GPS Tracking Helps Protect Lone Workers

In September 2009, the UK’s Health and Safety Executive (HSE) released an updated version of its ‘Working Alone’ advice leaflet INDG73(rev2),which provides health and safety advice on the risks of lone working.

This document provides employers with best practice guidelines on how to keep their lone working environment as safe as practicable. Whilst the advice and guidance in this document is not mandatory, it is intended to help employers understand what they need to do to meet with their legal duties towards lone workers under the UK Health and Safety regulations.

A key point to note in almost all regulation is that it is clearly the employer’s duty to assess the risks that lone workers may face and take steps to avoid or control risks where necessary. Lone workers include people who work both in fixed establishments as well as staff working away from a regular base.

Examples of people working in a fixed establishment include those working in small shops, working at home, or in isolated parts of a large building (including working out of normal hours).

People who are considered to be working away from a fixed base include those involved in civil engineering, plant installation, remote maintenance and external cleaning work, as well as service workers such as social workers, nursing professionals, sales representatives and drivers.

When compiling a risk assessment, common examples of hazards are “violence and threatening behaviour” and “working alone”. At the minimum, we might expect to see that an employer has issued a mobile phone to the employee so that they may summon help in the event that they do not have access to a landline. However, this is not necessarily always sufficient, and when reviewing what further action may be necessary, the next level of protection is often to consider providing a panic alarm facility. To be worthwhile in the event of an emergency, a panic alarm must not only be capable of alerting an employee’s supervisors, but also needs to be simple to activate, and also sending the employer an accurate position fix as an integral part of the alarm notification.

Now there are a range of different devices that are able to meet this requirement.

On the one hand, the lone worker could be provided with a standard mobile phone with an in-built GPS mobile phone tracking capability, running some tracking software that turns it into a GPS tracking device.

Alternatively, a dedicated lone-worker tracking unit designed for the purpose may be more appropriate. Typically, these units are simple to operate and provide limited mobile voice calling capabilities, for example to a small number of pre-programmed numbers, as well as a panic alarm button.

For employees that need a mobile phone anyway to carry out their work, then the first alternative makes a great deal of sense, whereas for employees that should only ever need to contact a couple of phone numbers, then a dedicated lone worker tracking device will provide everything that the employer needs to manage their risk, without the risk that the employee may abuse the privilege of having a fully functional phone.

Corporate Manslaughter Act, three years on

No responsible organisation will deny the significance of the Corporate Manslaughter Act.

It is a key piece of legislation that businesses must adhere to, and as we approach the third anniversary of the Act, new sentencing guidelines remind us of the importance of doing everything possible to keep employees safe.

Guidelines introduced this year recommend convicted companies face fines starting from £500,000 and there is also an increased risk of conviction, with 13 situations that organisations may be prosecuted for, rather than two previously.

Meanwhile, Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings' recent conviction serves as another reminder of the legislation's importance. The first company to be prosecuted under the legislation, it was fined £385,000 after being found to have failed to take all reasonable steps to protect employees. The company ignored industry advice prohibiting entry to pits over 1.2 metres deep and, at the time of his death, had left Alexander Wright unsupervised and alone.

The Act, which was brought in to deal with the most serious health and safety breaches, came into force on 6 April 2008. It introduced a new offence for prosecuting organisations when these failures have fatal consequences. To strengthen it, in January 2009 the Health and Safety (Offences) Act 2008 also came into effect, creating the possibility of imprisonment for employees who contribute to health and safety offences.

Businesses as a whole, then, must understand the importance of these laws - and so must professionals responsible for health and safety within them. While many businesses do fully appreciate the critical nature of keeping staff safe, there are some instances where there is room for significant improvement.

The economic landscape has had a big impact on how businesses are implementing their policies. Financial cutbacks are sometimes leading to significant implications for health and safety.

One of the results of today's climate is the rise of lone or agile workers. Lone workers come in many different forms; they might be employees working alone from home, or workers performing a task on their own that is traditionally conducted by two people. While lone working can bring huge advantages to businesses and employees, often, organisations are not properly adapting their strategies to protect these staff.

It is vital that businesses frequently reassess their policies to make sure they are realistic for their new operating circumstances. Lone working does not automatically imply a higher risk, but working alone can increase employees' vulnerability. Many forward-thinking organisations are implementing systems (frequently technology-based) to monitor lone workers' safety, but it is crucial that these systems work practically: for example, if lone working staff have personal safety devices, they need to be charged and accessible at all times and, obviously, employees must be able to raise the alarm when needed. As well as ensuring systems work for the business, it is imperative that staff can use them properly. Any technology will only work if those using it are doing so properly, so staff should be properly trained. Staff should also be made aware of their responsibility to keep safe at work.

While staff have a responsibility to look after themselves in the workplace, businesses should not forget their obligations. Those with health and safety remits must be aware of the systems and policies in place throughout the business. If incidents happen, directors will be judged on what they knew - or what they ought to have known. A lack of awareness is not a valid reason for inadequate health and safety provisions.

Whatever line of business you operate in, it is important not to fall below a standard that is reasonably acceptable for your industry. So whether it is a bank or housing association, your business must ensure that its health and safety policies are in line with the industry standard.

The third anniversary of the Corporate Manslaughter Act, along with the first conviction under it, have brought health and safety to the forefront of many organisations' minds. However, they need to realise that changing economic and business environments mean it is extremely important to constantly review and update their approach to health and safety. Every business must consider the safety of every member of staff. Whether employees are in traditional offices or some of the growing breed of lone workers, their safety should be of paramount importance.

Corporate manslaughter case: 385,000 fine for Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings

Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings was this afternoon fined the sum of 385,000 following its conviction for corporate manslaughter on Tuesday.

Gloucestershire-based Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings was charged with corporate manslaughter following the death of 27-year-old Lone Worker, Alex Wright, in September 2008. Wright was a junior geologist investigating soil conditions in a deep trench on a development plot in Stroud when it collapsed and killed him.

Sentence was passed this afternoon by Justice Field. He said the gross breach of the company's duty to  Wright was a "grave offence". He said the company, which was described in court as in a parlous financial state, could pay the money back over 10 years at a rate of GBP38,500 per annum.

He added that the fine marked the gravity of the offence and the deterrent effect it would have on companies to strongly adhere to health and safety guidance. But he added the company was on a small scale and a larger fine would cause it to be liquidated, and four people presently employed would lose their jobs.

"It may well be that the fine in the terms of its payment will put this company into liquidation. If that is the case it's unfortunate but unavoidable. But it's a consequence of the serious breach," he said.

No-one was in the dock for the three-week trial but the business denied corporate manslaughter. The prosecution was the first under the new Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007.

The fine is less than the starting point of £500,000 recommended by the Sentencing Guidelines Council (SGC).

David Foster, head of dispute resolution at Barlow Robbins, said health and safety had jumped to the top of boardroom agendas with the large fine.
Further reading

"The Courts are sending a clear message and are willing to have a fine that causes pain over a long period – in this case 10 years," he said.

Berrymans Lace Mawer partner, Helen Devery, said the act had finally come of age. "An appeal may be pending but the size of the fine will be a warning shot to all organisations that safety must not be compromised," she said.

"Although the fine is less than the starting point of £500,000 recommended by the Sentencing Guidelines Council (SGC) it will no doubt have a dramatic impact on a company of this size, reflecting the trend towards harsher penalties. The size of the fine is intended to make a significant impact on any organisation and while CGH may have had a modest turnover, larger and more profitable organisations, successfully convicted, can expect fines well above the SGC’s £500,000 staring point."

Jonathan Grimes, partner and health & safety law expert at Kingsley Napley, added: "This is a very substantial fine for a firm of this size. That this fine is lower than the recommended level will be a reflection of the company’s limited means."

The conviction of Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings for corporate manslaughter will herald an avalanche of similar cases, lawyers today warned.

Student tracks down iPhone using GPS tracking technology

Guided by U.S. military satellites, two young men sprinted across Manchester city centre.

The position of their target was tracked second-by-second via GPS Tracking, and relayed to them by mobile phone.

They dashed through a subway and emerged on Grosvenor Street, still in hot pursuit of their suspect.

At the last second one picked up the pace and, jumping on-board a departing bus, cornered the suspect. 'You've got my phone, haven't you?' he gasped.

The hi-tech drama started when James Bird, 20, noticed his £500 iPhone 4 had disappeared from a computer room at Manchester University.

Unfortunately for the suspect, the second-year student from Burnley, Lancashire, used a new app to track its location and get it back.

It uses GPS satellite technology to show the exact location of the phone on a map, updated live.

'The tracker is a free application I had set up. You log into the account and activate the service, and using the GPS in the phone it tells you where it is,' said Mr Bird.

'One of my mates Nick Crisp watched it on the map on his phone and me and Alex went out to track it down.'

The tracking app uses GPS to locate the phone, and its movement can be followed on a laptop or another iPhone.

Throughout the chase Mr Crisp tracked the location of the stolen gadget and shouted instructions down the phone until Mr Bird and fellow student Alex Bennett were able to corner the suspect.

Mr Bird continued: 'I got on the bus after him and said: "You've got my phone haven't you?". But he said no and showed me two of his pockets again.

'The bus driver said: "We're not going anywhere until you prove you haven't got his phone."

'I was out of breath because I'd just run all the way up the street, but I blocked the door and the bus driver said he wouldn't move.

'Finally the guy said "here you go" and gave me it back, but he didn't say sorry or anything like that, he just got off the bus and walked away.'

The bus driver told Mr Bird the vehicle was covered by CCTV and to ring the police.  By coincidence, parked behind the bus was a police van, and after a quick word with two officers, they followed the man and arrested him just around the corner.

Mr Bird, who is an aerospace engineering student, said he was just relieved to have his phone back, and grateful the technology had made it possible.

He said: 'I doubt many people get their phone back that quickly when it's stolen. I would have been pretty lost without my phone.'

A Greater Manchester Police spokesman said a man had been charged in connection with the theft and three other counts of burglary.

A lone worker should not be at more risk than any other employee

Changing work patterns and the need for businesses to 'downsize' are resulting in more and more staff becoming classified as lone workers. According to the Health & Safety Executive a lone worker are those who work by themselves without close or direct supervision. They work in a wide range of professions within a number of sectors.

Most UK companies will have lone working staff and therefore a duty to ensure their safety. According to the Health & Safety Executive from the 2008/9 British Crime Survey, there were approximately 305,000 threats of violence and 321,000 physical assaults by member of the public on British workers during the 12-months prior to the interviews. This represents a worrying rising trend facing many lone workers.

Employers have responsibilities for the health, safety and welfare at work of their employees and the health and safety of those affected by the work e.g. contractors and self-employed people who companies may engage. These responsibilities cannot be negated or transferred to people who work alone. The Health and Safety Executive says: “It is the employer’s duty to assess risks to lone workers and take steps to avoid or control risk where necessary.”

The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act added another layer of liability for organisations and, importantly, managers. An employer's duty of care is not only a legal requirement but now it must be seen to be demonstrated that a company or organisation is doing everything practicable to protect the health and safety of employees. As a result many more UK businesses are adding ‘lone working’ to their risk register and taking the matter more seriously.

A lone worker should not be at more risk than any other employee and precautions should be put into place to account for normal work and foreseeable emergencies such as illness, accidents and workplace violence.

Employers should identify potential risk such as:
· Does the workplace present a special risk to the lone worker
· Is there risk of violence
· Are women staff especially at risk
· Can the lone worker summon help in the event of an emergency

Those working alone and who face a risk of violence or abuse include community based public sector staff, bus and rail staff and retail workers. Other workers such as security staff, engineers and logistics/warehouse employees may be at risk of robbery related violence or an accident. The provision of any alarming system must take these specific factors into account in order to minimise employee’s risk and business risk. However, any hardware provided needs to incorporate a wider, ongoing assessment of risk.

Lone workers by definition are more vulnerable to accident and aggression than most employees and therefore it is vitally important that their employers develop long-term strategies in order to protect their safety. Risk assessment should help decide the right level of supervision, training and protective equipment that needs to be employed.

The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 (MHSW) require employers to conduct a ‘suitable and sufficient’ assessment of the risks to which employees are subjected to whilst they are at work. Any employer who has either failed to recognise a foreseeable risk or address a significant potential risk is likely to have been negligent in failing to give proper consideration to the potential risks faced by employees.

The MHSW Regulations generally oblige an employer to assess the risks of employees and make arrangements for their health and safety by effective:
· Planning
· Organisation
· Control
· Monitoring

The risks covered should, “where appropriate, include the need to protect employees from exposure to reasonably foreseeable violence”. The HSE estimates that it costs £17-19,000, on average, just to investigate a physical assault. It can take a lot less to prevent one.

Many companies have been issuing lone workers with mobile phones equipped with a speed-dial for staff to raise the alarm if threatened. A mobile phone is a communications tool; it is not necessarily an effective tool to use when faced with an aggressor or if a worker may become ‘man-down’. Arguably, by providing a worker with a mobile phone an employer increases the risks faced by the worker.

One way of protecting lone workers is through a dedicated alarm system. With the increasing number of personal attack alarms now on the market, the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) has reviewed its position on their use and been instrumental in helping define British Standard BS8484 for Lone Working. BS8484 came into effect on the 30th September. It defines Lone Worker Devices (LWD) and Alarm-Receiving Centre (ARC) compliance as well as calling for sound financial grounding, secure data protection, quality training and full audit capability from the supplier of a lone worker solution. The introduction of the standard sets a benchmark against which LWDs and services can be measured. It has been driven by ACPO and the security industry to promote best practice for lone workers and to reduce the high number of false alarms being received and responded to by the emergency services.

In January, ACPO also published its updated policy document to Police forces detailing when and how the Police will get involved in responding to an alarm. Appendix V details the requirements for lone worker systems and calls for devices to be audited against BS8484 and the ARC to conform to BS5979 Cat II. The Police plan to move towards allocating a URN to a compliant ARC - without a URN it will become increasingly difficult to get a Police response. Because of this, businesses and other organisations need to treat lone worker alarm systems with the same level of importance as they do their building alarms. Ask 100 business leaders if they want to ensure the Police respond to an incident involving a lone worker and 100 will say ‘yes’.

LWDs are now specifically required to possess the functionality to initiate an audio connection to the ARC and to have the capability to automatically retry that connection until an acknowledgement is received. They must also be able to receive a discreet signal from an ARC controller to acknowledge audio connection, have the capacity to be remotely accessed by a controller and contain an automated low battery warning facility.

When considering the supply of LWDs, the standard also states that the device should, like Identicom, be capable of being discreetly activated so as not to alert an aggressor, and where a man-down sensor is fitted, must have the facility to automatically send an activation message to the ARC. Neither function is common on mobile phones.

ARCs must have the ability to locate the lone worker and obtain their position remotely in the event of an incident. The device must also enable the ARC to dial into the LWD, listen discreetly to what is happening and initiate an appropriate response should a previously raised alarm be dropped unexpectedly.

It is essential you conduct your own research on BS8484. Beware of potential misinformation from suppliers. Some may claim compliance due to the ARC element of their service being audited and approved - but not the complete solution.

Lone worker technology can play an integral part in improving the personal safety of staff but only if it is introduced as part of an overall personal safety strategy. It cannot prevent employees from facing violence or aggression, nor can it help them to deal with such situations.

How can GPS tracking help an organisation adhere to Health and Safety Regulations?

In September 2009, the UK's Health and Safety Executive (HSE) released an updated version of its 'Working Alone' advice leaflet INDG73(rev2),which provides health and safety advice on the risks of lone working.

This document provides employers with guidance on how to keep their lone workers healthy and safe. Whilst the advice and guidance in this document is not mandatory, it is intended to help employers understand what they need to do to meet with their legal duties towards lone workers under the UK Health and Safety regulations.

A key point in this regulation is that it is the employer's duty to assess risks to a lone worker and take steps to avoid or control risks where necessary. Lone workers may be people in fixed establishments or people working away from a regular base.

Examples of people working in a fixed establishment include those working in small shops, working at home, or in isolated parts of a large building (including working out of normal hours).

People working away from a fixed base include workers involved in construction, plant installation, maintenance and cleaning work, as well as service workers such as social workers, health care professionals, drivers, sales representatives etc.

When compiling a risk assessment, common examples of hazards are "violence and threatening behaviour" and "working alone". At the minimum, we might expect to see that an employer has issued a mobile phone to the employee so that they may summon help in the event that they do not have access to a landline. However, this is not necessarily always sufficient, and when reviewing what further action may be necessary, the next level of protection is often to consider providing a panic alarm facility. To be effective, a panic alarm will not only be able to alert an employee's supervisors in the event of an emergency, but should be simple to activate, and ideally also provide an accurate location at the same time.

Now there are a number of different types of device that can fulfil this requirement.

On the one hand, the lone worker could be provided with a standard mobile phone with an in-built GPS mobile phone tracking capability, running some tracking software that turns it into a GPS tracking device.

Alternatively, a dedicated lone-worker tracking unit designed for the purpose may be more appropriate. Typically, these units are simple to operate and provide limited mobile voice calling capabilities, for example to a small number of pre-programmed numbers, as well as a panic alarm button.

For employees that need a mobile phone anyway to carry out their work, then the first alternative makes a great deal of sense, whereas for employees that should only ever need to contact a couple of phone numbers, then a dedicated lone worker tracking device will provide everything that the employer needs to manage their risk, without the risk that the employee may abuse the privilege of having a fully functional phone.

BS 8484:2009 Lone Working Devices

A lone worker is someone who works on their own, usually in an environment away from an office such as their home or those who work outside their usual work hours.

The protection of lone workers is increasingly important as more people are working away from a company office. In case a lone worker feels threatened, they are given an electronic device that allows them to request assistance and transmit their location. Alarm receiving centres can then transfer all information to the relevant response services.

BS8484 provides guidelines and procedures so that the centres can verify messages received from LWDs (Lone Working Devices) and can assist the appropriate response service. This will also help to prevent any false alarms that they may receive.

To learn more about Lone Working Devices (LWD) Standards and how we can help, contact us, or better still, fill out our contact form so that we can save some of your time by letting us know a little bit about your work first.

Improving the lives of people with long term conditions

Almost one in three of the population have a long term condition, such as asthma, heart and lung disease, arthiritis or diabetes.

The NHS will not be able to meet this increase in demand unless it changes. Add to that the fragmented and inefficient way the NHS currently looks after people with long term conditions and the health service just won’t be able to cope a few years from now.

However, the 15 million people with a long term condition will benefit from a modernised NHS by being treated more effectively.

The new, modernised NHS will improve the lives of people with long term conditions by:

• giving them more support to self care – for example providing asthmatics with new technology they can use at home to check their lung function so they can pick up problems quickly before they get so bad they have to go to hospital
• remaining independent for longer using new technology – for example telehealth and telecare technology means people can have their vital signs monitored remotely by a health professional
• simplifying who cares most for a person – one professional not five
• healthcare professionals focussing on the overall health and wellbeing of the patient rather than just managing one of their conditions

‘The average cost of someone without a long term condition is around £1,000, which rises to £3,000 for someone with one condition and to £8,000 for people with three or more conditions.’ said Health Secretary Andrew Lansley ‘That’s one reason why we need to modernise the health service and the way we care for patients.’

Patients throughout the country are already benefitting from improvements.

In Ipswich a pilot project that has helped 107 patients to better manager their own conditions has seen a 75 per cent reduction in GP visits and a 75 per cent reduction in bed days in hospital over a six month period. Staff are also being trained to become health coaches to their patients.

Sutton Council has installed monitoring devices in patients’ homes so GPs can monitor their clients’ blood pressure, blood oxygenation and other indicators so they can take early action. A six month pilot in the borough reduced admissions and saved around £322,000.

In Swindon a Community Matron oversees patients with long term conditions. The Matron ensures people are educated about their condition and are more in control and confident to cope when they feel unwell. Using telehealth patients monitor their own blood pressure, weight and pulse knowing that there is someone at the end of the phone if their vital signs are not as they should be.

GPs in Barking and Dagenham are pinpointing high risk patients and giving them a care coordinator to prevent several people going to visit a patient.

Better outcomes, more efficient, improved involvement
Using technology at the health service’s disposal will help people stay independent for longer, receive care on-line or in their own homes, avoid unplanned hospital admissions or unnecessary visits to clinics. Offering different ways to communicate with health professionals means a more streamlined efficient NHS.

New Health And Safety Guidance On Accidents At Work

Thе Health аnd Safety Executive, concerned fοr thе safety οf ‘lone workers’, hаѕ recently published nеw guidelines fοr employers thаt emphasises thаt out οf sight ѕhουld never mean ‘out οf mind’ іn a working environment.

Thе guidance reinforces thе concept οf thе employer’s duty tο ensure thаt a lone worker is properly assessed tο consider аll thе risks thаt аrе specific tο a lone working environment. Thеѕе issues include:

* Thе fact thаt thеrе іѕ nobody tο report incidents tο οr tο detect fatalities, particularly іn high risk areas.

* Omissions οn thе hand over οf duties.

* An increased threat οf violence, risk οf fraud οr dishonest activity.

* Consideration οf thе impact οf a lone worker’s medical shape up.

* Risk οf employees ‘cutting corners’ οr unsafe practices developing owing tο a lack οf supervision.

* Workers trying tο continue operating using defective equipment οr work stations.

Thе HSE considers thаt lone workers аrе particularly vulnerable аnd ѕhουld bе consulted οn thе assessment. Thеу аlѕο emphasise thаt lone workers ѕhουld аlѕο bе fully trained іn аnу areas identified аѕ a potential risk, аnd thаt measures ѕhουld bе enforced tο ensure thаt lone workers аrе nοt рlасе аt risk. Thеѕе mау include identifying jobs thаt аrе prohibited whеn working alone, such аѕ lifting heavy objects οr operating аt height without adequate safety equipment οr аn assessment οf thе situation beforehand.

Thе greatest issue іѕ thе lack οf supervision. Obviously, employers hаνе tο bе аblе tο trust thеіr employees tο operate іn thе safest ways possible, bυt thіѕ isn’t always thе case іn real life. Thе lack οf supervision аlѕο leaves another door open – thе risk οf fraudulent compensation claims fοr injuries suffered whіlе working alone. Oftеn, claims result frοm non-reported accidents at work, аnd leave thе employer аt a distinct disadvantage. Thаt іѕ nοt tο ѕау thаt еνеrу claim bу a lone worker іѕ fraudulent – whаt іt means іѕ thаt lone workers οftеn dο nοt hаνе thе same ability tο report аn accident аnd hаνе іt documented іn thе same way thаt аn accident іn a workplace whеrе thеrе аrе οthеr employees present dοеѕ. Lone workers don’t hаνе thеіr οwn ‘accident book’, аnd one οf thе mοѕt essential pieces οf аnу claims jigsaw іѕ hard evidence.

Although thіѕ mау seem tο рlасе employers οn thе back foot whеn іt comes tο fulfilling thеіr duty οf care tο lone workers, thеrе аrе ways thаt thе risk οf a lone worker suffering аn accident саn bе minimised. If аn employer knows thаt thеіr workers аrе going tο bе operating іn a solo situation, a complete risk assessment аnd (іf necessary) controlling measures need tο bе implemented. If thіѕ isn’t done, thеn thе worker hаѕ a legitimate grievance іn thе event οf аn accident аnd a claim саn аnd ѕhουld bе pursued. If nοt јυѕt fοr thе financial aspect οf thе claim, thеn tο prevent another lone worker frοm suffering a similar fate.

Out οf sight ѕhουld never mean out οf mind іn a work situation. Thе duty οf care responsibilities οf еνеrу employer extend tο аll employees іn thеіr care, whether thеу′re working wіth others οr οn thеіr οwn. Thе HSE hаѕ mаdе іt quite clear thаt thеу wіll take a strong, disciplinary line wіth employers whο adopt аn out οf sight, out οf mind аррrοасh tο worker’s safety аnd thаt claimants hаνе еνеrу rіght tο expect thе same treatment іn law аѕ those whο work іn more clearly defined working environments. Aѕ thе number οf people working frοm home аnd іn solo positions rises, іt іѕ аn issue thаt wіll continue tο hаνе thе HSE spotlight shined directly onto іt.

Telecare Gives Us Peace Of Mind

Telecare has made a big difference to the lives of Pat Williams and her mum Bessie Croft.

Pat now has more piece of mind while caring for her 93-year-old mother thanks to the system being taken up by more and more people in Blackburn with Darwen

Telecare involves a series of electronic devices that allow people independence and the freedom to stay in their own homes but with a safety net should anything unexpected happen.

Blackburn with Darwen Council provides the devices to people who are disabled, infirm or through illness need support in their homes.

They range from electronic alarms that can trigger if they sense risks such as smoke, floods and gas to monitors that can be programmed to remind people to take pills or even call for help if they fall.

Bessie has Alzheimer's and dementia as well as an aortic aneurysm and requires constant care from her daughter a retired sculptor.

Around five months ago the pair had an internal door alarm set up in their living room at their Livesey home.

It alerts Pat if her mum is moving from the living room where she usually sits as she has limited mobility.

“It lets me hang out washing or do gardening without constantly checking on her,” said Pat.

“And if the buzzer goes it tells me something is happening. It’s like an early warning system.”

Sheila Latham, Sevice Manager at the Independent Living Service, says many people are finding the devices are making life easier.

One device that is proving popular triggers a lamp to come on in the bedroom when the resident gets up from their bed.

This helps prevent falls as people struggle to find light switches.

Others include sensors for bed wetting or even epileptic fits.

This means people at home or in care facilities are not disturbed unnecessarily for checks and allows them a good night’s sleep.

Sheila said: “We are getting some very good feedback.”

“Families really appreciate that they don’t have to worry quite as much and those people who didn’t like the idea of having a care worker going into their homes appreciate that they have more independence with the equipment but still feel safe.”

To find out more information contact the Independent Living Centre on (01254)269220.

Owner uses GPS to locate Christchurch earthquake damaged vans

A Christchurch businessman is annoyed he had to use gps satellite tracking to trace his work vans after the quake.

Leighton Johnston, national sales manager for bathroom fitter Edward Gibbon, had left the quake-damaged vans on Tuam St.

He later tried to find the two vans, but could not locate anyone who knew their whereabouts.

Eventually, he tracked the vans using their GPS systems to a vacant lot on Halswell Junction Rd.

The lot is screened by black fences and contains about 60 damaged vehicles.

Johnston yesterday recovered tools from the vans, which had more damage.

"No-one seemed to know anything about where they were, so it was lucky that I could use the GPS. I would never have found them," he said.

"I would have thought that the people removing them would see the signs and my phone number on the side and ring me to say where they are.

"I feel a bit annoyed and I am a bit upset about the damage as well."

Police, Civil Defence and Turners Auctions are co-ordinating a process where owners can retrieve undamaged vehicles or salvage possessions from wrecks.

Turners general manager Shane Prince said people with damaged vehicles should call 033439850 to make an appointment to claim possessions.

He asked that people who had vehicles inside the cordon be patient.

"We are asking people to hold off," Prince said.

"We are trying to buy some time to get the majority of vehicles out of the CBD and then we can say we have them and here is where you go."

What is BS8484?

BS8484's official title is the ‘Code of Practice for the provision of lone worker device services’.

It was written originally by Patrick Dealtry, who also chaired the British Standards Institute committee which produced it as a British Standard.

A Code of Practice has no effect until an organisation establishes it as a requirement.

In this case two organisations have done so;

    * ACPO, (the Association of Chief Police Officers), has stated it is a requirement that any organisation which supplies such services must be certified to BS8484 before they can receive the highest level of police response
    * The BSIA (British Security Industry Association), requires all members of their Lone Worker group to be fully certified to BS8484.

Only 2 organisations are licensed to provide such certification; the National Security Inspectorate (NSI) and SSAIB

‘Wireless’ humans could form backbone of new mobile networks

A new project based on the ‘rapidly developing science of body centric communications’ is being carried out by engineers from Queen’s University Belfast’s, Institute of Electronics, Communications and Information Technology (ECIT), and has been featured in the February 2011 edition of High Frequency Electronics (on pg. 16).

The researchers at ECIT are investigating how small sensors carried by members of the public, in items such as smartphones, could communicate with each other to create potentially vast body-to-body networks (BBNs). The university’s press release (scroll about half way down the page for it) states that, “social benefits from the work could include vast improvements in mobile gaming and remote healthcare…”.

In so far as the technology relates to health monitoring: data from Wireless Bodily Area Networks (WBANs) (i.e. sensors placed in contact with the skin sending health data to a nearby central controller) will be routed from person to person with each not knowing or needing to be involved unless the call is to them.

Or as the Wireless Communications Research Group’s homepage explains; people will become ‘an important part of a novel, ubiquitous wireless networking paradigm, where they are seamlessly connected to network infrastructure through interaction with nearby wireless devices embedded in local surroundings and other bodyworn devices mounted on persons in the immediate vicinity.’

So each body basically acts as a cell tower and relays the data to the desired recipient. Interesting stuff indeed…. and certainly lots of implications for the future of healthcare.

Original Article

Lone Worker Protection Services in action - free trial

G4S Secure Solutions today announced it will showcase its Lone Worker Protection Services at the IOSH 2011 conference and exhibition, at ExCeL, London between Tuesday 15th and Wednesday 16th March.

G4S Secure Solutions (‘G4S’) today announced it will showcase its Lone Worker Protection Services at the IOSH 2011 conference and exhibition, at ExCeL, London between Tuesday 15th and Wednesday 16th March. Guests at the IOSH Conference and Exhibition 2011 will be able to participate in an exclusive free one-month trial of a G4S lone worker device (LWD).

The annual IOSH conference is the largest and most comprehensive health and safety conference in the UK. G4S Lone Worker Protection Services, part of G4S Secure Solutions (UK), the UK’s leading security service provider, provides innovative solutions to protect organisations’ lone and vulnerable workforces across a range of industries including retail, energy and utilities and financial services.  

G4S provides a comprehensive lone worker managed service which includes a range of market –leading devices, with features including real time active tracking, man-down,  and time-based alerts. The G4S service ensures at – risk personnel are protected and monitored 24 hours a day, from G4S’s accredited* monitoring facilities.

Mark Wakeford, Managing Director of G4S Monitoring & Response Services said, “Our managed service identifies how best to protect lone workers at risk of violence, verbal abuse or kidnap. Staff employed to work alone at remote sites at risk of “man down” scenarios need protection with adequate support procedures put in place too. During the current economic times, many organisations have rationalised their workforces, which has led to more employees working alone thereby increasing the risks for employees and employers alike.

“Employers have always had a duty of care for their staff and with the introduction of the Corporate Manslaughter Act 2007 and a tightening of associated Health and Safety Legislation, organisations need to continuously review and update the support arrangements they put in place for their lone workers.”

G4S supplies businesses with a lone worker managed solution. Solution build includes a  risk assessment, device options and selection,  mobilisation and training, service logistics (leavers, joiners etc), service management, management information, and specialist lone worker operatives monitoring and responding to alarm activations.

This service is backed up by our 24/7 specialist lone worker trained telephone operators who are continuously monitoring and responding to alarm activations from individuals in distress.

The G4S solution uses the latest advances in technology and tracks workers using GPS signalling, raising an alarm if an exception event occurs. The technology also provides valuable work force management information with an emergency response to be deployed quickly and accurately if required.

Join G4S on 16th March at the Spotlight Theatre 2, between 10.40am – 11.10am to see its lone worker protection in action and hear more about legal requirements.

GPS technology helping dementia sufferers retain independence

Known as Safer Walking Technology, Fife Council's social work services have been piloting the use of GPS devices with people affected by dementia to see how the technology can help continue independent living.

Forming part of their Telecare service, which offers door alarms, movement sensors, fall detectors and visual smoke detectors, the Safer Walking scheme helps find a person who has become lost or disoriented.

John Honeyman, from the community alarm and Telecare service, said the feedback from users and their families over the last 18 months has been "overwhelmingly positive" and demonstrates the success of technology as a useful aid to independence and autonomy.

"The technology not only enables a person to continue enjoying activities that they have been doing for years, it helps give family carers peace of mind," he said. "In the event of a person being away for longer than usual, it is particularly reassuring for a carer to be able to locate their loved one quickly either by telephoning the call centre or by accessing the emergency location map on a secure website.

"We were aware that GPS devices to help people with dementia existed, but had to be quite sure that it was not just a case of technology for technology's sake, hence the pilot project."

Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (COSLA) received a total of 220 applications this year and, in recognition of their work, the Telecare Team have already been given a silver award in the One to Watch category.

Liz Mitchell, health and social care partnership co-ordinator, said, "Our achievement so far is a credit to all those who work in the Telecare team, the service users and their carers who helped make the pilot happen. In turn, we hope, this is an initiative which Fife can be proud of as we continue to care for the vulnerable in our community."

At the end of March 2010 a total of 495 people were using Telecare in Fife.

Lone workers unhappy - and at risk

Although seven out of 10 full-time staff qualify as ‘lone workers’, just under half are unhappy with having to work by themselves.

The term ‘lone worker’ applies to self-employed people and home workers, employees in fields such as painting and decorating or repairs who work away from the office, personnel who work outside of normal hours such as factory security staff and mobile workers such as sales people.

According to a survey undertaken among 1,000 full-time workers in the UK by RedShift Research, just under one in five now spend more than 50% of their time working alone.

But even though 49% said they had felt uncomfortable with the situation at various times, 42% did not bring the matter up with their employer as they were nervous about the consequences.

Some 46% of respondents did not identify themselves as lone workers at all, however, even though 71% could be categorised as such at least at some point in their working day because they regularly worked late in the office (30%) or travelled to meetings on public transport (25%).