SAFE-ISH

There have been a few discussions in here on safety. Art "ChiefReason" Goodrich's latest "Don't Be Afraid" highlights a couple of NIOSH LODD reports. There was an extensive one on Acquired Structure Burns (NPFA 1403) and there is now a group to discuss such things.

My questions here are: Are we too safe (meet all NFPA standards or striving to), safe enough (meet many or most NFPA standards and feel you've done enough) or only safe-ish (meet hardly any or only a few NFPA standards and think that they're too much for most dept's)? Do you feel that NFPA is real-world in establishing our standards or it's something for just the rich kids to worry about?

Why would anyone enter a burning structure without putting on their masks?
Why would anyone have "excessive facial hair"? (recent annual fit test - I passed)
Why would anyone not wear seatbelts?
Why would anyone not require annual, thorough physicals?
Why would anyone utilize minors in any capacity other than strictly learn/observe?
Why is speeding ever acceptable?

Why would anyone, any department, ever be satisfied with being Safe-ish?

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on November 19, 2009 at 1:00pm

Jack,

I do the point that this is a tongue in cheek attitude, but I wanted to comment on the first questions from a more serious standpoint. I left out commenting on the "safe-ish" all together because I highly doubt anyone would want to say they are only "safe-ish" and as such if they can't meet some of the bare minimums of NFPA, they shouldn't be around. Yes, there are depts that operate as such and you see the excuses like "It works for us" and so forth and there has been a lot of discussion on "safe-ish" by you and others that also echo my own opinion. I felt I could rely a different perspective on "too safe" and "safe enough" because rarely have I seen those touched.

As for the NFPA being a "guideline" yes you are correct that it isn't. (It was late when I was posting that, and replying to some other discussions after running a nice flurry of calls...my mind wasn't 65% at that point) What I was alluding to is that NFPA is a standard when adopted and that some standards are and some are not adopted.....such as the staffing standard. NFPA calls for 4 on a pump, 5 on a truck, but we see all over 2 man rigs etc. The other issue with NFPA is that old equipment or adopted standards just have to meet the requirements of the date of mfg. Looking at PPE, there has been great changes in safety, but look how long it took the Chicago FD to get away from 3/4 coats and hip boots.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jack/dt on November 19, 2009 at 2:19pm

John C.
To your point(s), can we be too safe? Is safe enough, enough?

I understand as well the inherent hazards of the job. No job, or activity is ever truly 'safe' but I don't advocate a surround-and-drown mentality as a rule of thumb. So as we are going to at times be risking a lot, we need to do that as safely as possible. And the daily 'mundane' tasks and jobs need to be performed with safety in mind. It's really as much a mental issue as it is a logistical one.

As for 'safe enough' I don't believe that safe enough is safe enough. It (to me) clearly describes an attitude that says "we've done what we feel is needed." In other words, we are now as safe as we think we need to be, safe enough. We don't feel the need to reduce the risk any further.

Mostly though my post was directed as the safe-ish mentality. The one that thinks it's ok to speed to the scene (rig or pov), that RIT is a luxury, hoods and seatbelts are for sissies, safety officer buys the beer (what safety officer?), hell...beer in the station, minors on the job, lack of physicals, open-door hiring policies, social club mind-set, all of these are what comprises the safe-ish mentality.

You mention hip boots and 3/4 coats, what about the rear step? Open cabs?, Open hose beds? Leather lungs? All (mostly) gone the way of the dinosaur and for good reason; better, safer methods came along.

I don't think we'll ever be safe enough, not so long as we are willing to go into dangerous environments. And that is why we have fire departments. Likewise I don't think that too safe will ever be a problem or even attained. So long as living, breathing people continue to do this job it will never be 'safe'. All we can do is to try to be as safe as we possibly can. Too safe is certainly a reasonable, if impractical goal to work towards.

Ironically the safe-ish-est people are the ones least likely to be reading this.