Fire Warden Training

[stevew]

I am aware of an increasing number of premises where the responsible person has sent staff on fire warden courses without a thought to the fire evacuation strategy set out in the fire risk assessment.
One particular course, endorsed by the IFE, is run by a well respected voluntary service and is advertised as meeting the requirement of the RRO.  Having spoken to a representative, their take on the RRO Section 2 SS18 Safety Assistance is that all responsible persons must employ the services of competent persons, including fire wardens, to assist.

The above raises several issues.
Firstly the interpretation of SS18.  Fire wardens/marshals are not required in all cases.  Any decision has to take into account a number of significant fire safety considerations. 

Secondly delegates from all types of premises are coming away from the course with a 3 year certificate which is interpreted by the individual and employer as sufficient fire safety training for the duration of the certificate. I would not support 3 yearly fire safety refresher training in any circumstances. 

Comments please.

Steve

[The Colonel]

I have seen a comment recently from a fire authority inspecting officer that they are content with practical fire safety training one year followed by an online session the following year. However the next training should be practical with all training following a similar pattern, in other words fire safety refresher training must be an annual thing. I would not go along with a cert that said you need do nothing for 3 years, there should be something based on an assessment on a regular basis.

I have also seen enforcement notices that include the lack of fire safety refresher training on a regular basis as one of the points for enforcement.

[kurnal]

The need for refresher training and appropriate frequencies depend on so many things.

How good the training
How complex is the site
What is expected of the fire wardens
How complex is the emergency plan
How often do they get to put it all into practice
What other level of fire related responsibilities do they have

Annual refreshers will be needed if for the rest of the 12 months the fire wardens never get to think aboout fire safety again. Or if their role as a fire warden is totally divorced from their day job.

But if they are regularly hands on, for example carrying out regular drills, hazard spotting, testing fire alarms, sprinklers, emergency lighting, inducting new members of staff, evac chair training etc  then 3 yearly updates may be fine.

[Clevelandfire 3]

OK so my First Aid at Work cert is valid for three years. Is that too long? My Fire Management cert is valid for five years is that too long? In a world where money is king i very much doubt any RP has the expendable income to send people on yearly fire marshall courses
Some training is better than nothing.
It depends on several factors though.
How good is trainer?
What training is on offer and who decided what is or what isn't a good fire warden course?
What type of premises are the wardens going to be working?
Is it the type of property where regular fire drills take place?

[wee brian]

If a fire warden is there to manage an evacuation, why teach him/her to use fire extinguisshers?......

[kurnal]

Wee B
Is this not in accordance with Article 13 (1) (a) and (b) and 13 (3) (a) and (b)?

[Midland Retty]

If a fire warden is there to manage an evacuation, why teach him/her to use fire extinguisshers?......

A fire warden should, in my opinion, forfill a much wider role than simply marshalling evacuations.

Another point I want to make here is that many training providers, from what I am told by people who have attended fire warden courses, do not cover safe door entry procedures (i.e check door know with back of your hand, put foot in front of door crouch down, open etc.) I find that a little bit troubling.

[kurnal]

Fire wardens may fulfil many roles.

Prevention of fire
Hazard spotting
Supervision of contractors and hot work permits
Training and inductions
Testing and maintenance
In an emergency- as sweepers, routers, buddies, assisting those with special needs.
Liaison and guiding fire service
Roll calls
Management of assembly points
Liason with adjoining properties
Marshalling incoming traffic
Preventing re-entry to a building.
Shutting down processes and plant.
Welfare of those outside the building


Apart from care and nursing environments I do discourage them from opening a door if they have reson to believe there is a fire on the other side. The biggest hazard they face in doing this is a potential backdraught.  I cover it on care courses but on commercial / industrial courses tend to advise against it.

[Midland Retty]

Apart from care and nursing environments I do discourage them from opening a door if they have reson to believe there is a fire on the other side. The biggest hazard they face in doing this is a potential backdraught.  I cover it on care courses but on commercial / industrial courses tend to advise against it.

But if part of a fire wardens duties is to investigate all alarm activations to ascertain if there is a genuine fire, then how could they not enter the affected zone,area or room?

I dont see how you can say " if you suspect there is a fire on the other side don't go in" because there may not be any obvious signs. Clearly if there are obvious signs then of course they shouldn't go in.

But there are quick and easy checks that the warden can perform to decide on whether it is safe to proceed, and if a warden is taked to investigate alarms, and undertake sweeps of the building I would suggest that regardless of whether it is an office block, nursing home or otherwise they should receive training on how to enter / search rooms safely.

If they have an addressable panel and it tells them a detector in room 101 has gone off you seem to be suggesting Kurnal that they don't go into that room just in case there is a fire. Afterall the detector has gone off, reasonable to suspect or assume a fire might have started there. Whereas the cause of the activation might be a uwfs.

[kurnal]

OK guv fair cop. A poorly considered comment.
Yes I agree with you, to clarify-  if the only evidence is a smoke detector in alarm yes they should enter the room involved to investigate.  But if there are other signs that there may be a fire- signs of smoke, heat on the door or handle,  noise in the room then unless there is potental to save a life they should not open the door.

Perhaps just a smell of burning warrants investigaton too.

[wee brian]

OK, so on looking into the room, they find a fire.

Do they fight the fire or raise the alarm and let somebody else have a go.

[Midland Retty]

Hi Wee B

It depends.

The priority always is to raise the alarm (if the alarm isn't already sounding).

Depending on the number of wardens available they will begin to marshalling the evacuation and checking their allocated areas are clear on hearing the alarm.

The first warden (who discovered the fire)  may attempt first aid firefighting so long as they have had appropriate training and it is safe to do so.

Their training should be such that they will know if the fire is too big to tackle or when to call it a day and evacuate.

if there is just one warden available they should raise the alarm, marshall evacuation / do building sweep then evacuate themselves.

[AnthonyB]

We would accept a 3 year certificate in an FRA as long as there is ongoing in house refreshers, most often in the form of the evacuation drill and wardens debrief session every 6/12 months.

It's not realistic in every situation (although admittedly is in some) to shell out every single year on sending staff away for a day on a course.

At the end of the day the frequency and nature of training comes down to risk assessment - although the above is our general approach to the types of premises we deal with it isn't exclusive and far more rigorous regimes are specified in some instances.

The biggest problem we see is the use of the fire wardens course for people with fire safety management responsibilities (managers etc) and of course this is inadequate as there is more to managing fire safety than knowing what to do when the bells go and how to put out a waste bin on fire.....

As an aside when they reviewed the First Aid at Work Regs last year they were going for mandatory annual update training, but all the industry bodies went up in arms and now it is a non enforceable recommendation, so perfectly OK to only retrain/recert every 3 years - and people require first aid at work far more frequently than there are fires.

[stevew]

Thanks for the comments some of which delve into the role of the FW.

Firstly in raising the matter I accept that training will be appropriate and delivered by competent persons.

However my take on the role of the FW may differ from some.  In my view they have an important role before the fire,  assisting   
management in maintaining a fire safe environment on a daily basis.

What I am not recommending is that a FW should attend a full 1/2 or 1 day course each year.  We recommend a short annual refresher.  How can 3 year refresher training for a FW be reasonable where all other employees may be receiving annual training?

Concerned to hear that a 3 year certificate would be accepted with 'in house' refreshers involving fire drills and de-brief only.  Drills put training into practice and should be recorded as such. 

I would be interested to know how such a training regime would be 'sold' to a fire inspector.





 

[AnthonyB]

It's never caused problems with any fire authorities in the UK yet in any premises we have dealt with. We do require that the debrief includes relevant refresher training/toolbox talks to staff, all recorded of course. It goes down well with occupiers as they are more likely to do the training as they already have to accommodate the drill & adding an update session at the end is easy to accommodate.

It's difficult enough to get places to put their staff on the three year certificate, let alone shell out on a course and lost time every year.

Risk assessment will determine requirements in every case, but the answer is not always spending a fortune on external courses all the time, despite the training providers wishes.

Good site specific in house training can sometimes be of more value than a generic external course.