Citywire for Financial Professionals
Stay connected:

View the article online at http://citywire.co.uk/money/article/a603912

G4S Olympic staffing shortfall raises investor concerns

The reputational damage suffered by security firm G4S could jeopardise its chances of winning UK government contracts in the future.

 
G4S Olympic staffing shortfall raises investor concerns

Shares in G4S (GFS.L) are among the biggest fallers on the FTSE 100 today amid concerns of potential long-term reputational damage to the private security contractor after reports that it will not be able to deliver the number of staff it promised for the Olympics.

G4S has confirmed reports doubting its ability to supply 10,000 guards for the Olympics, out of a total of 23,700 staff – the rest were to be a mix of students, military and volunteers – that are thought needed to provide security at the London games.

The military has been asked to provide 3,500 extra troops to cover the shortfall.

G4S, formerly Group 4 Securicor, has admitted in a statement that it has faced ‘delays in progressing applicants’, but added that ‘we are working extremely hard to process these as swiftly as possible’.

‘G4S is committed to ensuring that London 2012 is safe and secure. This is an unprecedented and very complex security recruitment and deployment exercise which is being carried out to a very tight schedule.

‘We have made very significant progress - we already have some four thousand people at work across 100 venues. We currently have over nine thousand additional people going through the final stages of the required extensive training, vetting and accreditation process.

‘We have encountered some delays in progressing applicants through the final stages but we are working extremely hard to process these as swiftly as possible.  We understand the Government's decision to bring in additional resources and will work with LOCOG, the military and other agencies to deliver a safe and secure Games.’

UBS analyst Jaime Brandwood warned that whether or not G4S meets its deadline, ‘politicians are seeing this as an area ripe for political “points scoring”’.

G4S's success in winning UK government outsourcing contracts is one reason why it is widely tipped by brokers, the majority of which say the shares are a 'buy'. The company drew the ire of shareholders last year after finally abandoning an unpopular plan to acquire Danish cleaning firm ISS, but shares have moved higher – up 4% so far this year, bettering the wider FTSE 100 – since a strong set of first quarter results published in May.

‘The key now, regardless of risk to sales/profits on Olympics work, has to be to avoid reputational damage that could hurt its chances of securing future events work and a fair share of a burgeoning UK government’, Brandwood added in a research note today, while holding his buy recommendation for the shares.

Caroline de La Soujeole, an analyst for Seymour Pierce, disagreed. She said today's share price fall was 'overblown', noting that the group's sales totalled £7 billion last year, compared with the £200 million plus in sales that G4S expects to bring in from the Olympics.

G4S shares are down 9.1p or 3.1% to 281p.

3 comments so far. Why not have your say?

Philmo

Jul 12, 2012 at 13:38

I strongly suspect there's a little more to it than being slow to recruit - any fool can set up a recuitment programme and adhere to it, especially when it's as high profile as this one. If not the director concerned certainly needs his bonus deleting!

I suspect the problem is one of attracting the right calibre staff, and by imposed agreement with HMG, GaS have acceded to the need to "stiffen up" the staff profile by injection of military capability.

Just a hunch! [Though I'm sure Lord C would spin around such a persective!]

Either way, an opportunity to buy!

report this

Michael Brooks

Jul 12, 2012 at 14:08

We have seen with some of the heavy-handed security at music festivals that these companies don`t screen candidates that closely. Obviously, for the Olympics, stricter recruitment polices must apply, and this has resulted in a shortfall of suitable candidates.

report this

Anonymous 1 needed this 'off the record'

Jul 13, 2012 at 11:56

A lot of G4S (and other private security firms) comprise failed wannabee coppers who could never pass the stringent vetting used (or at least, which was once used) for police. A thug and a uniform are a dangerous combo.

A measure of their professionalism was recently demonstrated to us when we were on the motorway, at 70 mph legitimately overtaking slower moving vehicles. A G4S prisoner transport lorry, drew up to about an inch behind our bumper. I couldn't pull over safely until I'd passed the slower traffic but G4S man started flashing his headlights and gesticulating aggressively like a white van man yob (which he probably was the week before).

The function of a prisoner lorry is to transport prisoners safely, it's not an emergency vehicle and G4S aren't empowered to drive it as such.

Bunch of cowboys.

report this

leave a comment

Please sign in here or register here to comment. It is free to register and only takes a minute or two.

News sponsored by:

The Citywire guide to investment trusts

In association with Aberdeen Asset Management

Fund managers from Standard Life Investments quizzed on investment trusts


What can SLI bring to the table for those who want to put their money into investment trusts?

More about this:

Look up the shares

  • G4S PLC (GFS.L)
    Register or Sign in to receive email alerts for items in your favourites whenever we write about them

Archive

Today's articles

Tools from Citywire Money

From the Forums

+ Start a new discussion

Weekly email from The Lolly

Get simple, easy ways to make more from your money. Just enter your email address below

An error occured while subscribing your email. Please try again later.

Thank you for registering for your weekly newsletter from The Lolly.

Keep an eye out for us in your inbox, and please add noreply@emails.citywire.co.uk to your safe senders list so we don't get junked.

Read more...

Aviva: is Friends bid a rights issue in disguise?

by Gavin Lumsden on Nov 24, 2014 at 15:04

Sorry, this link is not
quite ready yet