Please don't slag off companies - heres why

Im gonna jump in here and risk getting my knuckles rapped!!

I agree absolutely with VICTORMACE that it is in the wording. Having said that.......one persons experience may well have been negative or unsatisfactory but that does not necessarily mean that the Company/Individual being critiqued is guilty of anything that warrants a public slating....and then... as another poster points out.... there are the slander and character assasination types who take great pleasure in stirring things up whether just for 'fun' or whether with some devious motive in mind.

It is a very difficult area to tread and as VICTORMACE puts it, the wording is all important and the wording is very difficult.

An area best avoided if possible in my opinion unless there are strong reasons and genuine motives involved such as the recent 'outing' of a company based in France shamelesly ripping people off!!!

Well worded critique is one thing......if it allows for the other party to respond.....attacking openly without just cause is another thing entirely.

morrigan
 
morrigan said:
Well worded critique is one thing......if it allows for the other party to respond.....attacking openly without just cause is another thing entirely.

morrigan
Click to expand...
Agreed! The problem is though, what often starts as a well worded critique does seem to often rapidly descend into out and out insults...

Even in the extreme case of our 'french farce' I would argue that although the con should have been brought to the forums atttention it should never have descended to the level that it did...

It doesn't appear professional to new arrivals..
 
The overall concern with this - although I must stress that I can see the reasoning behind it; it the wonderful and happy picture of the CP industry its going to paint by omission of identifying the cowboys.

People come here for advice, if all they get is a list of recommendations; which are going to include companies which are in fact a bag of the brown what good is it? Especially when courses actively encourage their students to come on here and recommend the course to everyone else.

How do those students know they've had a good course? I doubt any will have a standard by which to compare.

Sticky situation huh.
 
Very true Scab........... although you might consider that the omission of some companies in response to questions about quality and level of training could be seen as an indictment of sorts.

Speaking personally...... i would welcome feedback from students in an open forum..... in my belief we can always improve and how a company reacts to criticism is also a mark of its integrity.

morrigan
 
This is pretty much the point I am making. If you ban the free speech of forum members to talk about positive and negative experiences then this forum is not a true representation of the industry and wont help the new people...
 
It is all about how you word a criticism. If you say "Be aware that for that job you will have to work outside, regardless of weather conditions for 12 hours per day and the pay is £120 per day." That is simply stating a fact and people can make their own minds up as to whether the job is for them. If on the other hand you say "That job is terrible, no-one should have to put up with those conditions, the pay is poor, they expect you to work long shifts whatever the weather. They sack anyone that won't do it...." Then that is slagging!

I have actually had people say to me "Don't work for that company, stay clear, wouldn't touch them with a barge pole." Then when I ask why, they say "Oh, I'm not going to say, its unprofessional to badmouth companies. Just trust me on this, don't work for them." As far as I'm concerned its more unprofessional to badmouth a company and not give reasons than to simply say what the problem is with them.

Unfortunately there are companies in the security industry (perhaps more so in DS and SG sectors) that are complete cowboys and there is no-one regulating them. The SIA's remit is only to regulate individuals, they can not stop a company from operating. They can prosecute directors for not having an SIA license but its a very long process that means companies can run for many many months before anyone is brought to court. There are several companies that have set-up, got contracts and then not paid sub-contractors or employees. One company in this area run, by a convicted criminal, went through 4 name changes in one year, keep getting contracts and staying one head of employees he owed money to and the authorities. (I beleive he's now in Marbeya)
The industry does need some way of at least warning people about the cowboys, but I don't know how that can be done.
 
restraint

I urge all using this forum to practice personal restraint. As I said in an earlier post, if we slag off companies (justifiably or otherwise) it will put off good employers from advertising through the forum. Just because you feel let down and hurt personally doesnt mean that others may not excell with that same company.
As far as training companies are concerned, of course they ask students to 'blog' their courses, all providers want students who have enjoyed and improved as a result of their courses to let others know their experiences and thats how good providers gain a reputation in the industry. I have done 4 courses with 3 providers in the last year, yet I only wrote blogs and recommends on 2 of them. WHY?....... because the third provider was shite!!!! I dont name them and I dont recommend them BUT neither do I openly slag them off and name them.......... its called personal restraint and I think it means I am growing up as an individual and just as importantly..... an operator.

Silent :p
 
Good way of looking at it silent, but if course provider Bag-o-brown is running courses and saying to the students to get on here and tell everyone how brilliant it was, some of those students are going to naively do that.

Your omission may speak volumes, but these guys are filling that gap or the Bag-o-brown guy. End result is the same, no truth, no critisism, everyone gets good spoken of them and none of the chaff stands out.

The point made earlier about the chaff not getting involved with the nitty-gritty threads is extremely good; but only informative if everyone coming to look knows who everyone is and is not; and in fact understands the reasons some companies are not getting involved in certain threads.

Its too subjective.

We do need free speech, certainly not to the extent of slander; but something. How does it sit with stating "In my opinion only..." when presenting negative feedback about a course or even the standard of operators they are producing?
 
Hello All.

I appreciate members adding posts containing advice but as a forum, we have to be careful about the content of threads, even though we do not write them.

I cannot get involved with disputes between companies and their students or disputes between companies or allow potentially libellous comments.

Think of it this way, I've no way of knowing for certain if you represent a rival company, a disgrunteld ex employee, if its the truth etc...

The posts on this forum are public available, it is not private.

We do have a private message feature which allows you to send a private message to other members which will not be available to the public. What is Private Messaging?

I hope you understand, as per standard agreements page when you register,

quote_l.jpg
Quote:
By agreeing to these rules, you warrant that you will not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, sexually-oriented, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws.
The owners of [wiki=1582]Close Protection World[/wiki] reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any thread for any reason.

_________________
Mally

REMINDER ESPECIALLY FOR NEW MEMBERS:

With all due respect and personal opinions aside, naming and shaming is not permitted in the UK without going through the correct procedures.

Take in regards the following:
Defamation Act 1952, in regards to libel and slander:
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatutes/Acts/ukpga/1952/cukpga_19520066_en_1
By posting name and phone numbers you're not being constructive, and actually putting the site and yourself in a position of potentially being prosecuted.

I recommend you respect this legislation and will adhere to site rules and regulations; otherwise the owners of the site and the moderators might have to consider other methods to prevent potential damages to the site.
 
Last edited:
Hi Sunny,

I see your point and understand your view, but i also feel that part of the idea of the forum was for us to warn each other about scam whithin the industry.

Ok some people migth not choose the word carefully of belong to the pc brigade, but how mentioning a company or an individual by name will it be considered defamation?

All the best.
 
yoda said:
Hi Sunny,

I see your point and understand your view, but i also feel that part of the idea of the forum was for us to warn each other about scam whithin the industry.

Ok some people migth not choose the word carefully of belong to the pc brigade, but how mentioning a company or an individual by name will it be considered defamation?

All the best.
Click to expand...


It's not my point of view, was merely copying an earlier post and stating fact and link to legislation in regards libel and slander.

I do however believe we should warn eachother, but appropriately, contained anger, and using proper methodlogies.

I think in our industry more than most we should be aware of being very careful in many aspects. So the possiblity of a courtcase for libel slander will never be the way ahead.

I very well remember RB.
You know as well as I do, that the matter was dealt with accurately.
E.g. report, post for more people to liaise behind closed doors.

If I remember correctly (correct me if I'm wrong) it was dealt with as followed:

* A post requesting if anyone knew this person/company
* Anyone who did, or came across to contact poster of the topic via PM
* Poster collected data and got a sollicitor
* Data past on to fraud team in the MET
* People that got ripped off made their statements
* Data past from MET to local police force
* Courtcase against person mentionned in the first */post
* Person/company publicly appologizing
* Case to court
* Person got back to his old fraudulent behaviour

(During all this there was a moderator posting and keeping members up to date on going-ons, and all other posts on the subject were closed, or nipped in the bud)

Maybe not the wished for outcome, but it was dealt with according law, and hence no blemish on anyone but the person committing the fraud.
 
Hi Sunny,

Totaly agree with what you mentioned above.

Also it took many people in many forums whithin the industry to gather the info.

As human nature there will be some that will not be happy with the outcome. Wich you can also understand.

All the best.
 
Mally,

Agreed, the forum should be utilized for networking and sharing industry knowledge and expertise and promoting professionalism. Informative, thought provoking and unbiased posts should be welcomed by all.

Regards,

Must4rd
 
Descresion is the better part of valour

hippy said:
I thought it was Christopher 'Kit' Marlowe who wrote that first?
Click to expand...

The better part of valor is discretion. Henry IV, Part One, V, iv, 119. (Spoken by Falstaff, whose discretion might also be termed cowardice) From "A Dictionary of Quotations from Shakespeare," )

Christopher 'Kit' Marlowe: Strange Devices of the Sun and Moon homosexual protagonist - Kit Marlowe, and other mentions the better part of valour; historical fantasy, set in Shakesperean times.

Hope that clears it up.:D
 
Slating an ex employer achieves nothing in the end and leave the slater open to comebacks. As said several times in this post, this is a small world and everyone knows someone who known someone and it gets back. What gets posted is one side of a story and without the otherside of that story no conclusion can be truely made. Some members have genuine grievences but we have no way of sorting the wheat from the chaf. Public slattings are a good way to get a rep as a winger and no one likes one of those. My simpathies to those with genuine issues but this is not the place to air them.

Just my humble opinion

Selous
 
VICTORMACE said:
Well if you have had a bad experience with a company, constructive criticism is always good and after all your experience with the company is just that, your personal experience. Criticism can always be worded in a way that no one can take offence, and you can still get your point across. No point in slagging of a company who may have contacts with other security companies which could lose you work in the long run.
Click to expand...
This is right because the only way of protecting the interests of people starting out in this industry is to for worn others of unscrupulous activities of companies that are only too happy to rip you off.Unfortunately someone has to be in the first place but constructive critisism of a company or individual if warranted and not defamatery or libelous should be ok surely .Or maybe I misunderstand the reasons of the forum being there for help and advice.You guys who have the knowledge ,please don't lose sight of the fact that we all have to start some where .Thanks
 
Just an idea, how about using the search feature at the top, Annies favorite, and if no joy, ask about coy on forum, positives get posted, so if no replys, or only pm sent replys, or just PMs come in, alarm bells ring, then hopfuly get your answer.

I made this clasic mistake when new, I asked Mods to remove threads on the 2 forums, not malicious ones, just me being thick and going about it the wrong way, but as I'm not in CP, it just made myself look a bit think, lesson learned.

In normal jobs interveiws, golden rule is you don't bitch about previous employers
 
The problem with most of the criticism from disgruntled, former employees, is that its usually just sour grapes due to their own short comings and not anything constructive or substantial.
 
farangbootneck said:
The problem with most of the criticism from disgruntled, former employees, is that its usually just sour grapes due to their own short comings and not anything constructive or substantial.
Click to expand...

Not always.

You have companies that use such tactics as: Have you sign a contract. Then when you are down in the sand - " Oh, good to see you, you need to sign your NEW contract ". New contract could include minor changes such as: 50% pay cut, insurance is gone... etc. etc.:rolleyes:

Then it is the normal from the Site Manager : " Chiken or beef ", " Window or aisle":rolleyes:

I think others have the right to know about companies like this.
It is not about slating anybody, just telling a fact that can be verified by the company itself, it is something they can't deny. Just ask the company, did this happen or not?
There would be a bunch of guys who could show a copy of their original contract, and the "NEW" contract.

I know, many guys don't like to talk anything about their past company down in the sand in the fear that they would be " Shitlisted " ( no other company would touch them ), then there are some of us that are not looking for any work at all. We are satisfied with our current work and have no intentions to leave. So, I don't give a shit about my previous employer in the sand.
 
Back
Top