We all need to understand that a lack of adequate safety measures such as stab vests can put an individual at unnecessary risk and cause unacceptable injury or harm.
Body armour and stab vests have regrettably, but understandably become a real necessity within a number of domestic frontline professions.
We have to accept the fact that the increasing lack of respect, changes within health and safety laws and the potential negative media coverage following a potential fatal incident should really make everyone think twice and look into the potential use of protective equipment and clothing within their line of work.
Every professional whose responsibilities include visiting people in their home or office to enforce laws and regulations, police the system or being the bearer of bad news increases the level of risk should consider the use of stab vests or other protective equipment
Working within certain geographical areas or trouble spots can be high risk, such as poor or run down council estates and would subsequently require safety measures to be in place.
Dealing with certain high risk individuals, such as potentially violent or aggressive members of the public, drug users or dealers, or mentally ill individuals should also raise the question if PPE is required.
Dealing with frustrated and disappointed customers (e.g. customers unhappy with the service your or your partner organisation has provided), working late, evicting people from their homes, securing or protecting property, events or people, are all professional responsibilities that certainly warrant the need for stab vests.
However, corporate health & safety laws have recently been rewritten in a number of countries around the world, in order to protect those who serve and risk their lives for others. This fact has lead to the re-writing of risk assessments everywhere and health and safety managers and directors get more and more under pressure to make the right decisions when it comes to issuing personal protective equipment and clothing to domestic frontline professionals.
Sadly there is this so popular argument against stab vests I have personally come across so many times. How will professionals wearing stab vests be seen by the public when they start walking around in body armour.
Well, I fully agree with the fact that 'perception' is certainly one of the most important issues within personal safety, and I also very much agree with the fact that overt stab vests can often be perceived as very confrontational, aggressive or authoritative, especially when dealing with intoxicated members of the public or those who seriously dislike authority, your organisation or presence to begin with.
Yes, frontline employees dealing with the general public should be doing their utmost to express themselves as peaceful ambassadors within their line of work at all times. 'Covert' stab vests allow them to use their positive personality, diplomacy and negotiation skills to defuse a situation, whilst still being protected just in case things get out of hand.
Of course, certain professionals e.g. Police, Trading Standards or Licensing Officers need to be seen as 'Authority', 'Law Enforcer' or visual deterrent, and in these case overt stab vests would be the correct choice.
Regardless of the outcome of any common risk assessment, the fact of the matter is that there is always an 'unknown' level of risk due to unforeseen circumstances. Ordinary risk assessments might often conclude in the verdict of 'low risk', however these often fairly basic risk assessments are based on technical facts or 'on-hand information' only, and as much as I appreciate them, they often do not go beyond these facts. A risk assessment dealing with the activity of a lone worker having to enter someone else's property or deal with customers or clients on a one-to-one basis can in my opinion, can in my humble opinion never result in ‘low risk’.
The moment a lone worker walks through someone's door or deals with often unfamiliar member of the public at another location, one can simply not know who else will be in the house or who else might enter the house at a later point. What activities have taken place prior to your visit? Who else might be going to interfere or engage in your conversation or argument at a later point? All of these issues and questions must have an impact on the need for stab vests.
What would you do if you were driving a car and your petrol light comes on, indicating you only have a small amount of petrol left? Would you start thinking: Will I make it home or not? Some people would be willing to take the risk in this situation. In the workplace though, in my view, it is the duty of the employer to not allow their employees to take unknown risks on their own accord without the provision of equipment and training to protect them should they make a mistake in their own judgement. 'Better safe than sorry' and 'Prevention is better than cure' are two great sayings, making more sense within corporate health & safety than anywhere else. I hope you would stop and get some fuel, because you want to be on the safe side. You might have made it, but you didn't want to take that risk. The bottom line is you cannot afford to break down. The fact that a lone workers activity involves a rather 'unknown risk' must urge key decision makers to remain at least open minded when it comes to body armour, stab vests, or additional training that can be made available.
Recommending stab vests does not mean at all I suggest you are in danger. I simply say that anyone will have a higher chance of remaining unharmed in the unlikely, but possible, case of something going wrong. Wearing personal protective equipment can be compared to wearing a seat belt when driving a car. We do not put the seat belt on because we believe we are going to have an accident today. We are simply acknowledging the fact that there is an exceptionally small chance that we might crash. Yet, if this chance becomes reality, we have increased the chance of survival by wearing a seat belt.
Posts
