Legal Authority- Uniform Protocol- Richard Garrity

Légal Authority Guidelines
Uniform Protocol-Standards
By: Mr. Richard Garrity

This PowerPoint presentation is proprietary
information and can not be reproduced or
copied in any fashion without the consent of the
publisher owner, Richard Garrity

When people employed in the security
industry or the corporate world for that
matter, FAIL, it is generally because of
two reasons. “Lack of leadership and
lack of training”. RCG

“ Failure is certain, when
training is lacking”.

10/31/15 Free template from www.brainybetty.com 5
This PowerPoint presentation
will focus on five key aspects of
security and lobby operations.
They are:
1. Security Officer / Police Officer
2. Legal Authority / Use of Force
3. Uniform Protocols
4. Personal Grooming
5. Arrest/ Detain authority

Scope of Definition and Policy:
This policy defines the
general expectations of
Security personnel, as related
to legal authority, uniform
protocol, grooming, and other
general expected standards
and procedures.

Private Security-
A vital and growing industry

First and Last Impressions:
As a security officer, it’s important
to dress neatly, confidently, and
have an overall professional
appearance because you not only
represent yourself and your
company, but also the client.
Often, security personnel are the
first and last people customers,
visitors and employees see.

Security Officer VS. Police Officer:

The primary difference between
a security officer and a police
officer are as follows:
A police officer is an “agent of
the state’ and generally acts
under the powers of the state and
or local government to enforce
laws, maintain order, and provide
911 response. They have
warrantless vast arrest powers.

A security officer is an “agent of the
property owner” and acts under the
said authority of property mgt. The
security officer has, generally, no
formal police or arrest powers, but is
tasked with protection of property and
life in the installation they are
assigned. The primary duty of a
security officer is to provide Fire Life
Safety, deterrence, and 911 notification
in situations that clearly call for it.

• A security officer (or formerly
called security guard) is a person
who is paid to protect property,
assets, or people. Security
officers are usually privately and
formally employed personnel.
Often, security officers are
uniformed and act to protect
property and people.

• They do this by maintaining a high
visibility presence to deter illegal and
inappropriate actions, either
observing directly through patrols,
by watching alarm systems or video
cameras for signs of crime, fire or
disorder; then taking action and
reporting any incidents to their
superiors, client, and emergency
services as appropriate.

• Security personnel are not police
officers as we have stated earlier,
unless they are security police, but
are often identified as such due to
similar uniforms and behaviors,
especially on private property.
Security personnel in the U.S. derive
their powers from state laws, which
allow them a contractual
arrangement with clients that give
them Agent of the Owner powers.

•This includes a nearly
unlimited power to question
people with the absence of
probable cause, requirements
that frequently dog public law
enforcement officers.

• Since at least the Middle Ages in
Europe, the term watchman was more
commonly applied to this function.
This term was carried over to North
America where it was interchangeable
with night-watchman until both terms
were replaced with the modern
security-based titles. Security officers
are sometimes regarded as fulfilling a
private policing function.

• Many security firms and proprietary
security departments practice the
"detect, deter, observe and report"
methodology. Security officers are
not required to make arrests, but
have the authority to make a citizen's
arrest, or otherwise act as an agent of
law enforcement at the request of a
police officer, sheriff, federal
authorities, and others.

• If a private security officer or even
special police officer acts at the
behest of a police officer in
detaining or arresting an individual,
that security officer is then acting
under “The color of law” and must
abide by all legal means necessary
and not over step his/her authority.
If a security officer abuses that
authority, they will be liable.

What is “Color of Law?
Color of law refers to an appearance
of legal power to act but which may
operate in violation of law. For
example, though a police officer acts
with the "color of law" authority to
arrest someone, if such an arrest is
made without probable cause the
arrest may actually be in violation of
law and in violation of their rights.

What is “Color of Law?
In other words, just because
something is done with the "color of
law", that does not mean that the
action was lawful. When police or
private security forces act outside
their lawful authority and violate the
civil rights of a citizen, the FBI is
tasked with investigating such
instances and prosecuting.

Primary Duty?
A private security officer's primary duty is
the prevention and deterrence of crime and
Fire Life Safety. Security personnel enforce
company rules and can act to protect lives
and property. In fact, they frequently have a
contractual obligation to provide these
actions. Security officers are often trained
to perform arrest and control procedures
(including handcuffing and restraints),
operate emergency equipment, perform
first aid, CPR, take accurate notes, write
detailed reports, and perform other tasks
as required by the institution, contractee
and or client they are serving.

• One major economic justification for
security personnel is that insurance
companies (particularly fire insurance
carriers) will give substantial rate
discounts to sites which have a 24-
hour presence; for a high risk or high
value venue, the discount can often
exceed the money being spent on its
security program.

• This is because having security on
site increases the odds that any fire
will be noticed and reported to the
local fire department before a total
loss occurs. Also, the presence of
security personnel tends to diminish
"shrinkage theft”, employee
misconduct, safety rule violations,
property damage, or even internal
sabotage.

Historically, private security and
law enforcement agencies have
not always maintained consistent
and efficient relationships. A 1971
study conducted by the Rand
Corporation described the typical
private security guard as an
aging white male, who was poorly
educated, un-trained, and paid.

However, by the mid 1980’s,
that stero-type had drastically
changed to an even mix of
different races and ages. By
the mid 2000’s, especially after
9-11, wages and training had
increased exponentially.

In 1976, the Private Security
Advisory Council, through the
U.S. Department of Justice,
identified two main factors
which contributed to poor
relationships between law
enforcement and private
security personnel:

1) Their inability to clarify role
definitions / responsibility
2) Their practice of stereotyping.
The Hallcrest Report has also
been highly credited for
examining relationships
between law enforcement and
private security.

The Hallcrest Report, published in
1985 by the National Institute of
Justice, discovered that various law
enforcement officials, together with
proprietary institutions and contract
security professionals, decided to
convey police related actions to private
security. Similarly, the Hallcrest Report
II (Private Security Trends) concluded
that private security is America's
primary protective resource in terms of
spending and employment.

“In terms of spending
and employment,
private security is
America's primary
protective resource”.
That is an amazing
condition~

Although the role of the Security
Officer and the traditional Police
Officer differ greatly, the private
security personnel deployed around
the nation act as a positive deterrent
to routine crime, protection of
property and potential terrorist
threats. Certain levels of sensitive
intel have also been shared between
public & private agencies.

Fact point:
Recent research also found that
private security currently employs
approximately 1.5 million people and
maintained annual expenditures of
$52 billion (2004 figures). On the
other hand, approximately 600,000
individuals are employed with
federal, state, and local law
enforcement and maintain a $30
billion expenditure service.

Last, the increasing growth
of private security and the
limited growth of law
enforcement is due to four
main factors, according to
the Hallcrest Report:

1. Increasing workplace crime
and violence
2. Increasing fear of crime
3. A decreasing rate of spending
for public protection
4. Increasing awareness and use
of private security effective
protective measures.

In addition, police typically held private
security officers to a lower standard
because of their limited powers,
whereas security directors & Managers
believed police were uninterested or
incapable of handling their crime;
especially computer, white-collar, and
in the extreme, terrorism offenses. The
trend of these relationships in recent
years however, has been toward
partnership and liaison.

For example, in the 1980's, only a handful of
private security and law enforcement liaison
programs existed, while today there are over
60 liaison programs in operation. In turn,
Operation Cooperation has been a recent
contributor to the encouragement of public-
private teamwork. Operation Cooperation,
funded by the U.S. Department of Justice
and supported by the American Society for
Industrial Security (ASIS), represents a
major national initiative to encourage
partnerships between law enforcement and
private security organizations.

Some examples of these partnerships:
Virginia Police and Private Security
Alliance (VAPPSA) , The Boston
Police FDIN crime network,
Dallas/North Texas Regional Law
Enforcement and Security Program,
and the Area Police/Private Security
Liaison (APPL). This partnership is
centered in New York City with the
NYPD as the primary agency and
partnership liaison.

Liaisons and partnerships:
Although liaisons and partnerships vary
from program to program, they share
similar characteristics. The following
identifies common characteristics between
police/security liaison programs:
• 1) Networking:
• Social gatherings designed to discuss
common problems and aid each entity in
understanding others in the program.
• Lectures by security professionals at
police training events and vice versus.
• Directories of police and security contacts.
•

2) Information Sharing
• Exchange of information on
crimes and criminal convictions
between law enforcement
agencies and the private security
industry.
• Exchange of business crime in
the same manner.

3) Crime Prevention
• Joint participation in business
safety and security programs.
• Community policing.
• Addressing issues of local
concern as it relates to police
and security.
• Joint public-private support of
neighborhood watch programs.

4) Training
• Establishing training sessions on
topics of interest and need
(specifically terrorism and crime trends)
• Exchange of training and
expertise where the other entity
lacks.
• Police training of security and
vice versus.

5) Legislation
• Joint supporting of laws
and ordinances regarding
security officer standards
and licensing.

6) Operations
• Investigations
• Incident planning and/or
safety committees.
• Joint sting operations and
special weapons and tactics
(SWAT) teams

7) Research
• Review and distribution of
recent publications
regarding current issues
and technology within the
public-private sectors.

Despite their differences, law
enforcement agencies and
private security organizations
have increasingly come together
to prevent and deter crime.
Formality may differ, but all
partnerships work to protect life
and property. Thus far, the
history of police and security and
their relations has improved
dramatically since 9/11.

More open attitudes and
acceptance by the local
Police and increased
training and awareness by
private security personnel
have made the partnership
transformation a much
better entity.

Portions of the material just
reviewed were extracted from
and cited to:
Law Enforcement and Private Security
• Liaison: Partnerships for Cooperation
• Whitney Gunter
Jason Kidwell
York College of Pennsylvania
June 2004

Landmark Legal Precedents:

Escobedo V. Illinois- 1964

Escobedo V. Illinois- 1964
Escobedo v. Illinois, 378 U.S. 478
(1964), was a United States Supreme
Court case holding that criminal
suspects have a right to counsel during
police interrogations under the Sixth
Amendment. The case was decided a
year after the court held in Gideon v.
Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963) that
indigent criminal defendants had a right
to be provided counsel at trial.

Miranda VS. Arizona- 1966

Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966),
was a landmark decision of the United
States Supreme Court which passed 5–4.
The Court held that both inculpatory and
exculpatory statements made in response to
interrogation by a defendant in police
custody will be admissible at trial only if the
prosecution can show that the defendant
was informed of the right to consult with an
attorney before and during questioning and
of the right against

self-incrimination prior to questioning
by police, and that the defendant not
only understood these rights, but
voluntarily waived them. This had a
significant impact on law enforcement
in the United States, by making what
became known as the Miranda rights
part of routine police procedure to
ensure that suspects were informed of
their rights.

Foot notes: Inculpatory evidence
Inculpatory evidence is evidence that
shows, or tends to show, a person's
involvement in an act, or evidence that
can establish guilt. In criminal law, the
prosecution has a duty to provide all
evidence to the defense, whether it
favors the prosecution's case or the
defendant's case. Evidence that tends
to show a person's innocence is
considered exculpatory evidence.

Foot notes: Exculpatory evidence
Exculpatory evidence is the evidence
favorable to the defendant in a criminal
trial, which clears or tends to clear the
defendant of guilt. It is the opposite of
inculpatory evidence, which tends to
prove guilt. In many countries such as
the United States, police or prosecutor
are required to disclose to the
defendant any exculpatory evidence
they possess before the defendant
makes a plea (guilty or not guilty).

The Miranda Warning:

Use of Force Procedure:

STANDARD “USE OF FORCE”
POLICY & PROCEDURE
• When faced with a clear and
immediate threat of imminent bodily
harm, always try first, to retreat with
any people present, to a secure and
safe position.
• Use of Force is permitted ONLY when
it is absolutely necessary to protect
yourself and others, from a clear and
immediate threat of bodily harm, and
only when all options have exhausted

POLICY & PROCEDURE
• Use only that degree of force
that is necessary to repel an
attack or the threat of an
attack. Do not further provoke
or incite what you perceive to
be an impending attack or
threat of attack.

POLICY & PROCEDURE
• DO NOT use force to protect
property. There may be special
considerations that apply under
extreme certain circumstances.
Unless directed to, follow standard
UOF policy.
• If able to, always utilize the 911
system for Police assistance, as your
first and primary method when
confronted with these situations.

POLICY & PROCEDURE
• Always notify the dispatch operations
center or Field Manager if applicable,
the Account Manager, and site client
contact (MOD) if directed to do so.
• Record all incidents involving the Use
of Force on the standard incident
report site forms with brief reference
to such incident(s) on your daily
activity report.

Intrusion Procedure:

• If there is evidence that an
intrusion is in progress, or has
occurred, pull back momentarily.
Immediately advise the dispatch
operations center and notify the
Police Department- 911. Monitor
the situation from a safe distance
and work at the direction of the
your shift supervisor or manager.

• Do not look for an intruder(s) by
yourself. Assist law enforcement.
• If you ENCOUNTER a person(s)
on the premises who may be an
intruder, or if you are able to
confirm that status, pull back to a
safe area and distance.
Immediately notify 911. After 911
notification, notify your manager.

• If an intruder is confirmed on the
premises, assist police personnel
with search and sweep procedures.
Your presence and participation will
be vital, as you know the property
and can provide key access to areas.
Always work at the direction of police
personnel and your supervisor / mgr.
• Document fully on your standard
incident report form, all incidents
involving these types of intrusions.

Building intrusions are dangerous
situations. Don’t be a HERO!!

Legal Authority & Detaining

Detaining or holding a
person against their will…

The legal aspects:
 Private security personnel generally
do not have legal arrest powers. In
fact, 90% of America’s private
security forces have no formal arrest
powers or detainment authority.
Certain security officers like some
Mall/ retail officers, licensed special
police officers, sporting events
security personnel, and government
contracted personnel do have limited
arrest & detainment authority.

The legal aspects:
 Private security personnel who
have these licensed arrest
powers are usually restricted to
felony arrest ONLY. They do not
have misdemeanor arrest
authority and if they do detain
someone for a category
misdemeanor, they are liable for
abuse of power, liability claims,
and legal charges themselves.

Special Police/ Special Powers

The legal aspects:
 Hospital security personnel,
generally, are the largest licensed
group of special officers. Security
personnel who are licensed special
police officers are usually restricted
to the very property they are
assigned and have no other legal
powers elsewhere in the city or
county. The ID issued to such officers
will reflect on the back of the card
which property they are assigned to.

The legal specifics:
 Regular private security personnel
are legally bound by the following:
1. Unlicensed, unarmed security
personnel are prohibited from
“touching” anyone for any reason.
2. Security personnel will never wear or
“display” any type of handcuff or
similar “restraint”.
3. Staff will never “restrain” any person
or hold them against their free will.

4. Most importantly, corporate security
personnel shall never give the
“impression” that a person can not
leave of their own free will.
5. Personnel shall not prevent any
person from leaving the property,
either physically or by blocking
said exit or method of egress.

6. Unarmed, unlicensed staff (special
powers) shall never carry any badge that
displays any “police” insignia or patches.

Weapons Policy:
4. Private, unarmed corporate security
personnel are prohibited from
carrying the following weapons:
 Pepper spray/mace
 Police night sticks/ batons/ asps
 Leather blackjacks or knives
 Any firearms
 Tasers/ stun guns
 Anything considered a weapon

Weapons Policy:
Some client sites may encourage or
grant their security personnel to
carry pepper spray. Officers who are
unarmed or have no arrest powers
but are allowed to carry pepper
spray is fine. However, to carry this
incapacitating agent, you must be
trained to use it, you must have a
license to carry it, and it must be of
5 or 10% Oleoresin Capsicum (the
active agent in the spray).

Examples of Pepper Spray:

Weapons Policy:
Although regular unarmed
uniformed security officers have
many restrictions in terms of
weapons and arrest powers, there are
certain situations where detaining or
using physical force maybe
necessary. These volatile situations
will most likely involve extreme acts
of violence on your property or acts
of violence against you or a fellow
security officer.

Legal liability & the consequences:

Legal liability & the consequences
If you in the course of your duties as
a corporate security officer elect to
ignore the policies & procedures
outlined here in reference to arrest,
detaining, or use of unauthorized
weapons, then be prepared for costly
consequences. These actions if
engaged in, can be very expensive if
civil litigation is commenced toward
the company, the client company, and
even yourself.

Legal liability & the consequences
Making false arrests or
even briefly detaining an
otherwise free individual,
is a serious, serious
offense, and it won’t be
tolerated.

When a private security
officer abuses his or her
authority and places a
private citizen in
handcuffs, or they detain
them for whatever reason,
then what they are
ultimately doing is:

Giving them alot of CASH!

Legal Authority Recap:
1) A Security Officer is not a police
officer - you do not have the
same job duties as a police
officer, the same training or the
same powers as a peace officer
according to the law.
2) A Security Officer that pretends
or even implies they are a police
officer is committing a crime.

3) A Security Officer's role is to protect
the people and property of his/her
employer or contracted client.
4) A Security Officer's responsibility
before an incident has occurred is
prevention.
5) A Security Officer's responsibility
after an incident-offense has
occurred is to observe and report.

6) A Security Officer should
be highly visible. By
being seen, the officer
may discourage anyone
who might be considering
theft, damage, or
personal injury.

7) A Security Officer should follow
the post orders and policies of
the employer and client he/she is
contracted to as long as it does
not break the security officers'
code of ethics or any laws. These
may include checking ID's,
keeping the parking lot cleared,
observing inside for possible
trouble, etc...

8) If an incident does
occur, observe carefully
and take accurate notes.
Report immediately to
the local law
enforcement and your
supervisor.

9) You do have the power to
arrest (the same as a private
citizen) but the crime must be
done in your presence and
view. Once you make an
arrest you must turn them
over to a peace officer, you
cannot un-arrest them.

Public Law Enforcement

Private Security-Public Safety

A Growing partnership~

The Uniform:

The Hard Look VS. The Soft Look:
There are 2 basic standard uniforms
utilized in the security industry
across the United States today. One
is known as the “hard look” and the
other, the “soft look”. The hard look
is the traditional “police look” which
usually consists of standard blue
police pants (some striped), white or
blue military type shirt, a garrison
belt, metal badge, and sometimes, a
hat- traditional or baseball cap.

The Hard Look VS. The Soft Look:
The “soft look” is most recognized
as the corporate look and
considered more “user friendly”.
The uniform consists of corporate
suit pants (either black, blue, or
grey), a white standard shirt, a
blazer (usually blue or grey), name
tag instead of a badge, and a
dress tie.

Physical Appearance:
How you look is how you’re
treated. If you come into work
dressed like a slob, expect to be
treated like a slob. I have heard
too many times the line “they
don’t respect me”. Don’ start with
the “they don’t respect me”
routine. It is fruitless and an
pointless argument.

As a security professional, if
you are wearing a dirty shirt
that is un-tucked, you are
unshaved, your tie has pizza
sauce on it, your uniform is
not pressed and cleaned, and
or your overall attitude is lax,
then expect “no respect”.

The officer who takes pride in his
uniform and appearance can expect to
be treated with dignity and yes,
“respect”. Your uniform is 50% of your
job and clearly defines you as that of
an authority figure. It represents who
you are and your purpose. The “hard”
or soft” look does not matter in the
grand scheme of things, as long as it
clearly states your position of
authority in the facility assigned.

Anatomy of a Uniform:

Shoes: Black leather shoes that can take
polish. Shoes (depending on site) should be
black leather shoes that can be shined and
always maintained. If there is no
operational or medical reason for personnel
to be wearing soft shoes (sneakers), then
proper dress shoes should be worn, always.
Belts-Black: Belts should be of proper
length and worn through the belt loops.
There should be no “tail” hanging in front as
they may wear their casual cloths.

Socks- Black: If employees state that they
wear athletic socks due to standing posts or
because of tours, suggest that they wear
two pairs of socks, with the outer socks
being the black dress socks. Regardless of
reason, black socks are absolutely required.
Shirt- White: Shirts should be cleaned and
pressed daily. Particular care should be
given to fit and the condition of collars and
cuffs. As the shirt gets older, the collar may
not hold its shape as well it should, even if it
is in good repair. Replace as needed.

Trousers: Proper fit, worn at the waist,
hemmed so that the legs break once when
they hit the top of the shoes. Proper length
of uniform pants is most critical, as poorly
hemmed pants are improper and disgraceful
Ties: Length should be so that the tie
touches the belt buckle or slightly higher,
but never lower than the buckle. Ties shall
always be snug around the collar and never
loosened until the end of your shift(s).

Blazers: Proper fit and dry cleaned
periodically. When ever possible,
blazers should have the top button
buttoned. Blazers are to be worn at all
times, regardless of weather or off
hour shifts. Issued blazers are an
integral and primary tool in your role
as a corporate security officer.
Lapel Pins: To be worn as issued. (Mgt.)

Uniform Tie Regulations

Policy – Corporate security officers
do not have a “summer uniform”.
Thru all 4 seasons, the standard
attire is the blazer, long sleeve white
shirt and tie. These items must be
worn as required no matter what the
climate or weather conditions. There
have been complaints that the blazer
and long sleeve shirt coupled with
the tie are stifling during the hot
summer months and not “fair”.

Policy –
That argument is not valid
and dismissed. Just about
every building lobby I have
been in was well ventilated and
more than reasonably cool.
During breaks, taking the
blazer off is certainly
reasonable.

Uniform Lapel Pins:
Lapel Pins: Lapel pins can be an
integral part of your uniform and your
appearance of authority. Professional,
approved lapel pins without question
give the Officer and the uniform a
much more sharper image. Uniform
lapel pins are generally distributed to
staff by Mgt. and usually notate the
company name and may incorporate
the American flag within it’s design.

Uniform Lapel Pins:
Other acceptable lapel pins are the
ASIS Foundation pins, CPP
designation pins, and the lone
American flag pins. Lapel pins that
promote any political affiliations,
religious preference, sexual
orientation, or national origin are
inappropriate and strictly forbidden
while on duty.

Acceptable Lapel Pins:

Un-Acceptable Lapel Pins:

Fallacy- Commando sweaters can’t be worn with
corporate security attire. Answer. Untrue. Blue
commando sweaters can be worn over the shirt as
long as the tie is visible (top). But not the green type.

Safety- should be worn at all times
while on routine night exterior patrols~

ID Badges: Are to be displayed at all
times while on lobby duty or patrols

Pen and Notebook: Should be carried
at all times to document events / times

No sneakers, fashionable shoes or
high heels are permitted on duty

Black dress shoes or similar style
(Black Leather patent finish)

White under-shirts are the ONLY t-
shirts allowed under your dress
uniform shirt. NO exceptions-

10/31/15 118
NEVER label yourself just a
“Security Guard”. Your not.

10/31/15 119
You are a “Security Officer”

10/31/15 120
Your Uniform defines You

10/31/15 121
Grooming: Him and Her

10/31/15 122
“HIM”
Hair must not extend
past the shirt collar or
cover the ears. Hair
must be neat, clean,
and well groomed.
Sideburns must be
neatly trimmed and
cannot extend past
the bottom of the
earlobe as a rule.
“HER”
Long hair should be
combed away from
the face and secured
for your safety. Any
hair accessory must
be conservative and
complimentary to the
uniform. Extremes in
dying or bleaching
are not permitted.

10/31/15 123
“HIM”
Where permitted under
client standards and or
company policy,
mustaches and beards
must be neatly
trimmed and conform
to the contours of the
face. Generally, a clean
shave daily is expected
and mandatory
“HER”
Hair sculpting or
extreme hairstyles
are not permitted.
Women are permitted
to use conservative
makeup. However
ultimate discretion is
left to that of the
Account or District
Manager for further
review and follow up.

“HIM”
Use of deodorant or
antiperspirant along
with regular bathing is
required due to the
constant interaction
with others. Good
hygiene is healthy and
eliminates the risk of
offending fellow staff,
Mgt. and the public.
“HER”
Fingernails are to be
kept clean and
trimmed. Women
may use nail polish
in a conservative
manner and color.
“Panther Pink” and
“Sublime” nail colors
are not advised…

Jewelery Guidelines:

Jewelry Guidelines:
Rings- Only one ring per hand
is permitted, and it must not be
unreasonably large or
offensive.
Watches and tie clips are
permitted, but bracelets and
chains are not acceptable

Jewelry Guidelines:
Women are permitted to wear
one set of post-style earrings
that may not be larger than a
dime. Men are not permitted to
wear earrings as a rule.
Piercings- NO tongue or nose
piercings

Jewelry Guidelines:
Cover- Hats are not permitted except
where issued as part of the uniform.
Eyewear- Eyeglasses are to be
conservative in style. Sunglasses are
only permitted while on outside duty
during sunny weather and only where
they do not interfere with your duties
of observation and detection methods.
Conservative sunglasses only.

Not Acceptable Jewelry: HER

Acceptable Jewelry: HER

“Not Acceptable Jewelry” Him

Acceptable Jewelry? Him
NO YES

Got tattoos?

Got tattoos?
Tattoos have become very popular
in American culture these past 15-20
years. Tattoos can be colorful and
creative. In terms of tattoos, this
presentation makes no judgement
whatsoever about them. However, in
the corporate workplace, especially
high profile security lobby operations,
they must be covered up. They are not
professional and unacceptable.

“Personal appearance
makes all the difference”

Being responsible, punctual, well
dressed, and detailed are absolute
prerequisites to leadership

Thank you for attending today’s
presentation on
Legal Authority & Uniform Protocols

Legal Authority- Uniform Protocol- Richard Garrity

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

Similar a Legal Authority- Uniform Protocol- Richard Garrity

Similar a Legal Authority- Uniform Protocol- Richard Garrity (20)

Más de Richard Garrity

Más de Richard Garrity (20)

Último

Último (20)

Legal Authority- Uniform Protocol- Richard Garrity