Is it wrong to track your engineers if you suspect them of doing what they shouldn’t be?

Following the July issue (where I highlighted the problems of shortage of labour giving the unscrupulous engineer a ticket to lay down his own terms and the boss having to do all the night calls himself), I got another call along similar lines.

Once again it was a small company just getting to the point of reaping the benefits of years of hard work. Their story is even more harrowing that the last one because there were three engineers involved and they have all handed their notice in and gone to work for a rival within a month, leaving the company involved without the means to either complete their order book or fulfil their service contracts.

I have to say at the outset that I have known the proprietors in question for many years. They have always taken time to keep me up to date on how their company is. Although I have no reason to doubt their word and I have always found them straight, honest and decent, I am only getting one side of the story.

For some time now they had been noticing that the work schedules were not being met and there was always a reason for the work not getting done. The boss, being an engineer himself, regularly looked in at the systems being installed and could not understand why the work was not done faster. More than once he had turned up and found that the total day’s work output he could have done in half the time.

Tell them what they want to hear
Once again, because of the shortage of alternative labour and the fact that – although very slow – the quality of work was good, it was deemed better to say little and keep a happy team. Bonus schemes were tried, other forms of cash incentive were tried, all to no avail.

Work output was getting slower and slower. Finally there came a time when something had to be done and after a great deal of discussion between the owners it was decided to put trackers on the vans.

There are many advantages to the fitting of tracking devices, least of all keeping track of the workers. There is the obvious advantage of knowing just where the van is if it gets stolen. There is a chance to get the van back, catch the thieves and not lose the tools and stock in the process. There is also the very distinct advantage of being able to put your hands on the nearest engineer to respond to an emergency call, or to be able to inform the engineers of any accidents on the road in front of them (keep listening to Radio 2 for half hourly updates) … or to just reschedule the workload halfway through the day to make things run smoother. So, in this case, the decision to fit trackers was taken for a variety of reasons and not just to keep track of the workers. It takes very little work to find out just what an engineer has been up to without going to the expense of fitting trackers. Having said that, it was not done behind the backs of the engineers. They were told about the fitting up front including all the reasons why they were being fitted.

Within the month all three engineers had handed in their notices and had gone to work for the rival company. They all stated the reason for leaving was the fitting of the trackers. Oddly enough, when reports were obtained of the whereabouts of the vans they were spending periods of time during the working day at places where they were not booked to be and one of the vans had spent a lot of time parked outside the rival's office.

The times and locations didn't add up so eventually the partners arrived at the question – were they setting off to do a day's work for the company and then skipping off and either doing work for themselves or for someone else? Either way, one thing was certain, the tracker was going to bring the whole lot out into the open … So did they jump ship before the excretion hit the fan?

Is this kind of thing more widespread that I thought? Are there lots of lads out there ripping off the bosses? I know that if you want cheap bits of kit for cash then there’s always a lad somewhere that will sell kit out of the back of a van at half the normal price, but this goes on in all trades and, provided it doesn't get out of hand, it is often cheaper for the boss to turn a blind eye. Perhaps we don't agree with it but we have to be realistic and a good boss will know when to let go and when to drop like a ton of bricks.

One of the problems is that the workers rarely appreciate the problems of the boss, and in a lot of cases the bosses don't always see the problems of the worker. Those of you who are as old as I am will remember in the fifties and early sixties annual news bulletins that announced to the world how many millions the coal board had lost this year or how many millions the railways had lost that year ... So what did the workers do? Go on strike for more money or shorter hours, or both.

I seem to remember the car workers on strike every other week and they were producing cars that were very basic, often broke down and went rusty in two years. Before long the Japanese had wiped the floor with us and it took decades before we realised what we were doing. My own Yorkshire miners were a classic example, strike after strike, higher pay, shorter hours and finally, no pits.

I have sympathy in some ways, they did a dirty and dangerous job and deserved every penny they got. However, there is only so much you can charge for a ton of coal before gas, oil and electric become cheaper and you have priced yourself out of the market.

There is a strong parallel here with our industry. There is only so much you can charge for a system therefore only so much you can pay the worker. If the workers continue to rip off the boss then who do you blame when the company goes belly upwards and you are out of work?

Would it not be a better idea to go to the boss with suggestions on how to improve efficiency and then ask for a percentage of the gain? I have heard with my own ears disgruntled lads complaining to their co-workers about every mortal thing. They spread ill will and unrest and then wonder why relations have broken down with the boss.

I have to say however that I believe these lads to be in a minority, the vast majority of lads I meet in my day to day rounds are fair, hard working and enjoy doing a good job. It is, as usual, the few that create unrest for the many.

Are there lots of lads out there ripping off their bosses? ... Should you fit trackers on the vans?

I am the last one to want to see us return to the bad old days where the boss ruled with his fists, drove his workers to an early grave and paid them a pittance. But the distinct shortage of competent workers is a headache for every company in the country and in a lot more trades besides ours and gives the unscrupulous few a lever to make life difficult for the boss.

You have to admit though, the story just told raises a lot of questions.

Do we fit trackers? Are they proof that engineers are not trusted by the boss? Is it an infringement of civil liberties? Have the workers something to hide?

The fitting of trackers to vans should be done to increase security and to aid the company to run its business better and more effectively, not to keep track of the workers. You should be able to trust them and if they need to do the occasional detour to go to the doctors, post office or to pick up or drop off the occasional item for the family then we should be able to trust them to do so without losing too much time on the job.

The engineer that abuses this privilege is, in effect, robbing his boss. If they all do it they are effectively putting their own jobs on the line and it shows a remarkable level of ignorance and stupid-ity. In this case the partners have had enough and are seriously thinking of selling up and getting out and I can't say I blame them. I have tried to persuade them not to because the industry needs people with their expertise and competence.

Our industry needs good fair-minded bosses, it needs good competent engineers and above all it needs both sides to work together in harmony. On the other hand, I still believe there is a way forward and a solution in the idea of subcontractors working for themselves. It all boils down to one principle – if you are self employed then you get paid your true worth – good, bad or indifferent.

Standards make it plain and clear
Now we come to what could be called "the sting in the tale". If we have a look in BS7858 (the security screening standard) the very first statement we come to after the blah about scope and definitions says – and I quote it in full –

“3 General – 3:1 The organisation should not employ individuals whose career or history indicates that they would be unlikely to resist the opportunities for illicit personal gain, or the possibilities of being compromised, or the opportunities for creating any other breach of security, which such employment might offer.”

So there we have it in black and white, any engineer that does illicit work, for himself or others, or sells things from the back of a van or any other of a wide variety of misdemeanours then they have effectively made themselves unemployable in the security industry.

Worse that this – any company found to be knowingly employing people of this calibre are effectively putting their companies out of the scope of the inspectorates and therefore unacceptable for insurance work or police response, and for a lot of companies this could be a disastrous loss of work. Moreover, if it ever got into the press, then their reputation is shot; all of us have a duty and a responsibility to uphold the integrity of the industry.

To be more realistic it is the same as any other crime – you have to be caught and that is not easy in our industry. In this case the boss of the aggrieved company could contact the boss of the new company and complain. If it was an inspectorate company he could lodge a complaint with the inspectorate concerned, but, before he does he must ensure he has concrete evidence or he in turn could be facing a charge of defamation of character. Next, if the workers have moved to an inspectorate-recognised company what does he say when the new company asks for a screening confirmation and a reference?

If he holds the right evidence and he was bloody-minded enough he could put the errant engineers out of work for the next ten years.

Ask yourself this - is it worth the risk?

* Mike Lynskey is a former proprietor and independent inspector of alarm systems. He is now network manager with the NSI. The personal views expressed should not be taken as the opinions of the NSI. Email Mike on: mike.lynskey@virgin.net