Posted By Melinda Lyons
I have looked through the guidelines in some depth and would like real practical advice on the "problem" of blocking open doors labelled as fire doors in an office environment.

In my previous workplace, it was realistically impractical for workers to allow the doors to be "unblocked" as they would close and lock - requiring two hands to open the door from both inside and outside - thus creating a "minor" risk when people would carry hot drinks into their office. One might suggest that a door designed in this was was already dangerous as it would not allow someone to open it quickly in an emergency.

This being said, it was speculated at only local level that it WAS acceptable to block the door open - for example with a door wedge - on the conditions that the door would always be shut and acting as a secure fire door when there was no-one present - something that was complied with for reasons of security against theft - and that when it was blocked open, it was done with something that could be easily removed such as a door wedge so that it could be quickly adapted to be fire-safe.

However, the group would occasionally have fire safety inspections who would threaten the workers with fines for blocking these doors open - saying "it is a fire door, it should be closed" without addressing the behavioural need to pass through these doors while carrying objects (whether they be papers, mobile phones or hot drinks)

Whilst these doors are labelled "fire door keep shut" - clearly a fire door is not always shut - as occasionally people need to pass through it - is this due to an over-zealous need to make everything a fire door without considering its purpose?

How do you see the practical application of the guidance to incorporate "good sense"?

Posted By gham
The doors should be kept closed to prevent the spread of smoke and also fire ...... in the event of a fire

Have you considered using magnetic holders which release the doors when your fire alarm system is activiated. This an acceptable arrangement and is useded in many applications where foot traffic is high but there is still a requirement to maintain compartmentalisation in the event of a fire. you will see these type of magnetic holders in hospitals shopping centers offices warehouse corridors etc.

Most fire safety companies would be happy to advise

G

Posted By Ken Taylor
They may be safe from the fire protection point of view, Melinda, but I wonder whether disability discrimination has been considered.

There are add-on battery-operated door-holders that respond to the sound of a nearby fire alarm (eg 'Dorgard') which may be acceptable to the local fire authority - although I would always prefer holders as part of the installed system.

Posted By Melinda Lyons
Thank you both - you are entirely right about the DDA - I am certain this is something that has not been considered!

Posted By Graeme Millar
Magnetic release(Hardwired)-recommended option,more reliable and not neccessary very expensive depending on the site.
Magnetic (wire free) can be a bit misleading in that you will have to run additional cables for extra sounders if the required DBa levls cannot be reached to activate the units.

Posted By joe black
Hi Melinda, behavioural attitudes are all to do with culture, and having H&S inherent in the workplace, rather than being this ugly monster that raises its head every now and again to make peoples life difficult. In this case, I would say that the staff need to adjust the way they fetch their drinks, rather than putting people at risk of injury if there were to be a fire. I appreciate that this change of mind set is not easy to achieve, but such is the lot of any H&S rep/ manager!!!!

Posted By Ken Taylor
Just to add that hot drinks spillage can be rather serious for the person upon whom the liquid falls. It's a major cause of reported scalding injuries requiring medical attention.