In an era where security concerns are paramount, businesses and individuals in Ontario are increasingly turning to professional security companies to safeguard their assets and ensure peace of mind. With a multitude of security companies operating in the province, selecting the right one can be a daunting task. This blog post aims to guide you through the process of choosing a reliable security company in Ontario, providing valuable insights specific to the province.
1. Licensing and Accreditation
When considering a security company in Ontario, the first and foremost criterion should be licensing and accreditation. Ensure that the company and its security guards comply with the Private Security and Investigative Services Act (PSISA) regulations. This legislation mandates that all security companies and their personnel must be licensed by the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services. By choosing a licensed security company, you are assured that they meet the necessary standards and have undergone background checks.
2. Industry Experience
An established track record is crucial when selecting a security company. Look for agencies with a proven history of providing security solutions in Ontario. A company with extensive experience is likely to have encountered and successfully addressed a diverse range of security challenges. Consider the number of years a security company has been in operation, and look for testimonials or case studies that highlight their achievements.
3. Range of Services
Different businesses have different security needs. Before finalizing a security company, assess the range of services they offer. Whether it’s manned guarding, mobile patrols, loss prevention, or surveillance, choose a company that aligns with your specific requirements. A comprehensive security agency should be able to tailor their services to meet the unique demands of your business or event.
4. Technology Integration
In the rapidly evolving landscape of security, technology plays a pivotal role. A progressive security company in Ontario should embrace the latest technological advancements to enhance its effectiveness. Look for companies that leverage cutting-edge tools such as CCTV cameras, access control systems, and alarm systems. This integration ensures a more robust and proactive security posture.
5. Reputation and References
Reputation is a key indicator of a security company’s reliability. Research online reviews, seek recommendations from other businesses in your industry, and ask the security company for references. A reputable security company should be transparent about its client satisfaction and readily provide testimonials to showcase their successful partnerships.
6. Cost-Effective Solutions
While cost is a factor, it should not be the sole determinant in choosing a security company. Look for a company that offers cost-effective solutions without compromising on the quality of service. A transparent pricing structure and flexibility in service packages will help you align your security needs with your budget.
Choosing the right security company in Ontario requires careful consideration of factors such as licensing, experience, services offered, technology integration, reputation, and cost. By conducting thorough research and leveraging the examples provided, you can make an informed decision that aligns with your specific security needs.
When news broke recently that the Swedish Data Protection Authority fined a local municipality more than USD $20,000 for privacy violations, it marked the emergence of a potential new front in the struggle to balance privacy rights and security requirements.
Under the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)—sweeping legislation that governs everything from website tracking to data collection practices across the 28-member European Union and European Economic Area—the use of data gathered with the help of facial recognition and biometric software is restricted and tightly controlled by. Apparently, a school board in Sweden didn’t get the memo and used facial recognition software to track high school student attendance over a three-week trial period intended to test out new technology.
The school board saw the tracking software as a more efficient use of teachers’ classroom time. According to media reports, attendance-conscious educators had apparently been devoting about 17,000 hours a year to keeping tabs on their pupils. The SDPA saw the matter differently and issued a significant fine, a first for Sweden.
Prepare to customize your strategy and invest in security components that will mitigate risk and advance your organizations strategic goals.
Tech as a cyber security tool, but to what end?
The European Union has taken the lead in legislating to secure privacy rights and protect citizens, just as authorities in other regions have turned to cutting-edge new technology designed to enhance protection measures for the general public. In the wake of recent shootings in Toronto, for example, the city’s community housing agency has announced plans to increase video surveillance in at-risk neighbourhoods, all to help deter crime and aid police enforcement efforts. In the United Kingdom, cities such as London have long relied on street-level surveillance to maintain safety. The U.S. government has been using biometric technology, including the fingerprinting of foreign visitors, at border crossings for years.
The challenge that arises, of course, is when governments abuse these tools. China has faced widespread criticism for its use of facial recognition and data collection programs in its western provinces to track the local Uyghur community. In other parts of the country, Beijing actively uses technology to help silence or monitor anti-government voices. Many liken the tactics to an Orwellian invasion of privacy, an effort to enforce government-sanctioned values on an unassuming populace.
If a school board in Sweden uses facial recognition technology to track students, some argue, it’s not far-fetched to expect a more widespread application of that software across society. In the hands of a trusted few, there isn’t much concern. But what happens if those individuals can no longer be trusted?
Does your cyber security strategy violate rules? Consult with us to learn more.
Legal systems adapting to new technology
The reality is the use of technology as a protective tool is hardly novel and, in most cases, isn’t nearly as sinister as some may contend. The big question, as with the example from Sweden, is to what degree governments will tolerate its use. Authorities in Canada are beginning to weigh in on the safety and security vs. privacy debate.
In Ontario, for example, a labour arbitrator recently ruled in Teamsters Local Union No. 230 v Innocon Inc., that a concrete delivery company (Innocon) had the right to install cameras in its trucks to help improve driver safety and highlight potential driver misconduct by recording a driver’s actions, but only in the event that the vehicle swerved unexpectedly or took some form of evasive action that could indicate erroneous or erratic driving. In the arbitrator’s view, some level of in-cab monitoring was justified because an employer’s business interests can supersede an employee’s right to privacy under specific circumstances.
Cyber security strategies for business
Business owners should be aware that at any point, our legal landscape could shift and new laws could limit the use of biometric or facial technology when used in public spaces or workplaces. But I predict that governments will take a measured approach to balance privacy and security concerns. It’s likely that we will see a tightening of privacy restrictions in Ontario and across Canada at some point. In the meantime, however, your focus should be on assessing your organization’s security vulnerabilities and taking an integrated approach to protecting your people and assets.
That means reviewing the plethora of tech tools available on the market and deciding which ones make sense for your organization based on its operational needs. Facial recognition technology may make sense for a retailer with several busy locations, for example, but could provide little benefit to a software development firm with much simpler security needs. Be prepared to customize your strategy and invest in security components that will make a decided impact in helping mitigate risk and advancing your organization’s strategic goals (e.g., not being robbed, having your data held hostage, or seeing your commercial property or workplace invaded).
But first, take the time to understand your jurisdiction’s privacy laws. Make sure your security strategy doesn’t violate any rules when the time comes to implement cutting-edge—yet potentially controversial—security technology.
The new BOMA report offers cyber security advice for commercial property owners
We not only live in a world addicted to data, but one that often ignores cyber security.
From our smartphones to the digital personal assistants (Siri, Alexa) that have been marketed as tools to free our time for leisurely pursuits—the jury’s still very much out on whether they’re helping most of us achieve that goal—an increasing number of interactions in our daily lives involve internet-connected digital devices that track human behaviour. Most of this data is benign and has little application outside of the marketing world. When I mention visiting a destination on a social media account, for example, I suddenly find ads for that destination in my news feed. It’s annoying, maybe, but not necessarily a major breach of privacy.
Now, what happens when smart devices start tracking and collecting information across the commercial property?
… attackers are becoming more persistent and patient, whether to gain ransom or cause other damages …
BOMA Canada
Connected commercial properties
No need to wonder because that’s likely already happening in a building you occupy, and perhaps the one you’re sitting in right now. Everything from your building’s door card readers and fire alarm panels to its HVAC system, surveillance cameras, and thermostats could well be connected to the Internet. The potential for efficiencies, cost savings, and property performance improvements are almost too numerous to summarize in a single article. But so, too, are the cyber security risks.
While security firms such as ours still guard against so-called traditional thieves—thieves who break into a facility intent on stealing merchandise or equipment, or engaging in vandalism, for example—Wincon Security has evolved into an integrated solutions provider in recent years precisely because an equal and fast-growing risk exists in the online realm. Sophisticated malfeasants, many of whom are connected to overseas organized crime rings, are looking for easy targets. That means organizations or commercial property owners reluctant or unwilling to invest in a holistic, digitally-focused security strategy to protect their assets are gravely exposed.
Why wait-and-see never works
Unfortunately, many organizations take a cross-your-fingers approach to security, betting that they’re too small or their data is too invaluable to draw the attention of cyber thieves. That is until they’re hit. Then most are left scrambling trying to restore systems or pay ransoms to recover data and rebuild their businesses after an online attack.
Ensure your security personnel is well trained in mitigating cyber threats as they are standing guard. Consult with Wincon today to learn more.
So great is the threat that BOMA Canada recently published a Cyber Wellness Guide for commercial property owners. In it, the organization notes:
The IIoT (Industrial Internet of Things) currently in the market is geared towards user value and hasn’t necessarily been looked at from a thorough cyber security perspective. That increases the onus on building managers to have a robust plan to prevent and deal with cyber issues.
In addition to the expanding network of smart devices, attackers are also becoming more persistent and patient, whether it is to gain ransom from you or to cause other damage. In addition to local hackers who may use phishing attacks or ransomware to cause potential damage, there are international threats too as proximity does not matter when dealing with cyber risks, and no sector is immune.
Indeed, it’s not alarmist to assume that a hacker could breach your building’s cyber defences (assuming they’re in place, which isn’t always a given), steal data, and even coordinate with thieves to break into your facility. If your organization happens to deal in high-value or sensitive materials, this is of particular concern. So, what’s a property owner or manager to do?
Be proactive to bolster cyber security
As the BOMA report notes, it all starts with preparation. Having tools such as firewalls, anti-virus software or endpoint security on laptops and other vulnerable devices in place is crucial. Huge advancements are also being made with artificial intelligence technology to detect breaches long before they become obvious or increase risk. Of course, staff training is another important consideration—and that includes making sure that security personnel is as well trained in mitigating cyber threats as they are in monitoring traditional causes of building vulnerability or standing on guard to prevent incidents such as physical break-ins.
Having a significant security budget in place is another important consideration that many property owners overlook—particularly if they’re prone to trying to look for ways to maximize profitability at the expense of all other considerations. That budget should include line items for both physical and cyber security measures. From there your team will need a cyber security plan that can be implemented at a moment’s notice if a data breach occurs. The plan should be customized to your specific needs and be comprehensive enough to address a range of possible scenarios.
Most importantly, be sure to work with a security provider who understands the risks involved as the IIoT becomes ubiquitous, cyber threats increase and the need for solutions integration becomes more important than ever. Because the last thing any busy commercial property owner should waste time fretting over is whether a hacker in some far-flung locale is preparing to compromise the security of their data or their facility.
You know a situation is bad when even local governments are calling in the IT cavalry for help. But that’s the reality for municipalities struggling to combat increasingly frequent ransomware attacks that are targeting towns and cities across North America.
The problem is so severe that the Association of Municipalities of Ontario—a body that represents 444 of the province’s towns and cities—is encouraging greater information collecting and sharing between members, and calling on senior levels of government to provide funding to help protect their data and fend off this growing threat.
“AMO has also been urging the provincial and federal governments to work closely with municipal governments to help protect governments from cyberattacks, and to help public services weather attacks with less disruption,” AMO President Jamie McGarvey, the mayor of Parry Sound, Ont., told the Toronto Star, as published in a recent article.
Ransomware—a type of cybercrime where a hacker seizes or encrypts data and demands some form of payment, often untrackable Bitcoin, for its release—isn’t just plaguing big cities such as Toronto. Smaller communities with less robust digital infrastructure are also prime targets. So far the victims include Wasaga Beach, Stratford, and Midland, to name only a few. More are sure to follow.
Once you get a $1M ransom note from a hacker to release your data, the costs of being proactive seem more than reasonable.
A North America-wide problem
If it offers any comfort to municipalities and business owners in Ontario, a recent New York Times piece reminds us that hackers using ransomware to hijack public or private data do not discriminate when it comes to nationality. This is far from a Canadian phenomenon:
“More than 40 municipalities have been the victims of cyberattacks this year, from major cities such as Baltimore, Albany, and Laredo, Tex., to smaller towns including Lake City, Fla. Lake City is one of the few cities to have paid a ransom demand — about $460,000 in Bitcoin, a cryptocurrency — because it thought reconstructing its systems would be even more costly
In most ransomware cases, the identities and whereabouts of culprits are cloaked by clever digital diversions. Intelligence officials, using data collected by the National Security Agency and others in an effort to identify the sources of the hacking, say many have come from Eastern Europe, Iran, and, in some cases, the United States. The majority have targeted small-town America, figuring that sleepy, cash-strapped local governments are the least likely to have updated their cyber defences or backed up their data.”
And therein lies the challenge. Many municipal governments have cut their IT budgets to such a degree (or never funded them properly in the first place) that their systems are virtually open to Ransomware attacks by cybercriminals. In some cases, data is being held hostage for millions of dollars. While in many instances these crimes are being orchestrated by sophisticated organized crime syndicates, a skilled teenager with a laptop can manage the same feat with minimal effort.
It’s one thing to lock up the data of an SME, but what happens when entire hospitals or health care systems are shut down by a clever hacker with a grudge, or a desire to cash in? These attacks are becoming so sophisticated that civic agencies and businesses of all sizes and across industries are at risk.
Don’t let your city or municipality data be affected by Ransomware or other cybercrimes.
A very human problem
As I’ve noted in previous blogs, most cybersecurity vulnerabilities stem from human error or negligence. Case in point: the town of Allentown, Pa., was targeted in a malware attack last year that shut down some municipal computers for weeks. The hacker exploited a vulnerability in a single employee’s laptop while that worker was on the road. Not surprisingly, the laptop hadn’t been updated to the latest software and was an easy target for the malware-toting hacker. That attack cost about $1 million to fix.
Now imagine that same unexpected cost taking a nasty bite out of your balance sheet and annual financial projections. When figures such as those are bandied about, it brings home the scope and seriousness of the problem—and underscores the need to take action.
That requires policies that ensure regular software updates of all machines, especially if your employees work off-site. It requires sufficient spending on IT, security and employee training. If we all agree that this is a ‘people’ challenge, we can start taking steps to fix the problem.
Employees should be trained to recognize phishing emails. They need to be equipped with VPNs for off-site work, and an understanding that websites that look fake often are—and are potentially run by a hacker residing in the cyber netherworld, waiting to pounce on an unsuspecting victim. They must also never share passwords and should change theirs on a regular basis.
These are all seemingly rudimentary best practices—and this is by no means an exhaustive list of essential cybersecurity tactics—but when combined, they form the foundation of an effective cybersecurity net that can protect an organization from digital worst-case scenarios.
Because once you get a $1 million ransom note from a hacker to release your data, the costs of being proactive seem quite reasonable by comparison.
ARE YOU INTERESTED IN SECURITY FOR YOUR SITE?
FILL OUT OUR QUOTE FORM AND ENJOY A CONSULTATION WITH US.
For risk-averse commercial property owners, managers, and condominium managers—not to mention any company that has employees—unaware of the general duty clause contained in Ontario’s Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA), now is the time to get educated.
The principle behind the clause is simple. The Act states that employers must “take every precaution reasonable for the protection of a worker …” The measure is intended to ensure that organizations don’t cut corners to lower costs in areas such as workplace safety, thereby putting individuals at risk of injury—or worse.
But an Ontario Court of Appeal decision in Ontario (Labour) v. Quinton Steel (Wellington) Limited, 2017, greatly broadened that concept and should give property owners and managers pause. Now, basic compliance with the Act is likely no longer enough to satisfy the general duty test—a development that vastly increases prosecution exposures. It forces employers to analyze risk at all levels and take enhanced precautions that could far exceed legislated minimums.
Avoid fighting a liability case in court with our expert security solutions assessment.
Workplace liability exposures on the rise
In the Quinton Steel case, an employee died after falling from a two-metre platform. The welder who fell was not required to tie off at that height, nor did OHSA standards deem it necessary to install a guardrail across the platform on which he was working. A lower court dismissed charges against the firm until an Appeal Court judge overturned that earlier decision.
In his ruling, the Appeal Court judge explained:
“… Prescriptive certainty is not required in the context of regulatory offenses such as s. 25(2)(h) [of the OHSA]. That section establishes a standard, rather than a rule, the requirements of which are tailored to suit particular circumstances. Employers must take every precaution reasonable in the circumstances in order to protect workers. Reasonableness is a well-known legal concept that is interpreted and applied in a wide variety of legal contexts. Its use in s 25(2)(h) does not give rise to intolerable uncertainty.
“It may not be possible for all risk to be eliminated from a workplace … but it does not follow that employers need do only as little as is specifically prescribed in the regulations. There may be cases in which more is required – in which additional safety precautions tailored to fit the distinctive nature of a workplace are reasonably required … in order to protect workers.”
In other words, even though the employer didn’t have to use a guard rail or require its employees to tie off at the height from which the welder fell, the judge’s ruling indicates that management should have identified the risks and acted above and beyond those minimal legislative requirements.
This means that as a commercial property owner or manager, anyone working on or around your commercial property is effectively the liability of your organization; their safety in the workplace is of the utmost importance and cannot be ignored. In 2017, the government boosted OHSA non-compliance fines to $100,000 from $25,000 for an individual or unincorporated business, and to $1.5 million from $500,000 for corporations—further underscoring organizations’ impetus to comply.
Virtual monitoring and HD surveillance cameras can combat workplace liability.
Leveraging expert security solutions to mitigate legal risk
As you read this you may be wondering: why is a security agency working to educate its readers about a relatively obscure, albeit highly significant, legal consideration? Because your organization’s security team—whether staffed by in-house employees or outsourced to a company such as Wincon Security—can be the first line of defense in highlighting potential risk exposures.
The first step in our comprehensive client onboarding process, for example, involves a thorough property risk assessment. It isn’t simply meant to highlight potential security issues such as outdated camera systems or inadequate card access technology. It’s also intended to alert property owners and managers to other challenges that could result in fines or lawsuits. Our guards are not only trained to be on the lookout for potential risk areas during that initial assessment but throughout the entirety of our client engagements.
Adequate security training is crucial
In many cases our team will recommend one of our integrated solutions such as HD surveillance cameras, not only to monitor a property but to also provide a record of events should an incident occur that could lead to litigation. At the same time, our guards prepare daily reports (in addition to specific incident reports) designed to proactively flag risk areas. Let’s say you have contractors renovating your property and our guards see them acting unsafely, perhaps ignoring safety procedures such as tying off at heights or engaging in any other form of unsafe conduct. They won’t hesitate to bring the issue to a supervisor’s attention, who will then follow our incident response process and put it firmly on your risk-mitigation radar.
Because the courts have made it clear that organizations need to take every reasonable precaution—and then some—to prevent accidents and assume that risks may exist virtually everywhere, our clients need all hands on deck to mitigate the threat of prosecution. Expert security solutions like ours can fulfill that role, but it’s incumbent on property owners to ensure they choose the right firm to protect their interests. Not every security provider has the training processes in place to ensure their people go above and beyond the call of duty.
Take the time to vet several expert security solution companies and choose wisely. Doing so could save you time and stress—and enormous amounts of money—fighting a case in court if an accident occurs on the premises of your commercial property, retail outlet, or condominium.
Hire a security solutions company that takes a customized approach
One of the most interesting aspects of running a commercial property security business is being able to work with clients that have previously engaged with other firms in our industry. Maybe this applies to your company.
What we’ve found is that many of our competitors deliver security plans that are generic, non-specific, and inadequate. Why? Because many firms use templated action plans that can be standardized and rolled out time and again, no matter the client. While this helps maximize the efficiency and profitability of the security firm, what I would call the McDonalds-ization of commercial property protection offers few benefits to clients.
No two commercial properties—be it retail, commercial, condominium, office, or industrial building—are the same. They all have unique needs that require customized, expert security solutions that address your short- and long-term needs and goals. If not, your assets will remain vulnerable and an ideal target for the bad guys who might look to vandalize or break into your space.
Your security plan may be right for today but can it scale with your business as it grows and changes?
And make no mistake, professional criminals know the security firms that are more diligent and detailed as compared to those that are not. They tend to prey on the latter and design their plans accordingly.
As a commercial property owner or manager, look for a security company that comes to the table with a tailored strategy suited to your needs—not someone else’s. With that in mind, here are four important questions to ask when engaging with a security firm and evaluating their proposed security program:
Does it reflect your distinct requirements?—Before signing on with a security firm, sit down with your staff and determine what you think is your organization’s commercial property security needs. Perhaps you store hazardous chemicals at your facility, for example, or operate on a 24-hour basis meaning you require round-the-clock protection. Whatever the case, it helps to have at least a basic understanding of your unique security needs. When engaging with a firm, make sure they ask those same questions. Again, many will offer a generic plan, but only a thorough security risk assessment can define the ideal approach for protecting your property. If your security provider isn’t willing to take that step, be prepared to look elsewhere for help.
Does it integrate technology solutions?—This is a very important consideration at a time when everything from high-resolution cameras to drones and robot security guards are revolutionizing our industry. Any coherent commercial property security proposal should include a relevant security component when applicable. That could be something as simple as the use of electronic checkpoints to track guards’ movements or as complex as a complete integration of security systems across your IT infrastructure for ease in monitoring properties. Such considerations are no longer the domain of large, deep-pocketed security companies. They’re a pre-requisite for doing business in our industry, and a key element that you should expect to see in any security plan.
Can your security company build a customized approach to suit you at all levels?
Is it priced right?—Price points vary greatly across the commercial property security industry in Canada. As in any sector, larger, reputable firms will generally charge more than their smaller competitors. But that isn’t always the case. Sometimes industry behemoths will look to undercut their tiny rivals by offering security services at near break-even rates, particularly when they have other, highly profitable products and services to up-sell. As is the golden rule when buying any service, you only get what you pay for. Be just as wary of providers who undercharge as those who try to gouge clients based on perceived brand reputation and industry clout. Look for providers willing to work within your budget and establish a tiered rate card based on your individual property needs.
Does it scale?—The plan may be appropriate for today, but what happens when your facility-protection needs change, or you add more properties to your commercial portfolio? Can that security provider adjust its strategy to address those changing needs? Be mindful of how the security agency is managed, and particularly whether management is organized and willing to grow its business alongside yours.
It’s only once you have the answers to these critical questions that you can choose the security company best suited to protect your commercial property assets. And from someone with 25 years of experience in the industry, believe me when I say that it’s well worth taking ample time to come to the right decision.
DO YOU NEED EXPERT SECURITY SOLUTIONS?
FILL OUT OUR QUOTE FORM AND ENJOY A CONSULTATION WITH US.
This blog is part of our ongoing Wincon Team blogging initiative, designed to keep our employees up-to-date on company and security-industry news and developments
As always, this New Year brought with it a sense of hope, prosperity and energy to propel our business forward in 2018. It also introduced The Fair Workplaces, Better Jobs Act—better known as Bill 148.
The legislation transformed many of Ontario’s labour and employment laws, adding new penalties for employers that misclassify their employees as contractors, extended vacation time for some workers and made significant amendments to shift-scheduling rules, among many other changes. But for most of you, the most significant impact of Bill 148 is on your pay cheques.
Effective January 1, the legislation increased the province’s minimum wage to $14 per hour from $11.60. That hourly minimum will jump to $15 on January 1, 2019.
Now, you’ve probably read numerous headlines about the running battle between Premier Kathleen Wynne and various small business owners who cut shifts or slashed employee benefits in the wake of the minimum wage increase. In my view, the Premier’s attempt to portray small and medium-sized business owners as ‘bullies’ is both unfair and a deliberate distraction from the fact a great number of businesses took a direct hit to their bottom-line with the sharp increase in the minimum wage.
To be clear, I’m all for a strong living wage. All of you do great work—in fact, you’re the backbone of our company’s success!—and deserve every penny you earn. The greatest concern expressed by the entrepreneurial community has to do with the speed at which these changes were implemented. Many companies have, indeed, had to cut staff hours, lay off workers or make other operational or compensatory adjustments to stay afloat—that includes businesses of all sizes ranging from Tim Hortons franchisees to retail powerhouses such as Wal-Mart.
Our strategy was very different.
First, we decided that adequate staffing and coverage were far too important to compromise. So, too, was the strength of our company culture. We have a very positive, productive—and I would argue—innovative workplace, and we were determined not to upset that fine balance by thinning our employee ranks.
So, with that strategic decision in hand, we made our next move, which was to increase prices for our clients. This is never an easy task, nor is it a simple message to deliver to customers who need to carefully consider any increase to their business overhead costs. But here’s what I wanted you to know: our clients love the service we provide, and they love working with all of you. With the exception of only a limited few who simply couldn’t manage the extra costs, the organizations understood that a price increase was necessary as Bill 148 came into effect.
I want you to know that we’ve maintained a strong client base and our bottom-line is intact. You can rest assured that there won’t be any significant changes to staffing, other than our usual shifts in personnel as we address operational changes and requirements. In addition, we won’t be cutting hours. If anything, the new minimum wage has made us stronger by highlighting just how strong our client relationships are, as well as the extraordinary work each of you do to service our clients.
I’m all about finding silver linings in the face of adversity, and I think I just discovered another one as we stared down a seemingly insurmountable financial obstacle. As we continue to celebrate our 25th anniversary, you can even expect us to unveil new employee-training initiatives and strategies to further strengthen our already amazing culture.
With that in mind, my only request is that all of you keep up the great work, continue making our clients happy and never stop contributing your remarkable ideas and ingenuity as we work together to make 2018 our company’s most successful year ever!
The New Year brought with it new challenges for owners of small and medium-sized businesses across Ontario.
On January 1st, The Fair Workplaces, Better Jobs Act—better known as Bill 148—came into effect. The legislation makes significant changes to Ontario’s labour and employment law landscape, from extending paid vacation for qualifying employees, to making it easier to unionize. Other new compliance requirements will be rolled out this year and next.
But there was one major amendment that sent shockwaves across the province’s entrepreneurial community: an increase of the minimum wage to $14 per hour from $11.60, with another $1 jump slated for Jan. 1, 2019.
Almost immediately, business owners took action to protect their bottom lines. Some laid off workers, while others eliminated paid breaks and rolled back some paid benefits. The latter was the case at several Tim Hortons franchises in Cobourg, Ont., owned and operated by Ron Joyce Jr. and his wife, Jeri Horton-Joyce—the son and daughter of company founders Ron Joyce and Tim Horton, respectively.
In response to the Joyce’s cost-saving moves, Premier Kathleen Wynne decried the actions of the Tim’s franchisees and cautioned others who might consider similar changes in future. The Ministry of Labour promised to crack down on any organization that violated the Employment Standards Act to protect its profit margins in the wake of the minimum wage increase.
Labour Minister Kevin Flynn followed by saying this: “The problem with the minimum wage was that the baseline was too low. We were doing it the right way, but we started from too low a place. So, what we don’t want to do is we don’t want to politicize this issue again.”
He’s right. ‘Politicizing the issue’ is exactly what should be avoided.
To be clear, our organization stands firm in its support for a strong living wage for our employees—many of whom earn at or near the minimum. In our view, providing adequate pay helps our staff make ends meet, helps ease the many financial stresses they might encounter, and helps them be better, more productive employees—not to mention engaged members of society who don’t have to struggle simply to put food on the table. That’s a win-win for our province and everyone across the political spectrum.
The challenge with raising the province’s base salary by nearly 30 per cent literally overnight is that it created an unbearable burden for entrepreneurs. And no, most business owners are not multimillionaires who can afford to shoulder the burden of such a rapid increase in overhead costs.
According to the Great White North Franchisee Association, which represents more than 50 per cent of Tim Hortons franchisees, the new minimum wage will cost the average Tim’s franchise $243,889.10 per year. Those numbers are staggering. Worse, they could send some franchises into bankruptcy. But the ripple effect doesn’t end with restaurants and food services companies. Other, far larger, firms such as Wal-Mart announced layoffs soon after the wage spiked.
I think we can all agree that our small and medium-sized business owners contribute a great deal to Ontario’s economy, including innovative new products and services, all while driving economic activity and helping to create jobs that fuel our province’s growth. A simple compromise—namely, a more gradual increase in wages—would have helped mitigate the impact of these changes.
It’s important to remember that entrepreneurs are not bullies. We’re simply trying to earn a living ourselves, while also keeping our staff employed in the face of crippling changes to the provincial business landscape. That’s not an easy task at the best of times—less so in the face of sweeping amendments to employment standards laws and compliance requirements.
When the Ontario government announced plans earlier this year to increase the province’s minimum wage, many small and medium-sized business owners like you were stunned by the pace of change being proposed by the current Ontario government. I shared in your disbelief.
The minimum wage hike is contained in Bill 148, the Fair Workplaces, Better Jobs Act 2017, which increases the rate from the current $11.40 per hour to $14 per hour on Jan. 1, 2018. It will jump again, to $15 per hour, on Jan. 1, 2019. In addition, the new law is introducing a host of legislative amendments including increasing the minimum paid vacation time for employees, increasing paid emergency leave entitlements, banning sick notes and amending employee scheduling rules under the Employment Standards Act.
That’s only the tip of the iceberg in terms of Bill 148’s potential impact on Ontario businesses.
Leading the way with a winning team
To be clear, Wincon Security is a proud employer to more than 300 Ontarians on a full- and part-time basis. We believe that everyone deserves a fair living wage and good working conditions. In our 25th anniversary year, we’re proud to have earned a reputation as one of the Greater Toronto Area’s finest security firms, not to mention one of its best employers.
Our employees are the backbone of our business. They are the reason we’ve achieved success and continued to grow. As our expansion continues and as we complete our transition to being a full-service integration solutions company, we’re finding creative new ways to celebrate our workforce. That’s why we’re making new investments in employee training and career development, optimizing our technology offering and integrating new globally-sourced security solutions.
None of that would be possible without our dedicated team leading the way.
We’ve earned the reputation of one of Toronto’s best security companies.
Headwinds for Ontario’s business community
The unfortunate aspect of Ontario’s minimum wage increase is that it will force organizations such as ours to adjust client rates to account for a measure that will undoubtedly have a negative bottom-line impact on not only our company, but thousands of others across the province.
Do workers in Ontario deserve a modernized Employment Standards Act that better serves their interests at a time when external factors such as globalization and automation potentially threaten their livelihoods? Absolutely. Do they deserve an even playing field that allows workers to better market their skills and services and negotiate higher wages with employers? Without a doubt.
But the reality is that Bill 148 goes too far, too fast.
Good intentions, unintended (job-killing) consequences
A recent Fraser Institute study confirms the harsh impact the minimum wage increase will have on SMEs, particularly those outside of the GTA. Researchers found that because more organizations outside of major centres such as Toronto rely on workers who earn at or near the minimum wage, smaller towns and cities will struggle to keep pace with the increase. The study’s authors predict that employers will be forced to lay off workers or resort to further automation to accommodate the increase.
Indeed, even the Financial Accountability Office of Ontario predicted that the hike would cost Ontario approximately 50,000 jobs, largely concentrated among teens and young adults. “The government’s proposal to raise Ontario’s general minimum wage to $15 per hour will dramatically increase the number of minimum wage workers from just over 500,000 currently to 1.6 million in 2019,” the report stated, further underscoring the unintended consequences that are likely to emerge from the government’s otherwise well-intentioned decision.
Fully committed to customer service excellence
Small and medium-sized business across the province simply can’t absorb the cost of these legislative changes without cutting staff, increasing prices or curbing further expansion—maybe all of the above. In our case, we will not compromise our service standard by slashing headcount or taking any action that could affect the safety and security of the properties and assets we protect. Service excellence is our top priority, and on that front, we simply will not waiver.
But the minimum wage increase will prove challenging for our business going forward. With a proactive management approach and smart decision-making, we’ll find ways to thrive under this new minimum-wage structure. I worry that others may not be as lucky.
