Fun with new offices

May 03, 2006 20:01

The snagging issues started to appear with the new offices today. The biggest, from a health and safety point of view, is probably also the daftest ( Read more... )

new car, office move

Leave a comment

Comments 7

paranoidangel42 May 3 2006, 19:50:41 UTC
If that was me and my sister, being Not Impressed would automatically make one of those names the actual one. You could always call it SJ for short (J for second letters is really handy, cf CJ) and no-one would have to know what it was short for. Or indeed, if it was short for anything.

Reply

selenay936 May 4 2006, 19:33:34 UTC
*g* SJ does have a certain amount of appeal, but I suspect mainly because you mentioned CJ in the same sentence! :-))

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

selenay936 May 4 2006, 19:33:49 UTC
*snort*

Reply


gmul May 3 2006, 21:09:59 UTC
Replacement lights
What is it with architects? purple_peril has just moved in to a new office and it's vey clear whoever designed it or the building as a whole wasn't going to have to work there either. We have an architects practise as a client although I don't know any of their buildings to be able to judge if they suffer the same problem!

Reply

selenay936 May 4 2006, 19:35:29 UTC
I think architects have been over-influenced by the Blue Sky thinking concepts - big on ideas, not so hot on practicalities. These places are never designed by the people who have to work in them. They'd definitely be more sensible, with better facilities and more logic to the design if they were!

I turns out that we have no microwave anywhere in the building :-( Our 'kitchen' is just a room with vending machines. Not even a sink. Bleh.

Reply


The opposite problem here ... the_magician May 4 2006, 11:02:47 UTC
... in that we've got lots of big windows allowing in far too much daylight (anyone who sits near a window gets an LCD monitor to help them actually see anything on their screen!) and we've got ugly dangling flourescent lighting ... some people have asked about being able to switch off the lights above their desk and were told that facility management takes their tasks very seriously. That there's a legal minimum lux that needs to be present on a desk, and that if the lights above are off, then when the sun goes in, winter arrives, evening draws on etc. that the lighting may be below the minimum level for someone on that strip of (switched off) lighting. So we're stuck with the lights on.

Still, it's a gorgeous day out there!

Reply

Re: The opposite problem here ... selenay936 May 4 2006, 19:37:37 UTC
I hadn't realised how annoying the opposite problem could be! Obviously none of these facilities guys think through what it will be like for people working in these offices :-( Otherwise everything would be much more sensible.

You'd think having the correct lighting levels available, and it be your choice as to what you use, would satisfy health and safety, wouldn't you?

But I got to spend plenty of time looking out of the window at the gorgeous day :-)

Reply


Leave a comment

Up