At least 800 of those jobs will be cut at Tyco’s SimplexGrinnell business, which is the new name for Grinnell’s fire protection and security business, since its takeover in 2001 of Simplex.

Some industry experts think that the layoffs are depriving Tyco/Grinnell customers of the quality services and product support that the customers have already paid for. In Denver, Stew Jackson, a Security Device expert and Tyco/Grinnell competitor in Colorado, describes how the layoffs are affecting Tyco/Grinnell’s sister company, ADT/Tyco. Tyco/Grinnell bought up ADT in 1997. According to Jackson:

We are being told that service is not being performed for days and even weeks. And now, with 800 ADT-Tyco personnel laid off... how can it possibly improve?... What is wrong with ADT-Tyco? A dead fish starts stinking from the head down. When the Chairman of the Board [and] the CFO of a Company of [Tyco/Grinnell] are under criminal indictment for stealing $600 +/- million from the company, the remaining personnel are disgusted ... In addition, the President of ADT was recently fired for irregular accounting practices.... We have heard from former ADT customers that the left hand doesn’t know what the right hand is doing [at ADT/Tyco].... Why would anyone want to have anything to do with a company that is already as fraud-ridden as ADT/Tyco?

Some potential Grinnell customers are already avoiding the company. John Musso, Deputy Superintendent of the Pueblo, Colorado School District #60, has stated in writing, " [We] are aware of the problems and issues with this company ... We will not invite Simplex[Grinnell] to bid on any project in the district."

Tyco, Grinnell's parent company, was ordered to pay $5 million in fines for their failure to provide required maintenance on fire systems that customers were paying for. The fines were the result of administrative proceedings that had charged Tyco with a "price-fixing" scheme to rig bids on numerous fire protection projects in Australia. Tyco was also charged with falsifying fire protection inspection records at a hospital, theater, college and a retirement village, when in fact the inspections were never performed. Meanwhile, the fire protection systems at the Prince Alexandra Hospital deteriorated to the point where there was no measurable flow to hydrants on floors five to nine. Tyco’s knowing frauds had exposed hundreds of persons to a vastly increased risk of death by fire. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission Chair, Professor Allan Fels concluded:

This extremely reprehensible conduct could have endangered lives and property of its customer … From at least 1990 until about September 1998, Tyco was only performing about half the contacted alarm routines and less than half of the annual sprinkler routines.

At no stage did it employ sufficient staff to perform the contracts or have a system to check if routines were performed or had been done. Tyco’s [sic] management was aware there was insufficient staff to carry out the majority, let alone all, the work contracted, yet continued to renew existing contracts and enter new ones.

Tyco also issued certificates of maintenance to building owners without knowing whether such routines had happened and knowing that lass than half of its contracted work was being done. Further, Tyco billed its customers without knowing whether the work was being done and accepted payment in advance knowing it was not going to perform all contracted work…

The Grinnell/Central Sprinkler "Deluge" valve is subject to a "product alert" issued by API Risk Management, a fire protection industry company. According to correspondence obtained by the Fire Protection Comments, Grinnell/Central is not taking the replacement of these defective sprinklers seriously.

API wrote a letter to Tyco/Grinnell addressing their concerns. The letter stated, "The potential catastrophic nature of this issue needs immediate attention... In [each of five] instance[s], the valve seat failed to open/elevate ... Viking contacted Tyco[Grinnell] Fire Products... to notify them of the problem and ask for a remedy. Viking was ... given verbal direction to replace only the latch itself..."

Viking and API Fire Protection Group had questions about three things. 1) Because only the latch was replaced, did that mean that the repairs were complete? 2) Were some parts replacements considered a complete fix? 3) Did Central have a plan to handle these issues?

They went on to state that, "Viking ... expects to be fully compensated by Central[Grin-nell] for actions taken. API Risk Management will be issuing a "product alert" regarding the Central [Grinnell]... Deluge valve to all API Fire Protection Companies ... We await further instructions from Tyco/Central..."

A recent court complaint also charges Grinnell with evading its duties to replace defective sprinkler heads. An April 18, 2002 motion in a Baltimore County, Maryland court case claims that Grinnell had installed the defective Omega sprinkler heads in the Bristol Park Condominiums. The Bristol Park Condo Council’s court papers state that Grinnell was originally hired to design and install the Condo’s sprinkler system and to ensure that the system had been installed and insulated "perfectly."

Grinnell did not contact the Condo Association, "to advise of the existence of defective sprinkler heads or offer to provide assistance to the Association in securing replacement sprinkler heads or having those replacement heads installed." Grinnell later admitted that it had installed the defective Omega Sprinkler heads.

The complaint stated, "Furthermore, in January, 2000 two of the sprinkler pipes in the Condominium fractured as a result of the failure [to] properly install insulation ... as a consequence of the fracture in the sprinkler line, water flowed from the broken sprinkler pipe and caused substantial water damage in common elements and units in the Condominium beneath the fractured pipe." The council had to repair the water damage made by the fractured pipe, costing them over $40,000.