One of the costliest expenses for security contractors is 'churn'. We can perceive the financial haemorrages of recruitment if we include interviewers' travel and time, televetting, full screening, assignment coaching, human resource communications, advertising and other expenses. Readers could easily make additions. Successful contractors are very sensitive about most costs, and finance directors must be made of carbon steal, but strangely, where an employee might need lance, armour and horse to retrieve expenses, many finance dragons will throw money into the abyss over avoidable 'churn'. So this article is dedicated to bandages and field dressings for 'recruitment cost' injuries. Here are just a few examples (out of scores) of how to lose good employees needlessly.

A contractor decided that once its operatives had booked on, this was adequate information for invoicing clients and paying wages, etc, so reduced costs by not requiring employees to 'book off'. Incidents involving guards leaving site before shift-end increased with subsequent suspensions and dismissals. One retail client decided to close some stores one hour earlier, yet one guarding team continued booking on at the original time which meant that they got paid (and the client invoiced) for not being present. This undiscovered situation continued for months. Apart from lost client trust, invoice clawbacks and reductions in safety, churn is massively increased if there are such lax systems in place, which positively guide employees into temptation. So to pay out for the cost of booking off all operatives would be more economic, safe and secure.

Another contractor relaxed the rule about its operatives booking on from specified on-site telephone numbers, accepting calls from any phones. Incidents where operatives booked on from their beds and went in late (or not at all) increased alarmingly, with subsequent recruitment costs and other damage.

A New Manager wanted to show his authority over the district, and since he had just attended a course which focused upon best practice, he applied this science with a firm hand. Guards that had worked at stores for years found themselves rostered to alternative sites. Some accepted new sites, but several gave notice and left. The manager shrugged off the losses with, 'new broom sweeping clean', because the cost of recruitment was not included in calculations to measure his success. To include all costs in a region's profit calculation can make a big difference to manager's decisions.

A contract SD was in doubt about the ownership of a child's coat that she had seen a woman remove from a display and put on a small boy because the woman might have removed the child's own coat earlier and hung it up before trying out the store's items. As woman and child left, the SD pointed them out to the manager and explained what she had seen. The manager declared that the coat was a 'new-line' received only that morning which could not possibly belong to the boy. He called the Police, and they were soon stopped and searched; the coat did belong to the very upset mother's child. A solicitor's letter caused fury at the retailer's head office, so the store manager claimed that he had only acted on the contract SD's report 'of a theft'. The blameless SD was taken out of that client's stores as a scapegoat. It took months, several attempts and many interview hours to find a suitable replacement at an enhanced rate. It's best to train SDs to only report certainties to clients (and Police), or management could take charge, using the store detective as sin-eater if all goes wrong .

A contract retail guard became worried about a new manager who did not seem to follow normal procedures, refusing to be present at detentions, and releasing thieves without even identifying them. He mentioned this to the contractor's manager who requested a written report and then simply sent it to retailer's head of security, who passed it to the Marketing Manager who handed it to the district manager, who took it to the store and chucked it onto the new manager's desk, asking 'what's this all about then?' He accepted the manager's explanation and forgot about the whole incident. Complaints about the guard started almost immediately, and soon the contractor decided that his conduct and standards had slipped beyond recovery. There was no other work in that region. Contractor's should think carefully before they pass operative's reports out of their own company. In this case, the contractor's manager could have visited the store, met with the new store manager and discussed the handling of theft incidents. If the new manager had any strange ideas, then this would have been discovered without the guard being involved. It was very difficult to replace the guard in that region, and an expensive 'out of Tribunal' settlement was agreed for the lost guard through arbitration, in addition to recruitment costs.

These 'lost employees' situations could continue on to fill a full training course, and new contract managers need to be shown a horrendous list of mistakes which can throw away the security contractor's biggest asset, or those finance dragons will lose all their fire.