In recent years, the UK security industry has seen a worrying trend: the increasing use of labour providers by security companies to fulfil contracts. While outsourcing labour might seem like a convenient and cost-effective solution on the surface, the reality is far more complex—and often, far more damaging.

What Are Labour Providers?

Labour providers are third-party companies that supply personnel to other businesses, including security firms. Rather than hiring their own staff directly, some security companies now rely on these providers to meet staffing demands for manned guarding, event security, and even alarm response services.

In many cases, this arrangement is not disclosed to the end client, who assumes they are receiving services from a vetted and professional team employed by the contracted security firm.

The Negative Effects of Labour Provider Dependency

While outsourcing in itself isn’t inherently unethical, the unchecked use of labour providers in the security sector introduces a host of significant problems:

1. Lack of Accountability and Oversight

When a labour provider is used, the security company has limited control over who is sent to work. Vetting, background checks, licensing compliance (such as SIA accreditation), and even basic training standards can fall through the cracks. The end result? Security personnel who may not meet contractual, ethical, or legal standards—posing a direct risk to the people and property they’re meant to protect.

2. Breach of Contractual Obligations

Many security contracts—especially those awarded by local authorities—explicitly require that the contracted company provides in-house staff. Yet, some providers flout these rules, hiding behind ambiguous subcontracting arrangements. They claim the personnel are “their own,” while in fact these individuals are sourced through opaque labour providers. This not only breaches the terms of the contract but undermines the integrity of the procurement process.

3. Hidden Employment Practices

Labour providers often operate under less scrutiny than established security firms. This opens the door to exploitative employment practices—low wages, lack of holiday pay, no job security, and little to no investment in training. In the long term, this erodes standards across the industry, undercuts responsible providers, and devalues the profession of security altogether.

4. Client Unawareness

Perhaps the most alarming aspect is that most clients—especially public sector organisations—have no idea this is happening. They believe their premises are being secured by vetted, professional staff from the contractor they’ve hired. In reality, they’re getting temporary or freelance labour from unknown sources, with no transparency or accountability in sight.

The Public Sector and the Outsourcing Problem

It’s not just private companies falling into this trap. Numerous local authorities across the UK have awarded sizable security contracts to large firms, only to discover—sometimes too late—that those firms are subcontracting the work to hidden labour providers. This is in clear breach of many public sector procurement rules, which stipulate transparency, direct provision, and due diligence in service delivery.

Some security firms play a dangerous game of semantics, claiming the labour provider staff are “self-employed under their supervision” or “subcontracted through an approved route.” In reality, these arrangements are often veiled attempts to cut costs and inflate margins, while passing the risk on to the end user and the public.

Why This Matters

Security isn’t just another service—it’s a matter of safety, trust, and public confidence. When companies put profit above professional standards by outsourcing to undisclosed labour providers, they jeopardise the entire sector. Clients, particularly in the public sector, must demand full transparency, verify who is delivering the service, and hold providers to account.

At Doyle Security, we take pride in delivering our services through a fully-employed, rigorously vetted team. We believe security contracts should be fulfilled with integrity, professionalism, and accountability—values that cannot be subcontracted out.

In recent years, the UK security industry has seen a worrying trend: the increasing use of labour providers by security companies to fulfil contracts. While outsourcing labour might seem like a convenient and cost-effective solution on the surface, the reality is far more complex—and often, far more damaging.

What Are Labour Providers?

Labour providers are third-party companies that supply personnel to other businesses, including security firms. Rather than hiring their own staff directly, some security companies now rely on these providers to meet staffing demands for manned guarding, event security, and even alarm response services.

In many cases, this arrangement is not disclosed to the end client, who assumes they are receiving services from a vetted and professional team employed by the contracted security firm.

The Negative Effects of Labour Provider Dependency

While outsourcing in itself isn’t inherently unethical, the unchecked use of labour providers in the security sector introduces a host of significant problems:

1. Lack of Accountability and Oversight

When a labour provider is used, the security company has limited control over who is sent to work. Vetting, background checks, licensing compliance (such as SIA accreditation), and even basic training standards can fall through the cracks. The end result? Security personnel who may not meet contractual, ethical, or legal standards—posing a direct risk to the people and property they’re meant to protect.

2. Breach of Contractual Obligations

Many security contracts—especially those awarded by local authorities—explicitly require that the contracted company provides in-house staff. Yet, some providers flout these rules, hiding behind ambiguous subcontracting arrangements. They claim the personnel are “their own,” while in fact these individuals are sourced through opaque labour providers. This not only breaches the terms of the contract but undermines the integrity of the procurement process.

3. Hidden Employment Practices

Labour providers often operate under less scrutiny than established security firms. This opens the door to exploitative employment practices—low wages, lack of holiday pay, no job security, and little to no investment in training. In the long term, this erodes standards across the industry, undercuts responsible providers, and devalues the profession of security altogether.

4. Client Unawareness

Perhaps the most alarming aspect is that most clients—especially public sector organisations—have no idea this is happening. They believe their premises are being secured by vetted, professional staff from the contractor they’ve hired. In reality, they’re getting temporary or freelance labour from unknown sources, with no transparency or accountability in sight.

The Public Sector and the Outsourcing Problem

It’s not just private companies falling into this trap. Numerous local authorities across the UK have awarded sizable security contracts to large firms, only to discover—sometimes too late—that those firms are subcontracting the work to hidden labour providers. This is in clear breach of many public sector procurement rules, which stipulate transparency, direct provision, and due diligence in service delivery.

Some security firms play a dangerous game of semantics, claiming the labour provider staff are “self-employed under their supervision” or “subcontracted through an approved route.” In reality, these arrangements are often veiled attempts to cut costs and inflate margins, while passing the risk on to the end user and the public.

Why This Matters

Security isn’t just another service—it’s a matter of safety, trust, and public confidence. When companies put profit above professional standards by outsourcing to undisclosed labour providers, they jeopardise the entire sector. Clients, particularly in the public sector, must demand full transparency, verify who is delivering the service, and hold providers to account.

At Doyle Security, we take pride in delivering our services through a fully-employed, rigorously vetted team. We believe security contracts should be fulfilled with integrity, professionalism, and accountability—values that cannot be subcontracted out.