The safety gods

Of course you should put human beings before possessions Zany. No one has or would argue any differently.

On the contrary Zany. I have told you what the standard advice in respect of fire is - employees should only fight the fire if they are certain they are not endangering themselves or others and that if in doubt get out. It’s putting people above possessions.

With respect I think it might be sensible for you to calm down a little, maybe eat a little humble pie and then reread the thread.

The points of substance you have made seem to be t
1) it is ridiculous that “the authorities” perform checks on fire safety compliance on buildings with public access
2) it is ridiculous that you should be expected to hold fire extinguishers
3) it is ridiculous that employers should hold a responsibility for ensuring as far as reasonably possible that their employees can perform a task at work safely.

I have to say I disagree with you on all three.

The companies checking your fire equipment are presumably doing that on behalf of the authorities (to be fair could be on behalf of insurers). They want an independent check as some, by no means all, business owners and employers may otherwise be tempted to cut corners or may not understand the rules. You seem to think that’s ridiculous. I disagree. I think we need to prioritise people over possessions and that seems proportionate to me.

Well clearly you are not really aware of ALARP and the body of case law behind it that actually comes NOT originally from the government but actually the courts holding a government body (the then NCB) to account.vis a vis the common law of tort.

Put simply, As Low As Reasonable Practicable means everyone should take measures to improve safety until the net effort/cost of such is disproportionate to the net gain.

Typically it means taking a view both on the value of a life and the degree to which non action is putting such live(s) at risk. HSE do give a lot of guidance .  An example:

www.hse.gov.uk/foi/internalops/hid_circs/permissioning/spc_perm_37/

I'm going to leave this thread Steve. I have found the reaction of posters on here upsetting. The assumption that if you question the amount of unnecessary checks must mean you don't mind people dying in your employ was shocking. 

The citing of a company that breached the rules or an employee who died due to neglect is IMO no different to saying because a Muslim killed people so should assume all Muslims are like that. 

I know how difficult it is to assess everything from what is safe to what constitutes reasonable access for the disabled. I have been told conflicting things by various government officials who also struggle to interpret the word reasonable. 
I'll leave it there. 

Its difficult Fire regulation used to be a set of rules, but this lead to some premises finding it impossible to meet them. Now its much more vague, but that leaves it open to interpretation. Most of the time its just easier to spend the money and do as is "suggested" 
by example. At one site where there are two fire escapes, one fire officer said we should have signs showing  people that,  and pointing both ways to the fire exits. The next told us that in a panic situation this would be confusing and we should take them down. 
So we had removeable signs made so we could replace and remove according to instruction. 
One government official told us our accident book was suspicious as nothing was recorded and we should record even minor grazes to show it was being filled in. 
The next told us it was a complete waste of her time reading through pages of Man bumped head, no action taken. Child tripped, cool bag applied to knee. 

(Incidentally in 17 years of trading we have had approx 860,000 visitors and nothing more serious than a broken wrist. And no incidents among staff at all.
I'm just not evil enough.

Its an endless round of people justifying their existence. 
They are not all bad we have some very helpful ones who give good advice, we have even been approached by ROSPA to help them write the rules after I met a safety officer who liked our methodology. 

Then you have crazy stuff like the new member of staff who worked for 3 weeks then disappeared, declined all calls and didn't answer emails. Who is still apparently according to advice I have from ACAS entitled to a weeks notice with pay and holiday. 
Mad but easier to pay it than fight. 
Pity the poor workers and their evil bosses.