Quality Management?

[Psuedonym]

I serviced an account who was 12 month's old on Friday, so no worries with the kit right? Wrong! The installation co. had installed  1999 2Kg Co2's repainted with the old valve (stamped 1999!) sprayed over (the original has to be removed, pressure tested and replaced therefore replacement with a new valve is the more cost effective and practical option) and stuck a label on claiming "New" and not even stamped to at least look like it had been tested. Arrogance and lack of H&S morals to gain max profit. The supplier are a fairly large, well established, registered to the hilt, company who you all know but shall remain nameless.

Cleveland and all are quite right with your comments re companies ripping off clients; There are firms out there ripping people off daily compromising H&S.  The "Registration" programs and companies out there, splashed on paperwork and vehicles to prove a firms guarantee of safe working practices and quality management systems which surley must include auditing one's own staff, are sold on thier quality and professionalim to avoid cowboys gaining business.
I have taken an "Auditor" out for a day who new absolutely nothing about fire extinguishers, types, requirements nor had he passed courses or had any experience within the fire trade - this all from his own lips.
Sending a rep out to sign a company up for the next 12 months, sorry, to audit and check their engineers quality systems, is not good enough. Unannounced spot checks by an experienced engineer turned auditor to random companies, THEN report back to the servicing company to answer any faults found, throughout the UK, would provide a more realistic and confidence boosting exercise to both trade and clients.

This happens in the food industry so why not the fire? Some sort of legislation decreeing food checks?
Is the fire trade trusted to police itself until there is a major incident or loss of life which will be attributed as a direct result of faulty servicing? Only when, following a public outcry or sponsored media push, would there be action taken to review processes?

These bodies are also a scam which need to be addressed.

[AnthonyB]

Hear, hear!

I suppose it's only because there aren't enough disasters that the situation is unchanged - if poorly serviced or unfit for purpose extinguishers were failing and popping with the same property damage and fatalities as gas installations pre-CORGI (which isn't perfect but far better than what the fire industry has) then we'd have something.

Current bodies & schemes just price out the smaller companies with large audit fees but little true protection - turnover does not equal quality as a matter of course.

How many companies have been thrown out of BAFE, IFEDA, FETA, BFC over the years? Not all the bad boys will have been non members!

[Psuedonym]

To be honest I cannot remember anyone being booted out of schemes, there will have been some I have no doubt but it is hardly cost effective if you throw out your potential revenue!
There are some very dubious firms out there with extremly questionable working practices but does it matter if they have any accreditation? Does it keep them out of business? No, they are still working and ensuring the rest of the industry is tarred with the same brush.

Your right, turnover certainly doesn't equal quality, regardless of size or published standards. The hidden work practices can be just as poor throughout the trade, this only tarnishes all ensuring trust is bloody difficult to achieve.

[f500]

Exactly right!

[FSO]

Pretty worrying that the Fire Safety industry is the only unregulated safety industry left.

[The Reiver]

By eck Phil, something's rattled your cage.

Being a cynical Cumbrian type, I believe that the problem is and always has been this:

FIA    
Thames House
29 Thames Street
Kingston Upon Thames,
Surrey,
KT1 1PH

FIA is a new trade association formed by the merger of two leading associations within the fire protection industry -
FETA (Fire Extinguishing Trades Association established in 1916), the trade association of companies responsible for the manufacture and maintenance of portable fire-fighting equipment
and BFPSA (British Fire Protection Systems Association established in 1966), the coordinating body for the UK fire systems industry.
The two associations have long shared the common interest of upholding and enhancing the professional status of the UK fire industry.

BAFE
31 Thames Street,
Kingston upon Thames,
Surrey
KT1 1PH

Established in 1984, BAFE is a non-profit making organization dedicated to improving standards in fire protection. It is supported, amongst others, by government, trading standards and the Heath and Safety Executive. BAFE adopts third party Certification schemes developed by independent certifications bodies and where there are not relevant schemes in place, develops its own.

The addresses (may) say it all.

NB: This is my personal opinion only and not the opinion of anyone else but me. If someone elses personal opinion is the same as my personal opinion then that is their personal opinion and just happens by chance to match my personal opinion.

[David Rooney]

Pseudo is right.

When we belonged to the NIC a few years ago the inspector knew nothing of fire alarms and was more interested if we knew how to test a ring main.... very useful for a specialist fire alarm company....

I recently took the electrical 17th edition upgrade course and exam with a large training establishment.... the tutor was from the pharmaceutical industry - sold microscopes and stuff.... and was doing the course electrical training as a side line. He could read from a book but didn't have a clue what it meant....

Our BAFE inspector is very good, but he still only looks at what we put in front of him.... no spot checks.......!!

For all the pomp and glory, regulation and legislation and all the crap that is spouted from ministers and the HSE this industry still relies upon the integrity of the majority of companies and individuals who actually give a damn.

The dodgy individuals and companies - some very large - in it for the money and the turn over are still out there getting rich and getting away with it.

[kurnal]

Is any other industry any different?
I could tell a few tales about building control enforcement, environmental and reclamation, recycling, construction, first aid, the food industry, the hotel and tourist trade, the rail industry, the motor trade,the security industry ......trouble is as soon as human beings come into the equation  human weaknesses come into play. Dont knock our industry too hard- its certainly no worse than almost any other you could mention. Only tight, strict impartial and independent enforcement of standards can make a difference in my humble opinion.

[Wiz]

I have never been impressed with third-party auditing.

As I have often said - who audits the auditors?

I have been told that there are auditors auditing the auditors. And I suppose auditors auditing those auditors.

Experience, not only mine, has shown that those being audited are invariably less than impressed by what they receive for their money.

To me it all seems like jobs for the boys. And they are encouraging you to join them. Pay their annual fees and you will get more work because they will promote their members as being the only people good enough to do that work. It all sounds like a good idea until you want to expand your business and move into new areas. But you find it impossible because you don't meet the criteria required. The main one being experience. It doesn't matter that you could do the work to at least the standard of everyone else already doing it. - you won't be given a chance because you are not a member of organisation X and you can't join organisation X (even if you can afford the fees) because you are not 'experienced' enough!

Don't fool yourselselves that these organisations are there for improving standards they are there to provide jobs for the boys and if you are prepared to pay them they'll throw you a few scraps. Play the game long enough and you get more and more scraps. Eventually you might even be considered suitable to join the boys.

Is this the sort of regulation we really want?

I concur with prof K that 'Only tight, strict, impartial and independent enforcement of standards can make a difference' but to which I would add the words 'free' in as much as it would be funded in the same way as Trading Standards. i.e not being paid for by the people they are supposed to be enforcing.

[Chris Houston]

I think UKAS audit the auditors.