Skip to content

Archives for safety

See all posts in the network tagged with safety

What Can Brown Do For You?

2 comments

The simple answer s that he can give you hope.

I am not referring to what he can do as a United States Senator from Massachusetts. I am referring to how he did it and using THAT as a model for those of us in the fire service that are fighting for the very life blood of our fire departments in our respective communities.

A quick political science lesson on this extraordinary accomplishment of Scott Brown, in my opinion:

1) A large segment of America is not happy with the direction that the country is going and all of the chicanery by the politicians who have gotten us there.

2) A Democrat has held that seat since 1966; Martha Coakley was anointed as the successor to the legendary “Lion of the Left”, Senator Ted Kennedy and ran with a sense of entitlement, not to mention a 20-point lead in the polls going into December. She grossly underestimated her opponent and the independent voters in Massachusetts.

3) Scott Brown traveled to the small cities, rural communities and suburbs in his pick up truck, gaining support, regaining trust and pulled off a modern day miracle.

Why should we give pause to think about this candidate and the race he ran and won?

Because we, the fire service, have to prepare for smaller government and Life after much of the federal grant money goes away…and it will!

I have always believed that funding a fire department is a state/local issue. The reason that I include “state” is because in Illinois, we have state-wide MABAS (Mutual Aid Box Alarm System) and the Illinois Terrorism Task Force (ITTF). These agencies should be funded by the state for obvious reasons.

However; our local fire departments should be funded by our citizens and the communities that we serve, because THEY determine what services, if any, that we provide. It doesn’t matter if it is a full-time, career department, a paid on call or a volunteer department; the community, through their elected/appointed officials decides how that is to be accomplished or not.

We cannot be “Martha Coakleys”, believing that we are entitled to whatever level of service that WE think the community should have. We serve the people; they don’t serve us. Therefore; we cannot jam anything down their throats, using the scare tactics that are so common today in government.

We need to be “Scott Browns”, educating our citizens about what we do. They already know why, but we have to give them the information to make informed decisions on their fire protection.

First and foremost, they have to provide for our personal safety and if we have to explain why, then we do that. When the discussion turns to the bigger ticket items such as fire trucks and new stations, the road might get bumpy, but by stating the facts and keeping emotions in check, proper justifications may prove successful. At least you can argue that fire trucks are still part of the personal safety equation.

New stations, unless it significantly improves insurance ratings, may only be seen as higher taxes with no immediate, tangible benefits and the community might very well decide that they don’t want that.

Unless you can prove the value to the community for more elaborate equipment like extrication, trench and structural collapse equipment, you may be limited to providing basic fire protection.

We have to ask ourselves if WE want it more than they do and if the answer is “yes”, then prepare for disappointment, unless you have the time to raise the funds without raising taxes.

As Scott Brown proved, you’re going to have to take the small victories and disappointments and work those into bigger victories.

Until then, protect yourselves, be the best that you can be and keep moving towards gaining and then keeping the trust of your communities, because, in the end, it will be that trust that will allow you to expand your services.

And it will be with the buy in of your community.

TCSS.

This article is protected under federal copyright laws and cannot be re-produced in any form without the expressed written permission of Art Goodrich aka ChiefReason. This article appears under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella.

Visit www.chiefreasonart.com on www.fireemsblogs.com.

Posted by chiefreason on January 21, 2010 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , , , ,

Cultivating a Civilized Approach to Safety

No comments

In Tim Sendelbach’s most recent editorial in the June edition of FireRescue found here http://www.firerescuemagazine.com/fromtheeditor/sendelbach_JUNE2009.html, he speaks to the very essence of effectively “selling” safety to the fire community.

 

With this editorial, I feel that FireRescue’s editor-in-chief clearly establishes the mission of the magazine. His very last statement-“It’s our responsibility to stand strong, unite and make OUR safety PRIORITY No. 1”-emboldens every one of us to take our safety personally!

 

Safety isn’t accomplished by reading the owner’s manual on a piece of equipment. It isn’t accomplished by appointing someone as your “safety” officer. It isn’t accomplished by reading from a list of “dos” and “don’ts”. It isn’t accomplished by putting on a bright yellow vest. It isn’t accomplished by bitching about wearing said vest. It isn’t accomplished by simply saying “be safe” at the end of every meeting. It isn’t accomplished by chance.

 

It can only be accomplished if a specific set of safety guidelines are written, implemented, then enforced EVERY DAY! It will NOT happen any other way.

 

Many are drawn to the fire service because of its “romanticism”; a “good vs. evil” scenario.

 

Bull McCaffery walking from the inferno through the doorway with a young child wrapped by Bull’s right arm in the movie “Backdraft” lends itself to the melo-dramatic side of what we do. And the funeral at the end caps an untimely end to Bull’s career, but the fire never got him! We get it!

 

But, when you watch that movie, you can also see a lot of risk-taking. Was it for “dramatic effect” or was it an accurate depiction? Only the film’s technical advisor knows for sure!

 

Many of us operate under a risk assessment policy that says “risk a lot to save a lot”, but we also understand that it is a very carefully calculated one as well.

 

Firefighters are NOT an asset or a commodity where their personal safety is at risk. Therefore; it is unacceptable should they be seriously injured or die in the line of duty.

 

We don’t risk death because the public “expects” it. That, I’m afraid, is where we are caught up in the romanticism of what we do.

 

No one that I have ever spoken to on the subject have said that they “expect” us to die to save their property. At least; they wouldn’t admit it.

 

But, WE-the fire service-have promoted this notion for decades. We have gone into structures for years without regard to their structural integrity, because “that is what we do”. Getting inside and fighting the fire on its turf is easier but not necessarily “better”.

 

In fact, just recently, it was stated that we have put ourselves first and the citizens that we have sworn to serve second. Another said that we should risk “everything” for our citizens.

 

Why? Because it’s “expected”?

 

So as not to create another controversy, suffice it to say that I believe that we can serve our citizens, reduce the number of LODDs and integrate safety into everything that we do.

 

Why can’t we simply treat safety with the same respect and urgency that we do for confined space, technical rescue or hazmat and apply that attitude to the firefighting component? Look at all of the safety requirements of the components that I mention and I have to ask why we can’t do the same for driving apparatus, wearing seatbelts, sizing up a building and fire conditions and yes; even our wellness/fitness.

 

While we argue for better presumptive illness legislation, we continue to clog our arteries with fatty foods and fill our lungs with the smoke from menthol Marlboros.

 

We are not “fighting the beast” or “slaying the dragon”, but it IS a little more complicated than simply “putting the wet stuff on the red stuff”. We need to inject the safety components into mitigating the chemical chain reaction caused by heat, fuel and oxygen.

 

We can do so while fulfilling our mission to our citizens and doing it as safely as possible.

 

And Tim nailed it in his editorial.

 

Following the 16 Life Safety Initiatives is an excellent place to start!

Posted by chiefreason on May 22, 2009 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , ,

Follow the Yellow “Safety Brick” Road!

No comments

Editted on 5/1/09-PLEASE NOTE: I AM NOT ACCEPTING COMMENTS AT THIS TIME. PLEASE DON’T WASTE YOUR TIME. THERE ARE OTHER SITES WHERE THIS BLOG IS POSTED. THIS IS A FAMILY FRIENDLY SITE AND I INTEND TO KEEP IT THAT WAY.

THANKS FOR VISITING MY SITE.

 

Borrowing and paraphrasing a comment made by FDNY Lt. Ray McCormack, I would wonder in his safety culture if I were the Cowardly Lion for a lack of courage, the Tin Man for lack of a heart or the Scarecrow for lack of a brain. I would think maybe some of all three, but this I know:

 

Last week at FDIC, in just under 40 minutes, Safety in the fire service took a major hit.

 

From the opening salvo delivered by Chief Bobby Halton to his “body-burying buddy”, FDNY Lt. Ray McCormack; disdain, indifference and apathy for a safer fire service was never more evident.

 

And clearly, I will respectfully disagree with their messages in this year of personal responsibility for safety.

 

This I want to die with my boots on mentality in the fire service is killing us. I cannot recall one incident where SAFETY killed one of us at an incident. So, it is Safety that is our only hope for reducing injuries and deaths; both firefighter AND civilian.

 

Honestly; I am shocked by what I heard. If I understood, Halton wants us to risk everything to save a life and to preserve the symbolism of the red fire truck, as defined by writer Kurt Vonnegut.

 

Now; I realize that when I became a firefighter, I promised God that I would risk my life to save another, BUT, I NEVER agreed to GIVE UP my life to save another.

 

So that you understand that last statement, what it means is that I would not consciously put myself in a position to die, but if I crossed that threshold during an attempted rescue, then play lively music at my funeral! It also means that conditions changed while I was inside from when I went inside.

 

And I’m sorry, Bobby, but art and commerce are not on my “save” list as you would like. I’m not willing to cross the threshold for an album filled with “Kodak moments”. They can get another camera and start a new album along with that new life that we just gave them!

 

I believe that our public does not want to see us dying in property that is unoccupied, insured and can be re-built. They do not want the guilt of knowing that we died and left families of our own behind.

 

Before I turn my attention to Lt. McCormack’s comments, I will say this with regards to Chief Halton’s comments: if you want a world where firefighters give the ultimate sacrifice to preserve honor, tradition and the sacred trust, then these should be men and women-orphans who are unfeeling, uncaring and unimportant to and of themselves, with no families or friends-who will not leave someone suffering, in order to relieve the suffering of others.

 

WE-every firefighter that you have ever stood before-understand and accept our fate. Unfortunately, our parents, families, friends, wives, and especially our kids do not feel full from our deaths; only emptiness.

 

So maybe, you should take your message to THEM. Get their buy-in and then we can come back to the safety table and talk about how sissified and saftified we’re making the fire service.

 

I will put my heart, guts and balls out there with anyone else, but as a leader, MY MEN COME FIRST, but the public is first on our list. Making my men number one does not make the public number two. I understand that we have to serve them, but we are not sub-servant; no less important.

 

And as their leader, no one is more important to me than my men are. And I am unwilling to believe that their lives are worth less than the life of someone we swore to serve.

 

The irony of all of this is that we only want to roll out Safety when there is talk of budget cuts and reducing manpower. Now, that’s unsafe!

 

“Too much safety lends itself to fear”, says FDNY Lt. Ray McCormack.

 

What is “too much safety”? I have been involved with safety as a profession for twenty-plus years and I have yet to see “too much”.

 

But, can someone show me ONE example of where Safety EVER got in the way of any of you doing your jobs?

 

No? That’s because you CAN’T!

 

You see; we pick and choose where we invoke the cry for Safety. The rest is simply ignored.

 

Why do we waste that one position on safety officer? Give him a set of irons and go do something, for chrissakes.

 

Teaching people the safe way to do their jobs gives them a better understanding, helps them to avoid problems caused by a lack of understanding and builds their confidence that is the underpinnings for their courage under fire. It makes them FEARLESS; not fearful!

 

In closing, I will also respectfully disagree with the Lt.’s assessment that “the path is paved with yellow safety bricks”.

 

The path is paved with black bunting, lined with Class A’s, vibrating with drums and bagpipes, grieving with widows, moms, dads, fatherless/motherless children and cemented with the spirits of thousands of glorious and gifted lives who thought that they were bound by duty to die, either by necessity or by accident.

 

“Courage-Determination-Pride”; me and the Lt. agree on these three, but this is my take on them:

 

Have courage to stand up to those who believe there’s too much safety and say that there is as of yet, not enough.

 

Have the determination to develop, implement and enforce SOGs that are constructed with a foundation strong in safety.

 

Show your pride, knowing that you did your job, did it safely, got the job done and you didn’t have to compromise your sacred trust.

 

To Bobby Halton and FDNY Lt. Ray McCormack; thank you for keeping the spotlight on Safety.

 

It will continue to be seen in a different light.

 

TCSS.

 

This article is protected by copyright and may not be re-produced in any form without the expressed consent of the author.

Posted by chiefreason on April 28, 2009 • Filed under: Miscellaneous • Tagged: , , , ,

A Defective Maintenance Program Defined

No comments

 

…does not have a professional fleet manager or professional maintenance technicians, which is surprising given the size and costs of the fleet, the complexity of the vehicle3s and equipment comprising it and the criticality of these assets to the Department’s ability to fulfill its mission…

 

…these positions were eliminated for budgetary reasons in the early 1980s.

 

…fleet is overseen by a combination of career firefighters and civilians…

 

…Maintenance Department includes firefighter superintendent and assistant superintendent positions, both of which are currently unfilled…

 

…positions are not clearly defined…

 

…no formal position descriptions…

 

…some titles used…are clearly archaic…

 

…chiefs who oversee the Division generally are close to retirement…have no particular background in facility or fleet management and maintenance…

 

…firefighters assigned to the Division can leave and rejoin a field company, so there is no incentive to spend much effort or money to ensure that these technicians are properly trained…

 

…Has been reluctant to invest in the development of in-house fleet management expertise…

 

…this is the primary reason that the Department’s fleet management practices are deficient in many areas…

 

…staffing level is difficult to gauge. Normally, a fleet maintenance organization requires …detailed records on how they spend their time…to measure, among other things, technician productivity and efficiency…however, BFD does not maintain such records…

 

…day-to-day inspection of apparatus is inconsistent at best…the failure to perform such inspections is emblematic of a larger problem…has tended to react to problems…rather than trying to prevent them…

 

…lack of a sense of ownership of and responsibility for apparatus…the uneven and unpredictable utilization of apparatus…lack of appreciation for the costs of repairing vs. preventive maintenance…

 

On March 6, 2009, Report on Maintenance Practices Assessment for the Boston FD was released by Mercury Associates, Inc. to Commissioner Roderick J. Fraser, Jr. of the Boston FD.

 

If there has been a discussion on the report’s findings, then I must have been asleep at the wheel, because this report was commissioned AFTER Lt. Kevin Kelley died in an apparatus accident, where the mechanical condition of the apparatus was suspect.

 

I can sum up the report in one word: STARTLING!

 

Mercury Associates, Inc. is a company that provides fleet management consulting services. According to the report, in the last three years alone, they have provided their services to Boston Police Department (don’t they talk to the fire department?), Charlotte, Houston, Las Vegas, Louisville, Oakland (CA), Orlando, Philadelphia, Salt Lake, San Antonio, San Francisco, Seattle, Tampa, Washington, DC and Vancouver, British Columbia.

 

The last paragraph in the introduction opens a door to a culture that has existed at Boston FD for at least since the 1980s (see report). It states: Ideally, an assessment of this type would have included the review of policy and procedure statements and other documentation that specifies ‘how’ all maintenance and repair activities are to be performed and the calculation of a variety of key performance indicator statistics and their interpretation using suitable industry benchmarks so as to gauge ‘how well’ they are being performed. However, as will become clear in this report, neither of these types of information are readily available in BFD because they are not used to any significant degree to manage the maintenance and repair of the fleet.

 

I interpret this to mean that no one person was tasked with insuring the safety of Boston’s fleet of fire apparatus. An “informal” system to prevent problems, identify problems and correct problems with apparatus was in place, but was an orphan in its treatment by the city and FD leaders.

 

Again; remember the outcry after Lt. Kevin Kelley was killed. Remember that it was quickly noted in articles after the tragedy that this was not an isolated incident where the safety of the vehicle was identified as a potential problem.

 

It becomes very clear upon reading the report how apparatus with problems remained in service.

 

It leaves me wondering AGAIN why someone has to die in order for Change to occur.

 

How can a department as storied as Boston’s have a fleet maintenance department that is described in the report as ‘archaic’? How can ANY department treat maintenance of their equipment with such indifference?

 

Small departments, such as mine, understand the importance of keeping equipment properly maintained to avoid costly repairs because in many cases, they do not have a budget that could support them. Most likely, the money would have to be borrowed if not covered by warranty.

 

In larger departments, where apparatus sees multiple calls in a day, there has to be a clearly defined system for recognizing mechanical problems, taking the unit out of service for repair and a “loaner” to take its place until that unit is repaired and placed back into service. It cannot be left to chance.

 

At a time when the focus in on personal safety, what could possibly be more important than equipment that gets us to and from the scene?

 

What good does it do to hammer home the idea that we should only use professionally designed, professionally built apparatus if we’re not going to keep it in safe, operating condition?

 

Where I came from, it wasn’t unusual for a department to refurbish or rebuild their own trucks to save money. Water tanks could be increased in size without any regard for gross vehicle weight. No tank baffles and a higher center of gravity was a rollover waiting to happen. Forget about stopping quickly; the extra weight made sure that wasn’t going to happen, but again, it was about saving money and not about safety. The truck that AnnDee Huber died in was home-made, driven by a drunk that was home-grown!

 

Read the Report. Carefully review the twelve (12) recommendations that were made.

 

After you read the report, ask yourselves if any of it resembles how you regard vehicle maintenance and if it does, then it’s time to get something done about it!

 

Ignoring problems won’t make them go away.

 

It only makes for bigger problems and if you’re like my department, you won’t have enough money in the bank to cover it.

 

And most importantly, you won’t have enough heartache, sorrow or tears should it lead to a fatality.

 

TCSS.

Art

 

The article as submitted is published under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella and is the intellectual property of Art Goodrich a.k.a. xchief22 and ChiefReason. It is protected by federal copyright laws and cannot be re-printed in any form without expressed permission from the author. You may read other works by the author at www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on March 22, 2009 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , ,

How Did We Get to This Point?

No comments

The following link is worth your time and is the subject of this blog.

 

http://www.iafc.org/displaycommon.cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr=306

 

Now; try to work through my sarcasm as you read this.

 

There is this novel idea being floated that WE, as firefighters, need to take some personal responsibility for our OWN safety. What a surprise!

 

What I am about to say has a target. Some of you might be offended by my remarks, because you have been one who has always been a champion for safety. So, enjoy this blog for its entertainment value then.

 

But for the rest of you; when did everything that happens to you become someone else’s fault?

 

When did it become someone else’s responsibility to watch over you?

 

When did you resolve that you weren’t accountable for your actions any longer?

 

Why are you a master at playing the “blame game”?

 

Why do you believe that the easy way out is the only way out?

 

And last; why aren’t you willing to grow up, step up, suck it up and get up off of your “C” sector and make the right decisions for YOU, instead of leaving your safety in the hands of someone uncaring, unqualified or indifferent to the whole idea that firefighting, despite inherent risks, can be done more safely?

 

I am not talking about sanitizing it to paralyzing proportions. I am talking about educating yourselves and integrating that seamlessly into your firefighting tasks. It really doesn’t take any longer to do a job safely as it does to take needless risks.

 

If you have learned about building construction and fire behavior, you are well ahead of the safety curve when dealing with a structural fire. Risk vs. benefit will be at the front of your thought process. You will be assisting your officers with making good decisions when deciding interior vs. exterior tactics and with that, you will be creating a culture that will insure to everyone that safety is the first priority. It isn’t safe if YOU say it isn’t safe. It will not be up for discussion or debate.

 

Getting to the scene isn’t half the battle; it is much more important than that. Not only should your personal safety be of the utmost importance, but also the safety of the other motorists; your customers. Operating the vehicle with due caution is the only option that you have if you are the apparatus driver. You cannot sit in the drivers’ seat and assume or predict what the other motorists are going to do. Therefore, you cannot drive with disregard for others who share the road and you have to remember the valuable “resources” that you are hauling to a scene.

 

If you are a passenger in said vehicle, then you’d better be belted in. There isn’t an excuse that is reasonable or acceptable for NOT wearing your seat belt. Aren’t we all getting tired and frustrated by reading “ejected from the vehicle”? How many more have to die before it sinks in that not wearing your seatbelt is a dangerous and unnecessary risk? Why should we have to rely on someone else to tell you to wear it? Why won’t you wear it, unless someone tells you to?

 

We talk about how foolish and stupid it was to ride the tailboard in days gone by, but yet; we don’t wear seatbelts, SCBAs or safety harnesses when we should. We have all kinds of reasons and lip service for not doing it, even though we know that it will save lives.

 

Chief BillyG was recently quoted in an article on the IAFC safety initiatives:

Deputy Chief Billy Goldfeder, chair of the IAFC’s Safety, Health and Survival (SHS) Section said, “While some firefighter injury and death cannot be avoided, so much of it can be, and it so often falls to each of us taking responsibility for ourselves and each other. A very critical factor in success is the role of fire officers and chiefs developing policy, providing training and enforcing the policy based on training to each and every member. The IAFC SHS Section proactively leads and supports any department, anywhere, in accomplishing these goals.”

I love Billy to death for his immeasurable contributions to the fire service, but when making that statement, he is thinking like a firefighter and not like a safety guy, because a safety guy will NOT accept less that ZERO for injuries or fatalities. You see; in my world of safety, accidents aren’t accidental; they are caused. When looking at the causes, you have to look at if they are preventable and if so, make the necessary changes to avoid repeating them.

I am also a realist. I have been a safety professional and a risk manager for 16 years. I was active in the fire service for 22 years. I know that we cannot be engaged in the types of activities that are required of us and NOT take a calculated risk which could end in some unintended results; injury being one of them. But then; that is why your basic risk vs. benefit is done in the first place. THAT will at least force you to consider the bad stuff before declaring your EAP.

So; though I am not a “Safety Sally”, I am an advocate for reducing unnecessary risks. We have to prevent the injuries that are preventable. Don’t wait for someone else to do that for you. Take ownership. Take responsibility. Take the time to do it as safely as possible under the circumstances or in spite of them.

Don’t find yourself lying in a hospital bed asking yourself, “How did I get to this point?”

TCSS.

Art

The article as submitted is protected by federal copyright under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella. It cannot be re-produced by any means without the expressed permission of Art Goodrich aka ChiefReason.

Posted by chiefreason on February 6, 2009 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , ,