Security Guard Scheduling Dilemma: Should We Accept the Contractor's Proposal?

We have engaged a new security agency for round-the-clock security for the office. As per the contract, three security guards are engaged, and the monthly payment to the agency includes reliever guard charges as well. In compliance with labor laws, a weekly day off will be given to each security guard, and on those days, a reliever will be assigned duty. Based on the current practice, the reliever is receiving payment for only 12 days.

However, the contractor is proposing to assign equal duty (22/23 days duty) to all four security guards, stating that no guard will be required for relieving duty, which is 12 days. Should we accept the contractor's proposal, or is there another solution to address this situation? I kindly ask all of you to provide a solution.

Issue with Reliever Guard Duty Shifts

The issue arises from the fact that the reliever guard (4th Guard) has only 12 duty shifts and is paid less than others who have 26 duty shifts and are paid for the full month. This renders the provision unworkable and impractical. The contractor proposes a continuous cycle of duties so that all share the duties almost equally. This proposal sounds good as there will be a fair division of labor.

An alternative could be that the 4th guard is put on a general shift on the days when there is no reliever duty. A general duty shift occurs during normal office hours, and there is a maximum requirement/utilization of an extra hand. Moreover, certain extra office work like record-keeping or housekeeping could be added to be handled by the reliever guard.

Keeping the reliever guard for 12 shifts is ideal when other guards perform duty regularly, but you should anticipate their leave and absence situations too. This proposal entails smooth management of such eventualities. Therefore, restricting the 4th Guard to reliever duty is unworkable and impractical.