One of those nonsense matrix questions again, but what would you put down for the likelihood of a an uncontrolled risk occurring during a fire.
I consider the likelihood of a fire breaking out to be low, a 1, but do I look at this as the likelihood of this specific risk happening in the context of Yes, there is a fire? If so then uncontrolled the likelihood is almost guaranteed (arguably a 4 or 5 if we are doing a 1 to 5 scale). Or do I look at it as well, its very unlikely a fire will break out so this specific risk is then unlikely to occur in which case its a 1 again and therefore does it need control measures?
And if that doesnt make sense... its a monday morning.
And since people may ask for what the risk is...
Wheelchairs mechanically clamped to wooden boards so they can go on the ice. They cant get off the ice and therefore out of the building without someone unclamping them first. There is no procedure in place to ensure employees are available to do this and potentially, when we have minimal staff numbers, and they may have been assigned other duties.
Risk ratings for fire.
Moderator: Moderators
-
- Anorak Extraordinaire
- Posts: 743
- Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 1:55 pm
- 10
- Has thanked: 26 times
- Been thanked: 202 times
- Messy
- Grand Shidoshi
- Posts: 3585
- Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 8:59 am
- 17
- Occupation: 46 years experience with a metropolitan Fire Brigade and then Fire Safety Manager for a global brand.
Now sort of retired from the fire safety game, but doing the odd job here and there to keep my grey matter working and as I hate sudoku and havent got the back for an allotment - Location: Sunny London where the streets are paved with gold ;)
- Has thanked: 363 times
- Been thanked: 660 times
Re: Risk ratings for fire.
I hate risk ratings but I will remark that unless your emergency plans cover ALL relevant persons, they will.be seen as non compliant - and an enforcement notice (at the minimum) will be issued.
-
- Anorak Extraordinaire
- Posts: 743
- Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 1:55 pm
- 10
- Has thanked: 26 times
- Been thanked: 202 times
Re: Risk ratings for fire.
In reality,. the FS wont have a clue about the specifics of the people using the facility. They've seen the EP and not blinked. They'll see the standard stuff about refuge's and evac chairs and they'll be happy but as we are the only people in the country who use these, they'll not even know they exist.
- Messy
- Grand Shidoshi
- Posts: 3585
- Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 8:59 am
- 17
- Occupation: 46 years experience with a metropolitan Fire Brigade and then Fire Safety Manager for a global brand.
Now sort of retired from the fire safety game, but doing the odd job here and there to keep my grey matter working and as I hate sudoku and havent got the back for an allotment - Location: Sunny London where the streets are paved with gold ;)
- Has thanked: 363 times
- Been thanked: 660 times
Re: Risk ratings for fire.
Until it goes wrong, then your emergency plan will almost certainly find it wanting
The Responsibile Person must make a plan to evacuate everyone. Indeed the FRA must consider the needs of those especially at risk
Do not get lulled into a false sense of security just because one Inspecting Officer didn't.blink at the EP
The Responsibile Person must make a plan to evacuate everyone. Indeed the FRA must consider the needs of those especially at risk
Do not get lulled into a false sense of security just because one Inspecting Officer didn't.blink at the EP
-
- Anorak Extraordinaire
- Posts: 743
- Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 1:55 pm
- 10
- Has thanked: 26 times
- Been thanked: 202 times
Re: Risk ratings for fire.
I agree entirely, i'm not the one that needs convincing though, its the responsible person, and that's not me.
I've put it in the further actions section of my risk assessment with a nice yellow highlight. That's all I can doos and can't doos no more.
I've put it in the further actions section of my risk assessment with a nice yellow highlight. That's all I can doos and can't doos no more.
- witsd
- Grand Shidoshi
- Posts: 1086
- Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2014 4:37 pm
- 9
- Occupation: Fire safety officer
- Location: Glasgow
- Has thanked: 90 times
- Been thanked: 264 times
Re: Risk ratings for fire.
I've only ever used a matrix for a 'final / overall' risk rating for the FRA.* Everything else just gets a priority rating that determines how quickly it should be dealt with. Are you really matixing every single finding?!
*Currently we are using the standard PAS79 one, which is split into low / normal / high chance of fire, vs low / medium / high amount of potential harm.
*Currently we are using the standard PAS79 one, which is split into low / normal / high chance of fire, vs low / medium / high amount of potential harm.
We often think that when we have completed our study of one we know all about two, because 'two' is 'one and one.' We forget that we still have to make a study of 'and.'
-
- Anorak Extraordinaire
- Posts: 743
- Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 1:55 pm
- 10
- Has thanked: 26 times
- Been thanked: 202 times
Re: Risk ratings for fire.
Yep. It's really annoying. - I just rate everything as 5 and 1 now. (Yes it can kill you, but its not likely to happen in the first place) and roll on to the next one. I really couldnt care less about the rating anymore, too much thinking wasted on a pointless task.