LONE WORKER PROTECTION
THE TIME OF DEATH
Klaus Allion, Managing Director at ANT Telecom, takes a hypothetical look at the dangerous nature of lone working.
At 2.16pm, Harry suffered a cardiac arrest whilst working alone at a wind farm in a remote part of Western Scotland. The tilt and motion sensors on his lone worker device detected that he was unconscious and automatically alerted an Alarm Receiving Centre (ARC) in Northern England. They set about escalating a response. At 4.45pm, after a series of unsuccessful attempts to contact nearby co-workers for help, one of Harry’s colleagues finally came to his assistance. The time of death was recorded as 3.47pm.
Harry’s story is both hypothetical and extreme. But as the UK’s lone worker population climbs towards seven million, the scenario is much more than a work of fiction. It’s an accident waiting to happen. Many companies have strengthened lone worker security with the deployment of an ARC. And why not?
ARCs are regarded as an effective means of activating an emergency response and, in tandem with intuitive lone worker devices, can mobilise appropriate support when an incident has taken place. Furthermore, their use can demonstrate an employer’s commitment to lone worker safety and provide a robust audit trail of activity to help prove regulatory compliance. It certainly ticks a box.
ARE ARCS ENOUGH? ARCs are undoubtedly effective when a lone employee is under the threat of
www.tomorrowshs.com
abuse or attack from another person – operators can listen in to determine the emergency response and take appropriate action following clear and accredited processes. However, in the event of a serious accident or injury, this approach can have major limitations.
HELP IS NEARBY The most logical assistance in an emergency situation will come from individuals in the near vicinity – particularly fellow lone workers who are familiar with the terrain, the circumstances or the challenges of their profession. It’s a simple notion: colleagues who are commonly exposed to the same risks and have a real-world understanding of the potential pitfalls will have a high motivation to run to help a co-worker. The trick is to alert them.
With a wide range of lone worker devices available in the market, designing an effective rapid response process that alerts and mobilises nearby workers is relatively straightforward. But implementation depends on companies rethinking their processes and procedures and leveraging technologies that reflect the specific challenges of their lone workers’ environments. To progress, health and safety executives should consider reviewing their current means of protecting lone workers – and take an holistic and inclusive approach to developing a more robust system.
RETHINK YOUR STRATEGY The most effective strategies have emerged where operations managers and health and safety executives have engaged in open dialogue with lone workers to understand their requirements, and designed systems that align with their needs.
Furthermore, best practice commonly relies on the involvement of a telecoms partner that can help companies identify options, define processes and implement solutions. Partners in this field should have expertise in the design of lone worker strategies, an understanding of environmental risks and knowledge of the evolving marketplace for lone worker solutions. Moreover, they should provide independent advice to help organisations design agile communications approaches that respond to the changing lone worker landscape.
Protecting lone workers is a serious consideration with major human implications. Companies must take the time to think the process through. Fundamentally, it is only by focusing on ‘the help’ rather than ‘the alarm’ that businesses can implement systems that genuinely safeguard isolated workers, wherever they are. With lone workers currently totalling 22% of the UK employment market, it’s not just about protecting remote workers in harsh environments – it relates to every Tom, Dick and hypothetical Harry.
www.anttele.com 37
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