The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
Hi Visibility Safety Vests and the impending LAWS
Hi Guys, I just thought I would throw this in the ring for discussion and IF anyone has any questions or comments please feel free to add or contact.
The new law for wearing safety vest was passed some time ago. On November 24th, 2008 the grace period comes to an end.
ANY and ALL workers who will be working on or near a federally funding highway MUST wear an ANSI safety vest class 2 or better. At last, someone is beginning to consider knock downs as a problem. There are NO exceptions! Police, fire EMS, tow truck drivers and even the guy cutting the grass.
However, if you are a fire fighters that MAY cause you a problem. The new law does NOT state that the vest has to be a breakaway design nor does it state it has to be flame retardant or flame resistant! But whatever vest you have you will have to wear it!
This LAW is basically being extended to ALL public roads across the U.S. in early 2009 via the publication of the new MUTCD. That means anywhere the public can drive a car is included.
At the Baltimore Expo the buzz phrase "if your feet are on the street, your vest is on your chest" is being sung.
My concern is that IF you have a current/old vest it is more than likely to be flammable, and highly flammable at that. So PLEASE check out your vest ASAP. and IF it is flammable, either get news ones or if you are in a road situation and fire is in effect, ensure your own safety by using the fire truck as protection from passing traffic, close the damn road down if necessary and at that point knowing you are moving into a burning scene, do not wear your FLAMMABLE safety vest. You have a damn good reason not to and NO sensible person is going to fault you if you protect the scene, consider yourself and then deal with the scene itself. After all what is the point of you getting burnt and injured as well as the people in the accident as well?
The suggestion moving forward is that your vest should be an ANSI 107-2004 vest which is 5 point breakaway and at least flame retardant or hopefully flame resistant. Do not sell yourself short on this.
The police complained loudly about the fact that an ANSI 107 vest MAY cover their gun belts and therefore endanger them if they need to draw their guns quickly. They were lucky and 3 weeks after the new law was effected ANSI came out with the ANSI 207-2006 standard. This has exactly the same amount of reflective; however instead of 775 square inches of background fabric, it uses only 450 square inches of background fabric.
So it generally rides up higher on the body to give them access to their guns.
At the Firehouse Expo, we still had a few people think that the new laws do not include them! Wow are they in for a nice surprise and several fire fighters looking for ANSI 207-2006 vests instead of ANSI 107-2004 vests.
Let me state clear and LOUD, ASNI 107-2004 vests are FINE. In fact they are better for most firefighters as they have increased visibility as they are larger than the ANSI 207 vests.
BOTH standards do NOT include five point breakaway OR flame retardant or flame resistant features. These features can be ADDED to BOTH vest designs.
Most police in reality are not that concerned with getting to their guns and wearing a much smaller vest than doing traffic control on a winter’s niters night in the rain when the power is out. Then of course the more reflective and background fabric they wear the better for them.
So just to let you know you can get an ANSI 107-2004 vest that is flame retardant and five point breakaway and actually folds up to form an ANSI 207 vest all in one garment. One size fits most.
Now in November of 2009 new fire appliances will need one vest per riding position that is ANSI 107-2004 and flame retardant and five point breakaway. So there is hope going forward.
If your dept, cannot afford new vests use caution. You can get funding for vests from a wide variety of sources now.
Slowly manufacturers are responding to the new laws and demands and bringing out product to comply. So shop around get a flame retardant vest at least, with five point breakaway, and washable too. You can cut a deal for around $30 a vest for flame retardant or $50 a vest for flame resistant. DON'T get ripped off, higher price does not mean better quality or more features!
One final point, ensure each vest has a serial number. Why? Let’s say you decide to have one vest per rider instead of personal kit issue of one per staff member.
Let’s say Monday night that vest attends a nasty chemical incident, colorless, odorless, but highly irritating chemicals get on the vest, it's dark, cold and you are there for hours. Finally you get to go home, safe, warm and tired you leave the vest on the truck not even thinking you got it covered in this chemical.
You go home, sleep and a few days later another call comes in during the afternoon. Your day off, your buddy rides in your place, it's only for a small grass fire. It's hot; he's wearing a t-shirt and his turnout pants and boots. He sweats he rubs against the seat as the truck travels to the scene, the vest rubs against his arms, his skin starts to itch, the sweat mingles with the molecules of this nasty toxin. After all it wasn't washed.
Now it silently seeps through his skin and into his blood stream, the toxins react under hot conditions. Just like snake venom, the more you move the faster it works. Slowly he becomes tired, restless, and finally collapses from the effects of the chemical.
Everyone thinks it is because of the heat, no-one understands it was because his vest was contaminated. He gets worse, he is rushed to the hospital, a victim of cross contamination, yet no-one has any idea what it is, and so the medics cannot help him fast enough and he slowly slips away.
So is one vest per rider or is one vest per person a better. SAFER policy?
You see, most people look at a vest and don't think there is much behind it. Almost like a t-shirt really. Well some people out here understand much more of the science of trying to keep people safe that you can see from just the outside of a vest.
I look forward to your ideas and thoughts.
BTW these are just a few of the issues regarding vests, there are plenty more to consider down the road.
The new law for wearing safety vest was passed some time ago. On November 24th, 2008 the grace period comes to an end.
ANY and ALL workers who will be working on or near a federally funding highway MUST wear an ANSI safety vest class 2 or better. At last, someone is beginning to consider knock downs as a problem. There are NO exceptions! Police, fire EMS, tow truck drivers and even the guy cutting the grass.
However, if you are a fire fighters that MAY cause you a problem. The new law does NOT state that the vest has to be a breakaway design nor does it state it has to be flame retardant or flame resistant! But whatever vest you have you will have to wear it!
This LAW is basically being extended to ALL public roads across the U.S. in early 2009 via the publication of the new MUTCD. That means anywhere the public can drive a car is included.
At the Baltimore Expo the buzz phrase "if your feet are on the street, your vest is on your chest" is being sung.
My concern is that IF you have a current/old vest it is more than likely to be flammable, and highly flammable at that. So PLEASE check out your vest ASAP. and IF it is flammable, either get news ones or if you are in a road situation and fire is in effect, ensure your own safety by using the fire truck as protection from passing traffic, close the damn road down if necessary and at that point knowing you are moving into a burning scene, do not wear your FLAMMABLE safety vest. You have a damn good reason not to and NO sensible person is going to fault you if you protect the scene, consider yourself and then deal with the scene itself. After all what is the point of you getting burnt and injured as well as the people in the accident as well?
The suggestion moving forward is that your vest should be an ANSI 107-2004 vest which is 5 point breakaway and at least flame retardant or hopefully flame resistant. Do not sell yourself short on this.
The police complained loudly about the fact that an ANSI 107 vest MAY cover their gun belts and therefore endanger them if they need to draw their guns quickly. They were lucky and 3 weeks after the new law was effected ANSI came out with the ANSI 207-2006 standard. This has exactly the same amount of reflective; however instead of 775 square inches of background fabric, it uses only 450 square inches of background fabric.
So it generally rides up higher on the body to give them access to their guns.
At the Firehouse Expo, we still had a few people think that the new laws do not include them! Wow are they in for a nice surprise and several fire fighters looking for ANSI 207-2006 vests instead of ANSI 107-2004 vests.
Let me state clear and LOUD, ASNI 107-2004 vests are FINE. In fact they are better for most firefighters as they have increased visibility as they are larger than the ANSI 207 vests.
BOTH standards do NOT include five point breakaway OR flame retardant or flame resistant features. These features can be ADDED to BOTH vest designs.
Most police in reality are not that concerned with getting to their guns and wearing a much smaller vest than doing traffic control on a winter’s niters night in the rain when the power is out. Then of course the more reflective and background fabric they wear the better for them.
So just to let you know you can get an ANSI 107-2004 vest that is flame retardant and five point breakaway and actually folds up to form an ANSI 207 vest all in one garment. One size fits most.
Now in November of 2009 new fire appliances will need one vest per riding position that is ANSI 107-2004 and flame retardant and five point breakaway. So there is hope going forward.
If your dept, cannot afford new vests use caution. You can get funding for vests from a wide variety of sources now.
Slowly manufacturers are responding to the new laws and demands and bringing out product to comply. So shop around get a flame retardant vest at least, with five point breakaway, and washable too. You can cut a deal for around $30 a vest for flame retardant or $50 a vest for flame resistant. DON'T get ripped off, higher price does not mean better quality or more features!
One final point, ensure each vest has a serial number. Why? Let’s say you decide to have one vest per rider instead of personal kit issue of one per staff member.
Let’s say Monday night that vest attends a nasty chemical incident, colorless, odorless, but highly irritating chemicals get on the vest, it's dark, cold and you are there for hours. Finally you get to go home, safe, warm and tired you leave the vest on the truck not even thinking you got it covered in this chemical.
You go home, sleep and a few days later another call comes in during the afternoon. Your day off, your buddy rides in your place, it's only for a small grass fire. It's hot; he's wearing a t-shirt and his turnout pants and boots. He sweats he rubs against the seat as the truck travels to the scene, the vest rubs against his arms, his skin starts to itch, the sweat mingles with the molecules of this nasty toxin. After all it wasn't washed.
Now it silently seeps through his skin and into his blood stream, the toxins react under hot conditions. Just like snake venom, the more you move the faster it works. Slowly he becomes tired, restless, and finally collapses from the effects of the chemical.
Everyone thinks it is because of the heat, no-one understands it was because his vest was contaminated. He gets worse, he is rushed to the hospital, a victim of cross contamination, yet no-one has any idea what it is, and so the medics cannot help him fast enough and he slowly slips away.
So is one vest per rider or is one vest per person a better. SAFER policy?
You see, most people look at a vest and don't think there is much behind it. Almost like a t-shirt really. Well some people out here understand much more of the science of trying to keep people safe that you can see from just the outside of a vest.
I look forward to your ideas and thoughts.
BTW these are just a few of the issues regarding vests, there are plenty more to consider down the road.
- Attachments:
-
-
Picture 001.jpg, 1.2 MB -
Picture 010.jpg, 1.2 MB
-
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by 2y0a1vey9p4zt on
-
The 2008 edition of NFPA 1901 - Standard for Automotive Fire Apparatus specifies that all new apparatus will be provided with one safety vest per riding position that meets ANSI 207 standards, to include the breakaway features. This standard is effective January 1, 2009.
5.8.3* Miscellaneous Equipment. The following additional equipment shall be carried on the apparatus:
(18) One traffic vest for each seating position, each vest to comply with ANSI/ISEA 207, Standard for High-Visibility Public Safety Vests, and have a five-point break away feature that includes two at the shoulders, two at the sides, and one at the front.
The above was quoted from Chapter 5 of NFPA 1901, which covers pumpers. The other chapters that cover tankers, aerials, initial attack, and other types of apparatus have similar requirements, appropriately labelled with the correct chapter numbers for the specific apparatus.
I feel that one per seating position is a good start, but one per person is a much better choice. An even better choice is both options.
As far as flammability requirements, a firefighter is not going to wear their vest into a structure fire, nor should they be wearing it when conducting other types of suppression activities, and no police officer is going to go near a car that is smoking unless there is a definite life threat. However, none of the rest of a police officer's clothing and equipment is required to be fire resistant, so what difference would it make if their safety vest was?
More information can be found about these vests and the new standard on www.respondersafety.org -
-
Permalink Reply by Edward on
-
Excellent reply Sir,
I can see you take safety seriously and have a good deal of expereince to judge the good sides and the bad sides of policy.
This country is about 20 yrs behind Europe on safety with regard to vests and hi-vis. They went through all the image traumas, the people who wouldn't wear it, the people who couldn't wear it and stats show they have had dramtic decreases in LODD's due to knockdown.
That is the principal conern but when you throw in the flammability issue, one guy recently was stunned when he found out that some older vests burn like christmas trees. He wanted to know why he hadn't been told, and who was the SOB who sold it to his dept.
Begs the question when is a safety vest not a safety vest?
You are well informed but sadly the training and communications with smaller depts, more rural has left some people with false reliance on some older vests. Some of these people still have no idea that vest laws are here.
So the whole reason to bring this issue up is to hear from people like you who can help/guide others along a safer road.
Of course no-one expects draconian laws to be enforced and jail sentences handed out (although in Euroep that does happen). However some insurance companies look for any excuse not to pay out for injury or LODD. Why give them a way out?
As for Police, well I have lost count how many still say it does not apply to them, well good luck to them. Why should the public donate funds to families who will not get insurance monies when the LODD decided for better or worse not to be a safety sissy for the day and got their butt tagged by the truck on the highway.
NO law is perfect, NO policy is perfect but IF everyone bands together to get depts the funds they need, to get the best kit that is made, then you job becomes easier.
Then we will have fewer LODD, fewer night laying vigil in hospitals, fewer families to help through their grieiving , fewer kids to soothe and support their loss etc etc.
The more these subjects are debated the better laws can become. The better policies can be and hopefully from all of that, the fewer funerals we will have to go to.
Your last comment about police uniforms, more and more depts are opting to go for fr fabrics in uniforms, so one day maybe, just maybe a police officer might just escape serious injury if his vest was fr too. I think that one cops lack of pain would be worth him wearing an fr vest. besides when there is little or no cost increase, why not buy or use an fr vest.
The pennies difference makes a huge difference when you are wearing an fr vest.
Test it, try burning an old vest and contact a vest company for a sample of fr fabric, the difference is huge. Samples should be free BTW.
But thanks for your positive response and contribution, greatly appreciated. At least you and your team are aware have the opportunity to stay safe. thanks again. Good Luck. -
-
-
Thank you for your kind words, sir. Unfortunately, when I went in to edit my response further, it was eaten by the site here. I had put in there what the current policy is in my department.
I had said that it was currently the unwritten rule (but I am in the processof putting this and many other policies in writing) that all personnel involved in suppression or rescue operations wear appropriate levels of PPE, but not the safety vest. They don the vest when those operations are concluded. Those personnel not actively involved in the operations, such as the IC, apparatus operator, and personnel involved in flagging/traffic control operations, ARE required and DO wear the safety vest.
Our vests are ANSI 107 vests. None of them have the breakaway features. They were put in place before I became a member, and our current chief was unaware of the safety standards (he is now, and is wanting to replace all the vests with newer ones). I am not sure what the plan is for replacing the vests, but I believe we are going to order enough for each member to have one in their gear, as well as place at least 2 on each apparatus, as we have joint-membership personnel in my department (meaning they are members of 2 fire departments, one primary and one secondary, and respond with either department when toned out).
Yes, you are correct in saying I am big on safety. I follow what I call Rule #1, "Go Home In One Piece At The End Of Your Shift." To me that means I leave in the exact same physical condition (minus the expected tiredness that comes with the job) as I arrived at the station in. And I include my department members in that as well. More than once I have stopped a training evolution because of safety issues. Once those issues were pointed out and corrected, the evolution went on. It is also a standing rule that no one in my department is above correcting anyone, regardless of rank or time in department, on safety issues. It works very well, as we have not had anyone injured or killed in the 29 year history of the department, and none of us will allow that record to be broken. We do a good job of keeping Murphy tucked safely in his cage in the corner with a sheet over him. I have the keys to his cage, and they are nowhere that he can get to them, and he is searched daily for contraband. -
-
-
Thank you kind Sir for your nice words. Greatly appreciated. I just love the idea of Murphy's keys being in your pocket, a safer place I cannot think of. I would like to extend the hand of friendship to you, your family, friends and colleaugues. May you endeavours all be fruitful and enjoyable along lifes path. God Speed and may you keep going home safe and sound when the shift is over for as long as you wish to serve. Thank you.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Don Zimmerman on
-
Piece of cake, we been wearing them a long time and as the chief on scene my guy/gals all now to have them on whether they like it or not. I also have my Engine Officers educated in putting that 25 ton red stop sign in the best position possible to protect us first and the scene second. I just cringe when I read about scenes being compromised.
My last shift I was assigned to had a bit of problem learning it but they did and it makes sure that 'Everyone Goes Home' at the end of shift with all their fingers and toes!!!! -
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
