Minute of Meeting
156th
Sighthill Campus,
SEDERUNT: M Bancroft R Lovering S McColm B Anderson S Hunter H Gardner P Graham R Hall G MacGregor C Lawson R McClean C Black J Walker I Currie S Heesom V Stewart J R Brownlie T Sayer N Doherty J Fell M J Moore I Wilson M Hardie M Johnstone D Ronarty A Wright D Richardson S McMorland R Walker R Kotas J Davis P Hanley P Brown J Hepburn M Browne C Wilmott I Wilson K Lloyd D Sinclair J Brannigan J McMahon G Foggo A Davies S McKiddie R Adams A James S Morton T Mellon
APOLOGIES: Bob Bertram; Liz Young, Dick Morrison, Graham MacNab, Derek Cawkwell, Karen MacDonnell, Ian MacDonad, Iain Murray
1.0 CHAIR: Richard Lovering took the Chair and welcomed members to the new but temporary venue. He outlined the safety arrangements. Being the 11th day of the 11th month, he asked the meeting to observe a minute’s silence.
2.0 MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS (October 2004)
2.1 Receipt: These had been received by those expecting them.
2.2 Accuracy: Proposed by Simon Hunter; Seconded by Vic Stewart
3.0 MATTERS ARISING NOT ON AGENDA :
4.0 CORRESPONDENCE
4.1 Fife Chamber of Safety – October Minutes.
4.2 David Jones – thanks for several offers of assistance with his ergonomics research.
4.3 IOSH HQ: Membership: National Total 26781: Edinburgh Branch: 763
Corporate 357 TechSP 110 Associate 187
Construction 184; Public Services 128; Environmental 98: Off shore 44; Consultancy 38;
Healthcare 35; Education 32; Fire RM 22
4.5 IOSH HQ: IOSH 2005 Conference & Exhibition, Wednesday 27 – Thursday 28 April 2005, Cardiff International Arena.
4.6 IOSH HQ: Details of changes to membership structure and corporate governance of IOSH to be voted on at AGM
4.7
Clive Castell: Job Spot: Logic Safety: Need a person carrying out audits for a
major utility service company based in Scotland. Mobile with own car: initially
for 3 months and could become 6 months or permanent. Mobile 07816 521
391 Home Tel/Fax 0131336 4283
5.0 BRANCH EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT ADVISOR - Liz Young. Nothing to report.
6.0 SPECIALIST GROUPS
6.1 PUBLIC SERVICES – Marion Johnstone: The National Safety Symposium in 2005 would be looking at the issue of Personal safety.
6.2 CONSTRUCTION – Allan Dick: (report received after the meeting)
Review of breakout groups performance against the construction SG 2004 plan - it was agreed that all objectives had been achieved by the various working groups including ; -
- publish 2 issues of Construction news - completed
- provide info stand at IOSH exhibition 2004 - completed
- deliver the Douglas Short Memorial Lecture 2004 (review the future of the lecture - recommended to continue)
- agree to work with environmental SG & continue to support ISHCCO
- publish articles regularly - 5 articles accepted or published, SHP, UK plant Journal etc. - ongoing
- review operating method of the groups - successful trial of new meetings format
- develop a construction site induction pack - completed on target
- explore, establishing a resource library supporting best practise- report completed on target
- open dialog with Constructing excellence south group - completed on target
- develop power point promoting the Construction SG - advance draft completed
- decide on contribution to IOSH exhibition 2005 - SG to submit a paper - completed on target
- produce a SHP article focused on SG's - completed on target
Site Induction Pack will be available early in the new year - available as a free down-load or for a break-even fee as an IOSH pack
Construction SG Power Point available early next year (will deliver this to branch as a short presentation)
6.3 FIRE RISK MANAGEMENT - Dave Sinclair. Nothing to report.
6.4 HEALTHCARE - Martin Scott-Smith. Nothing to report.
6.5 ENVIRONMENT – Julian Davis.
"Climate Change - a Challenge for Scotland": Edinburgh Conference Centre, Heriot-Watt University: 7th December. www.holyrood.com
6.6 OFFSHORE - Tam Boyd: Nothing to report.
6.7 RAILWAYS - Need a representative
6.8 CONSULTANCY - Derek Cawkwell: Nothing to report.
6.9 SAFETY SCIENCES - Steve Boucher: Nothing to report.
6.10 TELECOMMUNICATIONS – Graeme Lyall: Nothing to report.
6.11 EDUCATION – Chris Lawson: The new guidance document from the Scottish Executive had not yet been published.
7.0 FORTH and TAY DISTRICT
The November meeting had been well attended and the presentation well received.
8.0 MEMBERS ITEMS
8.1 Julian Davis: In addition to the new statutory discipline and grievance legislation, from 1 October 2004 the role of representatives at disciplinary or grievance hearings has been extended. Under the new legislation, the role of the companion is similar to that of an advocate in putting the worker's case to the hearing. The employer must allow the companion the opportunity to:
· address the hearing to put forward the worker's case;
· to sum up that case; and
· to respond on the worker's behalf to any comments expressed at the hearing.
More details from Julian.
8.2 Request for assistance from Yorkshire Branch member carrying out reserach – fill in questionnaire on Corporate Killing. Details by email from Secretary.
8.3 Russell Brownlie commented on the current tendency of some in the media to go over the top when reporting H&S issues in education– he commended RoSPA for its 3 hour workshop in risk assessment which put the issues in perspective.
9.0 GUEST SPEAKER:
Evacuation Plans for Less Able-bodied: Dave Sinclair MIOSH, RSP, MRSH, AIFSM: Chairman - Fire Risk Management Specialist Group
The Chair indicated that there had been a last minute change in the topic for presentation this month and we he had great pleasure in introducing someone from amongst our own Branch to present the afternoon topic.
Dave then indicated that the duration of the presentation was a little fluid in that he had originally offered to make a 10 minute member's presentation and the set of slides were adapted from ones used when briefing members on a half-day workshop to discuss the topic earlier in the year, so the afternoon timings may be a little haywire.
Introduction
The speaker indicated that there is no one answer that will cover all situations in planning for evacuation of the less able-bodied and that each individual must be assessed for their needs and the environment in which they work. However he did believe that Line Management must own the assessment, but they will more than likely need advice and assistance from local Facility Management and Safety Consultants.
The session
He then indicated that he intended to cover –
· What does “Less Able-bodied” mean?
· Key Considerations and Roles
· Provide some past personal examples
· Perhaps pose some further thought - What about Visitors?
Less able-bodied
This may include people with:
• Impaired hearing – and consider this may not mean stone-deaf
• A number of those persons who are hard of hearing will still recognise the sounding of an alarm even though they are unable to define what it is.
• The warning signal necessary for these persons may be in the form of a Vibrating Pager – collected as they arrive each day, having been on charge overnight (or they may have their own disposable battery). Dave had noted the use of this form of warning was of no use if the battery was flat. This had been highlighted to him by a user who realised that they had failed to “hear” the regular alarm check one Tuesday morning as their battery had gone flat. Thankfully they were alert.
• The warning signal could be via Flashing Lights – but beware there will need to be repeater flashing beacons not just in the normal Workplace, but consideration should be given to locating them in the local toilet, restaurant and any other likely places which may be visited on a regular basis.
• The use of a Buddy System is another alternative warning system
• The speaker then warned that the use of Induction Loops must not be considered as a suitable sole means of provision of warnings for the hard of hearing.
• Impaired vision and this may not mean they are totally blind or without sight
• The use of a Buddy System – where the “Buddy” will be walking next to the persons with sight problems, offering an arm for them to use as a guide and when you come to stairs they will place their hand on your shoulder and follow in that way – let them follow – do not try to lead or steer them.
• If a Guide Dog is involved, it is normal to leave the dog control to the impaired vision person, but if you are requested to take control of it - take the lead not the harness as the dog is likely to get conflicting signals from you on the harness as opposed to the owner.
• Impaired mobility and this may involve wheelchairs or crutches or both
• Remember they may be able to walk out on their own volition – sometimes people will use wheelchairs as they are unable to be mobile for a full 8 hour working shift – the only way you are going to know – IS TO ASK THEM.
• Lifts or Elevators (particularly Evacuation Lifts) which have a dual power supply, or Fire Fighters lifts can be utilised in the evacuation plans, but a full detailed risk assessment needs to be undertaken of the suitability and back-up conditions related to them.
• There may be a need for supply of Evacuation Chairs as a back-up to the use of Evacuation Lifts – each case needs to be considered individually.
• There are many different types of “Evacuation Chairs” on the market – NB: the use of “chair lifts” must NOT be considered as a suitable means for evacuation, and a number of limited mobility individuals will not agree to the use of some forms of evacuation chairs – often because they have not been “asked” or provided with instruction on how they are used.
• The original format of evacuation chair involved 4 persons lifting and carrying the person aloft. This may still be acceptable, but it is very heavy on man-power and is not suited where several levels of floor will need to be passed.
• The more popular format now-a-days is the “ski” style chair, where one person is in control to effectively “slide” the chair down the stairs. It is vital that the manufacturers are involved at the specification stage to survey the format of the stair nosing and coverings in order to select the suitable runners/skis as a number of different materials are available with different levels of friction applicable to each.
• It is of prime importance that the users must practice the use of the evacuation chair even if an evacuation lift is the first choice – you do not want the first use to be a disaster in itself.
• Heart or breathing problems this is often missed in considering those less able-bodied
• Those with this form of limited ability are going to be more at risk where there are a number of floors in building – they may need to use the normal means of egress, but be given recovery time every floor etc..
• Expectant mothers
• Whilst they may be fully mobile initially, as the pregnancy progresses they may fall into a similar category to those with breathing difficulties, in that they may need recovery time at each floor.
• People with broken limbs
• Those who may have returned to work after a major injury undertaking light-duties or perhaps have returned on a part-time basis, such that the evacuation plan may be a relatively short time based effect.
The Assessment
Any assessment of the requirements of individuals needs to undertaken before they move into a position of risk – before they start on day one, or before they move across the organisation. And then they need to be subject to a review them on a regular basis and again if there are any change in circumstances.
The following documents may provide some guidance on preparing the assessments –
BS 5588 Part 8 Code of Practice for means of escape
BS 5588 Part 5 Code of Practice for fire fighting stairs & lifts
Guide to Fire Precautions in Fire Certificated Premises & Approved document B
Key Considerations:
Mobility - Can the individual get out under their own steam – this is by far the best form of evacuation system for any person.
Evacuation Lift – This form of lifts are slightly more costly to install than a normal lift and to install 2 in larger buildings will provide greater flexibility in meeting the requirements of the DDA standards.
Fireman’s Lift – You may be able to make use of a Fire Fighters lift as part of an evacuation plan, until such time as the Fire Service arrive on site. Even the use of such a lift for the initial 5 minutes while the Fire Service is en-route could have evacuated a number of limited mobility individuals. This must be agreed with the local Fire Service.
Communications – It is of vital importance to know exactly where any less able-bodied persons are located in the building. The use two-way radios which are issued to the individuals in the mornings as they arrive is one option. When an alarm goes off, it is then the Security guards who will use the radios to gain details of the exact location of each less able bodied person to ensure an effective evacuation can be achieved.
Temporary Refuge Areas – The speaker made a strong play on the element of being “Temporary” – this does not mean the less able-bodied being wheeled into a 900 x 900 vertical coffin to await eventual rescue. You cannot write it into an evacuation plan that individuals will be placed there until they are rescued by the Fire Service. All evacuation plans must be from the individual's normal workplace to the assembly point.
The speaker provided an example of poor planning – At one location, space had been let out to a third party on the 5th floor of one of their buildings, he found out that their evacuation plan was –
A buddy system would be used to get the person to the refuge area.
The buddy would leave the less able-bodied person there and exit the building.
The buddy would find the Fire Service Officer in charge and would provide him with the mobile telephone number of the less able bodied person so they could find out exactly where he was.
This is no longer the case.
Temporary refuge areas have to be very carefully considered in terms of location – to put one on a stairwell may well impede the evacuation of everyone else from the building, so they may need to be in a protected position just alongside the stairwell.
The intention of Temporary Refuges is just that – a temporary place of safety which is occupied long enough to enable the more able-bodied persons to pass by – then the evacuation which is likely to be much slower can proceed.
Evacuation Chairs – The use of Evacuation chairs will also involve the use of a Buddy System – where there is more than one “Buddy” trained up to assist the less able-bodied person in case of absence, holiday, and sickness etc.
The chairs – these will normally be located close to the worker in their workplace, rather than on the stairwell where it may cause an obstruction to others etc. and there will be one for each mobility impaired person, with “buddies” for each.
Location of individual – This needs to be carefully considered. It may be that some cases they are located on the ground floor or 1st floor where they can leave with out assistance, i.e. the use of and evacuation chair.
The speaker discussed two case studies
Edinburgh –
· No assessment had been carried out prior to the individual moving to new post on 5th Floor of their building.
· The individual suffered from MS and was sometimes in a wheelchair and sometimes on crutches and unfortunately the condition was getting worse.
· An Evacuation chair was provided and a Buddy system was available
Two choices available –
• Stays on 5th Floor and makes use of a Fireman’s Lift. A Communications system of a two-way radio is provided daily and an Evacuation Chair and Buddy system would be put in place from a Temporary refuge area in case the lift evacuation system failed.
• Moves to Ground Floor where he could leave unaided although there would be a Temporary refuge area where he could wait if he felt he needed assistance. The Restaurant, First Aid Room and welfare facilities exist ed on the ground floor
How was the choice made?
• Discussed with individual = he chose to move to the ground floor
·
The
speaker was in the habit of issuing briefing reminding managers to carry out
reviews and had recently done just that when a manager from
· Safety Consultant contacted and a meeting was set up with Line Manager, Facilities Manager, and Safety Consultant. And assessment was carried out and an evacuation process agreed with individual which was practiced with the individual and the Buddy’s
· A week later there was a Fire Alarm drill and all went smoothly
· The speaker indicated that the often unheard of condition happened – he gained positive feedback, in that the Line Manager called him to say thank you as it had worked out well, but hated to think what could have happened had they not prepared the plan.
Key Roles
• The Line Manager – He/she owns the assessment and any necessary reviews
• Facilities Manager - Knows the building and often organises equipment etc.
• Safety Consultant - Advice on how to carry out risk assessments and can assist in the production of a safe means of escape
• Individual - what are their preferences – it is often their choice which will make all the difference
The speaker then introduced two subjects which he said he would possibly leave with the individual to consider as he was possibly providing them with more questions than answers =
What about visitors?
Front Desk: -
Do you have a sign that asks the question about limited mobility etc?
Part of evacuation instructions could ask the question
Get the Security Guard to ask the question
Just make sure that someone does ask the question!!!
Meeting Rooms:
Assess their suitability
Have you documented escape routes / options?
Should you restrict the use in certain locations?
Can you provide guidance for users?
What about Booking Rooms?
Do you ask if there will be any less able-bodied?
Were you asked in this room booking today?
Should you make it part of the booking form – especially if this is done Online where it would be easy to provide links to useful information
Will an evacuation plan be needed?
Some events may have several wheelchair users which may demand extra Fire Wardens / Evacuation Chairs
Summary
What does “Less Able-bodied” refer to?
Key Considerations and Roles
Consider the examples provided
What about Visitors and meeting rooms?
http://www.paraid.co.uk/evacchair/index.html The evac chair section on the Paraid site also has a demo button near the bottom of the page
http://www.safa-ips.com/catalog_frame.asp?pgid=27728 This one you need to click on the appropriate section.
10.0 DATES OF NEXT MEETINGS
10.1 Branch: 9 December: Behavioural Safety: Charles Shoesmith:
PyschaLogica: Lecture Theatre (Rm 217) Sighthill Campus,
10.2
District:
11.0 CLOSURE:
|
Max Bancroft, MRSC, TechSP Branch Secretary |
Richard Lovering, FIOSH, RSP Branch Chair |
