Rank: New forum user
|
Hi,
First posting on the Forum! I know this has come up loads of times before but presumably all old postings have gone? Advice please -
Employee with mobility issues working on first floor of multi-storey office building. Decline in condition means that using the evac chair & buddy scheme we had in place is no longer feasible as the lower limb will not flex sufficiently to get the chair down the stairs. We have therefore moved the employee to the ground floor. Long term however, the employee is remote from her colleagues and can only now undertake some of the previous admin support role. How do other organisations deal with evacuating employees with mobility issues from upper floors?
Thanks every so.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Hi yroyal
at a previous company I was advised to provide a room with good access for the fire and rescue services which had an hours fire protection, the idea being that we could move our colleague into the protected room and leave them to it. It's certainly a test of character and friendship.
BBT
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
I attended a presentation today by our local fire and rescue service, and their advice was to establish a safe haven as suggested but they also stated that if you do you would need to have in place a communications link in order that they could contact persons in these area remotely.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
It depends on the layout of the building, most F&R services work on the theory that you are getting them out as per the regulations. At least one openly states they are fire and rescue, NOT fire and evacuation!
Refuges are to be used as a place of relative safety until either the main evacuation flow has passed so the person with mobility issues does not impeade the flow, or until the person can be evacuated safely to another part of the building and then on to a place of total safety.
You have to look at the compartmentalisation of buildings, so if you can get them to another part of the building, suitably protected by fire resistant materials and compartments then they should be able to stay there until they can evacuate the building in either their own time, or with help as agreed in their personal evacuation plan.
I for one wouldn't want to be abandonned in a building with the fire alarms going off!! You also have to consider DDA and the disabled persons rights.
Sorry it's not a short or conclusive answer, I would however recommend reading the relavent RRO guide so you can use the appropriate bit to demonstrate to the management why certain actions are required.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Y- notwithstanding any of the above;
I lost a friend to MS a few years ago. She had the same sort of issue to deal with in terms of mobility and reasonable adjustment.
I would just say that the person should be involved in the descision so that they (hopefully) can appreciate what the employer must do for them.
This should be done carefully (HR issue) but insistingly as the employee may have internal denial wrt their capability and, if relevant their potential decline. If it is debilitating and progressive perhaps larger but fewer steps in making arrangements would be better.
At the end of the day it will come down to capability and suitable deployment in work (perhaps of a different nature). At some point people may hae to face the inevitable 'change' in work which is never going to be easy.
Finally you may need to consider other practicalities as well as evacuation; location of disabled toilet, coffee/ rest, etc area is going to need more frequent attention than evacuation. Car parking may also be worthwhile thinking of, and these things might offset some change resistance and illustrate fulfiling the doc.
I use a temorary/ permenant disability assessment set of q's as part of an interview RA process which might be useful to do in this instance.
Good luck
Steve
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
BBT just an observation - one hour fire protection does not mean that the wall, door or other element of construction will resist the passage of fire for one hour. Depending on the intensity of the fire the construction element may last longer or shorter than designated fire resistance period. The designated period of fire resistance is only what was achieved under a standard fire test but as we all know fires do not follow a standard fire. So your old employer was wrong in asking you to place a disabled person in a one hour fire resisting area until the fire service evacuated them.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I think if you read the question - "How do other organisations deal with evacuating employees with mobility issues from upper floors?"
you will see that yroyal is looking for real examples of procedures that others have in place, not ideas from people who do not know the actual set up or the individual.
Shaun you are exactly right about the unpredictability of fire, further the behaviour of people involved in a fire situation is also unpredictable.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Some good comments ,However as opposed to or even alongside looking for procedures etc that other people use perhaps taking a broader view of the overall picture might provide the solution, Can the employee be retrained to provide a different service that can be performed from the ground floor, could more of their colleagues not be relocated onto the ground floor, may be cheaper that building a fire refuge that may not even get used in an emergency,
|
|
|
|
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.