Use of fire extinguishers

[Fishy]

Yes Fishy but many of my clubs are small, open perhaps only once or twice a week and often staffed by volunteers or people on a very low wage. Staff turnover is often extremely high. Take one football club. Open on Wednesday and Saturday only. One part-time member of staff. If he can't turn up then the secretary has to phone around to get a replacement, someone's son or daughter who is looking for a few extra quid. Maybe 40 or 50 patrons. I imagine that if an incipient fire was discovered, someone, drunk or sober, might attempt to tackle it. Whether they tackle it or not, fire risk assessment is about saving lives. I see no point in forcing these small clubs in to providing fire extinguisher training to staff who may be there for such short periods. Framing a strategy around a simple instruction of immediate alert and evacuate is to me reasonable.
We have not had a single fatality or serious injury as a result of an accidental fire in a private members club as far as any of us can ascertain in over twenty years.
Yes to fire extinguisher training, of course I see the merits, but horses for courses!

...all of which (according to my understanding & what I've been told by lawyers over the years) would not influence a verdict in Court one jot!

Fire law gives no credence to lack of 'affordability' as a defence - it might affect the sentence, but not the verdict.  As I say, the presumption is that if you can't afford to do something safely, you don't do it at all  (I'm not saying that the subject of the OP describes an 'unsafe' situation by the way - it's the principle I'm talking about). 

It's a bit like trying to tell the policeman that's pulled you over for driving without insurance that you couldn't afford to buy it 'cos you're on minimum wage - you can imagine what the response would be!

[wee brian]

Cost does come into it - its all about proportionality.

In a factory where there are things that catch fire regularly because of the processes involved (and you can't avoid that) then you spend a lot of time and money teaching your staff how to use the extinguishers.

In a little club maybe provide a few extinguishers in sensible places and get the volunteer staff to watch a video.

[Fishy]

Cost does come into it - its all about proportionality.

In a factory where there are things that catch fire regularly because of the processes involved (and you can't avoid that) then you spend a lot of time and money teaching your staff how to use the extinguishers.

Absolutely - cost influences what's 'reasonable' in the circumstances, but the point I was trying to make was that once you've established what's reasonably practicable, you can't use lack of affordability as an excuse not to implement it.  The acceptable level of fire risk isn't influenced by the size of an RP's bank balance!

[wee brian]

Agreed.

[lyledunn]

Ok chaps, affordability is an issue but not the key one. If a small club is staffed by someone who is there on a temporary basis covering a shift then it would be difficult to prove to a court that the strategy was adequate if the person injured themselves or someone else when they used an extinguisher in an incorrect way. If a fire is discovered the employers duty is to keep people safe. In small premises he can do that by giving clear instruction that on discovering a fire the staff member should commence evacuation and not attempt to tackle the fire under any circumstances. What case would there be to answer if no one is injured?
However, this is just my personal opinion. You guys are the ones who have been around the corners and I very much respect your advice. Is there a particular video that you might recommend for the circumstances I describe. Many thanks.

[Fishy]

Ok chaps, affordability is an issue but not the key one. If a small club is staffed by someone who is there on a temporary basis covering a shift then it would be difficult to prove to a court that the strategy was adequate if the person injured themselves or someone else when they used an extinguisher in an incorrect way. If a fire is discovered the employers duty is to keep people safe. In small premises he can do that by giving clear instruction that on discovering a fire the staff member should commence evacuation and not attempt to tackle the fire under any circumstances. What case would there be to answer if no one is injured?
However, this is just my personal opinion. You guys are the ones who have been around the corners and I very much respect your advice. Is there a particular video that you might recommend for the circumstances I describe. Many thanks.

Slight correction, if I may?  Affordability isn't an issue - it shouldn't influence safety decision making (of any type) at all.  Cost may, though.

[wee brian]

A policy of never using fire extinguishers is often used to justify not providing them and or the appropriate training. I think this is a poor approach and puts people at greater risk.

Apparently even an MP managed to use one the other day so it can't be that difficult!

Minister saves the day in Commons chip-pan blaze
 
"Tory MP Tobias Ellwood knows a thing or two about putting out fires. After all, he?s Minister for the Middle East. So it was just as well that the former Army officer was on hand this week when a chip-pan fire raged out of control in the Commons tea rooms.
 
As flames engulfed the kitchen, Ellwood, 49, dashed in with a fire extinguisher to quell the blaze, singeing his hair and eyebrows in the process.
 
Such heroics were clearly wasted on his Conservative colleague Alec Shelbrooke. Moments after the disaster had been averted, Shelbrooke arrived at the counter, impatiently enquiring: ?Where have my sausages got to?"

[colin todd]

Would the world be any worse if the building has burned to the ground?

[wee brian]

Its a great building and it would be a tragedy to lose it. Its the stuff that goes on in it that people have issue with.

[Mr. P]

It's the people in the building which is the problem. Messieur Ellwood 49 (was that like 'Housewife 59?) likely remembered his military training where, he refreshed at least annually, his fire training... as they all do!!!
[singeing his hair and eyebrows in the process] - saves waxing and tweezers!!!

[colin todd]

Give me Holyrood every time.

[kurnal]

Hi Col if you are home sick I will happily buy you a one way ticket and make a small offer for your hovel in Surrey. Auld Reekie calls!

[wee brian]

I always like to step over the brass plate in Westminster Hall. Its the point where William Wallace was tried for going on about Scotland too much.....

[colin todd]

I always like to step on (the current) Stirling Bridge; you can see where Sir Bill picked off the English and sent them homewards tae think again.

[nearlythere]

A policy of never using fire extinguishers is often used to justify not providing them and or the appropriate training. I think this is a poor approach and puts people at greater risk.

Apparently even an MP managed to use one the other day so it can't be that difficult!

Minister saves the day in Commons chip-pan blaze
 
"Tory MP Tobias Ellwood knows a thing or two about putting out fires. After all, he?s Minister for the Middle East. So it was just as well that the former Army officer was on hand this week when a chip-pan fire raged out of control in the Commons tea rooms.
 
As flames engulfed the kitchen, Ellwood, 49, dashed in with a fire extinguisher to quell the blaze, singeing his hair and eyebrows in the process.
 
Such heroics were clearly wasted on his Conservative colleague Alec Shelbrooke. Moments after the disaster had been averted, Shelbrooke arrived at the counter, impatiently enquiring: ?Where have my sausages got to?"

A Guy Fawkes moment ruined.