Committee hears bill to loosen employer requirement in private security licensing; industry raises training and liability concerns

Summary

Senate Bill 198 would remove a requirement that private security guards be employed by a private security firm to obtain licensing. Supporters said the change eliminates a "competitor's veto," while security companies and associations raised concerns about training, background checks, oversight and liability.

Senator Jeremy Trebis introduced Senate Bill 198 to the House Business and Labor Committee on March 17, explaining the bill would revise private security occupation laws by removing the requirement that a person seeking a private security guard license must be employed by a private security firm.

Trebis told the committee the change is intended to remove what he called a "competitor's veto," where someone unable to secure employment with an existing firm cannot become a licensed guard. He said the bill preserves training and complaint-reporting requirements and is not intended to eliminate background checks or core licensing safeguards.

Why it matters: nut graf Opponents from Montana security firms, trade groups and the Department of Labor said the proposal could erode oversight and consumer protections. They urged clarifying language on training access, background checks for firearms endorsements, oversight of independent licensees and liability insurance requirements.

Opposition testimony Sean Belobradic,…

Committee hears bill to loosen employer requirement in private security licensing; industry raises training and liability concerns

Summary

Subscribe to keep reading