Without question, security personnel who exhibit dishonest behavior discredit the entire profession. Security personnel who are assigned to a facility to protect and ensure that property is not damaged or stolen, but then decide to engage in the theft of that property, have committed the most serious and damaging offense possible. Security and cleaning personnel are considered prime suspects in any theft investigation because of their opportunity to have access to various areas of a facility.

Security officers are required to record the actual hours worked in many different ways. Some officers will punch-in using a time clock. Others will simply write their hours in a log or telephone a central office to record their call-on and -off times. No matter what system is used to record the time worked, security personnel are often afforded the opportunity to misrepresent their actual hours worked. Security officers who walk off duty at a facility are not only leaving the facility unprotected, they are leaving their employer possibly liable for any loss or damage that occurs while the facility is left unprotected. In addition, if the security officer is a contract employee, his employer may unintentionally be cheating the client for hours worked. Again, eventually the truth will come to the surface and the security officer who is leaving his or her post will be identified. Usually, a situation of this type is extremely embarrassing to all parties.

Because of boredom, unethical security officers will often decide to use a computer, take a “spin” on a forklift, take a drive in a company vehicle, or simply perform some “knucklehead action” that damages or destroys property. Organizations with effective inventory control procedures will normally discover a loss or theft within a short period of time. Many security companies have checks and balances to ensure that a security officer cannot misrepresent his or her time, thereby cheating the employer or client.

Falsification of records is an act of omission and may be considered to be an act of negligence. A security officer who is tired from having worked 12 straight hours and skips a patrol should truthfully state why the patrol was missed rather than lying that the patrol was made. Once a person begins to lie or deceive someone on small things, it is only a matter of time until the dishonesty involves something of significance. Just because shift activities are identical on most days, a security officer cannot justify completing his log in advance. Damage to property can often be repaired or replaced no matter how costly. Damage to the reputation of the security officer, security department, or contract providing company will often be damaged beyond repair.

As with every other code of conduct violation, telephone misuse or abuse is discussed with security officers before their first day of work. Everyone knows that a security officer will occasionally need to use the telephone for legitimate reasons, and few would question this moderate use. However, because telephone calls are logged by most organizations—including the date and time of the call, whether the call was incoming or outgoing, telephone number called, length of the conversation, and cost of the call—it is very easy to determine if a security officer is abusing telephone privileges. If the security officer decides to make a long-distance call or call a 1-900 number, not only is communication to the protected facility often impossible, an expense is being incurred for the phone call. Additionally, the security officer is being paid to perform his or her job, not to talk on the phone! Eventually, the facts will become clear as to who was working on a particular date and time and who in all likelihood is responsible for the phone abuse. Because of the fact that most people now own a cell phone and have it with them most of the time, another example of telephone misuse can occur if a security officer is spending an inordinate amount of time using their personal phone.

As with all of the previously discussed rules of conduct, the use of alcohol or drugs while on duty is strictly prohibited. In addition, consumption of alcohol prior to reporting for duty is prohibited. As discussed in Chapter 29, the liver can detoxify only one ounce of alcohol per hour. Therefore, if a security officer consumes two or three beers an hour before the start of their shift, he or she will be considered unfit to work. The security industry attracts a great many individuals who have a variety of emotional problems. Coupled with the low pay associated with most contract security agencies, it is obvious why some people who work in security may suffer from alcohol or drug abuse. Because security positions will often allow a person a good deal of privacy, away from others, persons with an abuse problem can indulge themselves without immediate fear of being detected. However, signs and symptoms will eventually become apparent to coworkers, superiors, or even visitors. Once again, the credibility and reputation of the entire security organization is tarnished when incidents of alcohol and/or drug abuse are discovered.

There is sleeping on duty, and then there is actual sleeping on duty! The first type of sleeping on duty has occurred to just about everyone who has worked in the security field. When a person is in a relaxed position, even if they have good sleep habits, drowsiness may develop. It is at this time a person must take steps to keep from sleeping. Security officers who work two jobs are prime candidates to fall asleep while on duty. Excuses such as, “I’m underpaid, overworked, and nobody will ever know,” are not acceptable. There is nothing wrong when a situation occurs when a security officer is sitting in a chair with discussing a situation occurs as a security officer is sitting in a chair legitimately attempting to perform his or her duties. Before long, your eyelids may become heavy and your head begins to nod; before you know it, you are asleep! Usually, this type of brief sleep is interrupted by the security officer realizing what is occurring; he or she should immediately get up, walk around the desk, splash cold water on his or her face, and stand up for several minutes. Sometimes, the ring of the telephone or, worse yet, someone entering the security office awakens the officer. Although this situation is embarrassing, it will normally not lead to immediate termination after only one offense.

Bribes are defined as anything offered or given to someone in a position of trust to induce him or her to act dishonestly. Security officers who accept money from persons in order for the security officer to “look the other way” are guilty of accepting bribes and should be terminated at once. Attempted bribes of security personnel will often occur if other dishonest employees believe that, in order to commit an act, they must protect themselves from the likelihood of security observing their conduct. Bribes will usually not be offered if the person offering the bribe believes their offer will be refused. Acceptance of a bribe will result in immediate termination of a security officer. Many security executives believe that capital punishment is acceptable for officers who accept bribes.

Security officers who bet with other officers or with employees of a facility are violating the accepted code of conduct for security personnel. Gambling or betting debts can become quite excessive and result in compromises in the overall security of a facility. Borrowing money from employees and/or coworkers is also an unacceptable practice. Borrowed money is often never paid back, which causes resentment and hard feelings. Coworkers and client employees should never be asked to loan money for any reason.

Security officers who attempt to solicit attention from members of the opposite sex may find themselves on the receiving end of a sexual harassment complaint if their advances are unwarranted and not acceptable. Security officers should never attempt to date employees of the facility where they work for obvious reasons. Conflicts of interest can easily develop and compromises in the security operation are possible. Any verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature that can create an intimidating or offensive work environment cannot be tolerated. Any undesirable activity such as sexual, racial, or ethnic jokes; unwelcome sexual advances; or requests for sexual favors in exchange for special treatment cannot be tolerated.