Posted By Simonh
We have recently started sending staff on fire marshall training courses and they were instructed on the day that it is acceptable to fight small fires if they feel safe to do so. Although as an organisation we actively discourage this practise in favour of getting all staff out safely and letting the fire brigade deal with saving the premises, the question about in-house fire fighting has been raised. They have all seen a film entitled "Front Room Fire 2" I believe, which they say demonstrates that they should have time to tackle a small fire. In response to this, I would like to show them the film of the Bradford City fire at valley Parade, which clearly shows just how quickly a fire can spread in reality. I have tried sourcing this at places like www.brebookshop.com who are out of stock, so would like to know if anyone out there can suggest either an alternative supplier, or lend me (short-term) a copy until I can source one. I will only need the video for @ 1 week to get to all our current fire marshalls, by the time we need to train more I hope to have sourced my own copy. I will obviously cover all postage costs and promise to take good care of it.

Posted By JayneAnne Ridgway
Hello Simonh

Our company was running some in-house fire safety training, and we asked our local fire brigade chief officer for a copy of the Bradford Fire Video, not only did he send us a DVD copy free of charge he also sent copies of other fire incidents. Maybe you could try your local Fire Brigade chief Officer.

Posted By Simonh
Thank you all for your responses. I shall follow up these leads.

Regards

Simon

Posted By Arran Linton - Smith
Is it now ethical to show a film, video or DVD of a traumatic incident which took place 20 years ago?

What I would question showing are the images of someone who was clearly burning to death in the film.

If that was a relative of mine, I would be concerned that this recording is still being shown, particularly if the consent of the family has not been recently sought.

Has Granada Learning Ltd reviewed the ethical aspects of distributing this film and has Bradford Football Club been recently consulted on this issue?

Posted By Trudy Sharp
From personal experience - I would urge caution in showing this film. I used to use it to train fire marshals - until one of the delegates got up and ran out of the room. It later transpired that one of the people in the footage was the delegate's gradfather - who was one of the 56 that didn't make it out. The chances of that happening again are very slim but I now present my points in a less graphic manner.

Posted By Brett Day

I waas taught and have passed on that fire extinguishers were there to aid your escape and nothing else.

Posted By shaun mckeever
Hi Frank

We have disagreed in the past about staff tackling fires and I am afraid I still take the position that I did before. I know you disagree but my view is that given the right training, there are circumstances where it is appropriate for properly trained staff to use the extinguishers provided to nip small fires in the bud before they become unmanageable and require professional intervention i.e. the fire brigade.

I have used the Bradford video as a training aid when giving training fire maarshals. I always advise delegates that the content of the video may be unpleasant and leave no doubt as to the reason why. I invite delegates to leave the room before the video is shown if they prefer. I believe there is value to showing the video because most people do not appreciate how quickly fire can develop, they do not appreciate how people behave in fire and they do not appreciate the causes of fire. Yes it has shock value but I have never had anyone say to me that they did not think it was of value to them. Normally I stop the video before the man is seen walking on fire.

Frank I know you disagree with staff tackling fires but if you take one end of the scale say a candle burning (or a similar size fire) and the other end say a whole room alight. Surely you would not object to a member of staff snuffing a candle out but of course neither you nor I would support a member of staff tackling a whole room fire. So somewhere between the two there is a point where we would draw the line. I get the impression that you would not even agree to someone snuffing a candle out. Correct me if I am wrong.

Posted By Frank Hallett
Good evening Shaun, Simon [sorry about hogging this] and all others.

Yes, I do continue to totally disagree with those who encourage unprotected and unsupported people who are, at best, novices [in that their training will be minimal - one day is the norme that employers will pay for - and almost certainly not include any realistic scenarios] in fire-fighting to attack a fire.

I do not say that no employee is ever to attack a fire though; what I try to prevent is the employer who allows an employee to attack a fire that should not have occurred and for which no other precaution is made but expecting employees to extinguish it alone and without adequate support.

If an employer expects an employee to attack a fire on their behalf; that employer cannot rely on terms such as "only if it's safe" without clearly defining in their Safety Policy, Operating Procedures AND fire training exactly what "safe" means - the questions in my earlier response were intended to highlight this need. Not only that, the employer cannot then rely solely upon that training without providing suitable resources to comply with MHSW Reg 8.

If a suitable and effectively imposed incident management procedure is in place, I am quite happy to support an employee tackling a fire. Trouble is, most employers who allow, encourage or imply that employees should attack fires quite simply do not provide the necessary means of ensuring that the fire responder is adequately safe.

I am continually amazed at the bizarre and fundamentally unsustainable concept of it being absolutely essential to train, supervise and support people to use work equipment with [relatively] minimal consequences if the operator fails to follow the SSoW developed from the RA, but those same people somehow seem to believe that an unsupported employee tackling a fire containing unknown materials that has started for an unknown reason is quite OK.

I also have grave reservations about the validity of any training that is not employer procedure specific. The apparently "one size fits all" of fire marshal/warden courses generally available appear to assume that all businesses have the same structure, risks, ways of responding, employees, processes and premises. Well, they don't!! Therefore there will always be a [normally hidden] training gap when these courses are used. The employer however rarely identifies this gap 'cos "they're professionals in fire training aren't they?"

I'm really going to bed now; it's been a fortnight of a week.

Pleasant dreams to all.

Frank Hallett

Posted By Frank Hallett
Thank you for the response Shaun.

Yes, I slept like the innocent babe that I am - with colic.

Frank hallett