Sick Spies

Channel 4 in D.C. ran a story on the evening news last night about companies who hire investigators to “Spy” on their employees who call in sick and then use the day to go shopping, golfing and even working for other companies.

We have covered this topic before, so the story itself is not new, but what did seem strange, was the newscasters’ attitudes towards the private investigator who had been hired by the company.

One newscaster shook his head and said something like; “Can you believe that guy, he actually enjoys spying on people…what a job, I don’t know how he can do it”. Which leads one to understand that he condones employees who are dishonest and who call in sick when they are perfectly well and able to go to work.

There are some companies who allow employees to accumulate sick days and to get paid for them if they do not use them. On the other hand, if a company allows a person to call in sick only when they are sick and that person then goes out to the golf course, it is fraud.

If you are such an employer and reading this, you are totally within your rights to take measures which would detect an employee committing fraud. Investigators investigate such cases, they do not “spy”. I wonder if Channel 4 news also condones social welfare fraud or those who fraudulently claim workman’s comp?

It is little wonder that people like Bernie Madoff are allowed to steal billions of dollars in ponzi schemes and the mortgage industry issued loans that they new would not be repaid when we see our newscasters feeling empathy for people with fraudulent intent.

Brooklyn Congressman Hires Bodyguard


The New York Post, carrying a story by Natalie O’Neill, is reporting that the first politician to openly admit to hiring a bodyguard for protection in the wake of the Arizona killings is Congressman Micheal Grimm (R- Bay Ridge), from Brooklyn.

In an ironic twist of fate, all of Congressman Grimm’s Democratic collegaues in Brooklyn are stating that they have no intention of hiring security to ensure their safety. Grimm, a former Marine, is not only concerned for his own safety, but the safety of his staffers who accompany him.

It would appear that the decision for many politicians not to hire professional security is down to two reasons. Firstly, they would have to pay for it themselves and secondly, they are afraid of creating barriers between them and their consituents.

Regarding the first concern, it should not be too difficult or controversial to introduce a stipend to assist elected officals hire professional security personnel when they feel a need and can demonstrate that a potential threat may exist.
Afterall, the government already outsources these types of duties to private security firms for coverage in the U.S. and abroad.

Regarding the public being denied access to elected officals, this does not necessarily have to be the case. Whenever talk comes around to security, it is often linked to phrases like; “big, burly security guards”. The public and media alike should realize that Personal Protection, when conducted in a professional manner, is not as obtrusive as one might think.

Personal Protection or Close Protection, involves protecting a person in a very covert manner. Highly trained professionals remain in close enough contact with the person being protected in order to allow them to take action if necessary, whilst at the same time keeping their distance and allowing the person (in this case politician)to engage with the public.

Much planning goes on behind the scenes to allow for this “free flowing” movement. Professionals have an array of tools and devices to aid them. The days of the “big, burly security guard” blocking people’s path are over (for the more enlightened clients anyway). A professional bodyguard could easily pass as a politician’s aide and nobody would be any the wiser.

For more information on Executive Protection Services and to learn how to become an Executive Protection Agent, please visit the E.P. and Training pages of our website; www.sextonsecurity.com.