I'm really frustrated!!
When are we gonna get up to speed?
Happy New Year All.
However, I'm Pissed Off!
Lately, my frustration has peaked due to being involved in a large number of assessment situations that have only demonstrated the seemingly lack of effectiveness of Legislative Changes effected 01 July, 2020 that have been implemented to improve the quality of building certification.
Especially relative to Fire Measure Design & Annual Fire Compliance.
Don't get me wrong, a systemic change to the Fire Industry was well overdue and, in the absence of any other body, the FPAA undertook the massive task to improve building (and Fire) certification through the introduction of the FPAS Accreditation Scheme to support the Legislative Changes.
No mean feat, and I fully appreciate the magnitude of this undertaking and I applaud their efforts to date.
However, whilst there has been significant numbers of contractors successfully achieve accreditations of fire measures via the FPAS, it is evident that there are still those that either refuse to change or have no clear understanding of what all these changes are designed to do. ie IMPROVE LIFE SAFETY!!!!!
For example, there remains:-
many contractors who have completed only a few fire measure accreditations, even though there endorsing other non-accredited measures on AFSS.
many contractors have not completed Advanced Levels of Fire Measures, even though there endorsing these measures on the AFSS.
a complete lack of understanding from NSW fire contractors that Annual Fire Certification is against Fire Measures Performance Standards (installation codes) and not AS1851.
a lack of clear direction to handle conflicts that are apparent between Performance Standards (Install Codes) and AS1851
a lack of clear interpretation of the requirements in EP&A regulations as to ‘Assessment and Testing' relative to the 3 month period prior to the AFSS date. ie when can annual tests vs annual assessments take place?
a lack of understanding relative to defects and the expectations of building owners to rectify prior to any endorsement being able to be given.
a lack of practical competency and application from contractors (basically, shortcutting), even though they have gained FPAS Accreditation.
a lack of policing of the new requirements.
and more.
Again, after more than 30 years in the industry, I realise the effort and commitment involved to make a better system! But there are so many gaps and questions to still be addressed for the changes to really take hold, and without this work, "Old Dogs will just continue with Old Tricks"!
There’s plenty of poor reasons why these problems are still occurring, however.
Fear of loss of business/income/reputation
contractors don’t wish to lose the clients business by explaining their lack of competency or capability to complete the job
or choose to overlook defects to keep a client happy
lack of asking questions for fear of being labelled incompetent
Expense
the contractor doesn’t want to spend the money to achieve or maintain accreditation in whole or in part.
the contractor doesn’t want to engage subcontractors to complete assessments for fire measures they arent accredited to assess.
Incompetency
not ensuring that tests/inspections are actually being done properly or even that they are done at all. ie just signing off without checking.
have never advanced knowledge of Fire Codes and Standards
Lack of transparency
happy to keep the client in the dark while maintaining a ‘fake it till you make it’ attitude.
doesn’t care about the requirements and just plain lies without fear of consequence
Client Pressure
Building Owners threaten contractors with loss of business if they cant justify defects found.
I believe that most importantly, the lack of clear policing of the recent legislative changes means the contractors feel they can continue to act inappropriately as there are no apparent real consequences to their actions.
To demonstrate my point further, let me revisit a couple of my most recent experiences acting in the capacity of CFSP where other companies have been the incumbent fire or mechanical contractor.
While assisting a Mechanical Contractor, I have witnessed a complete lack of understanding of AS1668 when it comes to operations & compliance.
While performing site assessments and inspections, I have also seen items like
- Path of Travel - Fire Passages full of stored items,
- Path of Travel - Fire Stairs with items stored in them,
- Automatic Fire Sprinkler System - Fire tanks offline and inoperable
- Automatic Fire Sprinkler System - Fire sprinklers systems offline and inoperable
Yet when reviewing the applicable AFSS to endorse the measure I was assessing, the obviously critically defective measures listed above, had already been endorsed by the incumbent fire contractor irrespective of the existence of the defects.
In another even more recent case, when reviewing a different AFSS, it became evident that the incumbent fire contractor had signed off fire measures for which they had not achieved appropriate FPAS Accreditation.
That’s their problem I hear you say.
WRONG! If you think I will endorse a fire measure on an AFSS where another contractor has obviously overlooked defects for whatever reason or is not accredited to even endorse a fire measure, I won’t.
I refuse to have my company's reputation damaged by simply signing on an already fraudulent document.
Because that’s what it is. Fraud.
We are talking about LIFE SAFETY FIRE SYSTEMS here people!
When will the penny drop that actions have consequences?
In the last 3 months, 3 separate clients sites where my company is the incumbent fire contractor, have experienced fires.
I am proud to say that in each case, the fire measures installed in those sites, operated exactly as they were required to, and therefore prevented any loss of life, personal injury and with a minimum of asset damage.
Fire emergencies don’t send courtesy texts, emails or give you any heads-up of when they will occur.
However, if certification assessments are done correctly and honestly, and maintenance it kept up, fire safety systems will work the way they have been designed to perform when the critical time arrives.
Sounds like I'm taking aim solely at the competency of the fire industry. I’m not.
The shortfall in the understanding of Fire Safety Certification shown by Building Owner's and/or those non-fire bodies acting as there Agents, Like strata managers is sometimes just too ridiculous.
Most certainly are not aware of the requirements of the Fire Safety Measures installed on their sites, let alone the implications of the recent Legislative Changes and their accountability.
Yet Building Owners are free to select their contractor of choice to act as CFSP in assessing the Fire measures on their sites, irrespective of their ignorance.
This ignorance is prevalent across the building management sector. How do I know?
The huge amount of ‘jump-ship’ activity occurring.
When an accredited incumbent fire contractor identifies defects that under the EP&A legislation, must be now rectified prior to any endorsement of the fire measure/s involved, building owners go searching for other options instead of fronting up to the task at hand. Most times they approach other fire contractors, without advising of the fact that there are now existing defects. Some fire contractors are so keen to win that work, that unaware of the defects or not, they will 'overlook’ the problems to be rectified and provide sign-off.
All to ‘apparently’ save money. But it is certain that at some point down the line, the cost can become massive. Especially when a fatality takes place as a result of a failed fire safety system.
I have been on this rant before. https://www.extremefire.com.au/fact-sheets-posts/concerning-new-trends, and I believe that all valid fire safety defects should be placed on a register and provided to the council to prevent them being overlooked when the building owner decides to change fire contractors all of a sudden.
Again, so many parties involved in Fire Safety Certification are completely oblivious to the legal implications of ‘overlooking’, ’shortcutting’ or ‘ignoring’ the requirements.
Completely undermining the intent of the recent changes and all those contractors that have done the right thing and embraced the changes, the high associated costs and tribulations with clients to stand firm for the sake of supporting Life Safety.
It's all well and good to begin a journey of positive change, however, without adequate policing, too many gaps and loopholes are left for the less scrupulous to lurk in.
There MUST BE further work done here to make the system truly effective.
What are your thoughts? Can this whole system be perfect? Can we achieve a better certification framework that is fair and equitable?
I really would love to hear from you on this topic to learn your opinion.