Posted By Harry Mooney
Browsing through the Croner website forum, I noticed that on the subject of fire drills, one of the respondents indicated that IOSH and the Fire Brigades are now warning of the legality of unannounced drills, following a court case where a lady successfully sued her employer after being injured during such a drill. My own local Brigade say this is not a policy, rather a recommendation. Anyone out there with further information, or can IOSH confirm this news?

Posted By Hilary Charlton
I've never been able to see the point of "announcing" fire drills. What happens in the event of a fire - "oh, er, excuse me everyone but tomorrow at 3.04pm precisely a small fire will break out in the generator room, so if you could all, er, evacuate nicely at that time, but not before, we'd appreciate it, thank you."

Hilary

Posted By Andrew I. Butler
Good Afternoon Harry
Your thread has caused me to question my own procedures.
A presidence has now been set, what effect will this have on future training in fire prevention?
I agree with Hilary to announce such a drill will create apathy amongst workers.
Do you happen to have access to the case study for the incident in question or can you direct me to your source of information.

Many thank

Andy

Posted By Terri Cox
Nice point, and I must say my own personal experiences have been that they should be unannounced so as to mirror the actions in the event of a genuine emergency.

I have also been advised that routes should occasionally be blocked off so as to bring to peoples attention the other routes available should a fire block off the most accessible route.

And, yes I agree no amount of prior warning will prevent some accidents and the consequential actions that people take to make a fast buck!!! (Ok, before you all jump on me, some will be genuine, some will chance their luck!).

Posted By Merv Newman
Harry,

I always ran two fire drills a year - the first was announced - date/time - but the second was just "advanced warning" ie next week sometime.

The value and objective of the announced drill was that it gave people - employees and supervision - time to check their procedures, role call lists etc were up to date and known. It was a deliberate dress rehearsal. The "advance warning" drill was meant to be a bit more like real life, and we used it to stage one or two scenarios - missing person, blocked exit route ...

What we were trying to develop was familiarity and routine habits. "If the bell rings, this is what I do and this is where I go, and I don't rush in to it".

We always held a brief "post mortem" after the drill, and ALWAYS found some way to improve the system.

I think I should insist on the point that familiarity and routine reaction to the alarms sounding is the best way to avoid panic and injuries.

Regards

Merv Newman

Posted By Steve Sedgwick
Listen to Merv Newman, he has a good approach to drills.

I usually arrange for someone to stand at one or more exit and tell people that that exit is blocked by fire.

As for common law claims, if someone is injured during a fire drill does it matter that it was announced or not, it would not effect any defense.

Fire drills do not have to be too disruptive to the business. The objective is to get people to think how they will escape in the event of an alarm, test the alarm, and test the escape routes.

-Pre plan them
-Check with a few key people that the time you have chosen is not going to be too disruptive or embarrassing ( I have never seen Prime Ministers question time be interrupted for a fire drill)
-Be prepared to cancel it if it is teeming it down or blowing a gale
Keep it in proportion.
Steve

Posted By Merv Newman
Thanks for the kind comment steve.

Someone else mentioned disabled people and pregnant women.

Disabled people have to be evacuated and assigning helpers to them and practicing how to get them out is part of the planning before any drill. (disabled persons who might have to be carried down stairs should be excused the actual exercise but the planning, practice of the helpers and required equipment should all be in place)

Pregnant women and others who may have difficulty are always consulted beforehand. If they opt not to participate then they become "missing persons" as a check on the headcount system.

The same applies where continuous monitoring of a process is required. One or two employees made be detailed to remain on duty.

As for new employee induction, just about the first thing we said to new employees/temps/contractors was "Welcome, now you have found how to get into our building, we are going to show you how to get out." Visitors received a card with basic site rules and the instruction "if the fire bells ring, follow the instructions of your host or any other employee - other wise just follow the green arrows to the emergency exit".

Regards

Merv Newman

Posted By Jim Sweetman
I'm glad to see that everyone is in favour of the unannounced drill and have made some good points considering how to go about it.

I can remember the fuss that we used to go through with foreign crews during my days at sea. If the alarms were sounded any othertime than 4pm on a Friday afternooon, the only procedure that the crew followed was to make a beeline for the lifeboats with packed suitcases - they must hold the record for 'speed-packing'!

One thought I would add to the discussion is regarding 'persons with special needs'(pregnancy, disbility etc.). If they, and/or any designated assistance, don't take part in drills, whether they are announced or not, how is it ensured that relevant persons are aware of what is required of them and are they able carry out their designated role? This could be done in a separate discrete training exercise.

Jim Sweetman

Posted By Steve Sedgwick
To state that everyone is in favor of unannounced drill is not totally true. Look at MN, MM, KT, and HMs comments.

Many of us announce drills to certain individuals, some with disabilities, others with key positions e.g. I usually check with manager’s secretaries to ensure that key visits or meetings are not disrupted and agree times with them. I am sure they let it out to others, I certainly tell them to let the MD know.

We do not have to too rigid in our approach to this; it doesn’t have to be strictly one or the other. It all depends on the circumstances ie is it a power station, a steel works, a small office block, a large shopping mall.
Come IOSH, have say
Steve

Posted By Harry Mooney
Jack,
My query re an IOSH response was due to the initial concern raised on the Croner website where the respondent commented that his information casting doubts on the legality of unannounced drills had come from IOSH on a "Manageing Safely" course from an IOSH trainer. I don't expect the CEO to respond to every query from the shop floor, though I did think that someone somewhere might be monitoring the website as other Institutions do and where there is a response from upstairs when it is felt necessary.

I also accept that the silence could mean that the concerns on this are considered minor, and would only result in unnecessarily prolonging the debate.

So just in case someone somewhere is watching, and not wishing to start a rammy (a guid Scots word), I'll say au revoir, ta-ta, and see you again sometime.

Harry