The Lothian and Borders Fire and Rescue Service (LBFRS), the worlds first municipal Fire Brigade (Edinburgh Fire Brigade, 1824), currently serves approximately 890,000 people over 2,500 square miles in the South East of Scotland. They employ 1,114 staff across their 36 local fire stations and their administrative Headquarters based in Edinburgh.
The LBFRS provides both a proactive and reactive service to the community. Proactive work includes safety checks in the home and the workplace and a variety of training courses. Youth projects, school programmes and attendance by the LBFRS at local events are also an invaluable part of this work. The reactive work includes the traditional and highly visible roles of firefighting, road traffic accident management and rescue alongside the newly developed skills of advanced line rescue, urban search and rescue, Ship firefighting and activities related to environmental and terrorist risk.
Also, the LBFRS are the first Fire and Rescue Service to survey all their staff (whole population survey) using HSE’s Management Standards for Work-related Stress.
The LBFRS took part in a stress survey in 2004, which was completed by a local University. The results from this were inconclusive, but the experience highlighted the value of a whole population survey. In 2004 the organisation recognised that the large number of changes occurring at a national level (UK) in the Fire and Rescue Service could be having a detrimental impact on the well-being of staff.
The HSE Management Standards were not the only option available to LBFRS, with the Scottish ‘Work Positive’ approach also a possible option. Whilst both methods were praised, the LBFRS selected the HSE methodology for two reasons. Firstly, it was believed that the support available from HSE via the website would be extremely beneficial – the research documents and reports. Secondly, there are only eight Fire and Rescue Services in Scotland. This created a gamble in relation to future benchmarking, as it was unclear whether the other Services in Scotland would, or would not use, the Work Positive approach. The HSE approach was considered to be the preferred option because, potentially, it would enable future benchmarking against the other Fire and Rescue Services in the UK.
‘The support from the HSE site is quite outstanding’
Work-related stress can be perceived as a failure of management and rather than confront potential criticism many organisations may shy from potential negative exposure, particularly in the press. The LBFRS Joint Fire and Rescue Board [elected representatives], senior managers and trade unions (Fire Brigades Union and UNISON) debated, honestly, the subject and collectively accepted the need to protect their employee population and members from this form of psychosocial workplace hazard.
‘Each group had, essentially, their own benevolent reasons to gauge the levels of work related stress within the organisation to ensure the wellbeing of employees’
This collective reasoning led to a collective ‘buy in’ which, had there been any resistance, would have resulted in failure to secure competent results. By communicating and involving all key stakeholder groups the process was therefore endorsed and was given the appropriate resource
Existing working groups (including the Revitalising Health and Safety Group) were utilised to form a steering group for implementing the Management Standards initiative. A number of stakeholders were involved in these groups, including the Chief Fire Officer, The Assistant Chief Fire Officer, Trades Union, Health and Safety, Occupational Health, FRS Medical Adviser and Human Resources.
Training on work-related stress was provided for all senior managers including the Chief Fire Officer and trade union officials. The attendance of the most senior people within the organisation gave weight to the whole process and confirmed its relevance and the commitment of senior management. This was delivered in the form of a one-day course at the FRS training facilities. The Health and Safety Manager, the FRS Medical Advisor, Clinical Psychologists and Occupational Psychologists all assisted in the delivery of the training and a number of workshops. This assisted with the wider buy-in from the organisation; recognition that trade union and senior management collaboration.
‘Once they had the [stress] course it was almost automatic buy-in and perceptions were challenged and major wellbeing issues discussed’. All understood that work-related mental ill health can be managed out of an organisation’
Other training and support included providing every manager (Operational staff - Crew, Watch, Group and Brigade Manager, Non Operational staff – all service delivery managers and functional managers) with HSE’s ‘Real Solutions, Real People’ work-related stress packs. The packs also included a CD produced by the LBFRS with additional resources on, including the presentation slides from the training course. An e-learning module on work-related stress was also available to staff.
Throughout the process the FBU and Unison were kept informed and communication began with all staff very early on, using existing seminars and e-mail. The Health and Safety (H&S) Team at LBFRS identified that there was a stigma attached to the term ‘stress’ within the Service. In order to help overcome this a comprehensive campaign of communicating to all staff was seen as essential.
Communication with staff included using existing seminars to discuss work-related stress and post-traumatic stress disorder. The minutes from the Health and Safety Working Group meetings were also available to staff.
Existing data was gathered in order to assist with identifying the scale and extent of stress as an issue. This data included sickness absence data; return to work data and previous surveys conducted on well-being and stress.
The Management Standards Indicator Tool was adopted in order to conduct a whole population survey. Prior to the distribution of questionnaire, the LBFRS promoted the survey and raised awareness by using their ‘in house’ magazine. The subject was raised as business at all management meetings with managers directed to bring the survey to the attention of all their staff. E-mails were also sent to staff (all users), supported by trade union officials, as an additional method to raise awareness about the survey.
Paper copies of questionnaires were sent to all employees (both uniformed and non uniformed) at their home addresses. This approach was favoured in an attempt to get a good response rate. It was thought that ‘questionnaire fatigue’ might result in employees not completing the questionnaires if they were sent to email addresses or given out at work. Each member of staff was sent an envelope which included:
The response rate for the survey was 39%, and although not ideal, this was relatively positive, as it was higher than a number of other surveys used by LBFRS.
The data entry [1] was relatively human resource intensive and due to confidentiality issues, two support staff in the Human Resource department were utilised to assist with this task, thus ensuring confidentiality. The analysis of the returns was then relatively easy by using the HSE analysis tool.
The focus groups were conducted on a relatively large scale, including approximately one half [2] of the staff within the LBFRS. The groups were facilitated by Occupational Psychologists, Occupational Health Nurses and a Medical Advisor.
The results from the survey were used in order to help guide the focus group discussions. In some instances the key stressors for some groups had changed since the time of the survey. A feedback document will be produced and will be made available to staff via the Intranet, site safety reps and Watch Managers.
An action plan has been produced and a number of the goals have been achieved. A re-survey will be conducted in the near future in order to assist in the evaluation of the strategy. This will be a sample survey, rather than another whole population survey.
A significant amount of time was spent by the Health and Safety Manager on running the Management Standards process. Other time was needed from a variety of support staff (e.g. for data entry) and other senior staff (e.g. to assist with training) and the Health and Safety Team. Other external support was provided by Occupational Psychologists. The project cost in total was approximately £40,000 to £50,000, which is largely the cost associated with staff time. In relation to costs that did not include staff time the figure is closer to £10,000 to £15,000. The benefits of running the process did, however, far outweigh the costs.
‘The main gain was a reduction in harm to the employee population by confronting and managing work related stress. The resultant reduction in absence due to work related stress made the whole exercise financially very cost effective, making net fiscal savings over the period.’
The risk assessment process has not yet been completed in LBFRS; however sickness absence rates have reduced significantly. From a financial perspective, running the Management Standards has easily paid for itself several times over. This saving can be seen by money saved by employees not going on sick leave with stress alone. Then there are also unknown savings, such as those from civil litigation and increased efficiency of staff.
‘It’s [the Management Standards] helped us help people whilst saving public funds in terms of sickness absence due to stress ’
Another benefit is that the organisation now has a significantly higher awareness of issues surrounding mental ill health.
Some poignant quotes from LBFRS:
‘Our sickness absence rates have plummeted’
‘It [stress] is being de-stigmatised’
‘As a management method to remediate these hazards it really is a worthwhile exercise’
‘The HSE Standards themselves are excellent’
‘People are [now] more open at management meetings to speak about the subject of stress’
‘The HSE Management Standards are easy to use – by following the various steps an employer will easily identify the areas they need to address. They also set reasonable targets to achieve over the medium and long term. ’
Robert Allan led the Management Standards implementation at LBFRS and is happy to provide advice and support to staff at other Fire and Rescue Services who are running, or considering running, the approach.
Robert Hunter Allan, BA, Pg Dip, MSc CMIOSH
Lothian and Borders Fire and Rescue Service
0131 659 7230