Wednesday, June 20, 2007

Thermal comfort in Portcullis House

Why is it that a building like Portcullis House, which cost a small fortune, seems to have so many problem with the 'elf and safety? If it isn't the flagpole, it's "thermal comfort". What's that you might ask? Well apparently it is defined in one of those British Standard safety requirements (BS EN ISO 7730 to be precise) and is "that condition of mind which expresses satisfaction with the thermal environment".

Yes, you read that right, it's a safety standard that is based on the subjective perception of the awkward troublemaking worker. It's not a standard that is defined as "between x and y temperatures is acceptable", no, it's a standard that says if one worker out of an infinite number of workers is not experiencing "thermal comfort" then you're doing something wrong as an employer.

Personally in these situations I either put on, or take off my coat, but then I'm a personal responsibility nut who doesn't think the company is to blame (except of course if they make the air con pump out at say 5 degree C which is of course taking the piss (unless I was meant to be working in a fridge in which case it would fine by, I digress)).

So yes, apparently Portcullis House is having problem with thermal comfort. I don't know who's complained, nor do I where in the building they may be, I just know that someone somewhere has - it may be even more than one person, who knows! Apparently the complaints have been caused by a knackered temperature control system and air conditioning cock-ups. All par for the course I guess in a building that's only a few years hold and cost £234 million to construct.

Never fear though, the 'elf and safety fascists are on their way soon. Well I say that, but I am making an assumption based purely on the fact that the House of Commons Commission haven't carried out a "workplace temperature risk assessment" (yes there really is such a thing). Naughty naughty them! They'll be a GNN press release next about how the HSE has fined the HoC Commission £50,000 but no one will mention the fine would be revenue neutral.

Oh I'm such a cynic this morning aren't I?

3 comments:

Old BE said...

I wonder if the spanking new building is better or worse to work in than the 200-year-old one across the street?

Wasn't it known as Colander House for a while because of its leaky roof?

At my office there are some people who complain about the temperature whatever the temperature is. I just utilise the window and my clothing to control my "comfort".

Anonymous said...

"Wasn't it known as Colander House for a while because of its leaky roof?"

No, it wasn't. Tit.

dizzy said...

How do you know? Perhaps they kept you out of the loop to avoid you having an epi?