I have been reviewing our first aid needs assessment and cover.

Now this may seem a minor point but the guidance allows for the use of appointed persons. They do not need first aid training but 'should not attempt to carry out first aid training for which they have not been trained'. At the same time the guidance suggests first aid kits should include INDG 347 - basic first aid. which includes resucitation and treatment of eye injuries etc. Does anyone else think the two statements conflict?

Looking at remoteness of the site, we are 7-10 miles way from the nearest station but are a lab (60+ staff) handling hazardous chemicals (although we have never had any serious incident involving in at least 20 years and have a pretty good record). It feels remote at times but maybe not if put in context of say the middle of the Dales, Scotland etc, I guess it could take longer to get across a major town or city than to get to us? I have tried the ambulance authority but they can seem to advise the best person to talk to (bit worrying seen as how we have the worst response times in the country!). Advice would be appreciated as I am trying to get the right balance (I don't want to be OTT and start advising rescus equipment and automated defib etc only to be shot down in flames).

We have 3 FAW and 1 EFAW, aiming to maintain at least one of each on site at any one time. I also think this is a bit low but am struggling to convince otherwise. Views welcome.

Thanks in advance

quote=Jon B] handling hazardous chemicals .

Thanks in advance

Sorry Teh_Boy, the reference to appointed persons was just an observation because I felt the ACoP was at odds with itself. We don't use appointed persons (except on very rare occasions when we have a couple of people in on a weekend doing low risk activities).

Chemicals wise we are talking relatively small quantise (lab reagents) some can be 'nasty' but exposure is well controlled and we have the usual emergency showers / eye wash etc. We are looking at the 'special requirements' which may arise out of the various CoSHH assessments and wail arrange training additional to FAW as required.

I was really looking for an idea of what others classed as 'remote' and typical ratios of first aiders trained against the actual requirement, For example we have 4 to ensure 2 are always onsite but the policy for maintaining cover is weak (ie we have had 3 allowed holiday at once). The company does not want to make first aider arrange holidays around each other but I see no other way unless the ratio increases to avoid penalising them as this may act as a deterrent.

Thanks