What is clear under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 is that when you provide extinguishers for your staff then they must be trained to use them. Training must take place on induction to the company and at regular intervals thereafter.
This is one of the most frequently non-compliant areas of fire-safety legislation for the vast majority of British businesses. The problems are obvious:

1 – It is logistically difficult to organise a large group of staff to take part in practical extinguisher training.

2 – It is cost restrictive (anywhere from £30 – £120 per head).

3 – Organising practical training for one person (on induction) is even more costly and many trainers have a minimum number of trainees before they will offer their services.

The alternative of a fire-extinguisher training DVD therefore seems more practical. It is certainly more cost effective and much easier to deliver to groups and more particularly single inductees.
Obviously it does not hold the currency of physical hands-on training but compared to what most companies settle for ‘Nothing’ – it is perhaps the best alternative. Factor into this also the ability to get most fire-extinguisher servicing companies to deliver ad hoc and free training when extinguishers are due a discharge / extended service and as a whole this becomes quite a reasonable approach.
So far so good eh? – However simply playing a training DVD would be most unlikely to pass for ‘training’ in a court of law. The trainees could have chosen to watch it and take everything onboard or alternatively daydreamed the time away enjoying the paid break from work. Then there are the trainees who watched it avidly but misunderstood or just plain got it wrong. Training without ‘a test of understanding’ is just not training.
Therefore a fire-extinguisher video training course / DVD should be accompanied by supporting test materials and have a minimum pass mark to prove competency. If you don’t pass you can’t use the extinguishers.

This is an example of just such a DVD 

What are Fire Risk Assessments?

Although the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) order has been in place since October 2006 it is amazing how many UK business owners pose the question “What are fire risk assessments?”
Many people remain blissfully unaware of their legal responsibility to carry out a fire risk assessment or undertake an insufficient assessment. One of the most common failings sited in prosecutions is that of ‘an insufficient fire-risk assessment’.
Many members of staff find themsleves being delegated the responsibility yet lack the knowledge or expertise to undertake an assessment to a reasonable and compliant standard.
In law it is perfectly acceptable to undertake your own assessment if you acknowledge your limitations and seek knowledge and advice to supplement this need. With this in mind I have written ‘The Ultimate Fire Risk Assessment Guide.’ The publication is free and will be updated annually. 
Having read the publication you will know where your business fits within the Fire Safety Order and how it specifically applies to you. There are many free guides including the government’s own guides. However they contain advice such as – “Ensure you have adequate fire protection measures (alarms, extinguishers etc.)” – very helpful. How do you know what is sufficient?
This free book takes you beyond the obvious and fleshes out the general statements to help you determine exactly what measures you should put in place to ensure you meet current fire-safety legislation.

You can order your free copy at http://www.whatarefireriskassessments.co.uk/

In simple premises it is quite likely and practical that the owner or duty holder carries out the assessment. In more complex buildings however it is wise to consider employing a professional consultant.

In fact, in England and Wales, Government guidance suggests that where buildings are more than four storeys high then the duty holder should seek the advice of a competent person.

As this requirement becomes more and more in demand this year saw the setting up of ‘The Fire Risk Assessment Competency Council’.
Their advice to duty holders carrying out their own assessment in simple places is as follows:

The following attributes of a fire risk assessor might be sufficient in conjunction with a study of suitable guidance documents. Even in such a simple building, the fire risk assessor will need:-

a) An understanding of relevant current best fire safety practices in buildings of the type in question;

b) An awareness of the limitations of the fire risk assessor’s own experience and knowledge;

c) A willingness and ability to supplement existing experience and knowledge, when necessary, by obtaining external help and advice

In order to help in this regard we are putting on a series of workshops. The first being held in Harrogate on Tuesday July 19^th, 2011.

For more details click [Free Fire Safety Training]

Did the smoking ban magically encourage employees to stop smoking? Is it fair to say that, on the whole, those who smoked before the ban still smoke now?

When carrying out fire risk assessments across the UK we often find that the provision for smoking members of staff is so poor that it is a significant fire risk.

When there is no real safe environment in which to smoke (either a smoking shelter or at least a fire-proof ashtray) then smokers often discard cigarettes close to a building.

Consider the following:
Cigarettes burn at  approximatley 700 degrees Celsius and they are designed to stay lit and can therefore smoulder unseen for some time.
Nationally, someone dies every three days as a result of a fire caused by cigarettes.
Approximately 800 injuries each year occur as a result of fires caused by smoking.

There is still a big potential fire-safety risk to businesses due to smoking and this is one reason why the UK Government has pushed for a new EU study into the effectiveness of ‘Reduced Ignition Propensity’ cigarettes – which go out quickly if left unattended.

With 80% of businesses likely to never recover from a major fire it is about time that business owners stopped turning a blind-eye to smokers and ensure there is safe provision for smoking on or near their premises.

The fire at the Care Home resulted in a fatality and as the fallout unfolds an employee of the home has been prosecuted. This is now the first employee to be prosecuted under ‘The Fire Safety Order’ and this one case alone shows the Fire Authorities’ intention to bring all persons involved to justice not just the owner.

Karen Sykes, 41, from Sale, on the 18^th of March pleaded guilty to breach of article 23 of the Fire Safety Order - a failure to take care of herself and other relevant persons.  The fire alarm sounded around 6pm but was quickly silenced by Ms Sykes who had not carried out search of the site to investigate the reason for the activation.

A fire was later discovered in a resident’s room and an hour and fifteen minutes after the alarm activation a call was finally made to the fire and emergency services. When fire crews arrived they found the fire-alarm to be muted.

Elderly resident Enid West died following the fire and an inquest into her death is scheduled to be heard by the Stockport Coroner this month.

Assistant county fire officer, Peter O’Reilly, said: “This case clearly highlights and enforces the message that employees have a duty to ensure the safety of the people they are looking after. This type of behaviour simply isn’t acceptable and we should not forget that an elderly resident in Sykes’ care died that night. “This is the first time an employee has been prosecuted under this legislation, as opposed to the employer, and I am proud of Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue for bringing this about.”

The fallout continues and the message surely is the ‘responsible person’ carries the ultimate can but responsibility is devolved along the way. If you think ‘I’m just an employee it’s not my responsibility’ - then you’re wrong!

When carrying out fire risk assessments we ask ‘Have your staff been trained in the use of extinguishers?’ Nine out of ten answer in the affirmative but when we then test understanding a similar ratio prove to have poor or insufficient knowledge.

What people regard as training differs greatly from reading the instructions on the extinguisher through watching a DVD or very often by listening to a quick run through from the extinguisher chap!

As with many aspects of the ‘Fire Safety Order 2005’ just a token gesture towards compliance will hold no water in a court of law. Assuming that the ‘extinguisher chap’ is qualified to train you can be a big mistake. When choosing any fire-safety supplier, whether a service or a training provider, then you must prove due-diligence in your choice of contractor. Government guidelines suggest the easiest proof of due-diligence is via third-party certification schemes such as BAFE or FETA.

Training without any test of knowledge has little value therefore merely playing a DVD to staff would not suffice. Watching a presentation then having to achieve a minimum pass mark on a test afterwards may well be acceptable.

There is however no substitute for the real thing and live, real-time training delivers the best results.

Training cannot be a one-off ‘been there – done that’ experience. It must be re-delivered at appropriate intervals and whenever circumstances change within a workplace.

Fire safety training, like all safety training, is a positive boon to everyone whether they are in the workplace or not. Much like first-aid training it should be taught in schools. A topic covered well in this blog entitled ‘The Importance of First Aid Training’.

If you walked around the corner in a hotel tomorrow to discover a small fire between you and the lift would then be a good time to start learning which of the three available extinguishers to use?

Those who ignore fire-safety can pay fines at the magistrates’ court of up to £5,000 per offence. Some of these offences can be things like blocked exits which would have incurred zero expense to remedy. Very often the major failings are lack of training, lack of planning and lack of information; all these measures are minimal in terms of capital expenditure.

The costly items are usually poor fire-protection systems: extinguishers, alarms, emergency lights and poor electrical-safety (lack of PAT testing or periodic inspections).
However a fire-risk-assessment should not put you out of business. It is reasonable to phase in remedial action and even if the action required is urgent (such as no working fire alarm) then temporary measures can be put in place (such as instigating regular patrols and / or issuing manual air-horns).

Health and Safety legislation brings just as many potential expenses, new systems and training issues but has much less opposition in terms of capital investment – why is that? A law in place since 1974 has had the time, profile and financial impact to ensure that the vast majority of businesses believe it to be a necessary expense. The key however with both fire safety and health and safety legislation is deciding what is ‘reasonably practical’ in terms of expense, time and effort. This concept is highlighted well in a HSBC business-network blog – ‘Health and safety what is reasonably practicable?’Every business owner should realise that the Fire-Safety-Order, legislation introduced in late 2006, has bedded in and all the relevant stakeholders have become more comfortable with their roles – none more-so than the fire and emergency service. Insurers too are heightening their requirements and can no longer sustain £1.3bn annual fire-loss claims.

As with all safety legislation however surely the final word should not be about expense but common sense good-practice – As a business owner – It’s the right thing to do!

Do you know what the following signs mean? (Mouse over the envelope to reveal the answer)

.