Employee operated fire exits

[stephen1974]

Anyone have any advice on having a fire exit that would be used by the public, but would need to be operated by an employee.

We have an area with 2 escape exits (for distance purposes mainly, but also, one could be potentially blocked by the mains electrical boards if they went up). That exit is in an area the public would otherwise not be allowed. There is no door to this area, nor the frame work to put one in, so netting has been put up, which can be pulled down (velcro) if you need to get access.

I'm not keen but how do things stand with exits that have to be operated by an employee? (i could just put a sign saying pull here but who reads signs?)

I'm looking at alternatives and want to avoid saying they need to build a frame and stick a door in as its a bit more than the £20 they allow me to spend on things.

[witsd]

It's certainly not ideal, but my first thought would be to treat it like a PEEP.

In the event of fire, nominated persons (at least two at any one time, ideally working in different areas) would head straight to this location (if safe to do so) and remove the curtain, ushering persons present towards the now revealed fire exit.

Test it during each drill and see how well it works.

[Messy]

Blimey! A netting screen across an exit - perhaps used by the public!!!!!

What is the nature of the premises? From that I am trying to establish a profile of the type of 'public' that would be expected to use this pull- netting exit? Any vulnerable persons? Sleeping, non ambulant, old, infirm, kids, Persons seeking medical care, alcohol licence etc etc????????

How many people may be expected to use this route? - assume to other exit is unavailable for this exercise

What happens to the netting when pulled? Does it lay on the floor and create a trip hazard?

You really will have to provide a water tight business case to justify what you have already inferred is a cost driven control measure. I do not feel comfortable to be honest, so give me some more information to reduce my anxieties !!

[stephen1974]

Sorry Details won't do that. It's not appropriate in anyway, so now I have another battle on my hands.

You could have up to 60 people, from toddlers to big adults using it if things go wrong. The more people their are, the better the staffing situation so more likely it will be ok. However, potentially, if a staff member is hurt in some way, there could be noone to help out and the public, probably young kids, will be left alone.

Yes, pulling that netting loose could make it a trip hazard. In fact, I almost went butt over boob the other day testing it out.

Also, and there is nothing i can do this as we dont have any power over this part of the building, all final exits have bedlam bolts, which are 'advised' not to be used for public exits. The building is supposed to be able to hold 5000 people.

[Messy]

I really am struggling to get my head around the scenario here.

You say up to 60 people including children may have to use this exit, but there may be 5000 in the building. I assume this premises is a multi occupied building then? - perhaps a shopping centre or somewhere various occupiers share? This would mean that various responsible persons* will all have their own fire risk assessments and the landlord will have an over-arching FRA that covers shared spaces

You imply that as the part of the building with the netting is somewhere where you have any power, there is nothing you can do. If this is a shared exit route controlled by others - say a landlord - this means the various responsible persons involved (your space and the landlord) MUST cooperate and communicate by law.

To summarise, you have a situation where:
1) A piece of netting held by Velcro is across an escape route for 60 persons
2) That netting may create a trip hazard during an emergency evacuation
3) Vulnerable persons -children - may be present
4) Redlam bolts are in use (not the ideal solution, but they may be ok)
5) There appears on the face of it, to be poor communications between responsible persons*

The idea of a staff operated means of escape is not rare. Where vulnerable persons are occupying a space, it is common. 1000s of elderly persons homes, mental health units and children nurseries will use this system. Other places where security is a concern may do the same (Prisons, military establishments). BUT, where relevant persons cannot escape under their own steam and completely independently - or where obstacles such as suspended netting and Redlam bolts are in place, this needs strict management control which should be developed by a detailed fire risk assessment. From what you are saying, this does not seem to be the case here

You obviously have some responsibilities for fire safety so you could be considered a Responsible Person under Article 5 of the Fire Safety Order 2005*. You must push this matter up to your managers and create an audit trail for your own professional 'safety'. The comment that your managers don't like spending cash worries me a bit. OK, it is necessary and important to make sure the cost of any control measure is proportionate to the risks faced (you would not advise installing a sprinkler system in a phone box!!), but not wanting to do anything on the grounds of cost may leave you and your bosses in hot water.

If there are matters you can discuss openly on here, do PM me. But whatever you do - do something and do it soon!!

* Assuming this premises is in England or Wales

[witsd]

Yeah, that's a lot more people than I was initially imagining, for some reason. (Re-reading your post, the numbers aren't initially implied, so I've no idea where I got my visualisation from!).

I'm still not going to say that it couldn't be doable, but given the additional details, you really need to be able to guarantee that the netting can be removed quickly, efficiently and that at least one member of staff would be the first on the scene.

[stephen1974]

Ignore the 5000 people and the fact that its multple occupancy. That was more to do with the use of bedlam bolts on all the fire doors, nothing to do with the fire escape route in my little part of the world.

Communication between the various responsible people is fine. We all talk. This is an issue that has only just popped up in the last couple of weeks. It doesnt effect anyone else, just my place.

I need to get the netting removed. Im not happy with it at all but I need to find a solution that isn't going to cost a mid range 3 figure sum to put right. I ned to find something that can close off an area to the public, but can be safely and easily accessed in an emergency. I'm thinking just a simple wooden gate with a push button to open.

[Messy]

I need to find something that can close off an area to the public, but can be safely and easily accessed in an emergency.

er......... a door???

[stephen1974]

Like I said, They will not go to the extent of building a structure significant enough to put a doorway in. Too much money.

[stephen1974]

3 months on and I finally get them to install a 'gate'. (A small piece of wood, two hinges and a spring to automatically make it spring back)
Now, this is what i'm dealing with.

The spring is very strong and the door flies back closed with some force.
The direction in which the gate opens is against the flow of the escape route.
The gate is at the top of a set of steps, so when someone pulls it open and goes through, the gate swings back, whacks them in the legs, and sends them flying down the stairs.



I've told them to take it off, turn it round and put a push lock on it. In another 3 months they might get it sorted out.

[Messy]

This lot sound like a right bunch of cowboys!! So the netting has gone and been replaced with a catapult!!! ????

I still don't get why a door or double doorset with appropriate furniture was deemed too expensive. I remain confused about the scale of the occupancy of this building - but it's somewhere between 60 and 5000 with some being members of the public

Installing a suitable door does not sound exhaustively expensive- assuming there are no heritage or special circumstances. If this is how they resolve this simple fire safety issue, it begs the question how many other corners are being cut here?

With my former fire inspectors hat on, I would forensically examine this building top to bottom and all its paperwork as fire safety management here sounds proper iffy!!!