Examining the pieces of the firefighter safety jigsaw

Operational

Examining the pieces of the firefighter safety jigsaw

Lt d

FIRE Correspondent Catherine Levin reviews the first Congress on the Future of Firefighter Safety

I

ia

an dM ed

“It was clear that

hin g

changes in the

way buildings are constructed are not always done with firefighter, nor indeed

nP ub

Complex Risks To the uninitiated, the topic of firefighter safety might just mean PPE or perhaps risk assessment.

However, during the Congress a range of perspectives were revealed, demonstrating that the topic is much more complex and nuanced than it might first appear.

The risks to firefighters in the modern world are well rehearsed: the long-term downward trend in the number of incidents and the consequent reduction in exposure to operational environments has implications for the maintenance of competence over time.

A continued focus on training is, of course, the counter to this situation, but in the long term it alone may not be enough.

Sitting alongside this trend is the longevity of the firefighter career. With changes to government policy, firefighters will work until they are much older than previous generations.

This in itself presents risks to firefighter safety.

Firefighter fitness was the subject of a separate CFOA event running the same day as the Congress and provided a stimulus for some discussion about how to maintain fitness at all ages. While those references were aimed at the physical fitness of firefighters, there was little consideration of the wellbeing of staff.

lis

n the magnificent surroundings of the Caledonian Club in Belgravia, central London, senior staff from the Fire and Rescue Service, along with representatives from the fire industry and Fire Brigades Union, met on a sunny October day to consider the future of firefighter safety.

Opening the Congress, the first of its kind in the UK, Chair FIRE Editor Andrew Lynch described the subject as a Pandora’s Box. Fortunately for this audience, it was not all the evils of the world that were let out, leaving only hope inside, but instead a series of thoughtprovoking short presentations that revealed the wide-ranging topic that is firefighter safety.

Pa

vil io

fire safety, in mind”

Chair FIRE Editor Andrew Lynch encouraged the wider fire sector to contribute to firefighter safety

Dangers of the Built Environment Given this background, the Congress spent considerable time looking at the built environment. It was clear that changes in the way buildings are constructed are not always done with firefighter, nor indeed fire safety, in mind. One speaker asked the audience whether the choice of a method of construction was ever primarily driven by consideration of fire risk.

A rhetorical question perhaps. But when further examples, like the load bearing of drainage systems that cannot cope with the weight of fire engines, PV panels on roofs that present electrical risks as well as having the potential to fall off (and they are heavy), it becomes clear that building construction has a real impact on firefighter safety.

As a result, it is important for training to keep up to date on changes to the way that the modern world demands that buildings are designed and built.

One observation repeated during the Congress was the divide between operational response and regulatory fire safety. Seen by some as a short diversion before returning to operational duty, the changing world of fire protection presents challenges to firefighters; they need to be abreast of the legislation governing the enforcement functions and also developments in the built environment that may lead to the need to make changes in long held operational practice.

Research and the Knowledge Gap The world of smart technology may provide an answer to this knowledge gap.

The development of Building Information Modelling, the means by which everyone can understand a building through the use of a digital model, provides firefighters with access November 2015 | www.fire–magazine.com | 15

Operational

vil io

Pa

Ensuring High Standards of Protection Standards for equipment and PPE are a natural topic to sit alongside research and 16 | November 2015 | www.fire–magazine.com

ia

Lt d

innovation. Making standards a “sexier topic” as one speaker put it, may be a hard sell. Understanding the arcane world of the standards-making process here in the UK and in Europe is a tall order for most people.

But there is logic here; it makes sense that standards affecting firefighter safety reflect the modern world both in terms of the risks that arise and the technologies that have emerged in recent times.

Getting involved in the standards-making process, in particular becoming a member of a technical committee, is one way in which individual fire and rescue services can influence the development of standards.

Training was a theme throughout the Congress. The Institution of Fire Engineers provides continuous professional development and routes for the accreditation of members.

There was a concern about how intelligent a client a fire and rescue service can be in terms of specifying requirements for training from bodies, like the IFE or others, when it is not being exposed to as many incidents as in previous years.

an dM ed

“Sharing the learning from incidents, some of which

hin g

might be painful and organisationally

lis

uncomfortable, is critical to preventing others from falling

nP ub

to all fire-related information about a building from one digital source.

A lot has been written about the Internet of Things and how it can help householders garner electronic control over the home. It has equal application in the non-domestic sphere and this kind of technology may present new answers to better inform incident commanders before committing firefighters into risk zones.

Developments in technology and building construction may emerge from technical specialists. but there is clearly a role for the academic world here. Many delegates at the Congress referred to the need to make decisions about equipment and PPE purchases based on evidence-based research; and that records of this process would be helpful to call upon should questions be asked post incident.

There was a concern, however, that there is no forum for sharing academic developments and new knowledge of research and its application. One solution offered to this problem is the creation of a new research hub at the Fire Service College. This is in the early stages of development, but could prove to be a useful addition to the fire and rescue sector.

It would certainly be helpful if such a hub were developed with some pump priming funding to commission research into areas of immediate need. At a time when sources of funding for research from government and other bodies are diminishing, alternative solutions like this are very attractive.

There may be something to be learned from the US here. The Underwriters Laboratories Firefighter Safety Research Institute is “dedicated to increasing firefighter knowledge to reduce injuries and deaths in the US fire service and in the communities they serve”.

While in the UK sources of funding for research are becoming scarce, in the US the Department for Homeland Security continues to provide a multi-million dollar programme of funding for fire and rescue services under its Assistance to Firefighters Grant programme. This UL research institute is one recipient of the grant and received three year funding in 2014 to carry out a study of firefighter hands on training.

One UK forum for exposing current research is, of course, the long-standing annual conference on fire-related research and developments (RE 15) that is held at the Fire Service College in partnership with the Institution of Fire Engineers and supported by the FIRE Magazine/Gore Research Excellence Awards. This event brings together delegates from a range of backgrounds, including fire and rescue services, senior policy makers, universities, consultancies and international organisations interested in fire-related research and best practice.

into the same traps”

Silo Working Fire and rescue services continue to operate in silos: 46 silos in England alone. Even at this event services were sharing learning from their own organisations that others had not heard of and found that they were themselves duplicating this work. This is a nonsense that will continue as long as there is no central location for sharing. Perhaps the research hub highlighted above could be a source of information, a clearinghouse perhaps for sharing work to prevent future duplication.

Sharing the learning from incidents, some of which might be painful and organisationally uncomfortable, is critical to preventing others from falling into the same traps. One of the drivers for the National Operational Guidance Programme, which was set up in 2012, was to make sure that fire and rescue services were joined up and consistent about their operational practices so that when coroners called upon them to provide evidence of safe practices, they could demonstrate compliance with nationally approved best practice.

Anything that can be done to share learning quickly and painlessly has to be a step in the right direction. The Congress heard about the experience faced by some fire and rescue services where they have not been able to access reports into incidents because of legal process. Without access to that information, training cannot be quickly edited and improved to reflect new knowledge.

Shared Learning and National Operational Guidance The National Operational Guidance Programme is going one step further to look at sharing operational learning in an open and systematic

vil io Pa

ia

an dM ed

be done to share

learning quickly and painlessly has to be a step in the right

hin g

direction”

Chief Fire and Rescue Adviser Peter Holland’s jigsaw puzzle providing the aspiration for where the Fire and Rescue Service should be regarding firefighter safety

nP ub

Filling in the Jigsaw Puzzle It is this cycle of learning and reflection that can contribute to the operational learning approach that will come out of the National Operational Guidance Programme in the long term.

“Anything that can

lis

way. This is a new project that is in its early stages of approval, but should the Operational Guidance Strategy Board accept it as a project, it will go a long way to making sure that learning from operational incidents, both positive and negative, is shared widely.

Another theme that emerged that relates to the work of the National Operational Guidance Programme is operational discretion. Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) provide incident commanders with the rules for dealing with incidents, but sometimes the conditions presented do not fit the SOP and when this happens operational discretion is required.

There was no general agreement about the definition of operational discretion. For some, fire and rescue services should have in place policies and procedures that are robust enough to match all scenarios. Stepping outside of the parameters of the SOP should be rare and defensible. For others there is a question over just how flexible an SOP should be or if it is just a set of ideas that is not always practical on the ground.

The appetite for risk underpins any approach taken. However much an SOP expects an environment to perform in a particular way, it is still necessary to know what to do if it does not.

It is clear that when the SOP does not provide all the answers and the post incident review takes place, the SOP should be reconsidered in the light of this new evidence to determine if it really is fit for purpose.

Lt d

Operational

Chief Fire and Rescue Adviser Peter Holland

This first Congress demonstrated how far reaching the subject of firefighter safety can be. The diagram here, provided by Chief Fire and Rescue Adviser Peter Holland, presents the elements as a jigsaw. He sees each of the areas discussed above as pieces in the puzzle.

Together they provide an overall picture of the aspiration for where the Fire and Rescue Service should be regarding firefighter safety.

Total Firefighter Safety Given this evidence and the debate at the Congress, it is hard to equate this with a general feeling that firefighter safety simply is not on the top of the agenda for the sector. If the continued absence of the Thomas Review is anything to go by, it is not at the top of the Fire Minister’s agenda either.

Moving firefighter safety to the top of the agenda – at whatever level – should not have to wait for a major incident to occur. It should be through continued sharing of experience and an openness to learn from each other.

Bringing the Congress to a close, there was a suggestion that this event should not be a oneoff, a talking shop of the great and the good, written up and swiftly forgotten. Instead it will be followed by FIRE working with the speakers as well as the National Operational Guidance Programme and the research community to explore ways of filling in the knowledge gaps and working towards achieving the target of Total Firefighter Safety. In the spirit of sharing and learning, this seems like the best place to continue piecing together the puzzle of firefighter safety.

November 2015 | www.fire–magazine.com | 17