Facilities management-update-issue-93

! News

Part-timers can have it allPart-time work has attracted much negative press recently, so it isrefreshing to hear of something that debunks the myth that onlylow-skilled, low-paid jobs can work on a part-time basis.

Ernst & Young Partner, Fiona Sheridan, has been named as aninspirational role model in the Power Part Time Top 50 list —compiled by Timewise Jobs (a specialist jobsite for professionalpart-time roles) and an independent panel of judges — whichrecognises the UK’s most senior-level part-time workers.

Ms Sheridan is in a client-facing role at Ernst & Young and hasworked flexibly for the last 14 years, varying her patternsaccording to her family’s, her own and the businesses’ needs. Shenow works four days a week and is responsible for developingnew business and leading teams to deliver multiple client projects.

Steve Varley, UK Chairman and Managing Partner at Ernst &Young, said: “To achieve a flexible working culture requires ahigh-trust workplace environment. There are times in all ourcareers, including my own, when we need to work more flexibly,but reduced hours never means reduced commitment.”

The Power Part Time List was based on nominations frommembers of the public.

Government plans “cyber reserve” forceIn a written statement, Minister of Defence Francis Maude saidthat 93% of large corporations and 76% of small businesses hadreported a cyber breach in the past year.

Mr Maude said that help is needed with “critical” work incombating online crime. There are also concerns that an attackcould cripple the computer systems controlling vital nationalinfrastructure.

The Government is, therefore, proposing to set up a “cyberreserve” force to handle security threats posed by computer crime.The details will be unveiled next year.

Terrorists, fraudsters, rogue states and individual activists areamong the criminals targeting computer systems in the UK. Thereserve force will be run by the Ministry of Defence and willallow the armed forces to “draw on the wider talent and skills ofthe nation in the cyber field”. !

CONTENTS

1 News3 Danger on the roof6 Is the environment good for

business?10 Medical matters in FM12 Fire safety and timber-frame

building guidance14 Energy for all16 Degree day data

AUTHORS

Nigel Bryson OBEBryson ConsultingJon HerbertEnvironment WriterMike SoppHealth and Safety AdvisorDavid HowellNexus Publishing

DEVELOPMENT EDITORAnna Coyle

EDITORJoanna [email protected]

Facilities ManagementUpdateDecember 2012 Now incorporating asbestos, fire and energy management

Business SupportHelpline – Call us now

Simply call quoting your User

Code or contact Customer

Services for more details.

0844 561 8125

FACILITIES MANAGEMENT UPDATE 1

! News

Slow business investment stuntingUK growthInvestment by larger UK firms is still 15%below the position reached before thefinancial crisis, and that leaves them laggingwell behind those in the United States andGermany — both now 7.5% behind their 2008levels.

Ernst & Young’s Independent TreasuryEconomic Model (ITEM) Club — a group ofanalysts using the same computer models asThe Treasury for its forecasts — predicts in anew report that UK levels of investment willnot return to pre-recession peaks until at least2015. The report concludes that the UK canonly expect a slow and steady increase inbusiness spending over the next three years,hampering the wider economic recovery.

The ITEM Club says the Government has avital role to play in creating the conditions fora strong recovery in investment, and restoringconfidence.

The report recommends that theComprehensive Spending Review should bebrought forward to provide businesses withgreater clarity over the next phase of thepublic sector spending cuts, in addition tobeing clearer on policy in areas such as energyand environment, which have a long-termimpact.

The recovery in business investment has, thereport notes, been much weaker and slowerthan after previous recessions. If thebounceback had occurred at the same pace asthe 1979 cycle, The ITEM Club has estimatedthat GDP would now be 1.2% higher.

The report was published before theannouncement of the appointment of MarkCarney as the new Bank of England Governor.His experience in Canada, one of the fewdeveloped countries to escape the worst of therecession, will undoubtedly be useful inenabling the Bank to encourage an increase inlending to the real economy.

Average 4.2% fare rise forcommutersTrain fares have been rising year on year, butan average fare rise of 4.2% in the New Yearmeans that, come January, many annualseason tickets are going to cost more than£4500 for the first time.

Some of the annual fares most affected by therise, selected by rail watchdog PassengerFocus, include:• Canterbury to London: £4860 (5.9% rise

from £4588 last year)

• Colchester to London: £4556 (4.1% risefrom £4376 last year)

• Oxford to London: £4532 (4.2% rise from£4348 last year)

• Northampton to London: £4980 (4.7% risefrom £4756 last year).

While this may appear to be a steep increase,the rise could have been even steeper had itnot been for the Government’s decision tolimit regulated fares in England to an overalllimit of the inflation figure plus 1%, ratherthan the 3% that was previously proposed, andsome tickets will rise by less than 4.2%,leaving some commuters better off than others.

Passenger Focus also noted that traincompanies appear to be exercising somerestraint by not using the full flexibility theyare allowed to adjust season ticket fares onindividual routes.

However, only 29% of commuters are satisfiedwith the value of their tickets according to thewatchdog’s National Rail Passenger Survey.

Chief Executive Anthony Smith said:“Passengers will feel this pain. After years ofabove-inflation fare rises, fresh increases arepiling pressure on already high fares.Government and the rail industry must nowwork together to deliver on the welcomepromise to get fare rises in line with inflation.”!

!

Facilities Management Update

2 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT UPDATE

Contact us: 020 8247 1175

! Danger on the roof

The long-term health hazards associatedwith exposure to asbestos fibres are wellknown. The most common diseases arelung-related due to the fibres enteringdeep into the lung tissue. There is, ofcourse, another cause of death related toasbestos: falls through asbestos roofs.Nigel Bryson reports.

The sectors most affected by falls from heightare agriculture and construction. In theconstruction sector, 22% of falls from heightare through fragile roofs. However, there havealso been a number of deaths where workershave fallen through asbestos roofs duringmaintenance of buildings.

It is not just the material from which the mainpart of the roof is made that can give way.Consideration also needs to be given toweaker parts of an asbestos roof. The recentlyrevised Health and Safety Executive (HSE)guidance on roof work makes reference to thefollowing fatal injury: “A self-employedbuilder, aged 52, fell while he was trying torepair damage to the asbestos cement roof ofan industrial unit. He fell through a fragile rooflight.” (Health and Safety in Roof Work(HSG33)).

The HSE stresses that all complete roofs shouldbe treated as fragile unless a competent personhas confirmed otherwise. Fragile roofs areidentified as those that cannot support theweight of a person and whatever they maycarry. Guidance is given on the tests andstandards to determine the loads that can betaken by a roof. Such fragile roofs include:

• old roof lights

• old liner panels on built-up sheeted roofs

• non-reinforced fibre cement sheets

• corroded metal sheets, either as the primarywaterproofing system or as the structuraldeck supporting a membrane roofing system

• glass (including wired glass)

• rotted chipboard or similar

• wood wool slabs

• slates and tiles.

This article is primarily concerned withasbestos fibre cement sheets. However, someroofs may be made up of a number of differentmaterials, particularly where factories oroffices have been extended. Often, in thesecases, the roof cannot support the weight of aperson, as has been pointed out by theAdvisory Committee on Roofwork (ACR):“Consequently working on a fragile roof isextremely hazardous and not a task to beundertaken lightly.”

Asbestos roof sheeting normally contains about10–15% white asbestos. In older roofs, blue orbrown asbestos may be present. Since 1999,all forms of asbestos have been banned, so inbuildings constructed after 1999, there shouldbe no asbestos in any part of the building.

In most instances, asbestos roofs are a greycolour and will wear over time. The growth oflichen, for example, can get under the surfaceand cause it to flake, exposing fibres. This canalso make the surface slippery. Paintedsurfaces can hide damaged parts of a roof andskylights are often weak. If someone stumblesand falls onto an asbestos roof it can shatter,creating a hole for the person to fall through.

Safety measuresMeasures need to be put into place to protectanyone who may have to work on a roof,regardless of whether the work involvesconstruction, maintenance, repair, cleaning ordemolition. Anyone involved in work on afragile roof must account for the followingfactors.

• It can be a highly hazardous task.

• Operatives must be trained and competentin the use of any equipment used to reducethe risk of falling.

• Operatives need to check that any safetyequipment provided to reduce the risk offalling is adequate and undamaged.

• They should be able to state the correctprocedure for the tasks involved and the

!


Access subscriptions and services online at: www.croner.co.uk

emergency procedures in the event ofsomething going wrong.

People who work on a roof must also becomfortable doing so; someone who is scaredof heights is not likely to be suitable for thiskind of work.

In the HSE guide, comprehensive informationis given about how to deal with any work onthe roof of a building. It is clear the workshould be planned and only people trained inroof work should carry out maintenance orrepairs.

When considering asbestos roofs, two keylegal requirements are related to the Control ofAsbestos at Work Regulations 2012 and theWork at Height Regulations 2005 (WAH), asamended. The asbestos roof should beidentified and be included in the asbestosmanagement plan.

Given that one mistake could becostly, it is emphasised that goodplanning, and trained andcompetent operatives are utilisedto ensure that such work is donesafely

These regulations require certain controls to beapplied to asbestos materials, including saferemoval/repair, minimising fibre release duringwork and preventing its release into thesurrounding area, reducing the risk of falls byapplying a prevention hierarchy and usingtrained, competent operatives to do the work.

Using the hierarchy of prevention in the WAH2005, the HSE suggests that the followingshould be considered when planning work ona fragile roof.

• Work from underneath the roof using asuitable work platform.

• Where this is not possible, consider using amobile elevated work platform (MEWP) thatallows people to work from within the

MEWP basket without standing on the roofitself.

• If access onto the fragile roof cannot beavoided, perimeter edge protection shouldbe installed and staging used to spread theload. Unless all the work and access is onstaging or platforms that are fitted withguard rails, safety nets should be installedunderneath the roof, or a harness systemused.

• Where harnesses are used, they needadequate anchorage points. They also relyon discipline, training and supervision tomake sure that they are used consistentlyand correctly.

The HSE also recommends that such work isclosely supervised. Fragile roofs may look asthough they are strong enough to stand on andthere may be a temptation to walk on them.Given that one mistake could be costly, it isemphasised that good planning, effectivesafeguards, clear procedures, trained andcompetent operatives and good supervision areall utilised to ensure that such work is donesafely.

Demolition“A demolition foreman was removing asbestoscement roof sheets from a factory roof whenhe fell 7.5m through the fragile roof to theconcrete floor below. He received multipleinjuries from which he died four weeks later.No equipment was provided on the roof toallow the work to be carried out safely.”

Before demolition of a building can beundertaken, all asbestos materials need to beremoved. In some specific circumstanceswhere asbestos is bonded, and the risk offibres becoming airborne is limited and wouldtherefore be difficult to remove, the asbestosmaterials may remain in the building beingdemolished. For asbestos roofs, the materialsneed to be removed before the building isdemolished.

Generally, there are two methods that thecontractor has available.

! Danger on the roof (cont’d)



Contact us: 020 8247 1175

1. By hand: Where the asbestos sheets are ingood condition, it is preferable to removethem by hand. Not only does this requiretrained operatives who understand the workand risks involved, but also a suitable workarea and safe access. The asbestos sheetingshould not be broken or damaged duringremoval. The sheets can then be transferredto a covered lorry or skip, or wrapped inheavy-duty plastic sheeting.

2. Remote handling: Where the asbestossheeting is in a poor condition and maybreak up if handled, or safe access cannotbe obtained and the risk of falling is toogreat, the materials may be brought downby remote methods. This may be throughcontrolled demolition or by a mechanicalpusher arm, for example. In using suchmethods it is likely that some asbestos dustwill arise.

The HSE indicates that carefully controlleddemolition can give rise to dust levels around0.1 fibres per millilitre (f/ml). Hence, whenundertaking the risk assessment, if asbestoslevels could exceed the control limit of 0.1f/mlover a four-hour reference period, then alicensed asbestos contractor would be neededto remove the materials.Where the materials are in part of thedemolition, dust can arise from both thedemolition and clean up. If this is the case,managers need to consider people who maybe downwind of the site. Under controlleddemolition, the HSE indicates that dust levelscould reach 1f/ml during a clean up. It istherefore important to consider the following.• Such controlled demolitions should be

completed before the main building isdemolished.

• All the asbestos materials should be keptwet by the gentle application of fluids; forexample, liquid under pressure could forcefibres to become airborne.

• Waste materials should be moved by hand,where possible, and taken off site as soon as

possible. This helps ensure vehicles or plantdo not run over the asbestos. Wherematerials have to be left on site, they shouldbe covered in heavy-duty plastic.

• Where plant is used to move asbestos, thematerials should be wet, no toothed bucketsused and no materials bulldozed into a pile.

• Asbestos materials that are likely to give riseto dust should be put into covered wasteskips or wagons for transfer to a licensedwaste site.

• All wrapped asbestos, skips and othercontainers should be marked with theappropriate asbestos warning signs.

Demolition of any part of a building isspecialist work. Where asbestos materials arein the roof, those working on it must betrained and competent to deal with the specialconditions. Where the control limits will notbe exceeded — as determined by the riskassessment — workers will need to userespiratory protection and disposable overalls.

Tread with careTens of thousands of people have died due tothe lung diseases associated with exposure toasbestos fibres. The properties of asbestos thatled to over 3000 products being developed,many for use in construction, are well known.Normally, it takes many years for the asbestosdiseases — asbestosis, lung cancer andmesothelioma — to develop from the firstexposure. In the case of mesothelioma, itcould be 40 years before the disease isdiagnosed but it is terminal.

It is equally well known that many asbestosroofs are fragile. Some have been reinforced,many have not. In the case of an asbestos roof,death could come within a few seconds after awrong step. Managers must ensure that, ifanyone needs to go onto an asbestos roof,there are measures in place to protect them. !

! Danger on the roof (cont’d)



! Is the environment good for business?

Would an environmental policy makeyour business more competitive? Isbuilding an environmental managementsystem easy? Jon Herbert suggests thatfacilities managers can be the people withthe answers.

What is an environmental policy? Can afirst-class environmental management system(EMS) really improve both business and theenvironment? Crucially, how do you start toput both into place?

Designing a system to handle the many waysin which a working company operates canaffect everybody and everything around it, andmay seem a thankless task. But understandinga few key words can make a huge difference.It is not unusual for employees throughout acompany to become enthusiastically involved.

Once everyone realises that they can help tosafeguard their jobs, raise profits, cut risks, turn“green”, meet tough environmental laws,comply with international standards, impresscustomers and build a sustainable company,attitudes often change very quickly.

Beating the opposition boosts the wholecompany. Healthier balance sheets cheer theboardroom. Individual workers — as it is thepeople actually doing the job who often knowwhere the real problems lie — like to knowtheir advice is being valued. This putspragmatic facilities managers in pole position,and there is an important short-cut.

Understanding how we reached this point is agood start. It shows how the environment andcompanies can be protected together, whilemaking life as straightforward as possible forthe hard-working facilities manager — perhapssoon to become environmental manager.

Revolutionary thoughtsThe sea-change lies in these words —integrated, prevention and control. These haverevolutionised business thinking.

Historically, the operative word was “control”.But the addition of “prevention” changed

everything. A single word redefined industry’swhole approach to environmentalresponsibility and performance.

It summarises the core guiding principlebehind an effective environmental policy andEMS, with changes as profound and far-reaching as the health and safety revolution ofthe 1970s. What has been described as anindustrial “disease” was diagnosed andprescribed a cure. This opens the door forambitious firms to make their own uniquecompetitive mark in tough markets.

European changesThe driver for change has been EU frameworklegislation and environmental permitting,introduced to prevent, control and mitigateenvironmental impacts, and notably tackleclimate change through reductions ingreenhouse gas emissions. Like all EU MemberStates, the UK is committed to cutting itscarbon output dramatically. This has directimplications for facilities managers throughinstruments such as the Carbon ReductionCommitment, and for larger organisations, theEU Emission Trading Scheme.

A single word redefined industry’swhole approach to environmentalresponsibility and performance

More than 50% of UK carbon emissions resultfrom business services — ventilation, lightingand heating. Stemming these avoidable lossesbecame central to applying for environmentalpermits. This triggered a major philosophicalshift that hinges on the difference between“control” and “prevent”.

Until this point, control implied that allowingpollution events to build up during industrialprocesses was acceptable, providing effortswere made at the last moment to mitigate theireffects.

Control tacitly accepted that pollution wasinevitable — something to be tolerated and

!



Contact us: 020 8247 1175

tackled reactively, in much the same waysymptoms of an incurable disease arealleviated by painkillers.

But “end-of-pipe” solutions themselves werecostly to install, run and maintain. Theycreated their own pollution. Something farmore radical was needed. Rather than treatingsymptoms, the answer was to remove thecause itself.

Managing out inefficiencyThe disease disguised by “control” that“prevention” was designed to remove is“inefficiency”. Beating inefficiency mayinvolve major changes but, equally, it calls formany small improvements in daily operations,from repairing faulty boilers to fitting efficientlamps and minimising diesel costs.

Prevention meant beginning to manage outinefficient wounds and sores previously hiddenby sticking plasters. Environmental care isgood business. Neglect is bad management.

Rooting out poor practices and processes,energy losses, recyclable waste, avoidable airpollution, noise and vibration interference,transport impacts, greenhouse gas emissions,water pollution, accidents, communityincidents and bad resource use suddenly madecomplete sense on any scale. It always had!

Environmental care is goodbusiness. Neglect is badmanagement

The gradual introduction of more demandingenvironmental legislation also skewed themarketplace. Sustainability had a price andreaped rewards, particularly so when theeconomics of business are seen on asustainable, life-cycle basis from source,through use and re-use, to final disposal.

Economy of scale“Integrated”, the third word of the trio, is alsoextremely important for any facilities manager

and his team looking to put a soundenvironmental system in place.

Once end-of-pipe solutions are replaced by adeeper view of problems, economies of scaleare important, especially when the number ofinstallations covered by legislation begins tomultiply.

The logic is that if the combined impactsassociated with waste, pollution, energy losses,health and safety, and eventual site restorationare considered collectively, the overall cost,disruption and time involved is less. But theefficiency gains will be greater.

Changed outlook; changedbehaviourThis is music to the ears of facilities managers.Cutting unnecessary costs and protecting theenvironment are written on the same songsheet.

It is worth noting that the business case isoften stronger than the environmental case.

Prevention does not end all releases (zeroemissions), only harmful discharges. But froma business perspective, all emissions comefrom inefficiency.

Modern environmental legislation requiresbusiness organisations to pinpoint the manyways in which they can harm theenvironment, and take steps to minimise themwithin reasonable technological and economiclimits. The aim is to make operators challengetheir status quo and question whetheralternative designs, technologies and ways ofworking are more viable.

However, companies can decide forthemselves where their environmental andbusiness priorities coincide, as long as theydemonstrate consistent year-on-year progress.This flexibility is important for facilitiesmanagers, along with a number of otherpriorities.

• The first is that firms must show acomprehensive understanding of how theycan affect the environment — ignorance isno defence.

! Is the environment good for business?(cont’d)



• The second is to put in place managementstructures that can deliver planned changes— often to the internationally recognisedenvironmental standard, ISO 14001. Thiscalls for the implementation andmaintenance of an EMS carefully tailored toeach individual organisation’s peculiarcircumstances.

• Third, raw material, water and energymanagement, and minimisation programmesmust be developed. Waste managementtechniques should also be put in place.Reducing, and if possible eliminating,emissions and discharges are equallyimportant. So, too, is the remediation ofcontaminated land. Benchmarkingenvironmental performance againstestablished indicators or best practice isanother mandatory requirement. This maycreate new internal resources, training andlogistical burdens that companies must meetto satisfy the requirements of applying for anEnvironmental Permit.

ISO 14001There are a number of things that ISO 14001does and does not ask of an EMS. ISO 14001is a management rather than a performancestandard. It does not prescribe specific actionsor technologies for improved environmentalperformance. This is up to the company.

However, ISO 14001 does force businesses tothink about and define their environmentalpolicy carefully.

What will happen in normal, abnormal andemergency conditions? Specific responsibilitiesand authority are assigned to individual peoplewithin the company. Accident plans are tested.Environmental near misses are logged andreported. Preventative maintenance andperiodic reviews by top management arerequired.

An environmental managementsystemWhat is the methodology involved in settingup a successful EMS? One way is to put your

EMS into the hands of external consultants.This, however, can simply become a bolt-onactivity.

Alternatively, by putting an EMS at the heart ofa company, where it is built in detail and thendriven on a daily basis by an in-housemanagement team with their finger on thepulse, the system becomes a perfect pro-activeand powerful performance-improvement tool.Help is available in many forms for SMEs thatchoose this route. These detail the key stepsthat facilities managers must initiate, withsenior management support.Management team

The very first step is to create a competent staffteam. Nominating an environmental managerto take a leading role is a key appointment.However, he or she will be supported activelyby representatives appointed throughout theorganisation who are, or talk regularly with,line managers and data holders.

Talking to people on the groundthroughout any organisation canbe an eye-opener

Trained internal auditors are also essential. Inaddition, it is vital to have at least one directorpersonally committed at board level. Crucially,the company must WANT to improve itsperformance.Scope

The second task is to define an EMS’s ambitionand boundaries — its scope. Which plants willbe covered? What aspects can be improved?How will end goals be set? It is also importantto be quite clear about what is not included. Asuccessful EMS needs to be achievable.Identifying risks

The third chore can be demanding. The teammust consider in fine detail every potential risk(aspect) and the scale of its impact on theenvironment. This is not simply a deskexercise; talking to people on the ground

! Is the environment good for business? (cont’d)



Contact us: 020 8247 1175

throughout any organisation can be aneye-opener. Many businesses come face-to-face with practical eventualities they had nevereven considered previously. With the correcthelp, this is a very revealing exercise.

Goals

With these real risks in mind — some moreserious than others — the next step is toprioritise realistic improvement goalscompatible with other business targets. Thisagain needs total company buy-in andsufficient resources.

Setting up a robust documentation system isimportant at this stage. It must be capable ofrecording all data to external auditrequirements.

In tandem, it is vital to establish a LegalRegister. Companies are often surprised todiscover just how many laws they must meet.There are several subscription and legal newsservices that provide regular updates.Demonstrating a broad awareness ofapplicable law is another audit requirement.

Monitoring

You can only improve what you can measure.Creating a bespoke network of measuring andmonitoring parameters allows baselineconditions to be set, against which progress iscontinually assessed. Trained in-house auditorsplay an indispensable role.

Feedback

Regular monitoring, feedback and analysis inan appropriate format enables progress to berecorded and further steps taken to correctdeficiencies.

Reporting

Senior management must have regularinformed oversight of the entire environmental

management process. Their role is to ensureprogress, confirm or adjust the strategicdirection, allocate more resources and reassess— and if necessary change — fundamentalssuch as the scope and targets. Executives alsohave the clout to sort out bottlenecks anddelays.

Audit

Once an EMS shows a consistent pattern ofprogress and record-keeping, it is ready forexternal audit to ISO 14001 standards byindependent accredited assessors. This takesplace annually in two parts.

When companies have put a goodEMS in place, they oftenexperience a new sense ofcohesion and purpose

The first is a desk exercise verifying all the keyelements of a competent management systemare in place. Obvious deficiencies are pointedout. The second is a detailed examination ofevery aspect of the system, documentation andrecorded results to date. Again, deficienciesare highlighted for correction. First year auditsset a base-line.

Daunting? Not necessarily. When companieshave put a good EMS in place, they oftenexperience a new sense of cohesion andpurpose. Everyone pulls together. Everyone’scontribution is noted. It can even be fun.

At least one known business has spotted afuture commercial edge in legislative changesthat its competitors failed to spot. Productionproblems are sorted out. Maintenance costscan tumble. Procurement improves.Efficiencies are passed on to customers. Clientsnotice. Reputations rise. !

! Is the environment good for business?(cont’d)



! Medical matters in FM

With absenteeism on the rise, absencemanagement is becoming a key facilitiesmanagement tool within manyorganisations. Dave Howell reports.

Ensuring the health and well-being ofemployees is a vital consideration for allfacilities managers (FMs). However, researchby PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) reveals that10 unscheduled absences from work was theaverage within the UK’s workforce last year —more than twice that of their US counterparts,with 80% of absences due to ill health.

Richard Phelps, HR Consulting Partner at PwC,commented: “Absenteeism is a malaise forBritish business. The line between ‘sickie’ and‘sickness’ can be blurred, with disenchantmentat work sometimes exacerbating medicalconditions or preventing a speedy return.”

In addition, last year’s absence managementsurvey from the Chartered Institute ofPersonnel and Development (CIPD) showedthat stress is the most common cause oflong-term absence and nearly two-fifths ofemployers report they have noticed anincrease in stress-related absence over the pastyear. There is a clear need for pre-emptiveaction to promote well-being and reducestress. Nevertheless, just 58% of organisationsare taking steps to identify and manage stressat work and just under half have an employeewell-being strategy in place.

The CIPD report also stated: “On average,levels of absence in the private sector aresubstantially lower than in the public ornon-profit sector (private sector: 7.1 days peremployee per year; manufacturing andproduction: 5.7 days; public sector: 9.1 days;non-profit sector: 8.8 days). However, privatesector absence has increased slightly on the6.6 days reported last year.”

For FMs tasked with looking for ways toimprove the efficiency of their organisations,clearly focusing on the heath and well-beingof their staff can bring commercial rewards aswell as boost morale and productivity. On top

of the need to look closely at the levels ofabsenteeism and the reasons behind them isthe general provision of health and safetysupport. FMs should look to integrate thesestrategies to deliver complete andcomprehensive health support within theirorganisations.

Health and safetyAll organisations have a level of legalresponsibility regarding the health and safetyof their employees. It is a legal requirement toappoint a primary and emergency first aider.The law now requires that the primary firstaider should attend a full three-day course toobtain their certificate of competence, notforgetting that your company’s first aiders needto re-qualify every three years. Build this intoyour general risk assessment to ensure fullcompliance.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) clearlystates: “The Health and Safety (First-Aid)Regulations 1981 require employers to provideadequate and appropriate equipment, facilitiesand personnel to ensure their employeesreceive immediate attention if they are injuredor taken ill at work.” The Reporting of Injuries,Diseases and Dangerous OccurrencesRegulations 1995 (RIDDOR) also require thatmajor injuries, dangerous occurrences, diseaseoutbreaks and any deaths all be reported tothe HSE via its contact centre.

Companies are required to keep a lockedfirst-aid box — its precise contents are notdefined, but the more comprehensive this is,clearly the more effective it will be. Inaddition, advances in technology have enabledportable resuscitation equipment to becomeavailable. There is no legal requirement forFMs to specify the inclusion of an automatedexternal defibrillator, but more companies areexpanding their first aiders’ training to includethe use of such devices. Lastly, medicines canbe administered in some instances, such as theuse of an Epipen if someone suffers ananaphylactic shock.

FMs who want to improve the health supportwithin their organisation must first understand

!



Contact us: 020 8247 1175

the causes of sickness and ill health. Theresearch from the CIPD identifies a number ofkey areas: “By far the most common cause ofshort-term absence (four weeks or fewer) isminor illness, such as colds, flu, stomachupsets, headaches and migraines. The nextmost common causes are musculoskeletalinjuries, back pain, home/familyresponsibilities and stress, withmusculoskeletal injuries and back painparticularly common for manual workers andstress particularly common for non-manualworkers.”

FMs should also not become blinkered by theirperception of what absenteeism means inmodern business. Yes, sickness is a majorcause, but as a recent survey by FirstCarereveals, other factors must now be taken intoaccount by all FMs.

James Arquette, Operations Director forFirstCare, said: “This could be a difficult winterfor businesses, and I would fully anticipate thatwe will see a further increase in the number ofnon-medical absences following last year.Employers will need to give serious thought towhat they can do to mitigate the impacts ofthese absences.”

When the causes of illness or general absenceare known, it becomes much easier to developsystems that you can use to reduce theseinstances. In the public and private sectors,management approach has changed little overthe last few years. Return-to-work interviewsand trigger mechanisms identifying patterns ofabsenteeism, which can then be investigatedto improve the level of sickness in yourorganisation, can all be used. However, todaymore sophisticated management techniquesare now developing.

In the best of healthFMs within larger organisations can also lookclosely at the provision of either part-time orfull-time medical staff on their premises. Insome sectors, these services can have aprofound and positive impact on the health of

a workforce. Being able to obtain medicalsupport within office hours can be highlybeneficial, as many employees continue tocriticise the lack of flexibility they often findwithin their own GP practices.

Clearly the cost of setting up a medical roomfor your organisation and then staffing thiswith a doctor, nurse or other specialist medicalpractitioners needs to be carefully assessed. Anaudit of your company’s workforce can beinvaluable here to ascertain the medicalsupport they would most like to see madeavailable. Locating the medical staff required isfairly straightforward as there are myriadservice providers that can offer medical staffon an ad hoc or semi-permanent basis.

FMs should approach the establishment of amedical facility on their premises just as theywould any other major project. Planning andresearch are vital to carry out in detail beforeany resources are committed. Ultimately, FMsneed to clearly understand the motivation for amedical facility and understand how itseffectiveness can be tracked. Closerelationships with HR are critical as it is theywho will see initial improvements in sicknessand absenteeism levels. The project should beassessed at regular intervals to ensure it is ontrack to deliver projected goals.

What is happening at the moment is thatabsence management is increasinglyoverlapping with facilities management as theyshare a number of common goals. Asorganisations look to rationalise theiroperations and find new ways to efficientlyutilise finite resources, the drain that sicknessand absenteeism can have on a business arecoming under the spotlight.

Companies such as FirstCare offer a range ofservices that can help FMs develop their ownabsence management protocols. Gone are thedays when sickness, ill health and generalabsenteeism would be simply accepted as anecessary part of running a business. Today,managing these aspects of an organisation isrising up the agenda, as enterprises can see thereal-world value that this can bring. !

! Medical matters in FM (cont’d)



! Fire safety and timber-frame building guidance

New guidance on timber-frameconstruction aims to place fire riskmanagement at the heart of their use.Mike Sopp reports.

IntroductionThe use of timber to form building frames is anaccepted method of construction found acrossa range of building types, including residential,commercial and leisure sectors. Along withmany other forms of “innovative constructionproducts and techniques”, it is becoming morepopular with builders and developers.

Prior to changes to the Building Regulations inthe early 1990s, its use had been limited tobuildings up to four storeys. Since thosechanges were introduced, the provision ofmedium-rise timber-frame buildings is morecommonplace.

However, a series of large fires involvingtimber-frame construction over the previous sixyears has raised concerns as to the viability ofthis construction method. As a result, newguidance and procedures have beenintroduced so as to “drive the issue of fire riskmanagement right back to the early stages ofthe specification process”.

Fire and timber-frame constructionThe use of timber-frame construction can havemany practical advantages. Sections oftimber-frame buildings can be prefabricated offsite and assembled very rapidly on site. Thisprefabricated approach means that atimber-frame building can be constructed morerapidly than more traditional brick and blockbuildings, with resultant cost savings to thebuilder, as well as allowing more buildings tobe constructed in a given time frame.

It is also argued that timber-frame constructionhas significant environmental sustainabilitybenefits. Timber frame is also said to deliverhigh-build quality and the opportunity todesign adaptable and durable buildings.

With these benefits comes the potential forincreased fire risks with large volumes of

flammable material in the structure, arrangedin a readily burnable configuration. With sucha substantial fire loading present, there is thepotential for rapid and major fire spread.

Following a series of high-profile firesinvolving timber-framed construction methods,a number of enquiries were held andprofessional institutions within the fire industrybegan to raise concerns as to the safety of theconstruction method.

The Chief Fire Officers Association (CFOA)stated that it was “concerned that fires intimber-framed buildings have generallyresulted in very rapid fire development leadingto early structural collapse, and the severity ofradiant heat flux generated has caused spreadto neighbouring buildings up to 30 metresaway”.

Industry viewpointIn response to the concerns raised and calls forremedial action, the UK Timber FrameAssociation Ltd (UKTFA), the trade associationfor UK timber-frame manufacturers and thesector’s key suppliers, stated that “timber-frameand all other forms of mainstream constructionmeet the Government’s regulations on fire,flood and other health hazards”.

According to the UKTFA, “the key is reducingthe possibility of a fire event happening downto as near zero as possible”, which “demandsstrict site management and site security”.

Following meetings with the London FireBrigade and the Health and Safety Executive(HSE), the UKTFA published additionalguidance. As well as this guidance, the UKTFAcontinued with a project to look into fire safetyon timber-framed construction sites withsupport from Wood for Good and technicalinput from IFC Certification.

The project involved detailed research andindependent analysis of issues such as:

• the effectiveness of fire compartmentationand boundary fire protection on limiting firespread and radiant heat during theconstruction phase

!



Contact us: 020 8247 1175

• timber frame’s resistance to ignition andflame spread, and the effectiveness oftimber-fire retardant treatments applied tokey components

• the risk-assessment process and use of sitesecurity measures.

During the project, the HSE reissued guidanceon fire safety in construction sites. Thisprovides general guidance on fire safety,particularly during the construction phase, butalso reflects on fire safety after the constructionphase.

It highlights that the protection of a timberframe from fire is provided by the materialsthat cover the frame, but that during theconstruction phase and before the protectivemeasures in the completed building areinstalled, “high standards of control areneeded to prevent/control fires and protectpeople”.

It continues by stating that duty holders shouldgive serious consideration to the use of timberand/or materials that have received anappropriate fire protection/retardant treatmentthat will “provide additional safety during theconstruction phase, but gives added protectionfor the completed building”.

Guidance and notificationLate 2011 saw UKTFA publish guidanceendorsed by the HSE and prepared inconjunction with the Chief Fire OfficersAssociation and the Fire Protection Association(see Further information). It is designed to beused in conjunction with HSG168.

The guidance applies to structures over600m2and is aimed at architects, designers,developers and contractors. It covers theperiod during construction prior to thecompletion of fire-resistant finishes, anddetermines the appropriate separatingdistances between buildings to minimise theheat radiation to neighbouring properties inthe event of a construction site fire.

The guidance is split into three parts.

1. Part 1 provides a background andintroduction to the issues.

2. Part 2 provides guidance on the use ofstandard timber frames and providesmitigation measures, if required, to removea risk of high-radiant heat potential toadjacent buildings during construction.

3. Part 3 provides the user with timber-framesupply chain solutions to mitigate risk ofhigh-radiant heat.

In addition, there is supporting documentation,based on fire testing carried out by UKTFA, theresult of which is three generic categories oftimber frame, each with increasing resistanceto fire spread and associated reduction inemitted heat to neighbouring properties.

In addition to the guidance, a new notificationscheme was launched in conjunction with theCFOA. The SiteSafe Online Notification systemenables fire and rescue services (FRSs) toreceive electronic notifications aboutconstruction sites in their area wheretimber-frame methods are in use.

The system will be accessed by the UKTFAmember company, which will complete keydetails about the site such as:

• principal contractor for the site

• main site contact and telephone number

• building size and number of floors

• details of any risks near the site

• start and end dates for the project.

FRSs can then decide whether the site requiresinitial or ongoing inspection throughout thelife of the construction project.

Further informationDesign Guide to Separating Distances forTimber-frame Buildings During Construction(UKTFA). !

! Fire safety and timber-frame buildingguidance (cont’d)



! Energy for all

Certainty — almost as elusive as the HiggsBoson. Finding this fundamental particlecould give weight to a sustainable energypolicy, but it is taxing the bestgovernment minds, says Jon Herbert.

Ahead of the soon-to-be-released Energy Bill,which must set out a clear road for UK energyprovision, senior ministers and Whitehallofficials have been wrestling with anintractable problem. Algebra students knowthat finding the value of x unknowns requiresx+1 equations, and that is what theGovernment does not seem to have.

The knowns and unknowns are these.

Energy costs are rising. In recent weeks, the sixmajor energy companies have increased theirprices by between 6% and nearly 11%. Withreal incomes falling, price hikes are notappealing to “squeezed-middle” or “hard-working” family voters.

High prices — according to the principles ofsupply and demand — are caused by supplyscarcities. An obvious answer is to increasesupply. This can best be done, The Treasuryargues, by being ready to take advantage of aprojected worldwide increase in natural gassupplies due to come on-stream in the 2030s.

Fortunately, the UK already has a newgas-fired power station constructionprogramme in hand.

However, here the third unknown comes intoplay. It is difficult to predict the stability ofsome regions of the world from which futuregas would have to be imported, so supplysecurity becomes a big question mark.Environment is the fourth factor — natural gasis a fossil fuel, albeit less carbon-intensive thanreliance on oil.

Why not then, argue policy makers around theDepartment for Energy and Climate Change,put more emphasis on a new generation ofnative UK renewable-energy sources onshoreand offshore? Because they are expensive tobuild, potentially unsightly and costly tooperate, comes the reply.

Circular argumentThis is where the nub of the debate lies. Canthe UK meet its existing carbon-cuttingcommitments based on greater energyefficiency and reduced energy demand duringa recession? Also, will no further increase inlegally binding greenhouse gas reductionlevels, a complex mix of traditional and newpower sources and complete confidence that aboost in natural gas production be sufficient totake the UK up to and past the mid-centurypoint? The unknowns are beginning to stackup.

By 2050, new economic regimes and efficientnew technologies may allow the rapidlyexpanding planet to cope. However, evenreaching the mid-century mark could be tricky.One of The Treasury’s fears is that, without arealistic approach to medium-term energysupply and use, a hamstrung economy willhamper the revival needed to makesustainability possible.

To make equation solving even more difficult,Ofgem recently warned that pressure on gassupplies could potentially lead to powershortages as early as 2015.

Anxious investorsWhile costs and the certainty of being able toswitch power on in homes and businesses isone aim of the forthcoming Bill, a lack ofcertainty is also worrying another group — thelarge investors waiting to put money into anew UK energy infrastructure and power-generating capability.

Following David Cameron’s comments atPrime Minister’s Question Time to put allhouseholds on the cheapest possible tariff,Ofgem has been trying to end some of theconfusion.

However, business leaders have warned that alack of clarity over what carbon-reductionsteps industry will be expected to take up toand beyond the 2030s is threatening businessconfidence in making the giant investmentsneeded to transform the electricity market.

!



Contact us: 020 8247 1175

Some 50 major businesses recently signed aletter to the Chancellor saying that uncertaintyis compromising growth, manufacturing andexport potential. They include Marks &Spencer, Microsoft, Asda, EDF, PepsiCo,Philips, Sky, the Co-operative and Aviva. Theirconcern is that, while prolonged uncertainty isdeterring investors with the wherewithal to putmore than £100 billion into a sustainable UKenergy infrastructure, ordinary companies arelosing out. They cite CBI figures that estimateroughly a third of UK 2011/12 growth camefrom green business. A lack of clear directioncould cost the UK £400 million in lost exportsin 2014/15 alone.

Change in the airWhile renewables may be uneconomic in theimmediate term, there is a world appetite forgreen technologies.

An example is recent news of commerciallyviable “petrol from air” technology.Revolutionary though this might sound, it is aprocess as old as the trees — literally. Carbondioxide and water vapour were transformedinto “fuel” in prehistoric forests. The energysource needed for synthesis was solar power inthe form of sunlight. The result was sugars thateventually became coal, oil and other fossilfuels.

The modern challenge of harvestingatmospheric carbon and water to formhydrocarbons has been taken up by a numberof innovators in recent years. However, thepioneering work carried out by Air FuelSynthesis on Teesside underlines the need forcost-effective renewables. The firm’s uniquechemical process replaces photosynthesis.However, by substituting green energy fromrenewables for sunlight, it offers the prospectof making hydrocarbons sustainable — asmuch carbon is harvested from the atmosphereas returned to the atmosphere.

While this could totally redefine solutions toclimate change and the accelerating energycrisis, it does raise questions about theefficiency and assured availability of bulk,low-priced renewable energy.

All at sea

Such speculation probably does little toresolve the debate in Whitehall as to how anEnergy Bill can pragmatically address the UK’simminent economic and power priorities.However, it does emphasise the point that, inthe longer term, the cost of renewables shouldprobably be seen as a growth opportunity — ifthe UK can afford it.

Meanwhile, three important renewable energylicenses have been granted for projects off thecoast of Northern Ireland. The Crown Estatehas concluded business deals with First FlightWind Ltd, Tidal Ventures and DP MarineEnergy Ltd of Ireland with DEME of Belgium.

The projects, due to start in 2016, should see600MW of wind-generation capacity built offArdglass in County Down, with two separate100MW tidal turbine arrays at Fair Head andTorr Head off the County Antrim coast.

The result would be nearly a quarter of theprovince’s power needs generated by greenenergy in what could be Northern Ireland’slargest infrastructure project.

The Northern Ireland Executive requires 40%of electricity to be sourced from renewablesources by 2020. In Scotland, First MinisterAlex Salmond has launched the RenewableEnergy Investment Fund (REIF), a £103 millionproject designed to attract more privateinvestment to Scottish renewable-energyprojects.

The fund is intended as a catalyst to leverageprivate firms into key areas and is the result ofa deal with The Treasury on funds from thefossil-fuel levy that was introduced intoScotland in 1996.

Its priorities are wave and tidal energy, plusrenewable district heating. The ScottishGovernment is also expected to invest some£4.3 million into SSE’s (formerly Scottish andSouthern Energy plc) offshore wind farmturbine-testing facility at Hunterston on thewest coast. !

! Energy for all (cont’d)



! Degree day data

Weekly heating degree days (15.5°C base temperature)

Region 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

30/11/2012 72 70 57 60 74 79 90 91 69 88 80 76 76 82 73 61 73 60

23/11/2012 50 46 34 42 52 60 68 59 53 68 62 61 52 60 60 46 54 44

16/11/2012 50 44 37 38 51 57 62 50 49 63 58 56 50 58 56 42 49 40

09/11/2012 67 58 46 46 62 67 71 65 56 73 66 66 52 63 60 47 55 45

02/11/2012 63 60 43 46 60 66 70 68 56 69 63 65 56 64 64 47 60 44

26/10/2012 30 26 19 23 34 40 47 49 48 51 42 38 59 56 57 26 41 46

!

Monthly heating degree days (15.5°C base temperature)

Region 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Nov 12 256 234 185 199 256 284 314 287 245 313 286 279 248 284 270 211 252 205

Oct 12 162 147 104 115 171 199 228 234 200 236 195 191 202 236 236 136 195 177

Sep 12 80 66 43 62 94 111 129 130 93 120 97 91 144 126 124 70 108 102

Aug 12 25 18 10 18 31 36 60 68 35 54 29 26 74 61 58 20 46 52

July 12 51 44 37 48 58 62 79 90 69 82 63 59 100 94 99 57 77 99

June 12 84 74 65 77 86 110 125 136 115 132 107 107 144 145 161 87 113 129

May 12 136 129 125 139 142 163 190 209 215 210 175 168 190 234 241 156 186 190

April 12 243 230 220 234 260 277 298 294 268 294 269 270 268 281 295 252 268 242

March 12 194 194 193 195 206 210 239 254 227 231 213 219 235 228 226 198 224 204

February 12 350 340 288 273 325 342 350 336 299 356 351 355 288 305 292 270 262 228

January 12 316 295 238 239 300 335 354 340 306 364 343 341 341 342 336 263 298 255

December 11 310 284 200 202 278 316 330 316 292 353 332 337 337 336 331 222 296 246

Key to regions

1. Thames Valley 4. South Western 7. West Pennines 10. North Eastern 13. West Scotland 16. Wales

2. South Eastern 5. Severn Valley 8. North Western 11. East Pennines 14. East Scotland 17. Northern Ireland

3. Southern 6. Midlands 9. Borders 12. East Anglia 15. North East Scotland 18. North West Scotland

Data supplied by Degree Days Direct. Tel: 01531 822121. E-mail:

[email protected]

!


Published by Wolters Kluwer (UK) Limited, 145 London Road, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT2 6SR. Tel: 020 8247 1175. Fax: 020 8547 2637. Web: www.croner.co.uk, e-mail [email protected]

Copyright ! 2012 WOLTERS KLUWER (UK) LIMITED All rights reserved. ISSN 2046-097X. Head of Content: Michele Wheaton.

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission in

writing of the publishers. Although great care has been taken in the compilation and preparation of Croner’s Facilities Management Update to ensure accuracy, the publishers cannot in any circumstances

accept responsibility for errors or omissions or advice given in this publication. Subscribers should be aware that only Acts of Parliament and Statutory Instruments have the force of law and that only the

courts can authoritatively interpret the law. Crown copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen’s Printer for Scotland.

UP/FAC-EI12093
