Posted By Anthony Edwards
Robert,

I would suggest that the incident be investigated. Your Fire Risk Assessment reviewed. Difficult to say if the emergency services should have been called as it would be dependant on where the fire was, and what caused it.

It would have made practical sense to evacuate (IMO) and log this as a fire evacuation to ensure your laid down procedures are followed.

Tony

Re

Posted By David Passmore
As you stated Robert, the fire was small and contained, however, without more detail, the context of 'small' is difficult to define.

On the face of it, the action taken seemed reasonable and appropriate and I would suspect an investigation into the cause of the fire would be forthcoming with action taken to prevent a similar occurrence.

From experience, some 'small' fires can activate smoke alarms which can in turn, automatically signal a response from the fire services (obviously depending on the system). Overheating drive belts were a big problem in my circumstances - even though no fire as such occurred - the smoke would activate the alarm system.

Due to the ambiguity as to whether the fire services should have been called to the incident, it would seem some review of policy and procedures (including training if deemed necessary)should be considered.

Obviously, without knowing the nature or risks of your workplace, any procedures you decide to adopt (if required) would need to be relevant proportionate to the risk.

DP

Posted By Phil
Hello Robert,

I think contacting the Fire Service everytime a fire extinguisher is used in the UK could block up phone lines to an already busy service and could put more lives at risk.

I would suggest that this internal issue is dealt with internally. Obviously having very limited info at this point, I don't want to state the obvious.
I think you and your colleagues should view the incident as opportunity to improve your systems as clearly there is some confusion and risks are not properly controlled.
I would certainly revisit your fire risk assessments during a thorough investigation to confirm how the fire started in the first place.
I think awareness training is required or a refresher course, with clearly defined procedures being communicated.
Using a extinguisher to control a very small fire is a text book example and the person who took action should be praised.
Very small fires in areas with no flammable substances should be dealt with this way, but only training and defined procedures will allow the employee to assess the situation and risks before they attempt to extinguish the fire.
A decision on what point you do evacuate the building would have to be defined and communicated to all employees.
I do find comments like "disrupt production" as the main concern in the event of a fire or fire evacuation very concerning, considering such a large percentage of companies never re-open after a major fire.
I have experienced comments like this and just think this is why we all work in the Health and Safety Profession - managing, providing guidance, advising and saving lives!

Best regards,

Phil

Posted By TBC
I agree with the previous postings the fire was dealt with effectively - the Fire and Rescue Service has better things to do than chase around the streets with lights flashing and two-tones going placing lives at risk. I had a colleague (and friend) killed going to what turned out to be a false alarm with good intent once. The engine overturned after striking a pavement whilst avoiding a car.

Posted By TonyB
Hi Robert,

I tend to agree with the last response. I don't think the fire brigade should have been called, but the alarm should have been sounded. If that automatically calls the fire brigade then so be it.

First rule when discovering a fire - raise the alarm BEFORE attempting to tackle the fire. Second rule only tackle the fire if you have been suitable trained (i.e. how to select and use a fire extinguisher) and you believe it is safe to do so.

The only possible exception would be doing something like hot work - when minor fires are foreseeable as part of the process and a suitable risk assessment has been undertaken.

Would we be having this discussion if the fire hadn't been controlled and the whole site had burnt down or worse someone had died? I think not. It would be all the individuals fault for not raising the alarm first!

Given the numerous threads on minor fires and use of extinghisters I'm intreaged to know why people are so 'vocal' about them. Good idea for a new thread!!

All the best,

TonyB.

Posted By Richard Hammer
Firstly the answer is defo NO.

What would be interesting is your evacuation strategy.

What type of evacuation have you in place?? 2 stage, where the detector activated giving you (security who are trained)time to investigate and which where the small fire was tackled, which prevented full evac and disruption to production ??

Did any detectors get activated or was it identified by a staff member and extinguished before setting fire alarm system off??

I would do a investigation in reasons why fire started, how long, who, why and when and if new procedures will improve things and adjust emergency plan FRA accordingly.

Posted By Richard Hammer
Ron, I could not disagree with you more. Firstly the F&RS would not take a dim view, as they know through experience how people respond to the threat of fire in many different ways, human behaviour is a complex thing. If you saw a small fire and had to walk past an extinguisher to get to the MCP, would you use the extinguisher first (if trained I would say yes, if not then no).

To me the guy may well be very trained, hence the confidence to tackle the small fire.

Your rules you state are generic advice on what to do in event of fire, but can not always be practical to follow giving the situation you may be in.

As for reprimanding the fellow for acting swiftly and direct in reducing a potential incident to escalate and therefore put others in danger and remove the requirement for the F&RS to be called???????? I cannot believe what a read sometimes, you should read the gone to far thread.

Posted By Richard Hammer
Put others at risk??? by not letting the fire develop and spread, by containing the fire.

What makes you think they don't have a policy to fight the fire if safe to do so.

Obviously we don't know the exact details apart from very small flames and the fire was extinguished using a extinguisher which only have enough content to extinguish small fire

My main concern would be why the fire started in the first place, what was the ignition. Then to assess that the evacuation strategy would have kicked in if fire was not controlled. Surely this would focus your investigation rather than this 'rules are rules' attitude and to discipline the fellow.

Can you imagine what that would do to the workforce??? 5 steps forward and 50 back I would think.

Posted By Pete48
Richard, but you haven't answered my question. I said what if he hadn't been able to control the fire and the safety plan directed him to other actions which he knowingly failed to follow?
I accept all your points and agree with the principle enshrined in your response, I am just puzzled by your dismissal of any possibility of discipline as over the top rubbish.

Posted By Richard Hammer
I feel you are missing the point with this incident.

If the person instigated the fire/ignition in the first place due to not following guidelines or being negligent. If he knowingly put others at risk by just leaving the area without activating the evacuation process, or after the incident did not report to his/her supervisor and whatever the procedure is at the workplace, then yes I would also look into reprimanding to guy through re-training/education and a slap wrist.

But if the person was working and carrying out their duties in a safe manner, identified the fire and extinguished it out prior to it developing and putting others at risk. If the MCP was further away than the extinguisher, if they had the appropriate training and the incident was reported straight after. I would in no way even consider reprimanding the person.

If anything the training has worked wonders in how they dealt with it.

What is your view?

Posted By Frank E. Davidson
Did he fill out a risk assessment before tackling the inferno? ;-)

Posted By Messy Shaw
With regards to whether the Brigade should have been called, I suggest it's not as easy as simply saying yes or no.

A small fire in an office (the typical waste bin scenario) is easily dealt with on site, even by staff with little or no training. The Brigade are clearly not required in this example

A small fire in a building where such fires are anticipated and measures are in place (like fire watching & the plastic factory as mentioned earlier) - again, the staff should be trained to deal and make the informed decision whether to call 999.

However, perhaps consider a high life risk environment:- a care home at night with say 20 punters and two staff (only one being wakeful).

I would suggest that any fire - however small- should be followed by a 999 call, even if already dealt with. If that fact is made known to the Brigade, they will (should) send less fire crews to merely to check the staff's actions have been satisfactory & the situation is safe.

It is likely that staff in such circumstances will have lots on their plate dealing with residents, even if there has been a very small fire & no evacuation, Therefore to assume that staff will have time to adequately check a fire is extinguished is perhaps naive.

For instance, evacuating such a building a night with the often minimal staff is always going to be problematic. So to have a procedure where the fire service check that the building is safe after every fire (esp at night)is a reasonable control measure.

Whilst many will grumble about false fire alarms callouts, it would be difficult for any fire authority to complain if they've been called after such a fire as it is their statutory to attend.

As so is often the case, the emergency plan is wholly dependent on the circumstances and risks involved, as determined by the FRA. I feel for the higher risks, a 'call 999 procedure' can be fully justified.