NOTICE TO SECURITY INDUSTRY WORKERS

On April 15, 2010, a new regulation prescribing basic training and testing requirements for security guards and private investigators will come into force.

New Applicants

New applicants for a security guard or private investigator licence, who have not been licensed by April 15, 2010, will have to complete a basic training course and pass the prescribed test before their application can be considered.

Existing Licence Holders

Existing licensees do not need to take the basic training course if they pass the test before the renewal of their licence.

Those whose licences expire between April 15 and July 15, 2010, will not be required to pass the test until their 2011 renewal.

Those whose licences expire on or after July 16, 2010, will have to pass the test before the expiry of their current licences in order to renew them.

Training and Testing

Training will be available through licensed agencies, public universities and colleges, and private career colleges. Registered business entities may also train their own employees.

The test will be available after April 15 and individuals may write the test more than once if necessary. However, existing licensees must pass the test before their renewal date.

For more information, please visit the ministry’s website at www.ontario.ca/securitytraining or call the Private Security and Investigative Services Branch, Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services at 416-212-1650 or toll-free at 1-866-767-7454.

Paid for by the Government of Ontario

 AVIS AUX TRAVAILLEURS DE L’INDUSTRIE DES SERVICES PRIVÉS DE SÉCURITÉ

 Le 15 avril 2010, un nouveau règlement prescrivant des exigences relatives à une formation de base et des examens pour les agents de sécurité et enquêteurs privés entrera en vigueur.

Auteurs d’une demande de nouveau permis

Les auteurs d’une demande de permis d’agent de sécurité ou d’enquêteur privé qui n’ont pas reçu leur permis avant cette date devront suivre un programme de formation de base et réussir à un examen prescrit avant que leur demande ne soit examinée.

Titulaires actuels d’un permis

Les titulaires actuels d’un permis n’ont pas besoin de suivre le cours de formation de base s’ils réussissent à l’examen avant le renouvellement de leur permis.

Ceux et celles dont le permis expire entre le 15 avril et le 15 juillet 2010 ne devront pas réussir à l’examen avant le renouvellement de leur permis de 2011.

Ceux et celles dont le permis expire le 16 juillet 2010 ou après cette date devront réussir à l’examen avant l’expiration de leur permis actuel pour pouvoir le renouveler.

Formation et examens

La formation peut être dispensée par des agences de services privés de sécurité titulaires d’un permis, des universités et collèges publics et des collèges privés d’enseignement professionnel. Les entreprises inscrites seront autorisées à former leurs propres employés.

L’examen sera offert après le 15 avril et les candidats peuvent se présenter à l’examen plus d’une fois au besoin. Toutefois, les titulaires actuels de permis doivent réussir à l’examen avant la date de renouvellement de leur permis.

Pour plus d’information, veuillez visiter le site Web du ministère, à www.ontario.ca/securiteformation ou appeler la Direction des services privés de sécurité et d’enquête du ministère de la Sécurité communautaire et des Services correctionnels, au 416 212-1650 ou, sans frais, au 1 866-767-7454.

Annonce payée par le gouvernement de l’Ontario.

By Sarah Schmidt, Canwest News Service    November 11, 2009

Canada’s privacy czar is facing demands from key players in the insurance industry to butt out of claim investigations and to stop complaining about the use of covert video surveillance to catch suspected insurance cheats. After fielding a growing number of complaints against insurance companies, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner issued guidelines to the private sector in May to protect people against covert video surveillance, characterizing it as an “extremely privacy-invasive form of technology” to be considered “only in the most limited cases.”

“Covert surveillance is an intrusive act, and, if there are other means to resolve a dispute, we believe they should be explored first,” such as independent medical exams, assistant commissioner Elizabeth Denham said. Private investigators have fired back, calling on the insurance industry to disregard the directives. “Our advice to the industry is, if you need to investigate, do not be deterred by the privacy commissioner’s guidelines,” said Norman Groot, counsel to the Canadian Association of Private Investigators.

“We challenge the privacy commissioner on the existence and scope of a right to privacy in public places, and we say that, where there are flags of fraud, the right to defend and the right to investigate supersedes another’s right to privacy of their image in a public place.” The country’s privacy watchdog is also fending off a State Farm Insurance legal challenge questioning her jurisdiction over investigations in the first place.

The largest property and casualty insurer in North America is asking the federal court to rule that personal information collected during these investigations, including copies of covert video surveillance reports and tapes, falls outside the scope of Canada’s private sector privacy law. State Farm turned to the court in response to an investigation of a complaint against the insurance company. A man under covert video surveillance complained to the privacy commissioner after the company refused to provide him with the information compiled about him.

State Farm is seeking an order that the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) does not apply to the privacy interests of the man under surveillance. This is the second challenge to the privacy czar’s authority this year from an insurance company.

Following an investigation into the covert surveillance practices of a private investigation firm working on behalf of an insurance company, the privacy commissioner determined the complaint was well-founded and recommended the firm depersonalize or remove third parties caught on video without their consent. In this case, a mother and daughter were videotaped during covert surveillance of the mother’s sister, who had begun legal proceedings against her insurer over benefits following a car accident.

The privacy commissioner also found that the collection, use or disclosure of personal information about third parties without their consent was only acceptable in certain, specific situations: for example, when the information is relevant to the purpose of the collection of information about the subject of the surveillance. The privacy commissioner declined to bring an application to Federal Court to enforce the recommendations even though the firm refused to implement the recommendations.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen