Dec 14
Construction Site Security

Guards vs Mobile Surveillance Systems

Guards vs Mobile Surveillance Systems

The most recently released statistics from the National Insurance Crime Bureau reveal the cost of construction site crime to be between $300m and $1b annually. In addition to the loss of valuable equipment, crime on a construction site creates delays and interruptions in the building progress resulting in lost profits.  A single night of crime can cause a contractor to go over budget to a much greater extent than a good security service would cost. Consequently, it’s important to understand your options:   Guards vs Guards vs Mobile Surveillance Systems.


The Advantages of Having a Live Guard On Site

                      •  Physically lock/unlock doors or gates.
                      •  Fire and flood watch
                      •  Direct visitors/subs/suppliers/owners entering the site to the area they need to be.
                      •  Assist in site maintenance (picking up trash)
                      •  Stop and/or report site rule violations in real time.

Cost Difference: Guards vs Mobile Surveillance Systems

The most important things to consider are cost and liability.  These are the most compelling arguments in favor of using Live Remote Video Monitoring and Response verses a Live Guard.  Live video surveillance systems deliver a higher level of protection at a fraction of the cost. These systems eliminate potential human errors such as fatigue, inattentiveness, and sleeping while on duty.

  • A live unarmed guard ranges from $15.00 to $25.00 an hour​. Based on $20.00 per hour (mid-range), nights & weekends (108hrs wk.) and 4.2 weeks per month, the cost of one live guard on ​site will be approximately $9k per month.
  • The cost of one video system is, on average, $1500.00 per month. You would need 2 to 4 of these video systems on a typical job site to provide coverage of the whole site so the cost will run approximately $3000 to $6000 per month.

That’s an average of $4500. savings each month. 

You’re looking at a savings of over $54K on a 12-month project, for:

Video Coverage During and After Working Hours

Live Remote “Guards” Off Hours

Time stamped Video of Entire Events
(not just short clips)

Liabilities of Guards vs Mobile Surveillance Systems Solutions

  • Liability:​​ The role of a security guard is inherently passive because their job is to wait for a crime to occur. Such inactivity can trigger drowsiness.  This does not mean ALL guards are going to fall asleep, but your risk factor greatly increases.
  • Solution:  Like Air Traffic Controllers, Monitoring Agents are closely supervised and required to take frequent breaks to keep them alert in the middle of the day or night. They can, in turn, keep your man on the ground both awake and safe.
  • ​​​​Liability:​​   Guards are limited in coverage by their field of view. This is challenging when patrolling a large property.  While at one end of the property, the guard will likely miss an event at the other end.
  • S​olution:  Using strategically placed cameras, Live Remote “Guards” have the ability to view multiple critical areas of a property at the same time.  They can then activate an on-site speaker warning and deploy authorities that will prevent significant losses.
  • Liability:​​   After an event, police must rely on the guard’s memory of what took place.  This makes it difficult to uncover the details of the incident.
  • Solution:Mobile Surveillance Systems have video analytics that can yield detailed reports.  These reports provide you with time and date stamped digital video footage of entire events (not just short clips)  saved in cloud servers for at least one week.  Focal Point Security provides up to 30 days of saved video. With an all inclusive live monitoring system, you will have all of the evidence needed to provide police in the event of a break-in.

Remote Video Security Agent

  • ​Liability:​​  Security guards are given the jurisdiction to use reasonable force in the event of a physical altercation. This can be open to interpretation. Such use of force by a civilian security guard can result in assault charges filed by the opposing party. Guards are vulnerable to attack/assault by intruders as well. In either case, should  injuries be sustained by either side, the party who hired the guard may be exposing themselves to litigious action from the injured (or surviving family).
  • Solution: ​ Video systems are equipped with surveillance technology that proactively alerts monitoring stations of unusual activity. This constant and consistent stream of alerts keeps station professionals prepared to take immediate action. Simply put, they’re not waiting for something to happen; they’re continuously analyzing and reacting.  Additionally, Mobile Surveillance Systems can be equipped with audio for the remote “guard” to interact with an intruder​ while they roll police from a safe distance​. ​​


On rare occasions a “boots on the ground” guard is required.  Focal Point Security will work in tandem with the guard company of your choice​. We call this “Integrated Security”. We deploy video, then coordinate guard patrol patterns and guard-to-monitoring operator communications.  This increases your level of security at the same time keeping your ​”on the ground” ​guard awake and safe.  All while saving you money, cutting down on the number of guards you need to properly secure your site.


Caught in the act with Mobile Surveillance Systems

An actual capture. Focal Point Security provided law enforcement with video evidence that resulted in breaking up the ring and convicting the perpetrators.