http://www.fulhamchronicle.co.uk/fulham ... -33531643/

Whats a "snatch rescue" Bob?

What exactly are they saying he did wrong??

Snatch rescue in to building body picked up /dragged outside. Know location of casualty straight in straight out.

They're saying failed to wear his correct firefighting kit, which could mean a number of things from wearing absolutely no fire kit at all including B.A. To something like not wearing just his firefighting gloves.

OK I'm being biased but what he's done is rush into a building save a life but not wore something. Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't and the casualty dies. He sustained an injury in saving her.

Heath and Safety gone mad?? According to the article the guy hurt his shoulder saving someone surely he deserves a commendation not a rebuke.

but this is the world we live in now isnt it?

For him to be rebuked, someone else must have reported him.

Someone else filled in a report.

Someone else took the report to the next level, and so it goes on.

I was in one of our offices yesterday and noticed a sign saying we shouldnt be afraid to whistle blow on colleagues.

It isnt just bosses making things as bad as they are, there are plenty of people in between doing their worst o make it worse.

it happens in football.

A referee ref by the letter of the law with no common sense whatsover. Usually because they know some aresehole josworth is sat in the stands on a different gravy train, marking them down for their own personal glory.

And thats the same the world over now.

If you are one of those that has reported someone else, then you are the real problem.

we have that whistle blowing poster too.

Seems the world is run by little grey people with 'plans' to be adhered to and all that counts is the plan ....the system is all they respect and they're all as shallow as a car park puddle. Jeez.

Nearly everything in the world has now been dumbed down. As soon as the job is complete, get ready for the next stage.

A colleague of mine has just been given a formal warning through our disciplinary procedure ( ) for not asking 'are you the account holder' at the start of a call, despite the caller already saying to her that he wasn't the account holder!

I got bollocked on Friday because 2 guys came to service the boiler and I sent them down to the office and told them to ask for Jackie, bastards did as they were told and she was not amused, women pah, do sense of fecking humour

The flip side to all this is people suing left and right which make these pedantic regulations come about, seems there is no room for common sense,

Also nothing wrong with whistleblowing if it is done in good conscience and company's also allow the bosses to be subject of it without recrimination towards the whistleblower

Enron being an example of 'good' whistleblowing

Sounds to me like the newspaper has "twisted" this story (surprise surprise).

They didn't "dock his pay after he saved woman" - he's obviously been on the sick for a length of time that kicks in his docking of pay - standard procedure in many jobs.

Also , it's only right that they look into every major incident and try to improve things or point out any potential problems.
Whilst he was obviously courageous in doing what he did , PPE is issued for a reason.
Surely there's nothing wrong in pointing this sort of thing out to him - to safeguard his and other people's lives in the future

It used to be called safety gear. Perfectly self explanatory. But I hadn't reckoned with the much more obvious term PPE.

Im stood in a Chinese takeaway at the moment. Having just read that for the first time you really don't want me to pull it apart do you

What difference does it make where your stood?

Pull it apart until your hearts content if that's what you wanna do - we're all entitled to our own opinions.
What the hell a chinese takeaway's got to do with it i know not.

Imagine the carnage if he was in the Indians

I think maybe what he's trying to say is that the gadgie should be commended for his courage and fortitude rather than bollocked for not following the obstructive H&S twaddle.

Or he could have done what them PCSO''s in Manchester did and watch that kid drown in a park pond because they weren't 'equipped.'

A life lost but no rules broken. That's the way forward eh??

He's on the sick because of his actions in saving the woman regardless of how the paper twists it as you put it. If he doesn't help in saving the womans life because of some missing PPE he doesn't get criticised by management and therefore doesn't end upon the sick. The story states he's on the sick because of stress not anything to do with the incident he was attending.

PPE is issued for a reason as you rightly say but neither of us know what PPE he was not wearing and more to the point why he wasnt wearing it. A fire appliance can consist of a crew of 4 in this day and age that is the normal. Cleveland Fire Brigade was one of the last brigades to ride 5. So whether that appliance is a Pump Ladder or a Pump then the chances are the crew is 4. Those 4 men will consist of the following

(A) Officer in Charge (OIC)
(B) 2 in the rear of the cab who will be designated Breathing Apparatus (BA) wearers for the length of the shift.
(C) The driver/Pump operator.

Now when that appliance pulls up at the incident which and I'll use the report from the papers words " Smoke was billowing from the property " and from info gathered by people was a "persons reported" (People trapped inside). The 2 BA wearers are donning their sets, which will be on their backs but the masks need putting on before they can enter the building. They then have gloves/helmet to put on. The OIC is doing a quick risk assessment and maybe pulling off the hose reel for the wearers to take into the building. Getting a thermal image camera (TIC) for his wearers. We now have just the driver available and low and behold he has no fire kit or any PPE on as he's just drove the Fire appliance to the incident. He now may have to force entry somewhere for the wearers to get in, do you want him to say I'll just get my full fire kit out of the locker and put it on or do you want him to break in without PPE. You could say why isn't the OIC breaking in fair point but the driver still has get the hose reel/TIC off so if he gets his fire kit/PPE on then the BA wearers cant go into the building because they have no water. Rule 1 never enter a burning building without some form of extinguishing medium. One way or the other if he stops to don his PPE valuable minutes are wasted. Once upon a time the 5th man on the appliance did that. It states he entered the building to assist his colleagues which appears to mean that they only found out it was a persons reported on pulling up at the incident and where told where the casualty was, for example last seen in front room door to the left. The BA wearer have found her in seconds and are on way out with her he has been getting first aid equipment from the appliance with the OIC... Defib, First aid kit, stretcher, oxygen set that or putting on his PPE which do you want ???. OIC has a persons reported he may be the only appliance sent on the initial PDA (appliances sent to the fire) He has to get on to the radio/or designate the driver no one else is available to put a message back to control to "make up. Get more appliances including possibly specials to the incident. There's a lot needs doing in the initial stages of a persons reported incident and as most brigades have a rule which states drivers cant drive in fire kit ( probably dont want drivers throwing around a heavy fire engine while driving in big f**k off wellies with steel toe caps some little rules go out of the window and the driver putting on all his fire kit is one of them. I've attended incidents were my driver has got his fire kit on after the 2nd even 3rd appliance has pulled up. Yes in an ideal world PPE will be worn by all but as firefighters are attending incidents where things have gone wrong and therefore not an ideal world then sometimes corners may get cut. The incident is said to have happened on April 28th last year, does the Brigade in question not have occupational health people who could have visited him. Do they not have a policy where it should have been dealt with in some way by now.

Not arguing with any of that - i've already said that the bloke acted courageously.
I'm just pointing out that all firms/organisations have procedures and they have to stick with em - be they appropriate or not.

I can't see a problem in his bosses pointing out where he MAY have gone wrong in his actions.
As for the sickness/docking pay thing - many places of work operate a system where by your wages drop if you're on the sick over a certain amount of time - that's the part i meant has been "twisted".

"The incident is said to have happened on April 28th last year, does the Brigade in question not have occupational health people who could have visited him."

Agree with this like.

Surely when it comes down to it the employers have a duty of care to their employees?

If firefighters had no objective criteria on which to decide whether to enter burning buildings or not, they'd probably feel under pressure to take unwarranted risks, for 'heroic' reasons. Their lives are as important as anyone else's.

I certainly wouldn't want anyone to give up their life trying to rescue me

Is he still in the Chinese takeaways ?

But isn't that the point of the rescue services? Bob's given us a marvellous insight into how it all works and of course no-one wants the rescuers to die, because the likeliehood is that the rescuee might not make it either.

In my opinion, they can't pay the Fire Services enough.

I agree with the employers having a duty of care and will even push it that the employees, in this case firefighter also have the same duty of care towards themselves and other firefighters as well as anyone they may need to serve. The firefighter concerned may have "training needs" or as the report puts it ‘performance development plan. But there are ways to do it.

In the report it states rebuked his failure to comply with manual handling regulations in the manner that he rescued the casualty.

Never having served within London Fire Brigade I can't really criticise what there policy is for handling casualties but I will presume it goes much along the lines of Cleveland Fire Brigade. That pretty much says 2 firefighters to lift a casualty. Now if only one casualty that works he/she goes onto one the firefighters backs (fireman's lift) and out of the building they go. 2 casualties and both need carrying out "it's a case of Houston we have a problem". If there only a team of 2 firefighters and rules state 2 man lift on all casualties and one those firefighters has someone on his back what happens. I'll tell you strongest gets to carry lightest and he picks the casualty up himself to get them out rules go out of the window.

I've been lucky searched many a burning building never got hurt, broke rules never got found out as nothing untoward happened to warrant an investigation.

When you go to bed tonight look at how close your other bedrooms are to the one your sleeping in. God forbid anything happens but if it does and firefighters are called and have to enter your house wearing BA they'll enter in teams of at least 2, rules state they stay together at all times cant separate. If only one appliance there for little while then there only 1 team to search. If they searching for you and you alone and don't know which room they'll separate to cover the bedrooms quicker in case they hit the empty one first. Stay with your partner rule broke why they want to save life. Only if something goes wrong will anything be said.

Firefighter go to emergencies something has gone wrong yes if no life involved put every safe practice into place to tackle the blaze, if life risk involved then some most all practices may well be forgotten.

He needs to get back to work and stop moaning about it. And his union needs to be broken. And so do the teachers unions.

Unless he's a Poolie like.

What's that? He's not? Righto.

Rather than a new thread.... think some tory said 2 men in a fast car well think they might still needed help here last night. There's over 200 firefighters at it's height. That in the region (counting specials as having 2 firefighters on them) somewhere like 60-65 fire engines

Random thought like but there's probably 30,000 firemen and 500,000 H&S people with absolutely no experience telling them what to do.