and when they have the place well sussed out,,they start thieving.Nowadays, Guarda checks are common place, I've had them done several times...no problem. But still, you will find Company's that go on CV's and Reference's. And as in the OP case, increased checks on staff leaving the building, because there were theft's being carried out. There is an " acceptable" level of "Shrinkage" in most outlets, simply because it's not worth the hassle to go through it with a fine tooth comb, but when the management do react with increased checks, its a sign that the level of theft has become unacceptable, and action has to be taken. Like I have said earlier....if you have nothing to hide, why the fuss?
Strumms wrote: » I simply would consider that if I was requested or required to be searched that it was because I was personally under suspicion. Having your person and personal belongings searched is invasive and an invasion of your privacy. I wouldn’t accept a job where those sorts of practices were acceptable and commonplace. If I was asked to be searched I’d point blankly refuse, they could carry out whatever action they might choose as a result of this refusal but they’d want to have all ducks in a row, legally, every way. No way in hell am i agreeing to searches of my person or belongings either when accessing or leaving a workplace unless it’s somewhere like an airport where I have worked and acceptable.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wf.vanillicon.com/v2/f054c80ff399c4eba8d719c617220a57.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/6b0748b4741870baaad828fe92174b3c.svg)
