Comments by Kevin Brown

Kevin Brown
Member - 61 posts

Just yesterday I was risk assessing in an office building with an IOSH qualified TU rep. He told me that a couple of weeks ago a cast iron drainpipe running by the side of his window had come adrift from the external wall and was swinging back and forth in the wind across the width of the window. "Fortunately" he said" the landlord had builders on site and one of them hung out of the (3rd floor) window with his cordless drill and resecured it". When I challenged this method of working he tried to justify it by saying staff in the immediate vicinity were in danger from flying glass if the drainpipe fell through the window. When I mentioned there were spare desks at the opposite side of the floor that they could have moved to he declined to comment, as did his manager. When I tentatively raised the issue of clearing the area as a precaution under Business Continuity principles I was met with a look of total incomprehension only surpassed by a deafening silence by staff and managers alike.
(I noticed as I left the office that the TU rep had displayed his IOSH certificate prominently .... right next to the window he'd watched a builder hanging out of).
I've now discovered that in the same building, due to lack of attention to the hinges of the tilting windows, window cleaners regularly take unnecessary risks without recourse to eye bolts, fall arrest equipment etc. Honestly, you couldn't make it up ...
As Alan says, there are too many inexperienced FMs out there who've been appointed purely for the sake of expediency and, in MHO, a call centre culture has led to near-extinction of the intelligent client in the relentless pursuit of 'core' business.

Kevin Brown
Member - 61 posts

What a ridiculous attitude.

Kevin Brown
Member - 61 posts

Sorry Derek, I have to disagree. I also am a diabetic (but I'm not sure exactly for how long, having been one of the millions of undiagnosed for several years at least).
The current definition of disability under DDA is now a legal one, not based on medical opinion.
The Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) was designed to protect people who would generally be regarded as disabled from discrimination.
The Act defines disability as: "a physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long term adverse effect on a person’s ability to carry out normal day to day activities."
To be considered a long-term adverse effect: the effect has to have lasted, or be likely to last, overall for at least 12 months. And be a detrimental one - in other words harmful, or cause damage or loss.
The effects that matter are those that would be present without medication or treatment. Whilst I can function normally by controlling my diabetes with medication, I can remember the state I was in before being diagnosed and can well imagine how that could happen again if I fail to medicate properly.
I understand the word 'chronic' to mean lasting, or lingering. 35 years must surely qualify under those terms alone. The keywords are, of course, WITHOUT MEDICATION.

Kevin Brown
Member - 61 posts

This discussion is in the Opinion section of the forum. That being the case you really should expect contributors to state their opinions, navel gazing though it might seem to be. Labelling other contributors as imbecilic is unhelpful and suggests that you fail to treat other contributors with the degree of respect you advocate as a universal right.

Kevin Brown
Member - 61 posts

Why did you enquire about medical conditions? If it was to potentially exclude him from the selection process, the inference is that you did so because the condition might affect his ability to do the job. In effect, this would act as a dis-ability and would be discriminatory. He may well have unpleasant memories of similar unsuccessful interviews and not consider either possible answer relevant . Hands up everybody who hasn't embelished their CV at some point. Medical conditions are regarded by many people as deeply personal matters, as much or more so as religious belief or sexual orientation. Our ailments define us.
Provided that the condition is properly managed it should be perfectly possible for him to perform his work to an acceptable standard. You need to consider the possible consequences of terminating his employment, if that's an option you're looking at. Meanwhile you might use the Search facility, or I'm pretty sure someone will know of a precedent ( I seem to remember reading something lately).

Kevin Brown
Member - 61 posts

Hi Dave

I'm assuming that your place of work is large enough for your employers to be covered by the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order and therefore obliged to carry out Fire Risk Assessments. The fire safety measures that flow from these assessments will vary widely from building to building, based on the number of people employed, the building's physical characteristics, the fire safety procedures and equipment in place and the level of risk.
Escape routes should be designed to ensure, as far as possible, that any person confronted by fire anywhere in the building, should be able to turn away from it and escape to a place of reasonable safety, e.g. a protected stairway. From there they will be able to go directly to a place of total safety away from the building. Your staircase needs to match these criteria (and probably does). As long as the safeguards (fire doors etc) are in place and used correctly (i.e. not propped open to ventilate the interior etc) and your protected staircase is kept clear of combustible materials the escape route is viable.
For a fire to break out in your stairwell (which seems to be your worst case scenario), it needs three things, a source of ignition, fuel and oxygen. If any one of those three is missing you've prevented your fire. Removing the oxygen isn't going to happen, so eliminate anything that could become fuel and any sources of ignition. No combustible materials stored in the stairwell, no radiant heaters etc ... and of course, no smoking.
The bottom line is that if your employer has arranged for a comprehensive and relevant Fire Risk Assessment and is satisfied that the precautions taken and emergency procedures in place are adequate you would need a compelling argument to challenge them.

Kevin Brown
Member - 61 posts

....but HH is a shining example of the runaway success of positive intervention in the selection of New Labour parliamentary candidates, along with various others including Hazel Blears and Ruth Kelly. As one of my ex-managers (sorry, personagers) said once to the enlightenment of the whole office "The best man for the job is a woman - every time". Unfortunately she failed to let on which woman she meant. There is something farce-like about our British parliamentary democracy advancing rapidly to the rear proudly proclaiming 'We excel at mediocrity!' You have to either laugh or cry.
Personally, I'm reminded of the Peter Cook and Dudley Moore sketch where PC is a producer auditioning DM who's come, as a one-legged man to read for the part of Tarzan. PC delivers the great line "Personally, I have nothing against your right leg. Unfortunately neither do you".

Kevin Brown
Member - 61 posts

Bleach is an oxidising agent that, as well as being corrosive, can react with other household chemicals to release chlorine gas, which is a respiratory irritant. That being the case, there should be a COSHH assessment available on site to describe the product, its' inherent hazards, safe methods of working, protective wear, restrictions on use, what to do in an emergency ....... (I'm sure you know how the story goes).
Our contract cleaners don't use it at all. When their predecessors did, it caused damage to our pumped waste disposal units. Anyone using it needs to know what they're doing, and stock needs to rigorously controlled to prevent inappropriate use. Most firms seem to use alternative products.

Kevin Brown
Member - 61 posts

The 11 cubic metres assumes a notional ceiling height of 2.44 meters, so the associated floor area is around 4.5 square meters (about 48 square feet). This is an EU minimum requirement. Looking at it as a footprint, it could be expressed as a rectangle measuring 6 ft x 8 ft (1.83 x 2.44m) in which you have to fit the workstation, the user and the 'walkway'. You also have to factor in the need to allow space to get access to windows, to powerpoints, for IT maintenance etc.
A good rule of thumb is to allow each user 1 meter of space from the front edge of the desk to allow them to access the workstation without impeding other employees. You refer to 'operators', is this going to be a call centre environment? If so, greater separation should help control intrusive noise from neighbouring operators, thus increasing efficiency.
Finally, the 60 centimeter minimum quoted by the Fire Service represents what they require as a bare minimum to facilitate escape. In an escape you'd expect everyone to be moving in the same direction towards one exit or another, with the risk of obstruction or collision being well managed. It doesn't really suit the day to day scenario where workers have discretion to take comfort breaks etc. and by doing so, may affect their colleagues if they have to squeeze past them.

Kevin Brown
Member - 61 posts

Mark, You're half way there already. You've already made some sort of informal assessment that this individual needs more consideration than is usual, faced with the prospect of evacuating the building. You now need to get together with the individual, and any other interestd parties, and explore what would happen if the alarm went off. Maybe you have records of drills which could inform you of any serious concerns where your administrator is concerned. If he or she has difficulty with drills, they'll be similarly challenged with a real incident.

Kevin Brown
Member - 61 posts

Alex - there's a serious point behind the cheery northern banter. In some parts of the country strangers are habitually addressed in what might be interpreted as over-familiar terms by exotic visitors. To address a bar person as 'love' in Sheffield would be nothing out of the ordinary, the recipient (male or female) accepting the use of the word as culturally consistent with the area. If followed by abuse, suggestive remarks, or inappropriate behaviour the response would be somewhat different. What we seem to have here is an il considered 'one size fits all' propoal that takes no account of regional differences, and is far more likely to offend a sizeable sector of the population who use the word daily without malice or ulterior motive as part of their normal speech pattern.
You're right in stating that it is how staff are treated that matters, but that surely depends on their perception of how they relate to customers and that in turn has to be inextricably linked to attitude and intent.
If we start with 'love', who knows what will be deleted from the dictionary next. I suggest any form of address could be seen as a pejorative, depending on the moods, attitudes and intentions of those involved in the exchange.

Kevin Brown
Member - 61 posts

Where I was brought up (in South Yorkshire) it was, and is, commonplace to address all and sundry as 'love', irrespective of gender. It's part of the local patois and is used INDISCRIMINATELY.
It's arguably more acceptable than calling someone 'mate' (which might be interpreted as an offer) or 'pal' and 'chum', which might count as subliminal advertising for the pet food industry.
Let's be reasonable here, how could the word 'love' be associated in any way with gender differences .......
(Vive la difference).

Kevin Brown
Member - 61 posts

This thread about grape jokes is becoming unraisinable, the consequences of the accident could have been graves. Chiraz eggs is eggs the guy will end up with a chip on his shoulder after ending up with swede FA.
That's shallot for now ......_
(I can't believe I just did that).

Kevin Brown
Member - 61 posts

Is it 100% accessible to all employees? Do you employ any non-DSE users? How would you demonstrate to a regulatory body that you have such a policy?
Regulation 5 of the Management of Health & Safety at Work Regulations 1999 requires employers to establish a positive approach to health and safety which is visible and clear. Are you wholly convinced tht it is?
It comes down to effective communication. Saving a file to a shared folder isn't the same as circulating a hard copy, or getting assurance that every employee has read it (even the technophobes). You might even have to consider Dragon, Jaws or Braille versions if you have employees with disabilities.

Kevin Brown
Member - 61 posts

DSE is the acronym for Display Screen Equipment i.e. computer workstations.
As far as drinking water is concerned Regulation 22 of the Workplace (Health , Safety & Welfare) Regulations 1992 states that "an adequate supply of wholesome drinking water shall be provided for all persons at work in the workplace ............ readily accessible at suitable places".
Regulation 20 covers sanitary conveniences and, again, the word "readily" is used. My view is that a reasonable employer would allow his employees to be the best judge as to when access is most apt. A comfortable employee is a happy, productive employee. A dehydrated (at one end) and damp (at t'other) is probably not.
p.s. grey hair is often a sign of maturity, which is a sign of age, on which grounds one mustn't discriminate.

Kevin Brown
Member - 61 posts

How does this discriminate? I assume the employee records apply to people of all creeds and colours. There's a subtle clue in their relationship in that it appears to be of mixed gender and, presumably, as devout catholics they will have married in the eyes of their god. Their argument appears to hinge on what they theorize other peoples' perceptions of their status to be, rather than what it actually is.
I am surprised though that Strathclyde Police didn't offer the obvious third alternative,
- uncivil partnership.

Kevin Brown
Member - 61 posts

There are far too many of these incidents where innocent people are being assaulted in mindless attacks by binge smokers off their skulls on Benson & Hedges. I think they should all be rounded up and locked up - it might be the only way they can exercise their legal right to smoke. The only other place still left available would seem to be the bar of the House of Commons. Still, some animals are more equal than others.

I note that no comment has been made by the NHS Trust about providing smoking shelters or smoking rooms, and if we were merely talking about out patients I'd say let 'em go cold turkey for a couple of hours while they're getting their treatment.
Quite clearly, these unfortunate members of society are not in a position to pop out for a quick drag, NHS smoking bans tend to include the buildings, grounds and the rest of the UK that happens to be upwind. To treat inmates worse than prisoners is not acceptable. I have to agree that smoking is becoming less acceptable socially and as an ex-smoker I look back on the day I gave up with a sense of pride. BUT, I can still remember the withdrawal symptoms and the strength of will I needed to overcome them. I suspect most of these folk won't have the mental toughness or the external support to go cold turkey.
Now, can we have a go at gum chewers?

Kevin Brown
Member - 61 posts

Under the Workplace Health & Safety Regs not only are employers required to provide a source of drinking water (i.e. it must be up to potable standards) but also something to drink out of. Some enlightened employers provide water coolers with disposable cups. Some even provide Point of Use water boilers so their staff can get a hot drink on demand 24/7.
The last time I remember actually having a break with my mid-morning cuppa was in 1983, but I seem to recall the breaks always turned into work discussions anyway. Strangely enough, they were seen by management as a way of sharing Best Practice and encouraging greater productivity.
Of course, if the breaks are linked with working with DSE equipment it's essential that enough breaks or mini-breaks are planned to avoid fatigue and the onset of Upper Limb Disorders. If DSE is involved you really need to check if breaks are mandatory under the DSE regs BUT don't forget they're only breaks away from DSE activity. If there are other tasks that could be done then so be it ....

Kevin Brown
Member - 61 posts

Sheena, I work in Facilities in a very large Civil Service Department. If you were to go into any one of the hundreds of buildings we occupy I guarantee that you would find a detailed Health & Safety file containing, amongst other things, a thorough Asbestos Survey report. As well as fulfilling my employer's Duty of Care by conducting a rigorous risk assessment programme, I'm also a Trade Union Health and Safety rep, so I wear both hats on occasion. I think I do a pretty good job, but just to make sure the Department carries out regular audits of my records.
Linda's comment about the autonomy many Headteachers exercise is a valid one. I'm a governor of a Secondary School and the Head, quite rightly, puts most of her effort into her core business i.e. education. She's not a Facilities professional, nor is she IOSH or NEBOSH qualified but she knows enough to consult the likes of me if she has any major concerns.
Central to the issue of ignorance or wilful disregard of the rules and safeguards is the accountability of the Headteacher and the Board of Governors. To me, there is a striking parallel between the position taken by a subborn Headteacher to that which (my private sector colleagues tell me) prevails in many a boardroom throughout these sceptred isles.