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
Teknosquidgy  
#1 Posted : 14 December 2009 11:12:24(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
Teknosquidgy

Good morning all...a newby to the IOSH forums but hope someone can give me some insight into the current issues regarding Health and Safety facing the Fire Service / Emergency services today? Thanks, Wayne.
bob youel  
#2 Posted : 14 December 2009 12:31:40(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
bob youel

more detail please
ScotsAM  
#3 Posted : 14 December 2009 14:04:35(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
ScotsAM

They have as many issues facing them as any other operation. A myriad issues. Here is an interesting liability case I recently read. Two emergency vehicles in collision: Craggy v Chief Constable of Cleveland – Court of Appeal (2009) In a highly unusual accident a police car and a fire engine on their way to two separate emergencies collided at a traffic light controlled cross roads. The police driver had a green light in his favour and the lights were red against the fire engine. The fire engine driver treated the red traffic light as a give way signal as the driver of an emergency vehicle is entitled to do, not anticipating the presence of the police car. Both vehicles were displaying flashing blue lights and sounding their sirens. The fire engine driver was injured and sued the police for damages. At first instance the judge held that the police driver was negligent in that he should have been able to stop when another emergency vehicle entered the junction. He found two thirds contributory negligence on the part of the fire engine driver. “......the possibility that another emergency vehicle might drive into the junction against a red light at the very moment that PC Price drove into it was remote in the extreme. I consider that in imposing a duty on him to drive in such a manner that he could stop in the event of another emergency vehicle emerging from Linthorpe Road, the judge placed an unreasonably high burden upon him”. *Mr Justice Owen* The police driver successfully appealed. The Court of Appeal held that to expect the police driver to have driven in such a way as to be able to stop in case another emergency vehicle had entered the junction at the same time was to impose an unreasonably high standard on him. The circumstances of the accident were highly unusual and not ones that a driver could reasonably be expected to anticipate. The cause of the accident was the claimant’s negligence in entering the junction against a red light when it was unsafe to do so. Comment: The Court of Appeal does not expect even professionally trained drivers to anticipate highly unlikely occurrences.
UVSAR  
#4 Posted : 14 December 2009 17:50:42(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
UVSAR

In some sense it's the same as it always has been - responders are employees and subject to the same pressures as the rest of the workforce, though you get to replace "profit" with "operational urgency". Funds are being cut, yet the remit of both FS and AS crews are constantly expanding (Sir Ken Knight's program under CLG to reissue all the FS guidance documents is a reflection of this need to address firefighter and inter-agency safety within emerging roles). I can't see the situation getting any clearer for a good few years, as some services have yet to deal with stuff from the mid-90s, never mind the stuff that hasn't been written yet. HSE does give some leeway for ops needs and DRAs, but not as much as people think; especially if it's the public (ahem... 'customers') you're putting at risk. We all know the paperwork on a job is often heavier than the appliance it came in, but there remain a lot of critical gaps between the "workplace-view" legislation and what practicably needs to be done. The rate national guidance can be updated is often slower than the rate HSE issues new regulations that make it redundant again.
Teknosquidgy  
#5 Posted : 15 December 2009 11:54:13(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
Teknosquidgy

Thanks to all who responded...it's really great to get a community feel out of a forum like this. my overall views so far of where I think issues may lie is things such as the work at height regs which I believe the Fire service is partially exempt from? Other things involve the manual handling regs as I believe that was the biggest cause of over 3 day injuries in the 04/05 statistics. I am also looking at the likelihood of devastating medical issues, Legionnaires disease, risk of collapsed buildings, hazardous materials, DSEAR regulations and post traumatic stress disorders to name but a few...on top of that operatives need to be fully trained on dynamic risk assessment and then we have the issue of actually getting to the emergency safely. Can anyone expand on these for me?
UVSAR  
#6 Posted : 15 December 2009 12:49:45(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
UVSAR

There's no exemption to WAHR, merely a sentence that says emergency responders can ignore the blanket ban on work at height in poor weather, but only when attending an emergency. However, FSM volume 2 has yet to be updated to include WAHR, as it was last issued in 2002 (as I said, working on that) - so some brigades *think* they're exempt simply because they haven't been retrained in the new rules. Potentially the nightmare always on the horizon is the confined space regs; although we've been dealing with it for over 10 years, many brigades are ignoring the problem in the hope it'll go away, and have no formal policy on "goin' down 'oles". It's getting harder to ignore now brigades are rolling out trench to their USAR teams, and USAR is rolling out to other agencies (HART, etc.). In our work we're constantly having to make up our own policies for the emerging roles just to stop people arguing about whose idea is better. Corporate inertia. Gotta learn to love it as there's no shifting it.
martinw  
#7 Posted : 16 December 2009 10:04:34(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
martinw

There is also the Striking the Balance thing between the Police and the HSE, due partly to the fact that the Police in some cases are under a duty to put themselves at risk - rather uniquely in some ways - at work. Have a look at the HSE press release and statements, and also http://www.acpo.police.u...ressrelease.asp?PR_GUID={EF5AA09F-CBFB-4A43-8D18-2F81C3D01063} Martin
Users browsing this topic
Guest
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.