I was hoping one of you peeps might be able to help. Our city took away our weight lifting on duty yesterday. they did have a reason. one rao put in a workman's comp claim that he was injured while working out on duty. so as many gov agencies do. we got a blanket memo stating that there would be no weight lifting allowed on the clock. will not physical fitness help to prevent injury or even death in our line of work? ironically they just purchased us a new bench and weights less than one year ago and its in our sop's to exercise 30 min each shift but now we are allowed to walk. unless we want to clock out to lift weights. has anyone faced this? do you have any suggestions on how to back up a need for the physical fitness that can in the long run save the city money?
I take it, that your department doesn't have everyone sign a release before they're allowed to use the equipment. Pulling the fitness equipment can't be the only option, but it's the one chosen. If you and other FF's want the equipment back, you'll have to tell them why, explain the benefits of proper training, collect information from experts, ask for a meeting, as a committee and have a plan in place to show how safe it is when done properly. Present them with a proposal, including a release to protect the district, maybe they'll work with you, good luck. If anything, Strength training and Cardio should be mandatory in all departments, it is for mine.
Show the people who took your equipment that it is a policy to be physically fit in our line of work. And also show them that it is also listed in your sop's. This should help sraighten things out if possible.
Do you have a union? they should deal with this. Another question, if someone gets hurt fighting a fire will they make you quit that? They clearly do not get it. You need to educate your chief, city council and mayor. The IAFF has volumes of material that you can use to do this with.
"There are ways to work out without lifting weights". Brian beat me to it.
My department did the same thing and for the same reason. To make matters worse, the individual was injured while lifting without a spotter. The argument of not being able to follow the fitness policy because one cannot lift weights really swims like a rock. There are plenty of ways to stay fit without weights.
In Texas, "signing a release" is pretty much a waste of ink. If one is on the job and gets injured, the department must bear the cost. The cost of WC insurance which will go up with every claim. The cost of overtime to cover that shift for however long the injured is off, and the worse case scenario, the cost of replacing a firefighter who might be permanently disabled.
While it is unfortunate that a single incident can cause the loss for the whole station, I do see from an administrative prospective why a department might take this stand. Ours, is probably a temporary prohibition while the SOP's are revised. In the interim, our guys will have to continue to use the treadmill, bike, and other isometric and isotonic forms.
Permalink Reply by FETC on December 17, 2010 at 9:43am
You stated it is mandatory to workout 30 minutes each shift. So annual physicals must be mandatory as well.
Does your department have a total health and wellness program? Does your department have a fitness coordinator? Do you provide training on how to properly use all of your equipment? Is your fitness time logged and/or documented as training? Do you have a rule on spotter coverage or two person rule to watch out for each other? My guess is this is a knee jerk reaction to a single claim.
You stated that your department just bought a new bench and weights. I would like to mention if your firefighters desire to use free weights and a bench, you should have bought a Smith's Machine Bench, that allows the user to twist their wrists and the bench press bar locks in place at any height to reduce the chances of injury due to a lack of spotter. Can be used for many more exercises instead of just bench press.
Another option would be a Universal System. But your problem is now educating the rule makers or enforcers that walking alone will not be sufficient for physically demanding cardio workout. Firefighter cardio fitness will actually be reduced. Plus without any strength training, their worker's compensation claims may increase during physically demanding emrgency incidents. The other selling point for a total wellness program is exercise actually reduces sickness, use of sick time, and minor medical injuries that require a doctors visit which will reduce the insurance claims portion of what drives the annual cost of health care, barring they provide you with a health insurance plan.
Permalink Reply by FETC on December 17, 2010 at 2:58pm
If it was that easy.... but if it (is) or (was) mandatory and you are ordered to complete while on duty, then everything you do should be covered under worker's compensation and labor laws. Signing a release would lessen the firefighters benefit. The change in what is allowed as exercise is simply to reduce the occurrance or liability ($$$) from happening again.
I think the city understands the potential for serious injury when folks lift weights... We both know that this could happen!
and an even bigger concern is what happens when one overdoes it...
I think the concept of training as if your life depends on it can, at times, be exceeded beyond reality. Don't feel as if you are the only department to focus on firefighter weight lifting. This occurred in my department and a compromise was reached. It's a given that we, as firefighters need to do weight lifing, which also translates into bone and muscle strengthening, which obviously prevents expensive injuries to the firefighter in the future. The compromise is how much weight you can lift... This is the focal point and the solution to your situation. Dialog is needed to prevent this kind of "knee jerk" reaction...
Workers Comp over here in Oz is fairly straight forward- if it happened on the job, then it's generally claimable.
I know a few commercial organizations that have removed gyms from their workplace- the whole liability issue is a can of worms. The biggets challenge is that "untrained" people using the equipment and using it without supervision from someone who is trained.
And signing of a release doesn't mean jack- the OHS Act over here clearly puts an onus on employers to provide adequate training and supervision.
As for other ways to workout, some have better outcomes than others- choose wisely (or at least alternate exercise)...