PSST ! . . . WANT A CDM ?
Independent glazing consultant Philip Rougier takes a sideways look at the new Construction Design and Management Regulations, particularly at the role of the Planning Supervisor.
Glass and Glazing Products, January 1995 - "Tech Talk"
Copyright © Philip Rougier 1995
When Cadbury's copywriters first launched the phrase 'Award yourself the CDM' people smiled and understood. But 'CDM' now has much more sinister undertones. There have never been statutory obligations offering more prosperity to the legal profession. Of course the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) does not wish to start a roller-coaster ride of prosecutions under the new Act. They have the best intent (the safety of the human race) and their role is to be knowledgeable, timely and helpful. They will say, if you ask them, that they do not have the manpower or financial resources to take lots of people to Court. But the client's lawyers have. And they can (and very likely will) cause great fiscal damage with their new and vicious dentures. The CDM Regs will change the way we design buildings. Not a lot, but permanently.
Let's eavesdrop on a fictional exchange between a facades engineer and a helpful HSE officer.
CEng: My client's engaged some Planning Supervisor chappie. Keeps ringing me up about a Safety Plan for this fenestration scheme. Says its the law, check with you. What's that all about?
HSE: There's now a legal obligation to publish a Safety Plan covering all the safety aspects of a project, and keep the document on site. The Plan needs great attention to detail which is why the Planning Supervisor has come to you for your specialist knowledge. For example, what design measures have you taken to ensure the windows can be cleaned safely?
CEng: Oh I see. OK, we'll remove that problem by making them all cleanable from the inside of the building. Tilt/turn, horizontal pivot, or something.
HSE: That means a large opening area doesn't it? So how do you prevent people falling out?
CEng: They'd have restrictor stays of course, but I'm dubious about some of them, and they can be tampered with. I suppose we could put the windows at high level.
HSE: Glad you mentioned the stays, but if you put the windows at high level will that prevent people looking out? And wouldn't the Fire Officer want them lower?
CEng: Ah, yes. Could be a problem. Perhaps not too high then. Or we could put a bar across . . . yes, we'll do that.
HSE: Won't the architect be concerned about the appearance?
CEng: Blow the architect. This is an engineering matter.
HSE: You know best. Will the bar need to be taken off by the cleaner?
CEng: Er, yes.
HSE: And would the cleaner be able to reach to the top of the glass without a step ladder?
CEng: Ah, let me think . . . no. A step ladder would be needed.
HSE: So, we have large unprotected openings, seven storeys up. At each window location, several times a year, a cleaner will balance on a folding step ladder and clean the glasses and frame. How about some provision for restraining the steps? Do your frame reinforcement calcs allow for a fixing point for the cleaner's personal harness? Will the glass be laminated?
CEng: How about solid glass block walling?
HSE: Will you clean them safely?
CEng: Meet next week, same time?
HSE: That might be wise.
And CDM is not just about the windows, it's everything, whether there are published rules or not. Every eventuality will be deemed by the plaintiffs lawyer to be 'reasonably foreseeable'- after all, the Planning Supervisor has accepted good money to foresee all the client's likely problems, has (s)he not? Maybe it would be better to hire a clairvoyant, because from the lawyer's point of view the Planning Supervisor takes on every conceivable safety aspect of the building work as it is going up, throughout its long-term maintenance, until the day someone knocks it down. Even the dangers of its eventual demolition and materials recycling will be of interest. For the moment, Professional Indemnity insurers seem to be tackling the planning supervisor role in much the way they dealt with subsidence cover in the early 70s. "No problem" they said, and (at first) "no extra charge" - but within ten years, subsidence became a multi-zillion pound industry.
You will recall a fight a few years back to get on the Approved Inspector bandwagon. Some wanted to exclude others, and everyone had fun arguing about qualifications. But the role was uninsurable. And that was only for one-time compliance with the Building Regs! If an Approved Inspector's function can be likened to running a first-division football match, the planning supervisor's responsibilities are equivalent to running Erwin Rommel's Panzers out of North Africa.
Who was the planning supervisor?
In future when something goes wrong with a building, whatever it is, the first thing a solicitor will say is "Who was the planning supervisor?". The second will be "send me the Safety and Maintenance Plan documents". On the Richelieu principle (Cardinal Richelieu of France, 1585-1642, "... give me six lines written by an honest man, and I will find something in them to hang him...") a 20-page Plan will have several points of negligence, a sprinkling of omissions, and a host of items that can be profitably misinterpreted. And it will not need a Cardinal to analyse it. Richelieu died, Napoleon sorted out the mess two centuries later and they've stopped hanging people so much.
But my personal view (as a fairly lethal Expert Witness) is that planning supervisors might as well hand over their cheque books right now. I will not be in any rush to act in that capacity. Instead I intend to hang on for a couple of years until the problems start to surface, then join the festival of litigation.
Glass and Glazing Products, January 1995 - "Tech Talk"
Copyright © Philip Rougier 1995