Leaving disabled staff for fire service rescue

[AnthonyB]

Hi all,

Anyone come across any fire services allowing and even encouraging RP's to not need full PEEPs and to just leave people in refuges?

I've heard an anacedotal report of this but have a site where the fire service have apparently said this, I'm still trying to find out if this is a local crew or inspecting officer, verbal or written.

The site is a typical office, no special circumstances where there might reasonably be a need to rely on the fire service and the premises is actually fully equipped with refuges, EVC systems and even that rare beast an Evacuation Lift in addition to Firefighting lift provision.

The tenants love this as they think they can now just wash their hands of the disabled, the poor old landlords fire safety & building manager is tearing his hair out because he thinks it's madness!

[Mar62]

Currently have a situation myself in a multi occ office building with a building manager and receptionist on duty. The tenants have got it in their heads that the staircases are refuge areas (they're not) and that its the responsibility of the building manager to get anyone left in the refuge areas out.
We're both pulling our hair out!

[nearlythere]

And yet we keeping reading that an emergency plan must not be dependant on the arrival of the fire service. Ho hum!

[Mar62]

I have tracked my issue back to one tenant who had an FRA done and the assessor commented on the refuge areas and the lack of signage and comms system (they're not refuges). This then appears to have filtered through the building by word of mouth with a little chinese whisper thrown in for good measure. And now all the tenants are asking the building manager how HE will get any disabled occupants out! Grrrr. Other buildings of same landlord we have put in place evac plans that detail in depth about PEEPs and the responsibilities for evacuation etc but this building we were told not to but now at last I've been asked to compile the plan so at least the correct info will soon disseminate through.

[AnthonyB]

Ah tenants and their FRAs.......

Too many tenants think they have little or no responsibility for fire safety in a multi-occupancy and proper coordination and cooperation under Article 22 is rare.

Whilst the OSRP and FPA weren't perfect at least they took a coordinated approach to the building (at least on first full certification) with a single building wide fire certificate issued to the owner, calculated occupancy limits (at least some of the time), with both owner and occupier copies clearly defining responsibilities.

I wonder what would happen if you sent a group of different risk assessors back in time to 1960 and let them loose on some multi-storey multi occupancy buildings (or even to just one and give each one a different floor or the common parts) and see what they come up with....

[Fishy]

Hi all,

Anyone come across any fire services allowing and even encouraging RP's to not need full PEEPs and to just leave people in refuges?

I've heard an anacedotal report of this but have a site where the fire service have apparently said this, I'm still trying to find out if this is a local crew or inspecting officer, verbal or written.

The site is a typical office, no special circumstances where there might reasonably be a need to rely on the fire service and the premises is actually fully equipped with refuges, EVC systems and even that rare beast an Evacuation Lift in addition to Firefighting lift provision.

The tenants love this as they think they can now just wash their hands of the disabled, the poor old landlords fire safety & building manager is tearing his hair out because he thinks it's madness!

No, I haven't - on the contrary every technical representative from every fire authority that I've come across where this has been discussed has been at great pains to point out that leaving disabled persons in a building and hoping that they'll be rescued by the fire brigade is completely unacceptable.  Section 45 of BS 9999 is pretty unambiguous in this respect.

I have some sympathy for the fire safety manager - if I were in their position then I'd simply dismiss it as hearsay unless it was in writing.  If it were in writing then I'd write (in turn) to the relevant Brigade's Chief Officer, copying the letter to them and requesting confirmation that it represented their policy.

[Fire Monkey]

When ever I ask Fire Officers or IO's about this they always say its not there job to evacuate people and this should have already been done before they arrive (and they are right). They all said though they would not leave people there to burn. In terms of a Fire Authority saying something my view point that if its not written down in an official communication then it did not happen. If its verbal then its just not enough to risk your reputation on.

[DavyFire]

Had a case about a year ago in a premises where I was conducting fire awareness training for the staff. It was a two storey office building adapted as offices and therapy centre for people with head trauma injuries, someone wheelchair bound.
I did not carry out the fire risk assessment. The premises had rather narrow corridors and doors for wheelchair use. Not ideal. They had a lift to access the First floor with a refuge area clearly marked and signed by the lift with an intercom to reception.
I was discussing evacuation of disabled persons and the use of the refuge and was firmly told by the manager that wheelchair bound persons would be left in the refuge, to be rescued by the guys in the red lorry, while everyone else would evacuate.
I just could not get the message across that this was completely irresponsible and goes against all guidance.
Sometimes with the best will in the world you just give up. Aghh!!

[jayjay]

I often had the discussions with building managers on trying to get them to understand and accept that their evacuation procedure required the full evacauation of any disabled persons to a place of ultimate safety outside the building.

To reinforce the advice I wrote to the local fire and rescue service and got in in writing that they expected the evacuation of disabled to be undertaken by the building occupants as part of the written evacuation procedure.

A copy of the letter from the fire and rescue service was usually enough to get the responsible persons to accept they were responsible.

[nearlythere]

It?s even more difficult, understandably, to explain the principles of a defend in place strategy where the recommendation includes a member of staff stay with the individual. Big steps....

Thing is if they stay in place what is expected to happen? Fire Service arrive at some time or fire burns out?

I couldn?t even get staff to flick a rcb controlling an emergency lighting circuit as the panel was dangerous to be in the same room as never mind touch it.
Wonder who they get to switch their lights on.

[lyledunn]

When any aspect of your fire safety strategy relies on staff on ?7.20ph don't expect military style discipline.
I work a lot in the pub and club sector where sometimes it's best not to have staff test anything!

[nearlythere]

When any aspect of your fire safety strategy relies on staff on ?7.20ph don't expect military style discipline.
I work a lot in the pub and club sector where sometimes it's best not to have staff test anything!

And sometimes its best not to have some of the staff Lyle.