Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Admin  
#1 Posted : 16 April 2009 12:03:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By jenjer
A flat roof can be accessed through a hotel bedroom window and as the wall surrounding the roof is only knee height I am going to prevent access as I do not feel it safe for our guests to be out there - particularly if they have had a drink.
The roof is not a designated fire exit and there is no way down to the ground apart from jumping (a drop of over 3 metres).
I am looking for specific regs to support my decision but can only see Working at Height Regs - I have a feeling the wall needs to be at least 1.1m high, but cannot recall where I got this information from.
Can anyone help?
Admin  
#2 Posted : 16 April 2009 12:26:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By BPF
Jenjer,

Check out part K of the Building regs, section 3.1

http://www.planningporta...s/br/BR_PDF_ADK_1998.pdf

BPF
Admin  
#3 Posted : 16 April 2009 12:30:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Dave Merchant
WAHR don't strictly apply as the hotel guests aren't at work - so it's back to basics, referencing the Building Regs and your duty to keep "visitors" safe under HASAWA.

The 1100mm height for edge protection comes from part K of the Building Regs for areas of "public access", which would apply here. On construction sites it's only 950mm.
Admin  
#4 Posted : 16 April 2009 12:41:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Ron Hunter
Fit a window restrictor.
Admin  
#5 Posted : 16 April 2009 12:45:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By jenjer
Sorry - access through windows and double doors that are around 1 foot off the ground - so was going to restrict windows and seal door.
Thanks.
Admin  
#6 Posted : 16 April 2009 12:46:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Bob Youel

I attended a recent event where access to a roof was not secure and a non-worker jumped from the said roof - ~6 floors up!

yes its very important to have such places adequately managed with controlled access in place
Admin  
#7 Posted : 16 April 2009 13:07:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By jenjer
Thanks guys and girls - much appreciated!
Admin  
#8 Posted : 16 April 2009 14:43:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Richard Altoft
look at this the other way round (if that helps)- at that height breaking in is possible so windows etc should be secured or restricted anyway for safety and security of guests and their belongings.
R
Admin  
#9 Posted : 17 April 2009 09:42:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By MT
In terms of the Regs which apply, check out Reg 15 of the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regs.

"(1) No window, skylight or ventilator which is capable of being opened shall be likely to be opened, closed or adjusted in a manner which exposes any person performing such operation to a risk to his health or safety.

(2) No window, skylight or ventilator shall be in a position when open which is likely to expose any person in the workplace to a risk to his health or safety."

Guidance states:

"Controls should be so placed that people are not likely to fall through or out of the window. Where there is a danger of falling from a height devices should be provided to prevent the window opening too far."

You should indeed have controls in place to prevent any employees or members of the public gaining access to the flat roof.
Admin  
#10 Posted : 17 April 2009 11:25:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By TT
Its always the same on this forum isn't it?
Someone says one thing and then someone else comes along and disagrees. :)

Its going to be me today.

Reg 15 doesn't apply in my opinion. As I understand it - the fall off the roof is the danger, not a fall from the window.

By that logic, any window opening into any area where hazards may exist should be sealed...like the ground floor window that opens onto a yard where forklift trucks operate.

Not to say that I disagree with the option for window restrictors etc. just that my justification for it wouldn't be Reg. 15! :)
Admin  
#11 Posted : 17 April 2009 12:59:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By jenjer
MT & TT - there is nothing wrong with a 'heated debate'...after all, Mrs Merton swore by them!
Admin  
#12 Posted : 17 April 2009 13:03:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By TT
No heated debate intended. I hope one doesn't ensue!

I hadn't realised the 'MT' and 'TT' similarity though.

Perhaps we're health & safety brothers? ;)
Admin  
#13 Posted : 17 April 2009 13:45:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Dave Merchant
TT's correct - reg 15 does not apply. That's meant to cover things like hitting your head on the edge of an open window, or getting your fingers trapped. The fact the window leads someplace nasty is irrelevant to reg 15.

Also, remember we're talking about hotel guests - NOT employees. None of the workplace-centric legislation figures, apart from HASAWA's general duties of care to visitors.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.