Are H&S advisors over stepping the mark?

[Bert]

I’m being told by a H&S adviser that staff MUST be instructed NOT to use fire extinguishers unless they have been trained to do so.  I accept that extinguishers are more effective in the hands of trained staff, but I don’t agree that training is a prerequisite to using them.

Extinguishers are after all, designed as simple to use first aid fire fighting appliances and have clear user instructions printed on them.  In over twenty years of fire safety and fire fighting I have not come across any instances were people have sustained injuries from using correctly maintained and serviced fire extinguishers. (Has any one else?)  

Bearing in mind that something like 70% of all fires are extinguished using hand held extinguishers, then if people are dissuaded from using them unless trained, the risk of injury and death resulting from uncontrolled fires will increase significantly. Furthermore, if training is essential, then surely all extinguishers must be made inaccessible to none trained staff ?

[AnthonyB]

I know of circumstances where lack of training has lead to problems - such as a RIDDOR reportable injury to a member of staff because they tried to tackle an F Class Fryer Fire with a CO2 extinguisher an ended up blasting superheated oil all over their arms & upper body, seen footage of poorly/un-trained people using Powder extinguishers on Class B spills in life safety situations and not extinguishing the flames (started discharge too far away, directed wrongly so ended up chasing flash back around, etc, etc) and so on.

The risks in some environments of injury from misuse are less, especially with advances in technonogy and practice - an office fire point would not necessarily result in injury as both the extinguisher and accompanying signage would clearly & pictographically indicate how to use it, what to use it on and what not to use it on, the water additive or foam extinguisher would have 35kV protection against accidental use on electricity, the CO2 would have a frost free horn, etc (all depending on whether the appropriate makes & models of extinguisher are chosen, whether all the appropriate signage is bothered with, etc)

You could argue that the need is risk based - what could go wrong if the extinguisher isn't used to its best - would it involve injury to the operator? would it involve injury to others (e.g. in life safety situations like motorsport).

Ideally everyone should receive full practical training - but doesn't always happen.

Strangely the only person who normally receives practical training is the fire warden - yet their job is to entail safe evacuation, not act as a works fire brigade - perhaps they should be called evacuation wardens not fire wardens...

WRT H&S people, they sometimes come up with the most insane drivel when they try & dabble in fire matters, especially where most have no more knowledge than the contents of a wardens course - I've seen & heard some crazy stuff!

[kurnal]

Its important to note that the new RRO places much more importance on the role of fire fighting equipment.
You can stop a small fire becoming a big one and so whilst the operator of the extinguisher may face a minor risk it may prevent a large number of people facing a major risk if the fire develops.
A view that is in line with the principles of prevention.
I too have heard this argument about injury and training before. But what is adequate training? A video? or hands on?
My clients tend to want most staff to have an overview by explanation and video, with fire wardens having the full hands on with the gas fired simulator.

Where I plan fire strategy in the bigger places I usually plan some redundancy into the complement of wardens so there is capacity for investigation, evacuation, firefighting and liason.

[Chris Houston]

Some thoughts:

Here,s a different way of looking at it - how many injuries have been caused by wrongly using them.

Does he also ban the use of lifts, stairs, chairs and desks without training?

Health and Safety legislation, in my opinion, sugests that staff are trained to use the equipment given, rather than telling them not to use things without training.  so his objective ought to be to have everyone trained as opposed to restricting use.

[jokar]

Pointing and shooting an extinguisher is the easy part, if you have time to read the instructions and you have english as your first language.  However, the emphasis in the RR(FS)O is on fire-fighting, now isn't that a slightly different term than that of any used before?  The problem is, trained or untrained staff, are not taught to fight fire and Companies could be open to all sorts of litigation in the future if the Judiciary decide what this term actually means.  If the decision is to behave like a firefighter then suitable and sufficient training could and should include more than pointing extinguishers at a target as some training does.

[Bill J]

I think there are 2 issues here.

First - Health and Safety being what it is, should (my opinion) instruct people not to use the fire extinguisher if untrained. After all it is their role to ensure the safety of persons, and people should be instructed to first make all persons aware of the fire, and the H&S "global" remit, is to safely get all people out.

Even if a fire is going to be extinguished by a single extinguisher, by the discoverer, I think we would all agree that an evacuation is necessary. By instructing all untrained staff to Not focus on the Fire, but to raise the alarm and get out, H&S are doing their Job.

Secondly - In a land where the Pay as you Go Lawyers are on many high streets, companies have to protect themselves, (Sad but true), from poor use of equipment, or equipment failures, or tackling a fire too large, or any of many other reasons, it is therefore unrealistic to expect them  to say, have a go if you think you can handle it. I am aware of many offices staffed by (and I do not mean to offend) petite ladies in heels, who may have difficulty wielding a standard fire extinguisher. Is it safe to halve the size of the extinguisher and tell them to make 2 trips?

Hopefully common sense will prevail, and the 70% of fires dealt with by a competent, and possibly untrained person will continue to be dealt with in the same manner.

[fred]

There is a requirement ("where necessary" of course) under RRO Artilce 13 Fire fighting and fire detection for the responsible person to "take measure for fire fighting in the premises ........ and to ensure that "their training and equipment available to them are adequate"

.... and if you want a good example of a training video take a look at the Fawlty Towers episode where Basil tries to deal with a kitchen fire.

[Gasmeter]

I was very interested in the 70% figure, could you point me in the right direction to find the source?  I'm involved in a debate about the merits of staff extinguisher training.

[wee brian]

The figures are produce by the extinguisher manufacturers. FETA or BFPSA I think.

Its a well extablished fact that more fires are put out by people that are not firefighters than those that are.

Of course when they get past the extinguisher stage then you need people with the right kit and training.

My experience of a lot of H&S people is that they dont consider things on balance.

[Mark Newton]

I was very interested in the 70% figure, could you point me in the right direction to find the source?  I'm involved in a debate about the merits of staff extinguisher training.

Gasmeter,
I believe the original source for the figure is the British Crime Survey. A subset of questions deals with fires which were not notified to the local brigade. Not sure when the next set of results is to be published.

[wee brian]

The BCS was retitled the Briths Housing survey or somethinglike that - the fire bit was on the ODPM website but I dont think it covers Commercial premises. (I looked at the FETA website and it wasnt there)

[Gasmeter]

Thanks for the help, I'm concerned that while it is fine to tell folk to 'Get Out, Get the Fire Brigade and Stay Out', people still need to have some elementary knowledge of first aid firefighting; if current thinking in some organisations prevails then then fires that can quickly and easily be put out by some one with basic training will be allowed to develop unecessarily.

[AnthonyB]

I am aware of many offices staffed by (and I do not mean to offend) petite ladies in heels, who may have difficulty wielding a standard fire extinguisher. Is it safe to halve the size of the extinguisher and tell them to make 2 trips?

There is no excuse for having fire extinguishers that cannot be wielded by staff. Reputable manufaccturers and suppliers have overcome this. There is no reason to buy a 14 kilo charged weight 9 litre water extinguisher any more when you can install a far lighter 3 litre water additive that has the same fire fighting capacity (13A).

Yes prior to this you had to double up as a 6 litre plain water only had an 8A rating & before ratings the codes required either one 2 gallon or two 1 gallon extinguishers per 200m2. Thats why Boots, M&S and Woolworths stores used to have double extinguisher points goingback over the last 40 years as they deliberately used 1 gallon & later 6 litre extinguishers to take account of largely female staffing

CO2 extinguishers are now available again in 1 kilo sizes with a frost free horn to complement the water additives.

The LPG rigs now favoured are a clean safe way of training, but do give a rose tinted view of fire that instantly goes out and produces no smoke - my training was all real fuel - if you didn't apply the extinguisher correctly the fire didn't go out or flashed back and you stank of smoke as a result!

However even this is far far superior to a sign on the wall or a page in an H&S handbook which is what many staff get. Proper training forms a key part of fire response using the triple-A method - Alarm, Assist (evacuation), Attack

[ian gough]

The figures for fires extinguished (or not) by first aid firefighting equipment was produced by Chubb for FETA.

[messy]

Well that's what I call independant evidence!!!!!!

(It's about as reliable as to 8/10 cats prefer Whiskas - how did the market research people come to that conclusion??)

Remember: 4/5 of all statistics are made up