SB 1203 (2025-2026) will destroy California’s Security Industry.  

How does making security guard training more expensive, less accessible, and taught by unqualified instructors improve public safety? It doesn’t.  One California State Senator wants a law that forces security guards to receive their essential training from labor unions with no oversight from state regulatory agencies.  

May 15, 2026 

Bottom Line Up Front:  

• SB1203 will prohibit California’s existing statewide network of highly regulated, vetted, and licensed security training facilities from providing use-of-force, powers of arrest, and de-escalation training to security professionals, and to those people seeking employment in the security industry.  
• Under SB1203, security professionals will be required to obtain this important training from labor unions.  
• Labor unions will be allowed to self-certify they have the facilities, instructors, and qualifications to provide this important training. 
• Under SB1203, the California Dept. of Consumer Affairs will be striped of oversight authority they currently have to ensure delivered training is high quality and appropriate. 
• As we approach the FIFA World Cup and the 2028 Olympics, SB1203 will create a security professional labor shortage that will jeopardize the safety of security professionals themselves, as well as the public, while also significantly increasing the cost of security services. 
• SB1203 is sponsored by SEIU, who has given at least $21.4 million to lawmakers since 2015, and is being carried by State Senator Smallwood-Cuevas who once worked for SEIU and has received at least $119,100 from SEIU and its affiliates since 2021, according to Digital Democracy.       

SB 1203 will Reshape Security in California — At What Cost? 

California’s private security industry is facing an existential threat over Senate Bill 1203 (SB 1203), legislation that would significantly alter training requirements and oversight for security training.  If signed into law, it will reduce workforce availability, increase costs that will lead to layoff’s, create training bottlenecks, and ultimately undermine public safety.  

As California prepares to host globally significant events including the 2026 FIFA World Cup and the 2028 Summer Olympics, concerns about maintaining an adequate security workforce have become more urgent. The state will require thousands of trained security professionals to support venues, transportation systems, hospitality operations, and surrounding communities. 

A Potential Bottleneck in Security Training 

Among other things, SB 1203 changes who may provide certain mandatory training. California currently relies on a broad statewide network of licensed, highly-regulated private training facilities capable of delivering use-of-force, powers-of-arrest, and de-escalation instruction.  

SB 1203 will grant labor unions a monopoly on this training, which will reduce capacity and slow entry into the security profession.  

The bill also expands required training hours and requires more instruction to occur through traditional classroom settings rather than online formats.  This will create logistical barriers for prospective guards, particularly in rural areas where training centers are less accessible. Additional travel, scheduling constraints, and classroom requirements could increase costs for trainees and employers while slowing hiring. 

Security staffing already experiences high turnover. When onboarding becomes slower or more expensive, security companies will struggle to fill positions quickly enough to meet demand. Fewer trained applicants entering the field translates into fewer guards available to protect businesses, events, hospitals, schools, and public infrastructure.  

Reduced Oversight and Accountability 

Training quality matters because security officers may need to make rapid decisions involving force, de-escalation, detention authority, or emergency response. Policymakers must balance accessibility with rigorous standards. 

SB 1203 will reduce the role of existing state oversight agencies in evaluating training providers. The bill would require the state to approve labor organizations that self-certify they are qualified to provide the training; and the bill has no oversight provisions that would enable the state to revoke approvals for underperforming training programs.   

Increased Costs Are Likely to Reach Clients and Consumers 

If compliance costs increase, security companies may be forced to pass those expenses on to clients including apartment communities, hospitals, retailers, event venues, logistics facilities, and local governments. Businesses who chose to keep security will in turn pass those costs on to their customers. 

SB 1203 is a paradox.  Policies that claim they seek to improve working conditions for security guards will actually result in poor quality and less-accessible training, and a reduced desire from businesses to hire security.  

Public Safety Depends on Adequate Staffing 

Security officers are frequently the first people to respond during emergencies: violent incidents, evacuations, medical events, workplace disputes, or natural disasters. Understaffing creates risks not only for the public but for security officers themselves. 

If fewer guards are available, existing personnel may face larger territories, longer shifts, and more dangerous working conditions. Fatigue, delayed response times, and insufficient backup can increase risk during confrontations. During major events or disasters, staffing shortages could become especially severe. 

California’s upcoming international events will place extraordinary demand on trained security personnel.  

Small security companies will suffer the most 

If enacted, SB 1203 will affect all private security employers in California, but smaller security companies will experience the most severe consequences. Unlike large national firms with extensive administrative departments, internal training resources, and greater financial reserves, small and mid-sized security businesses often operate on razer-thin margins and depend on flexibility to remain competitive. 

Small security companies frequently compete by offering responsiveness and customized service. We fill last-minute assignments, emergency deployments, disaster response contracts, and niche industries. 

If training access becomes more centralized or constrained, smaller firms like ours will struggle to onboard new hires quickly enough to meet client demand. 

Security firms based outside major metropolitan areas will encounter extreme burdens when training options are no longer locally available.  

Existing Clients May Refuse Higher Rates 

Many security contracts are price sensitive. Apartment communities, small businesses, nonprofit organizations, and local venues often choose providers based heavily on cost.  Many security professionals will loose their jobs.