Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Chris1357  
#1 Posted : 28 October 2010 21:25:14(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Chris1357

Safety protocol 'delayed' 7/7 fire crew at Aldgate http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11635865 The spin in the article title is that 'safety' has stopped brave fire fighters doing their duty. Reading on, we find that they are simply following sensible protocols to ensure their own safety, and the 'delay' was a matter of seconds. I thought the BBC was supposed to be unbiased? It's a pretty loaded headline if you ask me... worthy of a popular tabloid perhaps...
Canopener  
#2 Posted : 28 October 2010 21:32:14(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Canopener

I have to say that my first read of it, it appears to look reasonably balanced and unbiased to me! It doesn't appear to be the stuff of tabloid fame, nor do I sesnse any 'spin'! Sometimes 'safety' DOES stop things happening, and rightly so! Or perhaps they should have just blundered ontot he tracks without checking that the power was off; what do know?
Chris1357  
#3 Posted : 28 October 2010 21:35:35(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Chris1357

Hi Phil, Fair comment, and I agree the report is not bad. It's the headline they stuck on the top that denigrates 'health and safety' especially for those who don't take the time to read the article. Chris
Ron Hunter  
#4 Posted : 28 October 2010 23:10:08(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Ron Hunter

Fair point Chris, the headline is the attention grabber though. What alternative headline would we suggest?
messyshaw  
#5 Posted : 29 October 2010 00:29:57(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
messyshaw

The LFB do have a safety protocol which dictates actions by the first crews which arrive at such an incident (where terrorist action is suspected) It is far too complicated to go into now, but in essence if there's a few people who appear injured for reasons unknown, then the crew get to work as normal. However, if there's lots of punters injured and staggering about, then the LFB crews must stay distant and request (and wait) for a CBRN (Chemical, Biohazard Radiological, Nuclear) monitoring crew to arrive and ensure their environment is safe to enter The procedure was a joke when it was launched 5 years ago and front line fireifghters said it would never work in practice - they were right. As for the junior officers who appear to have implemented this ridiculous policy that morning, shame on them to to not have had the balls to make their own decisions rather than stick to a procedure that doesn't fit/work. I wonder who were they protecting by blindly adopting this plan? The public, their crew or their career?? Answers on a postcard please.......
johnmurray  
#6 Posted : 29 October 2010 07:57:59(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
johnmurray

ron hunter wrote:
Fair point Chris, the headline is the attention grabber though. What alternative headline would we suggest?
SELFISH FIREFIGHTERS PROTECT SELVES MORE DEATHS AVOIDED AS FIREFIGHTERS CHECK LETHAL CURRENT IS OFF STUPID NEWS REPORTER INFLATES STORY BY ATTENTION-GRABBING HEADLINE BBC GETS FACTS WRONG, AS USUAL BIASED BBC: NOTHING NEW TO SEE, MOVE-ON ?
Ron Hunter  
#7 Posted : 29 October 2010 10:10:51(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Ron Hunter

Ah -cynicism is alive and well! Good on you John. The upshot being that the article isn't in itself particularly newsworthy, and without the "spin" wouldn't have been worth reporting at all. As has been said before though, newspapers at least have the excuse that they have column inches to fill. BBC website doesn't have that excuse, but does in turn tend to feed the "redtops". Back to the 'responsible journalism' issue that Lord Young's Report failed to address. p.s. that pic. of Lord Young on the front page reminds me of one of the baddies in Stingray, but I can't place it (wasn't an Aquaphibian though, rather one of their agents who lived on land and spied on Marineville). I might be showing my age...........
RayRapp  
#8 Posted : 29 October 2010 10:21:48(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
RayRapp

I think the article is a lot about nothing, just a silly headline grabbing title. Having worked on the Underground I am aware the LFB are required to confirm that traction current has been discharged before entering a tunnel, - and for good reason. It is really more about getting the information to the right people and in good time. There have also been some other accounts where health and safety has delayed the emergency services, for instance, the possibility of secondary devices. Again, I think the truth is when in a desperate situation a delay of a few minutes seems more like hours...the emergency services did a splendid job considering the circumstances and they should be commended.
messyshaw  
#9 Posted : 30 October 2010 01:23:45(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
messyshaw

The delay was nothing to do with isolating traction current and only partially connected to the fear of a secondary device. They were following a poorly conceived procedure that it appears I am not allowed to talk about (my earlier post has been removed) despite details of this pan emergency service procedure being in the public domain. Many who I worked with when this procedure went live said it wouldn't work - It seems we were right
firesafety101  
#10 Posted : 30 October 2010 01:49:09(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
firesafety101

I wasn't there so didn't see what actually happened. I was retired from the fire brigade twenty years ago. What I will say is when I was in the brigade it was common for firemen to enter dangerous/hazardous situations when everybody else was on their way out. I personally on one occasion accessed a train on fire across an electrified track, that was still live. No problem to me and the rest of the attending crews at the time because that was our job. That was the nature of the job and unfortunately it has changed due to enforcement of strong health and safety rules and regs. I also attended bomb incidents, following the set procedures, but once the bomb has exploded casualties are there to be attended to and that is what we would do. It is because of this that I can't understand why the Fire and Rescue Services are so called when they are so reluctant to attempt rescues.
MEden380  
#11 Posted : 30 October 2010 07:49:13(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
MEden380

Chris I am also a retired Fire Fighter and saw a lot of changes in the last few years I was serving, notably the realisation that the HASWA actually included the emergency services as well. There have been a lot of changes to procedures within the fire service, not always well thought out, as Messyshaw has pointed out, but there is an old saying "fools rush in", I would rather see a live fire fighter than a so called dead hero. The Fire Fighters of the UK are some of the best and bravest in the world and always rally to the call when needed, so lets treat the Beebs headline for what it is, insignificant dribble written by a so called journalist who thinks walking down Brixton high street makes them a war correspondent
johnmurray  
#12 Posted : 30 October 2010 08:06:11(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
johnmurray

MEden380 wrote:
I would rather see a live fire fighter than a so called dead hero.
But you are not a BBC reporter. Dead heroes make better headlines than live firefighters. As was said: "I waited for confirmation that not only was the power off, but that trains had been halted on adjacent tracks because trains can bridge live rails to dead rails"
Bob Shillabeer  
#13 Posted : 30 October 2010 10:35:33(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Bob Shillabeer

I can see the headlines now, Firemen killed by electric shocks after racing onto the track before the power was off has meant the number of killed and serioussly injured has gone up by twenty after a team of fire fighters ignored safety rules. The leader of the team in question has been arrested and is facing criminal charges of manslaughter. Of course they were right to wait until confirmation from the proper people (not someone on the platform who is hardly likely to know if the power was off anyway) because injured fire men are not in a position to help those injured by the original incident.
RayRapp  
#14 Posted : 30 October 2010 11:00:01(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
RayRapp

Good comments Bob, spoken like a true railwayman.
Bob Shillabeer  
#15 Posted : 30 October 2010 11:42:42(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Bob Shillabeer

Hi Ray, It seems to me that before someone goes off and makes comments they need to understand what they are talking about. Having experienced at the sharp end of a very serious rail incident the problems that often arise I can speak with some knowledge of these type of incidents I believe I can speak with some knowledge and would not do so without giving the situation some thought. What I said could unfortunately become a reality if some of the views put forward in the press come to pass. In a situation such as the bombings there needs to be a calm and clear head used to decide when it is safe to enter an alien invironment as there is a true saying 'Only fools rush in'.
johnmurray  
#16 Posted : 30 October 2010 13:01:02(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
johnmurray

I suppose, really, that they could have been prosecuted anyway: No trackside ticket !
Bob Shillabeer  
#17 Posted : 30 October 2010 17:40:12(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Bob Shillabeer

Sorry Johnmurrey but your remark is quite out of taste with such a serious posting. This sort of comment should be brought to the attention of the moderators and barred. This is not a flipent topic that such remarks are posted to.
johnmurray  
#18 Posted : 30 October 2010 18:59:42(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
johnmurray

I am serious. Rail management have been dismissed because of that same safety breach. Railways are inherently dangerous unless you are in the train. The firefighters were right. The newspaper was not.
martinw  
#19 Posted : 30 October 2010 20:26:51(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
martinw

This is unusual on this forum, very big hitters who know what they are talking about(let me finish!), as they have decades of experience in fire and railways. Please do not let John Murray - pardon the pun - derail this topic. I for one remain seriously interested and when the contributors to this thread post, I take notice. Please keep this running. Best thread for a while.
Canopener  
#20 Posted : 30 October 2010 20:46:49(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Canopener

I am heartened to find that others find John posts as similarly tiresome as me! John, it's a shame that you can't make take the time and effort to make more thoughtful and considered contributions and you may find that posts aren't deleted half as often as they appear to be! Hopefully this post won't fall foul of the 'antagonism' rule, and be deleted by the mods!
firestar967  
#21 Posted : 30 October 2010 21:39:03(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

I fail to understand why you wouldn’t expect a delay in that sort of situation. You wouldn’t just jump in without a plan. The appliances are not close at hand that means that equipment is not readily available. Just consider what you would need in that environment, lighting units, cutting equipment, etc. If you did send the fire fighters in without the necessary equipment then you are wasting time. Then to send them in without any thought of their safety would be insanity. Even on a road traffic incident an assessment is carried out first (inner circle, outer circle, DRA), then a plan formulated for the safe removal of the casualty, the safety of the fire fighters and other emergency services.
NigelB  
#22 Posted : 31 October 2010 00:25:58(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
NigelB

Dear All As far as I'm aware, this was the first bombing of the tube that nearly simultaneously blew up three trains at once, in a relatively small geographical part of the rail and Underground network in London. While mayhem was going on under the streets of London, those outside the BMA building in Tavistock Square were subject to the horror of a bus exploding in their midst sending bits of bus and body parts all over the surrounding area. In the ensuing reaction, parts of the road network - which were already jammed thanks to rush hour traffic - had many thousands of people taking to the streets in the surrounding areas. Some media commentators reported that some people panicked as if these people had some how let down the English character of keeping a stiff upper lip in a crisis. Within a short while all the buses and tube trains in London were halted. I understand this caused some disruption to the daily lives of many Londoners and people in London. Oh yes, some in the emergency services personnel did react in a way that - in the cold light of day several years later - may have been unprofessional. I have no doubt some swore at fellow workers from different emergency services in frustration/panic/horror/nausea at what confronted them. I have no doubt that at the scene of each horror stricken site some things might have been done better. However sensationally picking up individual failings made on the day is somewhat misleading. During the period involved I was contracted to work for the infraco company Metronet, who were responsible for the trains and - with Tubelines - sent their emergency response teams to secure the trains and tunnels so the police could get access. I spoke with several of the people involved with the emergency response teams. They did not want to discuss the details of what they saw and neither did I want to hear them. However they were able to convey the atrocious working conditions - heat, stink, blood, loads of rats at certain points etc - to me. I did speak to some of the Metronet managers and operatives who were in their offices - like any other day - near a tube station where one of the trains blew up. They felt the explosion - did not know it was a bomb - but knew it was serious and ran, yes ran, out of their offices grabbing PPE as they went to the station to try and help with a problem they didn't know the details of. With ambulances stuck in traffic; communications in difficulties; police trying to get some control over the situation; the passengers, London Underground staff and emergency services at the four bomb sites doing their best and tens of thousands of people wandering around the surrounding streets, is it any wonder some mistakes were made, bits of the plan didn't work etc. My overriding memory that day was of an injured person on a mobile hospital bed being pushed by nurses, with an intravenous bag being held by a health worker with a doctor beside the bed running - all of them running - through the streets of London to get the person to hospital because ambulances were not available. I have the Metronet internal newspaper printed the following month and it is has a list of all the staff who attended the scenes on that day, each of whom was publicly thanked by the company for their efforts. The list is long. It contains rail workers, engineers, Directors, senior managers and health and safety advisers amongst others. This would be repeated with Tubelines, London Underground and many other organisations. So if we are going to react to the testimony of individuals on the trains blown up, then I suggest it would be helpful to keep a perspective about what everybody was trying to do on the day. The emergency services put a plan into action. Elements of it did not work properly because of the damage done by the bombs and the resulting difficulties in communication and having thousands of people turfed out onto the streets. As always, in the aftermath of the day's events reviews have taken place. Whether lessons have been learnt can only be seen the next time trains and buses are blown up in rush hour. In 7 days, London Underground was operating at over 90% capacity, if my memory serves me well. I actually think the response effort to this horrendous act of mass murder was remarkable. Not only from those who actually responded to the four bomb sites but also from the hundreds of thousands of people who were left stranded in the city that day. So as the questions are asked about whether more could have been done, yes it could have. Were mistakes made, yes quite a few. The point is that day is history. Nothing we do or say is going to change it. Yes we may learn of individual mistakes as the Coroner goes through the testimony. Learn the lessons by all means and many have been absorbed. However it would be appreciated if all the efforts made by all those people and professionals on the day were not denigrated as individual issues come to light. Some months the before the bombings I had met a young Polish women receptionist as I checked in at a hotel I use and subsequently saw her again a couple of times over a two month period. She had come to this country to study and learn English, which was already good. She was looking forward to the future and was killed in one of the trains as it blew up. Monika was her name and I recognised her picture in among those that were printed of the dead. Details given about her confirmed to me that she was one of those killed. She was 21 years old. So - like many others - I will take the memory of that day to my grave. I wasn't in London when it happened, thankfully. Nevertheless I have tremendous respect and appreciation for all those who saved lives and dealt with the all the consequences of that terrible day. I'm sorry not everybody could be saved but as I reviewed the photographs of the wreckage of the trains and the bus, it was a surprise to me that any people in the vicinity of the bombs survived. For many that did, it was the emergency services and medical staff who made a difference. Nigel
Bob Shillabeer  
#23 Posted : 31 October 2010 00:46:26(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Bob Shillabeer

Just back from the club, very nice evening thanks. But back to the topic. On the day of the incidents I was in the office just a few yards from the bus that was destroyed. What a fuss that caused, people were trying to see what was happening through great big plate glass windows and all congregated around these windows, some like goules, but each to thier own I suppose. Never the less it was a very worrying time for anyone. Just emagine, you are a fireman called to an alien environment to what you are normally used to and you are told that there are live lines that need to be isolated before you can venture onto it to do your job. This is very frustrating for most fire fighters and other emergency service personnel. But in the interest of enabling them to do thier work it must be safe for them to enter an alien environment, so individuals decide that they need confirmation as to that safe system, so they waited a few minutes until that confirmation was possible. As Nigel siad it was the first time such an incident has taken place, therefore there was some confusion, only to be expected. The London emergency services responded remarkably well given the enormaty of the situation. I feel for the emergency services, who tried thier best under very hard circumstances to do thier job, and what do we get? Everything that could go wrong has been critisised by many who have no faced such a situation, It makes my blood boil to say the least. Get real.
johnmurray  
#24 Posted : 31 October 2010 07:34:10(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
johnmurray

It was not just live lines to be isolated, it was moving rolling stock on other sections of the rail that needed to be stopped as well in case they bridged the "dead" line to a "live" line. And it was only an alien environment because of the number of dead and injured. Firefighters deal with death on a regular basis, from having to extract the remains of a child from the wheels of a truck to having to remove charred remains from buildings. The start of the thread was that the BBC was not fair and impartial. My personal views on firefighters is that they are much more use than safety consultants, but that has always been my view. Anyway, continue with the personal attacks and the straw-men. Firefighters (politically-correct name) have a similar sense of humour to me...you have to in their job.
Bob Shillabeer  
#25 Posted : 31 October 2010 16:26:42(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Bob Shillabeer

JohnMurray, fire fighters should know when it is safe to operate in an alien environment, it is part of thier training not to rush into unfamiliar conditions without having an assurance that it is safe. That is not to say they won't enter a burning building if someones life is at stake, they do and thankfully generally escape. The point of this tread was to show how things are distorted by all forms of the media to suit its own view or to promote that view. The matter of the electricity being gapped over into an islotaed section, there are tests that must be carried out before the line is deemed isolated not just word of mouth that it is switched off. On the mainline railway this is called a box of eggs, I believe there is a similar requirement on LUL tracks. Therefore my original statement of only those with the correct competence and authority should state when it is safe to eccess the track not just someone working on the platform. Again no one would thank anyone if the rescue teams were killed or injured because the safety measures were ignored. This is a very serious issue and should not be used to express flipant remarks.
johnmurray  
#26 Posted : 31 October 2010 21:32:48(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
johnmurray

If you go to the top of the page you'll note that the story was blaming the firecrews for being too safe. If they had gone onto the track and been injured, or worse, by the current still being on then it would have been another story, blaming someone else: Win, Win. Again I'll remind you, the thread started about a news report that the firecrews had been too cautious. Even if they had been [too cautious] I would still support the firecrews. I'm 100% for employee safety: Too bad safety consultants are not. I also do flippant, which is better than "crocodile tears"
firesafety101  
#27 Posted : 01 November 2010 09:58:55(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
firesafety101

As Bob quite rightly says firefighters are trained to operate in alien environments - that's what they do so should expect them to enter the track side without too much delay. I wonder how many of the other rescuers and persons escaping from the train were injured as a result of the electrified line? Firefighters know where to walk on a train tack. By the way any delay was literally a few minutes and not as long as made out by the story. Further - before health and safety was rammed down firefighters throats recently, how many firefighters have been killed or injured on railways? Not many if any at all.
Heather Collins  
#28 Posted : 01 November 2010 10:20:08(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Heather Collins

JohnMurray wrote:
I'm 100% for employee safety: Too bad safety consultants are not.
A stupid and unnecessary comment John in what has become a decent worthwhile discussion. Why are you so surprised that your posts often get pulled?
sean  
#29 Posted : 01 November 2010 10:41:17(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

Heather, I think you are jumping to quickly on the Anti-John Train. I think John made it very clear that he was fully supporting the Fire Services, I noticed that you only copied in a small section of John's last post, which was used against John, totally out of context.
Heather Collins  
#30 Posted : 01 November 2010 10:51:04(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Heather Collins

I don't think it was out of context sean. I don't disagree with much of what John has posted in this thread. However why did he feel it necessary to have a quick snipe at consultants? I would suggest it was his comment that was out of context with regard to this thread not mine.
Moderator 2  
#31 Posted : 01 November 2010 11:52:06(UTC)
Rank: Moderator
Moderator 2

A number of messages have been removed. The reasons vary from 'likely to cause offence' to 'complaint' to 'no longer makes sense as context has been removed'. Please would forum users take care not to cause offence either to fellow practitioners or to bodies of people, such as fire fighters. If you see something that you feel should be moderated, please use the 'report message' facility, in preference to posting your concern directly on the forum. Thank you Moderating team.
sean  
#32 Posted : 01 November 2010 13:34:56(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

Why have these postings been banned? I have no mail explaining the reasons why my posting was wiped clean? I have seen many postings in the past where the exchange of postings between certain people were really near the knuckle and nothing was done? This exchange of views was mild, and was just a debate on different people's views. That's what I thought this site was for? Maybe issuing a reply to another posting involving IOSH conference might be better time spent, rather then picking on the poor!
Canopener  
#33 Posted : 01 November 2010 18:15:44(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Canopener

Sean, I would tend to agree. I have seen far 'worse' exchanges than this that have been left to run. What was particularly interesting, is that the post at #16 that 'provoked' or 'precipitated' the subsequent exchange had not earlier been removed, when all of the others had. It has since been removed! However, I have to abide by the mods decision, but would like to see some clarity and perhaps opportunity to discuss the basis of a deleted post. I think that was my first, so not too bad! Keep smiling :-)
Bob Shillabeer  
#34 Posted : 01 November 2010 19:40:41(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Bob Shillabeer

I am not aware of the reason the moderators have blocked some comments, perhaps it is because the matter is still being examined and they feel that some comments could possibly cause the Institute some grief, who knows, the Moderators do so perhaps an explanation would reduce the questioning of them????
Canopener  
#35 Posted : 01 November 2010 19:56:35(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Canopener

The mods have given a number of reasons, although not sure which fits with which post, but I guess in fairness they are doing this voluntarily and in their own or their company's time. I guess they don't have the time to justify every decision, which I think is fair enough. I'm gonna cut them some 'slack' although as I said I have seen far worse exchanges that have gone unchallenged. A lesson for us all perhaps? One thing of interest, is that I raised a concern using 'report message' the other day but never got anything of a response. It would seem a basic courtesy, although note my comments above. I also wonder if they ever take or consider taking action against those with a significant history of deleted posts?
Bob Shillabeer  
#36 Posted : 01 November 2010 20:02:57(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Bob Shillabeer

I can't question the Moderators view but I was once contacted by them along with a clear reason why one of my postings was blocked, so no problem as far as I am concerned they did thier job clearly and explained why they felt action was necessary.
RayRapp  
#37 Posted : 01 November 2010 20:24:12(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
RayRapp

On a similar slant, it did occur to me that this particular topic would have been more suitable for the Member's Forum, because I believe those that have contributed are all members of IOSH and the bun fighting would be out of the public domain and the Mods perhaps a tad more tolerant - just a thought.
Moderator 2  
#38 Posted : 02 November 2010 08:03:07(UTC)
Rank: Moderator
Moderator 2

When it becomes necessary to remove a large number of messages it becomes quite difficult and time consuming to sort out the reasons for each one and contact the originators. We hope that forum users will understand that a forum message is sufficient to explain what has been done and why. In answer to Phil's query, we do take formal action against people who persistently breach the forum rules, or whose breaches are perceived as more serious. "36. If the moderators perceive that your message has broken our rules, they’ll remove it. Where possible, we’ll let you know that your message is unacceptable and why. If you’ve been formally warned in this way more than twice, on the third occasion, your access to the forums will be removed." Note that this refers to a 'formal warning', and those who have received formal warnings are in no doubt that they have done so, because the message that is sent tells them that the warning is formal and warns them that access to the forums is removed for repeated offences. We only issue formal warnings on rather rare occasions - the last was in June. I am not sure what is happening to the 'report a concern' process, so I am making enquiries. Jane
Users browsing this topic
Guest (2)
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.