Postincident Management, the Cause for Error and Managerial Issues - Essay Example

POSTINCIDENT MANAGEMENT POSTINCIDENT MANAGEMENT Insert name: Insert course code: Instructor’s name: 9 December, 2010. Introduction For us to understand clearly the issues that arise when a fire brings down a whole company and the actions that should be taken by the management, it is important to understand the requirements of the legislation. According to section 11 (power to respond to other eventualities) of Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004, (1) a fire and rescue authority may take any action it considers suitable in response to an event or situation of a type as indicated in subsection (2) for the purpose of facilitating action to be taken in response to such an event or situation; (2) the event or situation is one that causes or is likely to cause one or more persons to die, be injured or become ill, or even harm the environment (including the life and health of plants and animals) (Elizabeth, 2004 p. 7). Furthermore, the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 (RRO) and the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 (MHSWR)demands that managers conduct fire risk assessment in addition to offering and maintaining such fire precautions as are needed to protect those that utilize the workplace. They also demand that the workers are given appropriate information, instruction and training concerning the fire precautions. According to RRO, it is the responsibility of the person building the premises to make sure that fire safety measures are adhered to. It is also the role of the Responsible Person to assess the risks of fire and take actions to minimize or eliminate those risks. The RRO imposes obligations in respect of firefighting, fire detection, emergency routes and exits, as well as procedures to handle serious and imminent hazard. The RRO comprises of the general precautions that a fire and rescue service manager should carry out: reducing the risk of fire as well as the risk of fire spread on the premises; means of escape from premises; making sure that the means of escape can be safely and effectively be used at all times; means for fighting fires; means for detecting fire and giving warning in the case of fire; and plans for action to be taken in the even of fire, including measures for the instruction and training of employees to mitigate the effects of fire. Having known these safety requirements, we are going to discus the legal and managerial issues that arise when a fire occurs that consume the whole company (Davies, 2011 p. 295). The cause for error and managerial issues Whenever a human-made disaster occurs, the hottest question is invariably what caused it. Was the fire due to human error or a systems or technological failure? In most case the fire and rescue service managers are blamed in case of fire mainly if the person dies in the disaster. Even in the cases where such claims are complex operations, accusations are made on human error. Although the act or omission of a person may precipitate a disaster, the cause of the event is likely to lie deep within the systems, outlook and personnel of organization, or is likely to involve several persons over a period of time. According to past occurrences, it has been noted the fire has consistently been caused, not mainly by persons but by errors, misjudgment, failures or even negligence by senior management since they fail to instill a culture of safety within an organization. Thus the problem could be with the factory manager and not the fire and rescue service manager. In most cases, it is easier to blame the error of an individual on the front line than to analyze the shortcomings of a corporation or its safety procedures. This is a managerial issue that arises especially when the management does not understand that it is extremely rare that a single simple piece of negligence can cause a disaster. Generally, the occurrence of a disaster involves a series of mistakes, some small in their individual impact, which on average lead to the disaster. The cause of disaster is mainly a mixture of apparatus breakdown, management malfunction as well as human mistake, in that there has been a failure to pay attention to counsel and warnings for a long period, compounded by lack of decision at the material time. However, as a factory manager, you need to understand that it is normal for human to make errors and little can be done to avoid this (Cote, 2003 p. 326). Another managerial issue that arises here is the hindsight, which is a specific science indicating that people should not be judged on facts that become known after an event. It is mainly composed of three characteristics: first, people are able to follow a sequence of events that led to an occurrence of a disaster ; second, they are now aware of the true nature of the situation in which those involved found themselves, as opposed to the situation they thought they were in; and third, since they have now acquired most of the information, they are capable of identifying what those involved missed, what they should not have missed, what they did and what they never did and should have been done (Moore & Lakha, 2006 p. 324). Most of factories like in our case are fixed with automatic fire systems that detect the likelihood of a fire occurring. One of the outcomes of automation is that the operators or fire and rescue service manager becomes de-skilled in precisely those activities that justify their existence. The only thing left to the operators is to monitor that the automatic system is functioning properly. It is well understood that even highly motivated operators cannot maintain effective vigilance for anything more than quite short periods; hence they are demonstrably not fit to conduct this residual function of monitoring for rare, abnormal events. What the factory manager required to know is that the manual control of automated systems is a highly skilled activity. Thus where it is the task of the operator to take charge when the automatic system fails or cannot be controlled, the skills needed require to be practiced continuously so as to maintain them. However, if the automatic system fails rarely, it denies the operator the chance for practicing these basic control skills. Humans are not particularly good at the kind of inspiration that is required sometimes in emergencies. This is because when operating in stressful situations, they tend to follow a pattern of pre-programmed responses. But these are shaped by personal history and tend to reflect patterns of past experience. Learning from one’s mistakes can be very beneficial process but when a whole factory burns down, such experience can be extremely costly both to the individual, the factory as well as the people involved. Health and Safety Executives have claimed that that human error contributes to around 90% of accidents of which 70% are preventable. Most likely, the fire could have been caused by somebody at low level but the fire and rescue service manager had to suffer the consequence. The factory manager needed to know that employee behavior largely depends on the way a company is organized. The responsibility for safety ought to lie in the selection, training and motivation of personnel as well as in the design of systems and in the apparatus they are given. A working environment ought to be created to such a standard that human errors become less likely. Thus efforts should be made to either improve the training or instructions, or simplify the job. Human failure like what the fire and rescue service manager did could be minimized by implementing safety oriented recruitment, training and personnel policies. Hiring highly qualified employees, providing them with suitable safety training, fostering a culture of vigilance and safety, as well as motivating them to perform well are all part of human resource management. Else, it might be important to change the function either by introducing new procedures or by changing the design of the machineries themselves. The fire could have been caused by slips and lapses of attention, but knowing how human body and brain works, it leaves little to be done to eliminate them fully. Thus the way a function is done can be changed to minimize the reasons why the slips and lapses of attention occurred in the first place. Thus people who are situated in positions where they may be required to make decisions during rapidly moving, serious events within limited time scales ought to be carefully selected to ensure that they are temperamentally suited and have the required skills to respond to such events. Such people ought to be trained in a way that will improve the speed as well as accuracy, along with the capability to make situation evaluations. These trainings require involving the swift presentation of situational data that demands them to make decision concerning feasible objectives as well as reasonable courses of action. Making decision to fire and legal issues In this case the employer fired the fire and rescue manager because of the fire that occurred n the factory. No matter what the reasons the factory manager had, he ought to have looked at all angles before taking the action of firing. Firing is one action that a manager can take and land the company in court. It is important to stay out of legal trouble through ensuring that the worker has been given the fairest shake before dismissing him or her. Thus there are quite a number of questions that one should ask himself before firing the employee: Did the manager have a legitimate reason for firing? The manager firing the other operator or fire and rescue service manager should have a genuine reason for firing him. Other than firing him because of the fire, could there be other reasons or misconduct in the past. Are thee records of negligence in the past so that the disaster can be attributed to his negligence? All the questions need to be addressed. Should an investigation be done first? I feel the in this situation, the investigation was not done before the fire and rescue service manager was fired. A detailed investigation cannot be done within one day. It is always important when the situation is not so clear-cut to figure out what happened. It is extremely essential to seize moment and investigate even when the employee is caught ‘in the act’. There is constantly an opportunity, though little, that things are not what they appear to be. Furthermore, the employer might have reasons or explanation for the occurrence of the event that could not be immediately apparent (DelPo & Guerin, 2009 p. 392). Does the worker’s personnel file support the reasons for firing? It is significant to evaluate the worker’s personnel file before firing. For this case, there was great destruction but this does not call for the fire and rescue manager to be fired if according to his past records, he has been performing his duties well. Even when firing a worker for persistent problems (poor performance or attendance, for instance), always ensure that the file documents these problems – in assessments and disciplinary warnings. However, of the worker is being fired for a single serious offence, the worker’s file might not mention any problems and this is okay. Have you followed company policy? When firing the manager, were the company rules and disciplinary policies followed to the letter? They should have been followed keenly to see that the factory manager had all the rights to fire him. Is the worker likely to sue? Although it is always hard to predict what another person will do, you should take some time to consider whether this worker seems likely to sue. Has he or she threatened to sue, thrown legal terms around with ease, or talked about hiring a lawyer? Does the employee have a history of butting heads with people, like neighbors or previous employers, and going to the court? Does the employee comfortably see himself as the victim? Has the company treated the employee unfairly? If the answer to these questions is yes, then the company might be at a higher risk for a lawsuit, thus the termination should be handled with extreme care (DelPo & Guerin, 2009 p. 393). Was there another alternative other than firing? The manager should have considered whether the firing was the most effective option to punish the fire and rescue service manager. If it was not the responsibility of the manager, how will it improve the situation? What if it is the managerial problem or a system breakdown, how will firing him help the factory? You require ensuring that you do not play favorites or bend the rules without a good reason. You particularly might require considering an alternative to termination if the manager’s problems are due to difficulties outside of work, increased responsibilities that the manager cannot handle or trouble working with certain systems. Is the firing decision impartial and fair? Ensure that the firing decision makes sense and can be defended if need be. Before doing such an action, it is important to consult other colleagues. This ensures that your decision is legitimate and well supported. A secondary review should ensure that the decision is based on objective, work-related and has not been influenced by discrimination or other subjective factors. Is it important to consult a lawyer? Acquiring legal assistance is probably a suitable idea if firing would dramatically change workplace demographics, the worker has an employment contract that strictly limits your company’s right to fire, the worker is due to vest pension or other benefits soon, or the worker denies the acts for which you are firing (DelPo & Guerin, 2009, p. 394). Management measures The comprehensive management of fire safety is the most significant facet of a fire safety strategy for the factory. The residents, visitors and contractors as well as staff will e at serious risk in the fire situation if fire equipment and fire warning/suppression systems are not properly installed, checked and maintained in line with statutory requirements and staff are adequately trained in fire safety, including evacuation procedures. The fire and rescue service manager should have provided a Fire Safety Manual that ensures that there is a planned basis on which to ensure that training, checking and maintenance are carried out and that these items are well recorded. To avoid such a mistake in future, the Manual requires consistent updating and ought to be formally reviewed every six months, as part of the Fire Precautions Inspection and changed to account for transformations of building use, staff, visitors as well as the contractors and their functions (Moore & Lakha, 2006 p. 252). Conclusion When an event like this has occurred, a post-incident analysis will be very important. Valuable information can be attained from a post-incident analysis. Such information is mainly valuable for the training program of a fire department since it highlights areas that require improvement. Some of the input will be valuable in revising departmental policies or procedures. The post-incident analysis should be conducted in a structured, nonthreatening manner that allows for a free exchange of information and honest assessment (Cote, 2003 p. 326). This is since the recognition of an unstructured occurrence as well as the administration of that occurrence as it generates itself can only be enabled if the decision maker has flexible measures, and an efficient communication scheme, facilitating continued assembly of new information, from the first occurrence beginning all through to the inhibition of that hazard. References: Cote, A.E. 2003. Organizing for Fire And Rescue Services. MA, Jones & Bartlett Learning. From http://books.google.com/books?id=M8NZeVI6eZUC&pg=PA325&dq=legal+and+managerial+issues+arising+due+to+fire&hl=en&ei=n4f_TKg1kbiEB4amnboL&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false (accessed December 9, 2010) Davies, A. 2011. Workplace Law Handbook 2011 - Health and Safety, Premises and Environment Handbook. Workplace Law Group. From http://books.google.com/books?id=2wWHm_EjwMQC&pg=PA511&dq=rights+of+fire+and+rescue+service+manager+in+case+of+fire&hl=en&ei=BIX_TMj3CcKJhQeUur3tCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false (accessed December 9, 2010) DelPo, A & Guerin, L. 2009. The Manager's Legal Handbook. California, Nolo. From http://books.google.com/books?id=HPJnLry7ivIC&pg=PA392&dq=legal+and+managerial+issues+arising+due+to+fire&hl=en&ei=n4f_TKg1kbiEB4amnboL&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CE0Q6AEwBg#v=onepage&q&f=false (accessed December 9, 2010) Elizabeth Ii. 2004. Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004. Elizabeth Ii, Part 21. The Stationery Office. From http://books.google.com/books?id=5jlX0WE7_psC&printsec=frontcover&dq=fire+and+rescue+act&as_brr=3&client=firefox-a&cd=1#v=onepage&q&f=false (accessed December 9, 2010) Moore, T & Lakha, R. 2006. “Tolley's Handbook of Disaster and Emergency Management: Principles and Practice”. Burlington, Butterworth-Heinemann. From http://books.google.com/books?id=uBmrIb_esC&pg=PA137&dq=legal+and+managerial+issues+when+handling+fire+accident&hl=en&ei=vIn_TPnXNYGyhAeSmaXDBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CFcQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q&f=false (accessed December 9, 2010) Read More