International Journal on Criminology Volume 5, Number 2, Winter 2017/2018 | Page 11

International Journal on Criminology
economic pressure and potential breaches of social legislation are issues in internal
security and contract security.
We should focus now on the French case and understand more concretely
how customers are taken into account within the strategic framework of the reform
of private security regulation.
3. “CONTRACT SECURITY” MEANS “CLIENTS AND CUSTOMERS.”
The client is the essential feature of contractual private security. The existence
of the client and the problems it creates are among the justifications
for reforming private security regulation. We should recall that one of the
first conferences organized jointly by USP and SNES in 2008 took buyers as one of
its main themes, most significantly through a survey of clients and customers that
found a “lack of objective qualitative criteria to evaluate service quality.” Clients
and service providers both wished to establish “common standards aiming to improve
the service quality and customer-provider relationships.” 10
We should also recall the “SNCF/Vigimark” case from the same year, which
involved a provider’s use of undocumented dog handlers within the complex situation
of a recovering market. 11 Vigimark’s president, who was also the head of one
of the two professional organizations for human surveillance, reminded the president
of the SNCF of his responsibilities in an open letter titled “The SNCF Killed
Me!”: “You intended—without admitting, though it was all too clear to those in the
know—to exonerate yourself from the full and entire joint responsibility as a buyer
and a client by offering the media a scapegoat: your supplier at the time, Vigimark
Surveillance.” 12
This case illustrates, in a rather climactic way, the difficulties faced by the
sector, which involves suppliers, customers, and regulators alike:
• The presence of irregular employment situations;
• Working conditions which hamper the quality of services;
• Breakdowns in relationships between service providers and customers;
• Insufficiently vigilant customers. 13
10 USP and SNES. April 21, 2008. “La sécurité privée mène l’enquête. L’USP et le SNES dévoilent
les résultats d’une enquête menée auprès des prestataires et clients de sécurité privée.” http://
www.dpsa-securite.fr/docs/ETUDE_04-2008_CP-USP-SNES.pdf (accessed April 2, 2017).
11 De Boisfleury, S. July 30, 2009. “Affaire des maîtres-chiens clandestins: Vigimark dénonce la
SNCF.” Décision-Achats.fr. http://www.decision-achats.fr/thematique/decideurs-achats-1035/
Breves/Affaire-des-maitres-chiens-clandestins-Vigimark-denonce-la-SNCF-30189.htm (accessed
April 2, 2017).
12 Quoted in De Boisfleury. “Affaire des maîtres-chiens clandestins.”
13 Following this case, the SNCF carried out an internal audit of the working conditions of the employees
of their private security providers on their sites and led a drive to inspect agents’ prefectoral
authorizations.
6