An Open Letter to Securitas

Dear Cohort Members, here is an excerpt of the e-mail I had sent to the Chronicle Herald and Metro News with respect to my experience at work today. I thought it would be nice to share this with the group especially where it seems to intercept with the discourse within our recently concluded GSLL 6206.

 

According to its corporate website, “Securitas’ three fundamental values are: Integrity, Vigilance and Helpfulness”. However, I am inclined to disagree with this assertion based on my resent unpleasant experience with this organization

As a result of this distasteful incident, I have therefore decided to present this open letter with the hope that, perhaps, someone on the upper echelon of this organization would read this, and be able to bring some redress to the issues and concerns raised in this communiqué.

I recently contacted Securitas, Dartmouth Office, on behalf of a pregnant client of mine who was let go in January of this year. As an Employment Specialist, part of my duties in addition to assisting client to navigate a career path, is to advocate for them when deemed necessary; hence my reason for contacting Securitas to inquire why my client has not been issued a Record of Employment four months after ceasing to be an employee of the company, and after repeated attempts by her to get this required documentation for EI maternity purposes.

During my first attempt, the initial story was that my client had failed to return her uniform as required after termination. However, after I reiterated that the said uniform had already been returned, it  was checked and confirmed that the uniform has indeed been returned (by the way the uniform in question was returned way back in February).  At this junction, the story changed to the fact that the delay has been due to some changes in staffing but I was promised that the ROE will be ready by Monday (and that she will personally take care of it).

Monday came, and gone. It is now Wednesday, my client is due in July and as of April 18^th, she does not know if she has enough hours to qualify for EI Maternity. I decided to call Securitas again, and this time had the privilege of speaking with the Branch Manager. After explaining to him that my client has made several attempts to get her ROE, he was very dismissive and stated that apparently my client hasn’t made enough attempt, otherwise, he would have know about it as he’s the one responsible for issuing the ROE (which tells me that my previous call did not amount to anything). Incredibly, just like the last time, the branch manager was quick to tell me that the ROE has been delayed because my client is yet to return her uniform! Of course at this time, I quickly realized some disorganization within this organization. In similar fashion to my previous call, I reaffirmed that this uniform was returned as required. He put me on hold, came back and informed me that two of his office staff did confirm that the uniform has been returned but no one kept him in the loop. He then proceeded to inform me that I should tell my client that the ROE would be ready for pick up 9 am the following day.

I thanked him for his assistance, and then proceeded to ask if it was alright to make a comment before getting off the phone, to which he said yes. I expressed my disappointment at the way my client has been treated, and how it literally took my intervention for her to get the ROE. At this point, he became quite belligerent, and reminded me that my client should have been the one contacting them and not a “third party”. He also asked me if I worked for the Labour Board, and reminded me that if my client has an issue with them, she should have approached them directly or contact the labour board rather than having me as the middle person, and he further went on to state that he is not interested in listening to any “crap” from me whether I’m an employment specialist or whoever I am. He was also kind enough to remind me that “in this country” that’s how it’s done!

I was astounded that someone occupying such a key position within a large organization will lose his professionalism while on the phone with another professional. It was also quite disappointing that the phrase “in this country” was uttered by this Branch Manager. I can only conclude that he probably assumed having an accent meant I did not know how things are done “in this country” (even after over a decade of declaring my allegiance to Canada)

While the event has been an unsettling one for me, it has nonetheless strengthened my resolve that I will never stop advocating for those whose voice are often left unheard especially by discourteous organization such as Securitas. It has also reminded me that there is still work to be done in the area cultural sensitivity by employers around the country.

As I reflect upon my day, I am left to wonder if this Branch Manager would have greased my ear with the statement “in this country” if I had been a member of the dominant culture and if my accent has been, for lack of a better term, Canadianized.

Thank you for taking the time to read.