Hi KM
I think perhaps you are overthinking this scenario, partly due to the advent of the BSA and the Regulations made under this, and perhaps because HSE now has a dual function both as the HSE of old and now also as it houses BSR.
Before BSA you would need to consider this alteration or whatever in terms of how it would enable compliance with occupational health and safety legislation AND whether it would comply with Building Regulations and whilst there would be overlaps clear guidance as to which enforcing authority took the lead.
Post BSA and with neither an HRB or residential accommodation in the mix, I think it would be wise to still treat these two sets of legislation as being largely separate and consider each on its own merits.
So, in terms of Building Regs does the alteration pose a "material" change to the risk - 1. Does it overload part of the building? 2. Does it change the fire risk e.g. by impinging on aspects such as travel distances or impacting exits OR increase the risk of ignition by being e.g. installed in an area which has a Zone classifiction.
If the answer to both these questions is "NO", then it will probably move through the Building Regs process quite easily (assuming there are no other considerations such as the building being Listed).
Next to the Workplace Regs, the Approved Code of Practice comments, amongst other things:
97 In most workplaces 11 cubic metres (11 m3) of space per person should
be taken as a minimum. This calculation should not take into account ceiling
heights in excess of 3 m. A space of 11 m3 per person may be insufficient if
much of the space is taken up with furnishing or equipment.
98 The minimum space referred to in paragraph 97 does not apply to:
■ retail sales kiosks, attendants’ shelters, machine control cabs or similar
small structures, where space is necessarily limited;
■ rooms being used for lectures, meetings and similar purposes.
So, starting with para 98, you are not looking at just the space within the phone booth but how much space is available for all the people working in the area that includes the phone booth.
No business would stay open for very long if it stuck people in separate phone boxes all day UNLESS the business was a rogue trader that perhaps has people crammed together in a series of phone boxes, with operators calling random numbers to tell those answering that there is a problem with e.g. their VISA debit. This is the sort of business that doesn't ask for consents for Building Regs, nor intend to worry about compliance with any legal requirements. They get caught, shut up shop and start again somewhere else.
However, even if someone was using the phone booth as a place of work for an hour or two at a time, then perhaps it would be akin to the scenario in para 99 (though to be honest, I doubt it).
However, if that phone box is there to allow someone with a degree of choice to go to use it to get some extra privacy for a call, then it wouldn't be in breach of the Workplace Regs as the phone box only forms part of the overall working space available to the person.
Bear in mind that the 11m3 is not some new standard. It is the metricated version of a number that dates back to the 19th Century, when Parliament decided that there had to be a limit on how many people could be crammed into a sweatshop factory. At the time when the Factories Act 1961 was enacted the number set out in Section 2(2) was 400 cubic feet which sounds much more than 11m3!
But 400 cubic feet for someone working in a room 2.4m (8 feet) high means an area 50 feet square, about 7 feet by 7 feet, so just over 2m x 2m.
Even in 1961 you were not allowed to count any space more than 14 feet above the floor. That number got reduced to 3m which is the metricated version of 10 feet.
Edited by user 11 May 2024 11:03:19(UTC)
| Reason: Formatting