EXPERT ADVICE


CALLING TIME ON THE DEEP CLEAN


There’s a profound problem with most cleaning regimes, says James White, Managing Director of Denis Rawlins Ltd. Time and money are being wasted on ineffective daily cleaning and deep cleans that should be unnecessary.


We all know that in any business time is money, but in cleaning it’s doubly true. Most cleaning tasks are labour-intensive, so wage costs typically account for three quarters of a building’s cleaning budget.


The other big cost factor that is time- related is the time-honoured deep clean. A facility may be cleaned daily or at least regularly. But periodically a more intensive and thorough clean is required. The conventional wisdom shared by most clients and their contractors is that this is essential to shift the ‘stubborn’ dirt that regular cleaning leaves behind.


Well we have a problem with that. If a deep clean is needed, then the regular cleaning can’t be effective. The reason is that much routine cleaning is disinfecting dirt rather than actually removing it.


So every time a deep clean is scheduled, it’s an admission that the facility is not only dirty (and probably unhygienic), but that it has been for some time.


What’s worse is that deep cleans are expensive, often disruptive (requiring extended cleaning shifts and possibly, specialist equipment) and therefore, may be postponed, so the underlying problem escalates. And the deep clean, when it eventually happens, may be even more time-consuming and costly. More important, more users will have been exposed to poor standards of cleanliness for longer.


This waste of time and money – not to mention risk to health and reputation – is completely avoidable. But why is it so common? Usually it’s because cleaners have not been given the right tools for the job.


The traditional mop is a prime culprit. We know from scientific testing that


www.tomorrowscleaning.com


mops at best displace dirt. Independent tests in the US showed that even microfibre mopping spreads floor soil back into cleaned areas, leaving three quarters of the contaminants in a test solution on the floor. A simple crossover cleaning system that dispenses solution and vacuums away the soil removed 99% of the bacteria present. The performance of the OmniFlex AutoVac was comparable with that of a scrubber dryer, at a fraction of the cost.


And it is up to three times faster than hand-mopping. So the return on investment is rapid and clear-cut. One fast-food chain realised it could equip every outlet with the Dispense & Vac version of the OmniFlex by switching its annual spend on mop- heads and buckets.


Food service poses the challenge of greasy kitchen floors as well as dining areas and toilets used by patrons. But the same economies apply to floor cleaning generally.


Take the health sector: it may be essential to decontaminate wards in an MRSA outbreak. But it should never be necessary to move patients out for regular deep cleaning of floors. Again, the daily clean can and should be leaving a hygienically clean floor that is safe and dry to walk on immediately.


Ignorance is no longer an excuse for using outdated cleaning methods that fail to eliminate invisible pathogens, let alone visible and malodourous dirt and soils.


At Denis Rawlins, we have been championing science-based cleaning and challenging the futility of hand- mopping through our Chop the Mop campaign. Its third plank is our effort to focus attention on the return cleaning contractors and facilities


“If a deep clean is


needed, it’s an admission that the facility is not


only dirty (and probably unhygienic), but that it has been for some time.”


managers can achieve on their investment in cleaning kit (and staff).


As mentioned, this applies to flooring like any other asset, but the most immediate and obvious priority is the cleaning regime itself.


A final example: a recent deep clean of the toilets at an International station in London cost £14,000. That would have been unnecessary if – instead of mops, buckets, cloths and spray bottles – the cleaning team sprayed and vacuumed all surfaces using the No Touch Cleaning system. Also from the same Kaivac stable as the OmniFlex, it too has been shown to be 2-3 times faster, more economical with consumables and to obviate the need for deep cleans – so saving time and money.


www.rawlins.co.uk Tomorrow’s Cleaning July 2016 | 59


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74