The Janitors' Closet

Reduced Vacuuming Impacts IAQ

Development of chronic lung diseases, such as asthma, can to some extent stem from poor indoor air quality, which in turn can be caused by a lack of frequent vacuuming, according to an article by BJ Mandelstam in Cleanlink.

"The largest source of indoor air pollution is from the common dust mite. In 1993, John W. Maunder, Ph.D., director of the Medical Entomology Center at the University of Cambridge, United Kingdom, published a paper entitled “Carpets, House Dust Mites and Asthma” in which he states, “There is no longer room for serious doubt about the dominant role of the house dust mite in both the initial induction of asthma and in the subsequent triggering of wheezy attacks.”

"Asthmatics are not allergic to living mites but to the airborne feces of mites and, to a much lesser extent, to dead mites. Dr. Maunder states that although living mites are difficult to remove from carpet, their feces are readily removed from carpets by proper cleaning.

“'A carpet regularly cleaned will not and cannot contain enough allergen to affect people. The proper maintenance of carpet completely prevents trouble from that source,' he writes."

We monitor our clients' indoor air quality, using a hand-held airborne particle counter, which measures the number of particles, in the size range of most allergens, per liter of air.  We do find that, in fairly tightly sealed buildings, we can greatly improve IAQ in those facilities that we are cleaning (and vacuuming) five nights per week; we tend to have little impact in those facilities that, for budget reasons, we only clean once or twice per week.

A questionable trade off: saving a bit on the janitorial service, in exchange for a less healthy workforce.

Perhaps just dirty-up the clean spot...

"Your strangest cleaning job" was this morning's request from one of my favorite industry blogs.  Just had to submit the following:

"Years ago, shortly after I'd started in the industry, I got a call from an apartment manager. Seems that he'd had an elderly tenant, smoking in bed, set himself afire. Tenant staggered into the living room, and expired in the middle of the living room carpet.
    The apartment manager, being cost conscious, replaced just the burned part of the carpet. Seems that the widow, still living in the apartment, experienced pangs of loss whenever walking through her living room, past old Harry's outline - the replaced chunk of carpet was a good match, but was cleaner than the existing.
    So the apartment manager wanted us to either clean the old carpet, or dirty up the new carpet, to match, and hide Harry's outline - as a benefit to the widow.
    Haven't worked for any apartment managers since."

And don't much intend to.

"Sears suffers as it skimps on stores"

Good article on the economic impact of deferred maintenance in today's Wall Street Journal.  Miguel Bustillo's piece contrasts traditional chain store annual maintenance spending of $6.00 to $8.00 per square foot with Sears current level, about $1.90; he ties maintenance spending levels to Sears steady decline in sales since 2005.  ("No one really comes here anymore", said the only customer to be found at the Sears store visited.)

The article does not specifically mention janitorial floor maintenance, but that's got to be a major part of the store's deteriorating appearance; for several years, I've heard stories around the industry about draconian reductions in budget, burnishing schedules, and so on.  A tacky looking floor in a big box store is about the first thing you notice on walking in - and you tend to not walk in again.  That's why, in even our smaller accounts, we pretty much insist on including appropriate floor maintenance (periodic burnishing, as needed refinishing) in our cleaning package.  A worn floor shouts lack of maintenance, lack of cleaning and sanitation, and lack of caring management.

Maintain it, and they will come (customers, that is).

 

Ecolab Receives Green Excellence Award

Article today in bsmag.com about our longtime floor finish supplier, Ecolab, receiving the 2011 Green Excellence Award from the Coalition for Government Procurement.  We felt that way about Ecolab long before the Coalition noticed.

Frankly, we use Ecolab's ultra high solids floor finish for a variety of reasons: great appearance, low lifetime maintenance costs, safety (it's non-skid) and, not least, a small environmental footprint.  We find that, pared with our aggressive burnishing program, the finish lasts for years - as a matter of fact, since we've only been using it for seven or eight years, we really don't know how long it will last in a low to medium traffic environment, as we've not yet had to re-strip such a job that we'd put the Ecolab finish down on initially.

Typically, we do a monthly burnishing and a very rare scrub and top coat (generally less than annually); we almost never have to strip.  Stripping is costly (labor and product), and not good for the environment (lots of stuff to manufacture and ship, and lots of old stuff to put down the drain).  So besides the environmental benefit of very infrequent strips, and infrequent top-coating, we save money.  We pass that savings along to the client, generally including the inexpensive periodic burnishing, and the moderately expensive but rare top coating, in with our monthly bill.  And avoiding expensive strips.  The client facility is thus properly maintained, and looks great ongoing, at a reasonable cost.  Client and environment both benefit.  And we look a lot better than our "competition".

Musty odor from the wet carpet

Eye opening article in Cleanfax on the source of musty odors in recently flooded carpet.

We do a fair number of small emergency flood clean-up jobs (from plumbing problems, roof leaks, etc.) for our janitorial clients.  We can generally respond faster than a carpet cleaning firm, price more reasonably, and come in after-hours without the client having to be present.  (We generally include with our full service janitorial contracts the various periodic services - burnishing and refinishing, windows, carpet cleaning - that other janitorial services either charge extra for on do not do at all.  Thus we keep floor technicians on staff, properly trained and equipped, for tasks like extracting.)

For wet carpet, we generally extract, then bonnet to get residual moisture out, set up fans if needed, and apply a quat based disinfectant.  We've always assumed (as most folks seem to) that what we're preventing is mold growth, as evidenced by that musty odor a day or two later.  Turns out that mold takes ten days or more to become apparent (unless today's flood has re-activated existing but dormant mold).  What generally grows fast enough to be apparent in a day or two is bacteria - already present in the carpet (and most everywhere else), mostly harmless, but capable of producing the odor.

Both bacterial and mold require water to thrive, hence their growth after a flood.  Our disinfectant will kill both.  So, in using the disinfectant over the years, and assuming we've been combating mold, we've been doing the right thing for the wrong reason.

Better, I suppose, than the converse.

"Nudge" the client on periodic services

A while ago, I read "Nudge", by Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein, respectively an economist at the University of Chicago and a Law Professor at Harvard.  Essence of their argument (from my perspective) is that, by presenting information and options, and organizing decision making processes optimally, one can gently guide ("nudge") folks into decisions that will work better for them, without applying coercion.

I quote a lot of janitorial jobs where the current provider is doing as perfectly adequate job, according to his somewhat limited specs.  The facility might look less than optimal because the carpet needs to be cleaned, or the exterior windows washed, or the VCT burnished.  None of these "periodic" services are in the specs, but might well be available (for extra billing) should the customer call.  The customer doesn't call - perhaps he's too busy, or forgotten what's not in the specs - so the periodic work does not happen, the appearance of the building deteriorates, and the janitorial service forgoes a bit of extra revenue.  Because the facility looks less than ideal (because of the dirty carpet, etc.) I'm there bidding on the current fellow's job.

In quoting a job, we generally give the prospective client two prices - one for basic janitorial (but with our health, security and indoor air quality programs built in) and a second price for a bundle of "periodic" services - perhaps a bi-weekly burnishing, an as-needed scrub and refinish, a quarterly carpet cleaning, monthly windows, and a quarterly ceramic or stone floor scrub.  One monthly price for the bundle, rolled into the monthly bill.  We optimize the frequencies, so the carpet and tile are never trashed, and we can do more of a maintenance than a restorative job (cheaper for us, cheaper for the client).  We schedule the jobs well in advance, and can thus even out work loads.  The client gets the same bill every month, so doesn't have to budget, or get approved, extra charges.  The client never has to remember to call to order a job.  And the facility looks good ongoing.

We "nudge" (never require) the prospective client to take the "full service" package.  It's better for him - less hassle, better looking facility; it's better for us - for the same reasons.

"Why don't my floors look like Target?"

Good discussion from Building Service Contractors Association International (BSCAI) on clients who'd like their hard surface floors to look like well-maintained big box stores, such as Target.

Target puts money and effort into janitorial and floor maintenance - nightly burnishing (ultra high-speed buffing), periodic re-finishing, thoughtful chemical and vendor selection, and so on.  Proper maintenance shows.

We recommend, and include in our janitorial program, a full "periodic" package - burnishing, re-finishing, carpet cleaning, scrubbing ceramic and stone floors, and window washing - all on frequencies designed to give superior  appearance and long floor life at a reasonable cost.  Now and again, a client or prospect insists on a "bare-bones" approach, usually to his sorrow.

I've one building trades client who, several years ago, had us eleminate his monthly burnishing and as-needed refinishing package, to save money.  Now, whenever the corporate folks come into town, he calls us - usually at the last moment, so my floor techs are on overtime - to do a refinishing or a full strip.  Seems to happen about quarterly.  Refinishing, or stripping, is several times more costly than burnishing (burnishing hardens the finish - harder finish lasts longer, resulting in less re-finishing).  He's paying me more now, annually, for a "do not maintain - instead restore occasionally" system than he was for his old maintenance program, and not keeping consistent good appearance.

One of the comments, by Curtis Elliot, in BSCAI's discussion summarizes: "So, in answer to the question of "Why don't my hard-surface floors look like Target???"  The client must often only look in the mirror to find the answer."

Sometimes it takes a while...

Months ago, I quoted a mid-sized pediatric clinic.  The pediatrician I spoke with allowed that her partners preferred contracting with an individual, as opposed to a "business", in order to save money.

She was concerned that the VCT (90% of the facility) looks a bit dull, even though her "service" is stripping every couple of months (at extra charge) - probably because he doesn't own a burnisher.  I'll
bet if she added the stripping charges to her monthly fee, she'd find out that she's been paying more than a legitimate service would charge her to clean AND periodically burnish.

She was also concerned about the building's heavy dust load, but thinks it's unavoidable, because Arizona "is a dusty place".  Which it is. 

A quick look in the janitor closet revealed a dust-mop (filthy, as always) rather than a hard-floor vacuum, a string mop rather than microfiber, and a feather duster (kind of ratty) rather than microfiber wipes.  What with Arizona being a dusty place and all, you'd think it would be a good idea to work a bit on removing the dust from the building, instead of just recirculating it.

You'd also think that a place treating little kids would have some concern for the health of the kids.  But perhaps working to keep the airborne allergens and pathogens circulating in the building keeps the kids coughing, and business returning... 

Finally, you'd think that a firm subjected to various regulatory agencies would want to have the chemical bottles properly labeled, and an MSDS book on hand (both fineable OSHA violations), and maybe even a decent touch-point sanitizer available.  But not in this janitor closet.

It's been about eight months; finally got a call to begin service.  They've been putting up with quite inferior service for all that time, and their patients have been living with a less than satisfactory indoor environment.  I'm interested to see the janitor closet when I drop by to pick up the keys, and to compare Indoor Air Quality readings after a few weeks proper cleaning.

Include the carpet cleaning and even the window washing

Got a call from a former client yesterday, wondering if we could help him out within a very tight budget.

He'd cancelled us during the downturn a couple of years ago, saying he couldn't afford even the several   hundred dollars per month we'd charged him (we're a janitorial and building maintenance business in Phoenix AZ).  It's a several thousand square foot facility, the office and restroom space of a warehousing oppertion.  We'd cleaned it once per week, and included monthly exterior windows, a monthly burnish and an as-needed refinish on the vinyl, and a semi-annual carpet cleaning.  His folks are doing a quickie on the janitorial (you wouldn't want to use the restrooms), and none of the periodics (floors and windows).

The carpet is bad enough that he's gradually added entry mats over the months.  Originally he just had treated mats properly placed at the entries; now he has 10' treated runners, eight or ten of them, scattered around the traffic paths to cover the discolored carpet.

I (none too gently) pointed out that his mat company, in cleaning and replacing those extra runners weekly, was likely charging him more per month for just the extra runners than we had charged him (and will again) for a full cleaning program, including carpet cleaning.

On the other hand, with the windows uncleaned in a couple of years (and doubtless the light fixtures not dusted in the same period), his office was dim enough that one didn't see a lot of the dirt.

Savings through group re-lamping

"Spot vs. Group Relamping: an Economic Comparison", from Aircycle in Maintenance Strategies, presents pertinent information on the higher overall cost due to the higher labor costs of spot re-lamping (replacing  fluorescent bulbs one-at-a-time as they burn out), as compared to group re-lamping (replacing all bulbs at, in the article's example, 70% of the bulb's rated life, and then replacing as needed the few bulbs that do burn out).

Other benefits mentioned but not quantified are the decreased illumination of a bulb toward the end of its life (or, put another way, less light produced per dollar sent to the power company), and a better chance of matching existing lamps (color temperature, etc.).

Not mentioned is ease of spotting questionable ballasts in group re-lamping.  Many fewer bulb replacements after a group re-lamping allows one to keep track of which fixtures require new bulbs; repeated new bulbs in a given fixture indicates a fixture, not a bulb, problem.

Fits in with our philosophy of building various periodic services into our ongoing janitorial package, and at the same time doing our best to educate our customer (we're a janitorial service in Phoenix AZ). 

A bit about us:

My firm, CBN Building Maintenance, provides commercial cleaning services in Phoenix AZ and the wider metro area.  We've been in business since 1974; hold the BBB's A-plus rating; and have long been in the forefront of the industry in environmentally sensitive cleaning for health, safety and security.  Our program can generally improve Indoor Air Quality, in the size range of most allergens, by a factor of 50%, as reflected in our ongoing IAQ sampling.  We also furnish Green Seal certified recycled restroom paper products and janitorial supplies.