Body Armour - Why?

In a world, dominated by a growing lack ofpublic or those who seriously dislike authority,
respect, appropriate solutions are required. A lackyour organisation or presence to begin with. For
of inadequate personal safety measures can putme, lone workers dealing with the public should be
a lone worker or frontline operative atdoing their utmost to express themselves as
unnecessary risk, and cause unacceptable injurypeaceful ambassadors within their line of work.
or harm. Body armour and stab vests haveOnly covert body armour allow them to do
therefore regrettably become a necessity within aexactly that, whilst still being protected.
number of domestic frontline professions.The fact of the matter is that there is always an
In 2003 the UK's Health and Safety Laboratory'unknown' level of risk due to unforeseen
developed 18 case studies and approached overcircumstances. Ordinary risk assessments might
400 organisations of various sizes and across aoften conclude in the verdict of 'low risk',
range of different occupations. Very detailedhowever these often very basic risk
questionnaires were sent and interviews wereassessments are based on technical facts or
conducted by the HSL with the selected'on-hand information' only, and as much as I
organisations and the information which theyappreciate them, they often do not go beyond
provided formed the basis of these widelythese facts. A risk assessment dealing with the
respected case studies.activity of a lone worker having to enter
The outcome is of great relevance to thesomeone else's property or deal with customers
question: 'Body Armour - Why?' The main risksor clients on a one-to-one basis can in my opinion,
areas highlighted by the HSL are as follows:never ever result in low risk. The moment a lone
- Visiting people in their home or office to enforceworker walks through someone's door or deals
laws and regulations, police the system or havingwith often unfamiliar members of the public at
to give bad news.another location, one can simply not know who
- Certain geographical areas or trouble spots areelse will be in the house, who else might enter the
high risk, such as poor or run down councilhouse at a later point, what activities have taken
estates.place prior to your colleagues visit or who else
- Dealing with certain high risk individuals, such asmight be going to interfere or engage in their
potentially violent or aggressive members of theconversation or argument at a later point.
public, drug users or dealers, or mentally illIf you were driving a car and your petrol light
individuals.comes on, indicating you only have a small
- Dealing with frustrated and disappointedamount of petrol left. What would you do? Would
customers (e.g. customers unhappy with theyou start thinking: Will I make it home or not?
service your organisation has provided)Some people would be willing to take the risk in
- Working late at night.this situation. In the workplace though, in my
- Evicting people from their home.view, it is the duty of the employer to not allow
- Visiting clients in unfamiliar industrial and domestictheir employees to take unknown risks of their
premises.own accord without the provision of equipment
- Visiting unoccupied buildings.and training to protect them should they make a
Several more reasons can be highlighted, makingmistake in their own judgement. 'Better safe than
a decision not to issue potentially life saving bodysorry' and 'Prevention is better than cure' are two
armour or stab vests even more controversial.great sayings, making more sense within
Corporate manslaughter and corporate homicidecorporate health & safety than anywhere
laws as well as health & safety regulationselse. I hope you would stop and get some fuel,
have been rewritten in countries around thebecause you want to be on the safe side. You
world, in order to protect those who serve andmight have made it, but you didn't want to take
risk their lives for others. The high cost of facingthat risk. The bottom line is you cannot afford to
potential legal action after a fatal or non-fatalbreak down. The fact that a lone workers activity
incident and the cost of injured employees takinginvolves a rather 'unknown risk' must urge key
time off would outweigh the one-off cost ofdecision makers to remain at least open minded
body armour. Assaults on personnel who are notwhen it comes to body armour or additional lone
wearing protective clothing also create badworker safety training that can be made available.
publicity for the Authority concerned, not toRecommending body armour does not mean we
mention the welfare of the person involved andsuggest you are in danger, we simply say that
operational problems resulting from the injuredyou will have a higher chance of remaining
staff being unable to work.unharmed in the unlikely, but possible, case of
Based on my professional experience, the mostsomething going wrong. Wearing personal
popular argument against body armour I haveprotective equipment can be compared to
come across, is the concern about how it mightwearing a seat belt when driving a car. We do not
be seen by the public when frontline employeesput the seat belt on because we believe we are
start walking around in body armour. Yes,going to have an accident today. We are simply
'perception' is one of the most important issuesacknowledging the fact that there is an
within personal safety, and I very much agreeexceptionally small chance that we might crash.
with the fact that overt body armour can oftenYet, if this chance becomes reality, you have
be perceived as very confrontational, especiallyincreased the chance of survival by wearing a
when dealing with intoxicated members of theseat belt.