NATIONAL REMUNERATION BOARD - PROPOSED RECOMMENDATIONS REVIEW OF THE SECURITY GUARDS - Ministry of Labour
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
NATIONAL REMUNERATION BOARD
REVIEW OF THE SECURITY GUARDS
(REMUNERATION ORDER)
REGULATIONS
PROPOSED RECOMMENDATIONS
APRIL 2019NRB Recommendations
NATIONAL REMUNERATION BOARD
REVIEW OF SECURITY GUARDS [REMUNERATION ORDER]
REGULATIONS 1986
PROPOSED RECOMMENDATIONS
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 On 23 September 2013, the then Minister of Labour, Industrial Relations and
Employment, acting under Section 91(1) of the Employment Relations Act, referred to
the National Remuneration Board, the Security Guards [Remuneration Order]
Regulations for review. The regulations set out the terms and conditions of employment
of persons employed in the Security Industry and it was last revised in 1998.
1.2 The Board started the review exercise by inviting interested parties to submit written
representations through notices which were published in the Government Gazette of 22
August 2015 and three dailies namely Le Défi Quotidien of 20 August 2015 and
L’Express and Le Mauricien of 21 and 22 August 2015 respectively. Written
submissions were received from (i) Free Democratic Unions Federations (FDUF) (ii)
Employees of Brinks (including ex-employee Mr Roopdev MANINE) (iii) Voice of
Security (anonymous letter) (iv) Confédération des Travailleurs du Secteur Privé
(CTSP) (v) Brink’s Mauritius Ltd (vi) Caudan Security and Property Protection Agency
Co Ltd (vii) the Mauritius Employers’ Federation (renamed Business Mauritius) and
(viii) Avacor Ltd.
1.3 The Board held Public Hearings in 2016 and 2017 and the parties were invited to
depone viva voce to elaborate and support their written representations. During the
proceedings, the Board had the opportunity to put questions to the parties to seek
clarification on certain issues raised in the written submissions. The parties were also
allowed, whilst answering to the Board’s question, to provide additional information
Page | 2NRB Recommendations
which they deemed pertinent to this review exercise. The Board thereafter undertook a
fact gathering exercise: the technical team of the Board conducted an investigation on
some 21 security enterprises, sampled in accordance to their size and to the nature of
their business activities. The employers as well as some 285 employees were
interviewed in relation to the prevailing wages and other terms and conditions of
employment in the sector. Since workers are posted at different sites, the technical team
had to go all around the island to conduct visits in construction sites, hospital, hotels,
retail outlets and shopping malls among others to interview the workers.
2. FACTS PECULIAR TO THE CURRENT SECURITY GUARDS (R.O) REGULATIONS
2.1 The Security Guards (R.O) Regulations first came into being in 1986 and the terms and
conditions of employment contained therein have since been amended thrice. The first
amendment was made on 31 July 1990 in relation to Maternity Benefits and same came
into effect on 1 February 1990. The second amendment (which represented a partial
review of wages and conditions of employment) was made on 12 December 1990 and
was caused to become effective as from 1st October 1990. The third amendment (which
was in relation to a partial review of wages and conditions of employment) was made
on 24 November 1998 and was caused to become effective as from 1st November 1998.
2.2 The 1998 review was quite peculiar in that the prescribed wages were contested by
employers before different judicial bodies including the then Permanent Arbitration
Tribunal (PAT). In December 2003, the PAT made an Award in which it granted a 15%
increase in salary, calculated on the basis of the salary that was being paid to workers
in July 2003 plus all additional remunerations that were granted since July 1998. The
Award however applied to only 4 security companies since they were the applicants in
the dispute before the Tribunal. On 6 August 2004, upon an application made by the
Unions, the Tribunal extended the Award to the whole of the sector. The extension
award took precedence over the Amendment and had the effect of lowering the wages
that were prescribed therein.
2.3 It is worth mentioning that Section 85(1) (c) of the Industrial Relations Act 1973
stipulated that an award was deemed to be binding on all the parties to whom the award
Page | 3NRB Recommendations
applied ‘for such period not exceeding 2 years as the Tribunal may determine’.
Hence, although the award automatically lapsed after two years, the wages applicable
to the sector continued to be as per the Award, inclusive of annual cost of living
compensations up until now. It is however important to point out that the Second
Schedule of the R.O Regulations which contains minimum conditions of employment,
has not been altered in any way by the PAT award and is therefore considered to be still
applicable to all employees of the security sector.
3. THE SECURITY SERVICES SECTOR
3.1 Overview
The private security services sector is a Rs 1,464 million industry, with an estimated
workforce of approximately 5515 persons. It employs people in categories ranging from
Security Guards to Chief Security Officers along with other categories employed under
different job appellations. The core business of most security service firms has always
been ‘manned guarding’ which essentially consists of the provision of security
personnel to (i) guard clients’ premises, (ii) conduct patrol/security checks and (iii)
provide safety to individuals during events. Over the last two decades however, the
security sector has witnessed a diversification in the range of services that are offered
and it now includes cash management and allied security services like electronic
installation, audio and video monitoring among others. In spite of the widespread
influence of technology, manned security guarding remains the predominant area of
activity in this sector.
Presently 43 firms are registered under the Private Security Services Act 2004 (PSSA)
as providers of private security services. They range from small informal firms
employing around a dozen workers to large well-established security companies
employing over two thousand workers. During the last two decades, the sector has
witnessed the closure of some security firms, the emergence of new ones as well as
some mergers and acquisitions of pioneer/existing firms. The current market is
dominated by a few major players on the one end and several small firms on the other,
competing for key users of security and allied services across various sectors of activity
encompassing residential, commercial, and industrial as well as government premises.
Page | 4NRB Recommendations
There is a growing tendency for business entities to invest in and outsource the security
and safety of their people and property. Some companies hire their own security
personnel, whereas others contract out to private security firms or they even work out
a mix of in-house and contracted out security personnel. The key motivation behind the
outsourcing of security services is believed to be the saving of costs i.e. the costs
involved with recruitment, retention, monitoring of work on site as well as wage and
pension related legal obligations.
Private security is driven by economic development and the need to protect life and
property. Discussions with operators in the industry has revealed that security can be
very flourishing and promising business but activity can be very volatile as it largely
depends on the operator’s ability to secure new clients and/or maintain existing ones to
ensure adequate returns for its survival in this highly competitive business environment.
3.2 Evolution /Structure of the Sector
With the influence of modern technology and the advent of sophisticated devices, the
security sector has undergone much improvement. Along with the conventional
‘keeping watch’, welcoming/directing visitors, guiding traffic, checking credentials of
persons and vehicles entering and leaving protected areas, issuing parking tickets,
providing first aid treatment and running fire evacuation drills, private security firms
now provide a large range of services which include cash-in-transit, protection in the
movement of valuables, on-call patrols and surveillance by the use of modern electronic
monitoring equipment such as alarm and CCTV camera systems among others. The
demand for security services has increased over the years but the sector is faced with a
major problem of labour shortage which may be explained by the comparatively longer
hours of work and the health risks associated thereto.
Page | 5NRB Recommendations
3.2.1 GDP of the Private Security Sector
Value Added Growth Rate
1464 11.3 11.3
1600 1323 1384 12 10.4
Value Added (Rs m)
1400 1129.21180.6 9.6
1200 990.8 10
Growth Rate (%)
858.6 7.5
1000 743 8
800 5
6 4.4
600 3.6
400 4
200 2
0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Year
Year
Source: Statistics Mauritius
In 2007, the contribution of the security sector to GDP1 stood at Rs 502 million,
reaching Rs 627 million in 2009. Furthermore, during the past 8 years, its value added
continued an upward trend, from Rs 743 million in 2011 to Rs 1,464 million in 2018,
though at a fluctuating rate ranging from 4.6% to 15.6%. However, its share in GDP
remained stable at 0.2% over the period 2007 to 2010 before picking up slightly in 2011
to remain constant at 0.3% until 2018.
The real growth rate, which is the change in the contribution to GDP from the private
security industry after making necessary adjustments for changes in price level, varied
over the period 2011 to 2018. A downward trend has been observed from 11.3% in
2011 to 3.6% in 2017, with a recovery to 9.6% in 2016. In 2018, real growth rate
rejuvenated to 4.4%.
3.2.2 The Service Providers
Suppliers of the private security services range from informal and unorganized small
firms employing workers on ad-hoc basis to large well-established and well-structured
enterprises employing over two thousand security personnel. The entry of international
player in the local market has led to acquisitions of pioneer/existing firms. For instance,
Brinks which is one of the major players in this sector, was established in 2006 after
the acquisition of two main operators, namely Securicor and High Security and it has
1
Figures for the period 2007 to 2009 are based on results of the Census of Economic Activity 2007, 1993 SNA and NSIC, Revision 2 while
those for the period 2010 to 2016 are based on results of Census of Economic Activity 2013, 2008 SNA and NSIC, Revision 2 conducted by
the Statistics Mauritius. Same explains the fact that the period 2009 to 2010 is non-comparable and figures over the period 2007 to 2009
cannot be correlated with those over the period 2010 to 2016.
Page | 6NRB Recommendations
recently acquired Reliance Security Ltd including the latter’s 80 new sites and 350
additional security guards.
The PSSA requires every security firm to be registered with the Commissioner of
Police. However, it has been brought to the attention of the technical team that there
are several rival firms in the market which compete for clients and succeed in securing
contracts without prior registration with the Commissioner of Police. This encourages
small operators to follow suit and to bid at low costs. Upon winning contract/s, these
small operators resort to cut labour cost (as the sector is labour-intensive) and workers
have to suffer from payment of sub-minimal wages and from the provision of other
terms and conditions of employment which are below the minimum prescribed.
To ensure accuracy in terms of the number of operators and employment in the sector,
data from the Mauritius Police Force [MPF] has been used. Since the coming into force
of the PSSA 2004 on 1 July 2008, 43 firms legally joined the sector over the period
ending December 2018, with the highest number of licences issued being 12 in 2015.
However, during the period under reference, it should be noted that 4 firms also ceased
business, the latest closure dating back to February 2016.
Closures Date of Expiry and not renewed
Bern Sty Ltd March 2010
SOS Guard Ltd December 2014
Ireko Sty Ltd December 2010
Swift Security Guard Ltd February 2016
Source: Mauritius Police Force
Nevertheless, according to the information gathered from the MPF, in 2017, 3 firms
entered the market followed by 4 new entrants licensed in 2018 to operate as private
security service providers. Such low rate of business closure and the increasing number
of licences issued are indicative of the increasing demand for such services and high
prospects in this sector of activity.
Page | 7NRB Recommendations
3.2.3 Employment
According to the MPF, there are therefore 43 operators presently licensed by the
Commissioner of Police to operate as private security service providers, employing
around 5,515 registered guards. The available figures reveal that 21 more female
employees were offered employment opportunities since 2017, although female
participation remains relatively lower at 829 compared to 4686 male workers,
confirming the expected male predominance in the sector with a current ratio of 5.7:1.
Registered Security Guards
2018 5515
2017 6918
2016 6154
Year
2015 5056
2014 5513
2013 2947
0 2000 4000 6000 8000
Number of Registered Security Guards
Overall, employment more than doubled between 2947 in 2013 to 6918 in 2017, with
a loss of 457 jobs in 2015 counterfeited by 1098 additional guards registered in the
following year. However, 2018 has witnessed a fall of around 20% with the MPF
reporting 5515 security guards according to their records. High labour turnover coupled
with exceptionally long working hours in this sector acts as a deterrent and may be
presumed to be the underlying cause.
3. FIELD INVESTIGATION AND OBSERVATIONS
As mentioned above, in the context of the review of the security sector, the technical
team of the Board conducted a field investigation on a sample of 21 security companies,
stratified by their size and the nature of their business activities. The fact gathering
exercise was done by way of survey questionnaires which were designed for both
Page | 8NRB Recommendations
employers and employees and interviews were held with the 21 employers along with
some 285 employees working in the sector. The interviews conducted by officers of
the Board gave both the employers and the employees an opportunity to address their
views and concerns on the terms and conditions of employment in general and on the
challenges facing the security business. The field investigation equally helped the
Board gauge the prevailing situation in the security sector bearing in mind of the
representations that were made before it during Public Hearings.
3.1 Retention of Labour /Labour Shortage
It has been noted that operators have to face a severe problem of labour retention. The
nature of the work in this sector is very demanding and workers have to perform long
hours both during the day and at night. The physical exhaustion involved with such
work along with factors such as lack of social and family life, appear to be the main
reason why workers do not remain in their jobs. It has also been observed that young
people who join the sector, generally do so because they are in quest of employment
and once recruited, they look for better employment opportunities and they tend to leave
the job as soon as they get better offers elsewhere. This phenomenon also explain the
high rate of labour turnover which is prevalent in this sector.
3.2 Unfair competition
From the investigation conducted, the Board has also noted that security seems to be a
flourishing and promising business but activity in the sector is very volatile as it largely
depends on the operator’s ability to secure clients and/or maintain existing ones. The
Board has also noted that there is a lack of certainty in business continuity as projects
are awarded based on bids and tenders. Discussions held with service providers during
the field investigation have revealed that there are certain operators who do not comply
with the laws and regulations which are in place. As such they incur lower costs and
they succeed in acquiring new contracts. Small operators, as compared to bigger ones,
generally tend to fall in this category. Terms and conditions of employment which are
applied and which are below the prescribed minimum give an unfair competitive
advantage to non-compliant operators over compliant ones. It also affects workers as
they are constrained to work long and ‘odd’ hours and are provided with wages and
other conditions of employment which do not meet the statutory minimum. It was
Page | 9NRB Recommendations
observed during the site visits that many employees were above the age of 60 years and
same due to costs advantages associated with travelling as well as non-payment of
NPS/NPF contributions.
3.3 Direct competition of in-house watchperson/security personnel
One key issue which was raised during public hearings and which does greatly impact on
the Security Services Industry is the existence of in-house watchpersons alongside the
private security service companies personnel. During the field investigation, the technical
team of the Board came across many employers who complained about the discrimination
which exists between security guards and watchpersons/in-house security personnel.
According to the employers, a watchperson/in-house security personnel literally performs
guarding duties same as a security guard but is not amenable under the PSSA and the
employer does not have to pay for any compliance cost.
On the other hand, security guards employed by the security companies have to abide by
the requirements of the PSSA and as such they have to be: (i) registered with the
Commissioner of Police, (ii) medically fit, (iii) be of a clean record and (iv) sufficiently
qualified and trained. Hence, private security companies engaged in manned guarding tend
to incur high cost in terms of training, licensing and other legal requirements and they
have to, at the same time, compete with in-house watchpersons/security personnel who no
such compliance costs are involved at all.
The employers complained that the same amounts to direct and unfair competition in the
private security services industry. They have therefore argued that the law under the PSSA
should be made applicable to in-house watchpersons/security personnel too. The
employers have also stated that they have to face a lot of difficulties in the recruitment of
workers because they have to select only those who are of a clean record. They said that
though it is a difficult process, they consider it important, not only because it is a
requirement under the PSSA but also because the nature of the work performed in the
sector requires people who are trustworthy and reliable. The employers have, in the same
breath, expressed concerns over the fact that there an in-house watchperson/security
personnel is not legally required to be of a clean record and same represents security risks
to the service users. The employers stated that this is another reason why in-house
watchpersons should be regulated in the same way as security guards
Page | 10NRB Recommendations
3.4 Enforcement of R.O Regulations
The Board observes from its survey that the minimum terms and conditions of
employment as prescribed in the current R.O Regulations are not being complied with
by several operators in this sector. Further, the lapse of the PAT Award appears to have
created a certain confusion with regards to the minimum terms and conditions of
employment applicable to the security sector and certain operators have deliberately
taken advantage of same. From the investigation conducted, it has been observed that
payslips are not issued by all the firms and from those who issue, the payslips do not
contain the details as stipulated. Many employees also seem to be unaware of their
employment contract (determinate or indeterminate); some having never signed any
contract with the employer but still in employment with the latter. It has also been noted
that some employers do not provide adequate uniforms and shoes to their employees.
Investigation in the sector has also revealed that in many cases, travelling expenses are
either included in the basic wage or ‘salary package’ and NPS contribution are made
not in conformity with the legal requirements. As matter stands, the Board deems it
appropriate to make a humble request to the enforcement division of the Ministry to
closely monitor this sector so as to ensure that the R.O Regulations are strictly complied
with.
3.5 Non Compliance with PSSA
An analysis of the data gathered during the survey has revealed that out of 245 workers
who were interviewed and who were supposed to possess a security guard licence under
the PSSA, 2.4% did not possess any licence while 14.9% informed the officers that
their licence was under process. It is interesting to note that from those who claimed
that their licences were under process, 61% had a maximum of 3 months’ experience
and 29% had more than 3 months but less than 1 year of service with the same employer.
During the field investigation, some operators complained that the time taken in the
processing of applications is too long and that all the facilities are not systematically
verified before operating licences are issued. The Board has noted certain discrepancies
in the registration of workers as security guards. It appears that in certain cases no
importance is given to the physical and medical fitness of workers since, during the
field investigation, officers of the Board have spotted security guards with physical
disabilities working on sites belonging to government departments.
Page | 11NRB Recommendations
3.6 Medical Check up
The nature of the work in the security services sector requires employees to be
physically and medically fit and it is precisely for that purpose that the current R.O
Regulations provides that every employer shall, at his own expense, cause every worker
to undergo a complete medical check-up once every 6 months. It has, however, been
found from the interviews conducted that medical check-ups are done on a yearly basis
and not every 6 months, as prescribed. It has further been observed that the cost of
medical check-ups are borne by the employees in many cases. It also appears from the
investigation that in certain enterprises where company doctors are employed, medical
certificates are issued for the purpose of renewal of the security guard licence and same
without a proper medical check-up being carried out.
3.7 Trade union membership and Collective bargaining
It has been noted from the field investigation that no trade union was present in 20
enterprises. Only one employer out of 21 enterprises surveyed, admitted trade union in
its enterprise where a procedural agreement could be signed. Interviews conducted on
48 employees from this particular establishment showed that only 3 were members of
that trade union and 52% of the interviewees were unaware of the presence of any trade
union at their workplace. With regards to collective bargaining, it has been observed
that many workers in this sector are unwilling to join a union and in the absence of any
other forum, communication seems to be one-sided from top to bottom.
3.8 Procurement by public bodies
In this sector, the method of acquiring market share is through bidding and generally,
the lowest bidder is favoured. Certain exceptions however exist in cases where entities
require quality service. With regards to public bodies, it has been noted that the norm
is to retain the most economical bidder. However, in light of the observations made in
sub-paragraph 3.2 above, the Board considers that due consideration should also be
given to Section 46 of the Public Procurement Act 2006 (as amended by section 70(6)
of the Employment Rights Act 2008) which stipulates among others that there should
be in every procurement contract, a clause to ensure that the rates of remuneration and
other conditions of employment of workers engaged in the execution of the contract,
Page | 12NRB Recommendations
are not less favourable than those provided in the R.O Regulations and that no
contractor should be entitled to any payment unless he has, together with his claim for
payment, filed a certificate stating the rates of remuneration of the various categories
of workers employed in the execution of the contract. For the purpose of retaining the
services of a security service provider, the Board suggests that public bodies should,
not only rely on the lowest quote but should also assess whether the quote is reasonable
enough to enable the private contractor meet his obligations towards his employees
insofar as the prescribed minimum wage and other conditions of employment are
concerned.
4. THE BOARD’S STAND IN RELATION TO THE SUBMISSIONS MADE
BEFORE IT IN RELATION TO:
4.1 Heavy weight of cash bags
During the public hearings, the representatives of workers argued that employees
performing cash in transit duties often have to lift and carry heavy cash bags (especially
those containing coins) and on account of the health risks involved with the lifting and
carrying of such weight, they requested the Board to set a limit on the weight of the
cash bags. The Board wishes to draw the attention of all the parties concerned that
Section 84 of the Occupational Safety & Health Act 2005 already makes provision for
a permissible weight limit of 18 kg. It further stipulates that in cases where workers
have to regularly lift, carry or move loads exceeding 18 kg, the employer should provide
'sufficient training in the safe techniques or methods of manual lifting and handling'.
The Board therefore finds that the law already provides sufficient safeguards on the
lifting of weight and same has to be complied with by the employers.
4.2 Unavailability of parking facilities for cash in transit operations
The representatives of workers have submitted to the Board that employees working in
cash in transit have to transfer banknotes, coins and other valuables from one location to
another in armoured vehicles and very often no parking space is provided to them close
to the clients premises for the loading and unloading of the valuables. As such, they stated
that workers have to spend time outside, carrying cash and other valuables when the
armoured vehicle is parked at a distance. They further submitted that cash in transit
Page | 13NRB Recommendations
operations at banks on busy high streets becomes more risky and problematic due to the
unavailability of parking space and parking zones anywhere near the bank and the loading
and unloading activities are effected on the road when the secured vehicle is momentarily
at halt. They explained that same often causes obstruction to the traffic and the driver has
to move the armoured vehicle and has to make rounds in the vicinity until the security
personnel are out of the bank to load the vehicle back again. The workers representatives
explained the Board that after taking delivery of cash, the security personnel often have
to wait in busy and crowded areas because the armoured vehicle fails to arrive on time
due to traffic jams.
The Board acknowledges that cash in transit operations put the security personnel at high
risk. It also appreciates that if an attack is perpetrated in a busy high street, it can also put
the lives of members of the public in danger. The Board therefore considers that necessary
measures have to be taken by all the stakeholders to protect the safety of the workers and
of the public in general. The Board is of the view that private security companies, as
employers, have a duty to protect the safety of their employees and as service providers,
a duty to protect from theft, money and other valuables belonging to their clients. Hence,
since it is in their own interest, the Board strongly suggests private security companies to
negotiate for proper and adequate parking facilities with their clients and to have a clause
inserted in their contracts of service accordingly. Further, since the Board has identified
that the current conduct of cash in transit operations can put members of the public at
risk, it humbly invites the competent authorities to look into the matter with a view to
finding a solution to the problem.
4.3 The creation of a Private Security Services Authority
Employers have submitted before the Board that there is a need for the establishment of
a Body to regulate the private security industry effectively, with the objective to reduce
criminality, raise standards and recognize quality services among others. The Board has
no mandate to make such recommendations and it leaves it for the policy makers to decide
on same.
Page | 14NRB Recommendations
5. RECOMMENDATIONS
After having carefully examined all the pertinent and relevant information gathered from
its investigation, bearing in mind its evolution of the security sector and the principles
enunciated in Section 97 of the Employment Relations Act 2008 as well the spirit of the
labour legislations, the Board has come up with the following recommendations:
5.1.1 Definition clause
1. Appellation
The Board recommends that the ‘Security Guards Regulations Order’ be renamed
as Private Security Services Employees Remuneration Regulations.
2. Earnings
In a spirit of harmonization with latest legislations, the Board recommends that
the definition of earnings be amended along the following lines:
''earnings'' --
(a) means basic wages; and
(b) includes
(i) wages earned for extra work under subparagraph 2(1);
(ii) wages paid under paragraph 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 14(1), (2), (4);
(iii) any sum of money, excluding commission, by whatever name called, paid
to a worker, in respect of any work performed by him, in addition to the basic
wages agreed upon between him and the employer and which is related to
productivity.
3. The Board recommends that “Private Security Service” be defined in the Regulations
as ‘the business of providing, for remuneration or reward, a security service, the
services of a security guard, including the secure transportation, delivery and
handling of property and also includes the provision of security through electronic
means or any other device.
Page | 15NRB Recommendations
4. Security guard
The Board recommends, for reasons provided in paragraph 5.1.2 (1) of this
recommendations, that the definition of “security guard” be amended so that
subparagraph (b) of the existing Regulations be renamed as subparagraph (c) and
subparagraph (b) be made to read as follows:
(b) ‘Includes a worker who is employed to provide security and property
protection services where, regardless of the sector in which he operates, his
employer employs more than one worker to perform such duties.’
5. In line with its recent recommendations, the Board recommends that the provision in
relation to ‘Trainee’ as it appears in the existing Regulations be amended so that in
regulation 3(2)(a) reads as follows:
“Where a trainee is undergoing training, he shall be remunerated at 95% of
the basic wages in the entry grade in which he is serving as trainee”.
6. The Board recommends that the words ‘Additional Remuneration Act 2003 (GN No
173/2003) in regulation3(3) be deleted and be replaced by the words “Additional
Remuneration And Other Allowances (2019) Act 2018”
7. The Board recommends, for reasons provided in paragraph 6 of this
recommendations, that regulations 3(4) and 5 be amended as per paragraphs 3(4)
and 5 of the Proposed Regulations in Annex 1
5.1.2 OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT(SECOND SCHEDULE)
1. Normal Working Hours
The normal working hours in the security sector is currently 12 hours daily over a period
of 6 days which makes a total of 72 normal working hours per week. A reduction in the
normal working hours is an issue which was extensively canvassed by both workers and
the unions during the Public hearings. The representative of workers submitted that the
actual 72-hour normal working week is excessive and has to be brought down to 48
Page | 16NRB Recommendations
hours. They argued that workers do not have enough time to spend with their families.
Moreover, the long hours of work especially at night, affect the health and the social life
of the workers in general. The unions have also argued that the industry suffers from a
lack of manpower because young people are unwilling to join the sector. They submitted
that a reduction in the number of normal working hours will act as an incentive to attract
more and more young people in the industry and this, at the same time is expected to
help the country reduce the current rate of unemployment.
The CTSP proposed the Board to consider a normal working week of 48 hours, made
up of 8 hours daily on a 6 days’ week basis. The Free Democratic Unions Federations
(Security Guards and General Workers Union) have made the same demand as the
CTSP, save that they have also requested the Board to consider the option of a 48-hour
week spread over a period of 4 days i.e. 12 hours daily on a 4 days’ week basis.
The employers have, during their deposition before the Board, stated that they have to
face high labour turnover and absenteeism in the security sector. They admitted that
young people show unwillingness to join the sector and those who do, do not keep the
job for long. The employers generally recognized the hardships which workers have to
face due to the long hours of work in the industry and although they appear to be in
favour of a reduction of the same, they have expressed reservations with regards to a
reduction in the normal working hours of workers who perform manned guarding (i.e.
security guards). The employers’ representatives have stated that the additional cost
involved with such a reduction (i.e. in the normal working hours of security guards) can
be fatal to their ‘guarding’ business. They explained that the additional cost which may
emanate from such reduction will have to be passed onto the clients through an increase
in the contract price of the guarding services and such an increase in the price will cause
their clients (both existing and prospective), to have recourse to the in-house
recruitment of watchpersons/ security personnel. They argued that same is very likely
to occur since the cost of the in-house recruitment of security personnel is bound to be
much lower since no compliance cost in connection with the PSSA is involved.
Page | 17NRB Recommendations
The representatives of the workers have also explained that although the normal
working hours of security guards is reduced from 72 to 48 hours a week, the normal
working hours of watchpersons (who are regulated by the different R.Os in the different
sectors) will still remain 72 hours a week and same will give impetus to business entities
to go for in-house recruitment of watchpersons, posing a serious risk for security
companies to be forced out of their guarding business.
The Board observes that hours of work vary substantially between countries, but also
within, e.g. due to the prevalence of part-time work and working hours’ regulations or
agreements (Bick et al., 2016; OECD, 2016). Understanding how the number of hours
worked affects labour productivity is an important element in understanding labour
demand, and has important implications for the regulation of working hours and firm
management. The effects which long hours of work have on the health of workers are
not easy to measure since predisposing factors has to be taken into account. The Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention, the leading national public health institute of the
United States have dedicated a website which deals with the consequences of extended
working hours. When employees compromise their sleep for work, it is considered to
be of a bigger concern because it impacts negatively on labour productivity. Long
working hours have also been observed, not only to have an adverse effect on
productivity but to also have a connection with employee turnover and absenteeism -
which happens to be the case in the security services sector in Mauritius.
The Board also observes that ILO Convention on hours of work CO30, which has not
been ratified by Mauritius, does not authorise working hours to exceed 48 hours in a
week. Moreover, to supplement and facilitate the implementation of the existing
international instruments concerning hours of work, the ILO has in R116 - Reduction
of Hours of Work Recommendation, 1962 (No. 116), provided at paragraph 4 of its
general principles that ‘Normal hours of work should be progressively reduced, when
appropriate, with a view to attaining the social standard indicated in the Preamble of
the recommendations without any reduction in the wages of the workers as at the time
hours of work are reduced’ and at paragraph 5 it provides that ‘Where the duration of
the normal working week exceeds forty-eight hours, immediate steps should be taken to
Page | 18NRB Recommendations
bring it down to this level without any reduction in the wages of the workers as at the
time hours of work are reduced.’
The Board considers that it is high time for Mauritius, as a developing country, to follow
the international norms with regards to hours of work. It is also of the view that although
Mauritius has not ratified ILO convention CO30, it would be advisable for it to consider
setting legislations which would come closer to International Labour Standards on
working time.
The Board considers that the existing 72-hours normal working week is not conducive
and does not attract new/young workers in the sector and that a reduction in the normal
working hours from 72-hours a week to 48-hours a week will be an appropriate solution
to the problem. The Board is of the view that the said reduction will not negatively
impact per se on the operations of the security businesses, it will rather bring redress to
the current shortage of manpower and high labour turnover, which appears to be a major
problem in the sector.
The Board also considers that more and more workers may be willing to take up jobs
in the security industry and this will ultimately help the country reduce the current rate
of unemployment. The Board is fully aware that such reduction in the normal working
hours will have cost implications. However, it considers that the additional costs may
be imposed on clients by the service providers as the Board’s investigation has revealed
that a majority of the service contracts do provide for a clause which protects employers
from any legislated increase in labour costs.
In light of the above and bearing in mind the specificity of this sector, in particular the
prevalence of shift work and the need for greater flexibility, the Board finds that:
(a) the normal working week for workers who perform shift work should be reduced to
48 hours, inclusive of the time allowed for meal and tea breaks;
(b) a shift worker may agree with his employer to work for a maximum of 96 hours in
a fortnight without extra remuneration provided that (i) the shift does not exceed
12 hours and (ii) extra work does not exceed, on average, 24 hours in a fortnight;
Page | 19NRB Recommendations
(c) workers performing shift work should be given equal opportunity to work on all
shifts; and
(d) no worker should be required to (i) perform night work on more than 2 consecutive
nights and (ii) work more than 6 consecutive days.
The Board therefore recommends that paragraph 1 of the second schedule of the
existing Regulations be amended as per paragraph 1 of the second schedule of the
Proposed Remuneration Regulations in Annex 1.
The Board has also given due consideration to the fact that a reduction in the normal
working hours of security guards may prompt more in-house recruitment of
watchpersons/security personnel and same may create business risks for companies
providing manned security services. The Board here wishes to highlight that its field
investigation has revealed that in many hotels and other places of attractions, in-house
watchpersons/security personnel have been employed to provide security and property
protection services. The Board however notes that these in-house workers are not
regulated by the PSSA and as such they are not required, among other things, to be of
clean records or to be sufficiently trained to perform such duties. The Board considers
this as a major shortcoming which affects the quality of labour in the security sector.
The Board also suspects same to be the reason why in-house security agents are, more
often than not, involved in serious offences at their workplace.
Hence with a view to reduce the business risks associated with the lowering of the
normal working hours and to, at the same time, ensure a quality labour in the security
sector, the Board deems it fit to recommend that the definition of security guard be
amended so that no employer, irrespective of the sector in which he is carrying out
his business, would be allowed to recruit more than one worker to provide security
and property protection services. The Board therefore recommends that the definition
of ‘security guard’ be amended accordingly as per the additional definition provided
in subparagraph (b) of the Proposed Regulations in Annex 1.
The Board also humbly invites the Honourable Minister to cause amendments to be
brought in any other relevant legislations and/or regulations to give effect to this
particular recommendation.
Page | 20NRB Recommendations
The Board is of the view that the reduction of the working hours in the security sector will
unequivocally prove to be more beneficial and will outweigh the inconveniences or
prejudice which could arise to employers.
2. Extra Work and Notional Calculation of Basic Rate
In line with its recommendations on the issue of normal working hours, the Board
recommends that existing provision for Extra work and notional calculation of basic rate
be amended so that shift workers who agree with their employer to work for a maximum
of 96 hours in a fortnight without extra remuneration, could also be catered for.
The Board therefore recommends that paragraph 2 of the second schedule of the existing
Regulations be amended as per paragraph 2 of the proposed Regulations in Annex 1.
3. Work in Cyclonic weather
With regards to this provision, the FDUF made representations to the effect that a worker
who is required to remain on duty on a second shift or more than 2 hours after the first shift,
should be entitled to have an adequate free meal.
The CTSP, on the other hand requested the Board to consider payment of 4 times the basic
rate when a worker works during a cyclone warning class III or IV is in force. The Board
considers the existing provision to be adequate and recommends that the status quo be
maintained.
4. Payment of Remuneration
The Board tends to agree with the representative of the FDUF that a worker should be
paid his wages during working hours and not later than the last working day of the pay
period. The Board is also of the view that the payslip if a worker should contain his ‘basic
wages and allowances’. The Board therefore recommends that the wordings of
paragraph 4 (1) and 4(3) of the second schedule of the existing regulations be amended
as per paragraph 4(1) & (3) of the Proposed Regulations in Annex 1 and the words
‘total wages’ in the same paragraph be replaced by ‘basic wage’
Page | 21NRB Recommendations
5. Annual Leave
On the issue of annual leave, the FDUF requested the Board to consider increasing annual
leave to 20 days over and above Part VI Section 27(2) of ERA 2008. It also submitted
that workers should be entitled to a total refund of annual leave not taken whether applied
for or not and that every trainee who remains in continuous employment with the same
employer for a period of 6 consecutive months, should be entitled during each subsequent
month up to the twelve months to one day’s annual leave up to a maximum of 6 day’s
leave. The Board has given due consideration to the submissions made by the union and
it wishes to highlight that Section 27 (2A) of the Employment Rights Act 2008 makes
provision for 6 days’ annual leave for workers with less than 12 months’ service after
completion of 6months’ continuous employment. The Board finds the existing provision
with regards to annual leave to be adequate and it recommends that the status quo be
maintained.
6. Sick Leave
In line with its recommendations on the issue of sick leave in other sectors, the Board
recommends that untaken sick leaves at the end of a period of 12 months, be
accumulated to a maximum of 90 days and same be used as a bank from which leaves
can be deducted when employees exhaust their available sick leave to undergo
prolonged treatment. The Board therefore recommends that paragraph 6 of the
second schedule of the existing Regulations be amended as per paragraph 6 of the
Proposed Regulations in Annex 1.
7. Special Leave
The Unions have essentially made representations for an increase in the special leave
provided to a worker on the occasion of his marriage and they have also requested that
leave periods should also be granted to the workers for (i) the marriage of their children
and (ii) the death of close family members. The Board agrees to this demand and in line
with its recent recommendations on this issue in other sectors, recommends that a
worker who has remained in continuous employment with the same employer for 12
consecutive months, shall be entitled to:
(a) 6 working days’ special leave on full pay on the occasion of the
celebration of the worker’s first religious or civil marriage;
Page | 22NRB Recommendations
(b) 3 working days’ special leave on full pay on the occasion of the first
religious or civil marriage of each of the worker’s child;
(c) 3 working days’ special leave on full pay on the death of the
worker’s spouse, child, father, mother, brother or sister, and
(d) 5 working days’ paternity leave on the occasion of the birth of his
child.
8. Travelling Benefits
The FDUF made representations to the effect that all workers residing not less than 2
km from their place of work should be entitled to a full refund of the bus fare and no
difference should be made between male and female workers. The Board finds the
existing provision in relation to ‘Travelling Benefits’ adequate and recommends that
the status quo be maintained.
9. Subsistence Allowance
The FDUF has made representations for a meal allowance of Rs 100 per day or an
adequate free meal for a worker who has completed a normal day's work and is required
to remain on duty on a second shift or for more than 2 hours. The Board has given due
consideration to the demand of the Union and it recommends that the word
“Subsistence Allowance” be deleted and be replaced by the word “Meal Allowance”
and the amount be adjusted to Rs 75. The Board recommends that paragraph 9 of
the existing Regulations be amended accordingly as per paragraph 9 of the Proposed
Regulations in Annex 1.
10. Protective clothing and equipment
During field investigation, employees complained about the poor quality of uniforms
and equipment provided to them. The Board here notes that adequate provisions exist
in the present regulations in so far as same is concerned and it would rather be a question
of non-compliance of the law by the employers. The FDUF demanded for additional
uniforms and shoes on a yearly basis. The Board finds the demand justified and it
recommends that workers be provided with 3 sets of uniform and 3 pairs of shoes
every year. The Board therefore recommends that paragraph 10(1)(a) of the
Page | 23NRB Recommendations
second schedule of the existing Regulations be amended accordingly as per
paragraph 10(1)(a) of the Proposed Regulations in Annex 1.
11. Public Holidays
The CTSP has made representations to the effect that for work performed on a public
holiday, Sunday or an off day, workers should be paid (i) 2 times the basic rate for the
1st 8 hours (ii) 3 times the basic rate over and above 8 hours if the public holiday falls
on a normal day/shift. The Board has given due consideration to the representations
made and it is of the view that the present provision in relation to Public Holidays is
adequate. The Board therefore recommends that the status quo insofar as public
holidays are concerned.
12. Death Grant
The FDUF has requested that the current death grant be increased to Rs 4,000 while the
CTSP has proposed a sum of Rs 7,000 for same. The Board considers the sum of Rs
4,000 as death grant reasonable and it recommends accordingly.
13. End of Year Bonus
The Board maintains the status quo in so far as the provision for end of year bonus is
concerned.
14. Maternity Benefits
In line with its recommendations on this issue in other sectors, the Board recommends
that paragraph 14 of the existing Regulations be amended as per paragraph 14 of the
proposed Regulations in Annex 1.
15. Overseas Leave
The Board concurs with the representations made before it and recommends that the
word ‘overseas leave’ be restyled as ‘vacation leave’ wherever it appears. The Board
is also of the view that an employee reckoning 10 years (instead of 15 years) continuous
employment with the same employer should be entitled to one vacation leave of not
less than 2 months to be spent wholly or partly abroad or locally at the employee’s
discretion and at least one month of the vacation leave shall be with pay and where an
Page | 24NRB Recommendations
employee intends to spend his vacation either partly or wholly abroad, payment should
be effected at least 7 days before he leaves. The Board also recommends that untaken
vacation leave by a worker be refunded by the employer upon his retirement or death.
The Board therefore recommends that paragraph 15 of the second schedule of the
existing Regulations be amended accordingly as per paragraph 15 of the Proposed
Regulations in Annex 1.
16. Gratuity at death or on retirement before 60
The Board recommends that paragraph 16 of the existing Regulations be deleted and
two separate provisions be made for ‘Gratuity on retirement before the age of 60 on
medical ground’ and ‘Gratuity at death’ as per paragraphs 16 and 17 of the proposed
Regulations in Annex 1.
In line with its recommendations in other sectors, the Board recommends that
gratuity in each case be paid on the basis of 15 days’ remuneration instead of the
formula N x W/2. The Board further recommends that the eligibility period for (i)
gratuity on retirement on medical grounds be brought down to a period of not less
than 5 years’ continuous employment and (ii) gratuity at death to be of not less than
12 months’ employment with the same employer.
In light of the above, the Board recommends that paragraph 16 of the Regulations
be amended as per paragraph 16 and 17 of the Proposed Regulations in Annex 1.
17. Refund of bus fares and telephone calls
The Board recommends that paragraph 17 of the existing Regulations be amended as
per paragraph 18 of the Proposed Regulations in Annex 1 where provision should be
made for a monthly mobile phone package benefit of Rs 150.
18. Posting
The Board recommends that the status quo be maintained with regards to this
provision.
Page | 25NRB Recommendations
19. Medical Check-up
The Board recommends that the status quo be maintained with regards to this
provision.
20. Compensation
Investigation conducted by the Board reveals the presence of contractual workers
in this sector and in order to provide minimum protection to those workers the
Board recommends that upon termination of their contract of employment, every
employee be entitled to a compensation of one day’s wage for each completed month
of service where:
(a) he has worked for the same employer for more than one month;
(b) his service is terminated before the expiry of 12 months for any cause other
than misconduct or his short term contract has come to an end; and
(c) his attendance has averaged not less than 20 days per month during his
employment.
Consequentially the Board recommends that a new paragraph under the
heading “compensation” be introduced as per paragraph 21 of the Proposed
Regulations in Annex 1.
21. Certificate of Employment
In line with its recommendations in other sectors, the Board recommends the
introduction of a new paragraph be added in the Regulations to provide for a
certificate of employment as per paragraph 22 of the Proposed Regulations in Annex
1.
5.1.3 Other items not covered in the Regulations
Night Allowance
The unions have made representations before the Board for a night allowance of 10%
on basic wage. The Board observes that the Employment Rights Act 2008 (ERiA) as
amended by Act 6 of 2013, makes provision by virtue of section 14A (5) of ERiA
Page | 26NRB Recommendations
(which has not yet been proclaimed), for a night allowance of 10% of basic wage to
workers, in addition to their normal day’s wage, for work performed during night shift.
The Board, being aware that amendments are currently being contemplated in the
labour legislations, humbly requests the Honourable Minister to consider proclaiming
section 14A (5) of ERiA so that same can have a general application in all sectors,
including the Private security services sector.
Attendance Bonus
The FDUF has proposed an attendance bonus of ‘not less than 10 % of the total monthly
earnings’ and the CTSP has requested the Board to consider an Attendance Bonus of Rs
1,000 per month. The Board has given due consideration to this demand and it finds that
Attendance Bonus is an incentive which is generally provided to workers to discourage
absenteeism. The Board, having already recommended a reduction in the normal working
hours to combat same, makes no recommendations on this issue.
Insurance Cover
The representatives of workers have also called for the need for the employer to subscribe
to a non-contributory insurance policy in the sum of not less than Rs 50,000 for workers in
this ‘high risk sector’. The Board is of the view that same does not constitute a minimum
term and condition of employment and leaves it on the parties to negotiate thereon.
6. WAGES
The Private Security Services Act 2004 (PSSA) defines ‘Private security service” as ‘the
business of providing, for remuneration or reward, a security service, the services of a
security guard, and the secure transportation and delivery of property’. The Act further
defines “security guard” as ‘a person employed by a private security service who guards,
patrols or provides any other security service for the purpose of protecting a person or
property and it also stipulates that “security service” includes the provision of security
through electronic means or any other device
The Board observes from the very definitions provided above, that the scope of duties of a
security guard tends to encompass almost all security tasks within the security industry.
However, in practice, security guards have to undergo specific training/registration for the
Page | 27NRB Recommendations
performance of certain tasks and as such, they carry added responsibilities – use of firearm
and dog handling are but some examples. Added responsibilities may also arise out of
factors such as the site of posting, the special nature of work and the use of specific tools
and devices among others. In the circumstances, the Board is of the considered view that it
should prescribe a minimum salary rate for the entry grade and leave it to the private
security companies to negotiate and to agree on wages for additional levels of
responsibilities.
The Board therefore recommends:
A. A flat rate of Rs 10,834 per month be prescribed for entry level security guard (for
standard guarding duties as specified in Section 2 of The Private Security Services
Act 2004);
B. The provision of a yearly increment of at least Rs 115;
C. The provision of an allowance of not less than 10% for added higher degree of
risk/responsibility for (i) armed guarding, (ii) cash handling and (iii) dog handling;
D. That provisions be made in the Regulations to stipulate that nothing will prevent
private security companies to come up, after mutual agreement with the workers,
with classifications based on the level, complexity and value (quality) of protection
services required of them and to reward the workers accordingly after giving due
consideration to the risk element involved in each type of activity they are called
upon to perform;
E. provisions be made in the Regulations to stipulate that those workers who are
already working 45 hours per week, should be allowed to retain their work
arrangements and not be made less favourable upon the new Regulations being
proclaimed.
The Board also wishes to point out the followings:
(1) The recommended wage for security guard is in line with the proposal made by
stakeholders in 2017 (where same has been adjusted with Additional
Remuneration of 2018 and 2019); and
(2) The wage proposal is made with a view to keeping the Regulations simple by
providing protection to the most vulnerable guards at the bottom of the ladder
Page | 28You can also read
