Anatolii Viktorovych Pavlov, the honored coach of Ukraine in all-around bodyguards, has been in the profession for over 40 years, 10 of which he worked directly as a bodyguard, the rest he devoted to training the protection of the first persons of the state. In the second part of the interview, he talks about how businessmen manage to get “presidential” protection and why a private “person” is paid more.
Private security: more skills, more work
Comparing service, say, in the UDO with work in the civil protection is completely incorrect from the point of view of the material and personnel base. It is clear that the provision of state security is much larger and better. For example, if a protected person leaves (let’s consider not the President, but a person who by law is supposed to have state protection), then a whole structure is provided to him – such a mini-variant of the machinery that exists in the state security department. Depending on the event, its importance, the number of people, personal security can be strengthened by external security – people who take over the security of the object where the person being protected is located. So, in addition to 3-4 people who work directly with the person being guarded, up to a dozen fighters can be involved if necessary. And in private structures, the “lichka” is 2-3, a maximum of 4 people, who perform front-line, out-of-court, and escort duties. It is much more difficult for them. After all, you have to work on all fronts together, and sometimes alone: the driver, you and the person being protected. It’s more complicated. Much more difficult.
State security: the law is on their side
The big problem now is that there is no law on personal protection in Ukraine. In many countries, a security guard, detective, or other employee of a private security structure has rights and responsibilities, can obtain licenses, and use weapons for work purposes. And in our country, it turns out that there is a profession, but the personal protection group of private structures does not have legal powers.
For example, consider a very common case: a security guard needs to check the premises before entering. According to the law, state security officers, if they deem it necessary, can enter any premises and, if there are people in it, give instructions to leave the object and seal the object itself; personal security of a private structure cannot do this. Within the framework of our legal powers, we can prevent, fence. Private security groups must constantly maneuver between “preventing an event that is a threat to the person being protected” and “not exceeding the authority”. You need to be able to avoid conflicts. When I was working, there was a case – we left, parked, a parking attendant approached and began to demand payment for parking in the city center. It is clear that he is not an official employee and has no right to take a fee. Therefore, the protected person wanted to establish justice. We settled the conflict, quietly paid for parking. Because we know: reputational losses of the protected person can be many times greater if someone takes a photo or video, raises an informational wave in the media.
Private individuals: choose who to work with
The question of the culture of the protected person is the cornerstone on which the attitude of the guard to his duties is based. If a person is normal and behaves decently with the guards, he can count on the fact that at the right moment they will save him, cover him with their body. If he behaves like a brat, then at some critical moment the guard next to him will simply turn away and that will be the end of it. And if in private security you, by and large, decide who you work with and who you don’t, then in the state security your leadership decides who you will protect. That’s why many people resign from service, they can’t stand it psychologically.
You can meet female bodyguards more often in UDO
In the West, both men and women are well involved in “lychka”. The latter often act as press secretaries and translators. A woman, if she is next to a guard, does not cause such fear as a male guard. It is usually part of a man’s outfit and is used for observation from the side. Zanevskyi began to widely use women’s outfits in Ukraine. But they are still perceived as something exotic. And I only met women’s outfits only in the UDO – these are the bodyguards who participate in bodyguards’ all-around competitions. In fact, they often work as part of mixed groups: as an observer or to gain access to those spaces where men cannot enter. If we talk about a private “licha”, then here women are often hired to work in the family: to accompany a child or a wife. But even for these purposes it can be difficult to find a suitable person. And it’s not about physical performance or salary. It is difficult for most of the female bodyguards to remain alone for a long time in a male-dominated profession, which is why they increasingly seek employment with state structures.
About methods “from the system”
Security guards use many tools and expressions that “people from the system” bring to their work. Such, for example, includes a comparative table. Each word means a certain number. For example, in order not to mention the names of the protected, they speak in numbers according to the approved hierarchy. Types of actions are also coded: “exit”, “arrival”, “departure” – these are called numbers 1,2,3,4,5….
Call signs are often used in the protection group. Each employee has his own number. So if you know your unit, you know who you’re talking to. This is a comparison table.
Another, sometimes forced, measure is scrambling. In personal protection, the common use of radios is usually portable 5-watt devices that can catch up to a kilometer. To use the frequency, you need to rent it from the specialized committee of the Cabinet of Ministers, and this is another red tape. Therefore, in private security, especially if the walkie-talkies are used while moving, many people simply neglect to buy frequencies, and instead use a scrambler. This is a small board that is installed inside the station. It transforms speech into an incomprehensible set of sounds, but on the other hand it translates normal speech back, and you hear what is being transmitted to you.
The problem of choosing a client
Actually, the choice is not that big. Today, you can’t hire state security: they don’t have the right to work. Therefore, “police” are either police protection groups or private companies. There are clients who want professional security, the kind that presidents have had, or the kind they worked with while in public office. Then there is an opportunity to gather a group of former “guardians” (guards who work for the state retire quite early).
If we talk about the security police, everything here works according to the following principle: the client signs a contract with this structure, pays money there, and the security police sets up a group. What does the buyer gain here? Formalized relations, a complete group with combat weapons and the opportunity to receive reinforcements. But all these preferences of state security over private security are quite questionable. Because the client’s life does not depend on the structure, but on the guards assigned to him and their motivation. And the motivation is usually payment for work. And if you figure it out, the client will have to pay several times more for a group of security police than for hiring personal commercial security. But directly, an employee of the security police will receive a lower salary than a self-employed security guard. Since money is paid directly in private security, a person has a great motivation to work, he is more dedicated to his work. Somehow our departure involved a meeting with a person protected by the DSO. I could observe how we and they work in the same situation. During the dinner of two restaurants guarded on the open terrace, we stood in our positions, and the “dsoshniks” saw that the guard was sitting in the establishment and went to the car. Therefore, a businessman who really cares about his security always wants to take highly qualified security – very often “from the system”, but pay it directly, thereby having the right to make high demands.