Security Officer Tentative Agreements
The previous agreement lacked clear structure and definition around how Security Officer work is organized and governed.
Members needed clarity on what work is covered, how responsibilities are defined, and how the agreement applies across locations and situations.
This agreement establishes a clear framework for Security Officer work, defining the scope of duties and the structure of the agreement itself.
It outlines how responsibilities are assigned, how the agreement applies in operational settings, and sets the foundation for all other provisions in the contract.
By formalizing the structure, the agreement improves consistency, reduces ambiguity, and strengthens enforceability across the system.
Security Officers perform important emergency-related work, but those responsibilities needed to be clearly recognized in the agreement.
Members needed language that reflects the real responsibilities they may be expected to handle during emergency situations.
This agreement confirms that Security Officers may be responsible for alarm response and emergency support duties.
These responsibilities may include contacting EMT, fire, ambulance, or police services when needed.
The agreement also recognizes that Security Officers may administer first aid, CPR, AED support, and other emergency aid when necessary.
This language better reflects the seriousness of the work and formally acknowledges duties that can arise during emergency conditions.
Escort responsibilities and access control duties are a regular part of Security Officer work, but needed to be clearly defined in the agreement.
Members needed clarity on expectations when escorting individuals and managing secure areas.
This agreement formally recognizes escort duties as part of Security Officer responsibilities, including escorting individuals who do not have authorized access to secure areas.
It establishes expectations for maintaining control and security during escorts, ensuring that access protocols are followed consistently.
The agreement also reinforces the role of Security Officers in protecting restricted areas and supporting overall operational security.
These provisions clarify responsibilities and strengthen consistency in how access control and escort duties are carried out.
Members needed a clear and consistent process for how work schedules are assigned and how shift preferences are determined.
Without a structured bidding system, schedule assignments could feel unpredictable or uneven.
This agreement establishes a formal work schedule bidding process, ensuring that shifts are awarded through a transparent system.
Schedule bids are awarded based on seniority among qualified employees, creating a fair and predictable method for assigning work hours.
The agreement also defines how schedules are posted and how the bidding process is conducted.
These provisions improve consistency and give members a clear understanding of how their schedules are determined.
Members needed defined time and structure for Union representation within the Security Officer group.
Without dedicated time, representation duties can be difficult to balance alongside regular job responsibilities.
This agreement establishes a defined annual bank of Union time, with 500 hours funded by the Company for Security Officer representation.
It ensures that Union representatives have the ability to perform their duties without conflicting with their assigned work schedules.
The agreement also reinforces the structure of representation within the group, supporting consistent and effective member advocacy.
Members needed clarity on whether vaccination requirements could be implemented without agreement.
There were concerns about unilateral policy changes affecting employment conditions.
This agreement establishes that the Company cannot unilaterally implement a vaccination requirement unless required by law or government mandate.
Any vaccination policy must comply with applicable legal requirements and cannot be imposed solely at the Company’s discretion.
This ensures that any future requirements are tied to external legal standards rather than internal decision-making.