Posted By Brenda H Think I know where i'm going with this one, but thought I would sound you out. We have an individual who is partially deaf, has cerebal palsy & asthma, who wants to be a fire marshal. I'm not sure if a PEEP has been carried out as part of the generaly fire RA. What are your thoughts on someone with these health problems being a marshal? The individual has confirmed that previously they have walked back into a building when the alarms were still sounding as they didn't hear them. What I don't want to do is increase the individuals personal any more than that of others Any thoughts?

Posted By Ashley Wood I disagree, this person would be at risk and so would the fire fighters life who has to go into the building to rescue them. We all forget that a drill and the real thing are totally different. What if the building has smoke building up and this person develops breathing difficulties, what if someone falls down and injures themselves and is calling for assistance, this person may not hear them and can not tell the fire service where they are. NO, this would not be wise. I am all for people volunteering, but this has serious implications. This is not about disability discrimination its about common sense. One area that people often forget is the need to have a senior marshal who's job it is to report to the senior fire officer when all other wardens have reported in that there areas are clear or otherwise. This person does not sweep an area but remains outside. What about this job for this person?

Posted By Tabs "this person would be at risk" What do you base this statement on? Have you met the person, and have you assessed the feasibility of an aid (such as a flashing light in the office as well as a sounder?). We should be very careful about being so definitive about people when all we have is a couple of lines of general description. I am not asthmatic, but a couple of lungfuls of smoke would do me in too. The DDA says that "reasonable adjustment" should be made - adding a flashing light or vibrating pager is a very reasonable adjustment. If the CP is a big issue to mobility, there may be an argument for saying no, but if it is mild and doesn't affect them too much, then why not let this individual feel useful and equal?

Posted By Ashley Wood Sorry, to many if's and butt's for me. As I said before, this is not about discrimination it is about the safety of the person, the other staff and visitors and attending fire crews. You could always ask the person to do a little test involving an imaginary emergency scenario? If they can do it without any problems then fine make them a warden, but if they can not that's the end of the matter. Do not make excuses for them if they can not do the job and feel sympathy for their disabilities. It could cost them or someone else's life if they are not up to it. Remember it is not just a question of sweeping a building, they are to assist the safe evacuation and this may include an injured person.

Posted By Pete48 1. This volunteer already works in the building or office? 2. Does this volunteer need special assistance in case of emergency? If so, then being a front line warden warden MAY not be practicable for their own safety and that of others. But they might for example work with their helper who could be a fore warden. 3. If they do not need special help, then exactly what are the reasons for denying them the chance to be a part of the team? 4. Remember none of us know how any of us will respond to the real emergency, irrespective of our everyday abilities. 5. Discrimination and inequality is often not wilful nor intended; but is just as real, nonetheless. 6. I could not discount this offer simply due to the reported medical conditions. 7. I agree wholeheartedly with others who have said, see the person not the disability.

Posted By Robert K Lewis Then again perhaps the role allocated should not be one of clearing areas but about Evacuation Point Control. These are two separate functions within any Fire etc evacuation plan. Bob