Cold weather clothing

Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2003 2:52 pm

Just out of interest, what with winter starting to rear its head. Does anyone work for a Security company that provides its Officers with good cold/wet weather gear? Are we all in the same boat with a thin Hi-viz and a tw*t hat? Or are there companies out there providing fleeces, gloves, etc to their personnel? I provide my own cold weather gear, as it makes life, and work, easier and more enjoyable. I just wonder if my Company is the exception or the rule.

Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2003 9:19 pm

An very good question geeza!
It has been my experience that the vast majority of private security companies normally supply either a padded (or quilted) black over coat or hi-viz coat.
A plain black over-coat seems to be favourite as this is far less expensive than the hi-viz equivelant.

Unfortunately there are still a high number of companies who issue no coat at all unless there is a contractual requirement for the S/O to do external patrols.
Most of the reputable companies however, do issue an over coat of some description.

Very few companies issue waterproof over-trousers as these are seen as "not the professional appearance one would desire" - but obviously the appearance of an S/O with sodden trousers and muddy boots must therefore be acceptable?

I know of no company that issues gloves, thermals, fleeces or anything else that could be considered 'cold/wet weather gear'.

For your information, something that we addressed with our CoRE document was the limitation of wet/cold weather exposure and the proper provision of guard bases with adequate heating and draught free ventilation - but as yet, not one private security company has made any effort to comply with our CoRe document, presumbly because it would mean spending some money!
The availability of waterproff over-trousers is also mentioned as we consider this PPE to protect the employee from the effects of wet weather.

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2003 12:10 am

It would be nice to see.

I am extremely lucky, in so much as, the site I work already has excellent facilities for us and our time outside is generally short in duration (I can also get a free flu jab if I wish), but I know that not every one is as fortunate as myself. I understand cost must feature in these sorts of decision, but I wonder if the cost of hours lost through ill health would counter-balance the outlay for better inclement weather gear.
Another strong arguement I feel is quality of service. Surely a warm dry S/O is going to take more time and do a more thorough job, than the poor soul walking round shivering trying to get back before the rain soaks right through his coat. Still better minds than mine make these decisions!

I like your comment

Quote:

Very few companies issue waterproof over-trousers as these are seen as "not the professional appearance one would desire"

That must mean most security firms think we Officers are more professional than the Police, Army, etc. cos they get water-proofs! Laughing

Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2003 4:00 pm

I take it you are working under in-house security then geeza?
If not, I would like to personally congratulate the private security company involved in the treatment of their workforce in this respect.

Yes, obviously costs are an issue in this discussion but there are so many cost savings to be made that cannot be readily quantified on paper.
As you say, a dry warm security officer is much more likely to be at his/her peak vigilance and maximum alertness than one which is cold and wet through, thus it is an easy matter to guess which of the two would more readily spot that open window, damaged door casing, intruder breaking open a skylight, cut perimeter fending etc etc.

Over-trousers as an example are not that costly when bought in bulk (they are usually a one-size-fits-all) and I'm pretty sure the costs could be off-set with the added benefit of having a much more contented workforce as well as the impact this has for potential clients - 'wow, you must really care about your officers welfare if you are providing foul weather gear'.
And I'm sure the companies clients would much rather see a security officer patrolling in proper wet weather gear than not patrolling (or falsifying his/her patrol records) at all.

Posted: Thu Oct 30, 2003 3:21 pm

I wish I were in house. I am currently employed by one of the big companies but the client we work for treats us, pretty much, the same as their own staff. Hence the flu-jabs, good gaurd base etc, they're available to their staff and are extended to us if we wish. As I said I'm "extremely" lucky. Very Happy

Newbie Joined: May 26, 2003 Posts: 6 Location: London

All our officers get gloves benny hat thick High Viz and anything they need to combat the cold. Cool

Posted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 3:59 pm

I would like to think that the majority of companies do supply proper winter clothing nowadays. I guess it is the same ones who are on the fringe of legality already that would not do so.

Maybe I am just being wishful?

Frequent Poster Joined: Sep 24, 2004 Posts: 25

I've worked for two large companies and one small one in the past and not one of them issued anything more than a security coat and that was a dark blue one. Anything else you had to supply yourself, including torch, as usual site ones never work do they? I learned quickly how nice having your own Mag was. I think it will be interesting to see how firms shape up over the next year, or so with the licensing. I would think that in not issueing foul weather clothing some health and safety issues were being ignored. Or am I just being hopeful?

Cheers Philip

Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 1:55 pm

Quote:

I would think that in not issueing foul weather clothing some health and safety issues were being ignored

Not issuing appropriate clothing, e.g. for cold/wet weather would constitute a breach of health and safety in as much as 'the employer has a duty to protect their employees from situations which may be injurious to their safety or health'.
The hard part is 'proving' that in not providing cold/wet weather gear it is injurious to the health of the employee. Having said that, we are all entitled to work in a 'comfortable' workplace and if we are wet and cold we are also going to be pretty grumpy and pissed off.
We have to be mindful of 'degrees' of discomfort though. Walking briefly in a shower in the middle of winter is uncomfortable but if you have a site that is quite big and requires a lot of external patrolling, the degree of discomfort will build up to an unacceptable level.

One thing that might be beneficial in these circumstances is to ask to see the task based risk assessment that every employer must do on each site they have staff working. Whilst the employer has no legal obligation to show you the actual risk assessment itself (this is going to change son so they DO have to show you), the do have to show you the RESULTS of that assessment. It would be easy to see if they had included wet/cold weather patrolling as they would of had to include the risk of slip/trip/fall due to ice or snow.

Having said all that, I better remind everyone of the 'get out of everything' clause.
Under current H&S legislation, your employer is required to remove or reduce risk "as far as is reasonably practicle".
Would it be reasonable to issue wet/cold weather gear - yes!
Would it be reasonable to pass this cost onto the employe - yes, provided it is issues as standard from the company. If it is issued as personal protective equipment (PPE) due to a risk assessment then no - they cannot pass on the cost to the employee.