Employers are expected to provide a safe workspace for their workforce. This is a good thing but becomes challenging during an emergency. Firefighters do not have regular work.
Their next emergency is not necessarily known. The work environment, time of day, and other issues are variables and outside of firefighters’ control. Still, there is a responsibility to protect firefighters the best possible way. This includes protective clothing and the training needed to work in the expected environment. As the industry continues to evolve, more variations of emergencies are emerging, which leads to more methods of protecting firefighters. In a dynamic industry, challenges to keep up are great but absolutely necessary.
One of the things that the pandemic should have taught us is that there will continue to be new threats to firefighter health and wellness. Of course, this pandemic has affected everyone, but for those in the fire service, knowledge of hazards and a commitment to safety give firefighters a leg up in preparing and adapting. Even with a deadly virus, firefighters should have habits and personal protective equipment (PPE) that address many of the concerns. It is also an attitude. Understanding that firefighters have the ability to evaluate risks and consider reasonable options allows for a proper approach to working in hazard zones and unknown environments.
For some time now, the fire service has been promoted as an all-hazards service. This requires a great deal of preparation for the departments and firefighters. There is the obvious need for training, both initially as newer responses are expected and ongoing to maintain skills. The preparation also requires obtaining the appropriate PPE for the specific risks and hazards likely during the emergency response. Too often, there is the approach of “one size fits all.” By that I mean frequently fire departments take their structural firefighting PPE and try to “adapt” it to the emergency at hand.
There may be various reasons for this. It could be budgetary. It may be a lack of total understanding because of a lack of information or research. It could be an attitude that we always have to be ready for a fire, so we always need our structural firefighting PPE. Whatever the reason, now is the time to evaluate what you do and adjust based on the risks presented by the response to “all hazards.” We have precedent and examples of that adjustment. Technical rescue teams and hazardous materials responders know that regular firefighting PPE is not proper for the jobs they are doing. We also understand that wildland firefighting PPE is different from structural firefighting PPE and vice versa. On some responses, it is necessary to have body armor.
Some things to think about: Should you be wearing your structural PPE while on an EMS call? Is this the proper use when going into someone’s home to provide medical care? “But what if we get a fire?” you ask. Maybe the answer is to put your PPE on when you get the fire call. “But we don’t have room on our vehicle to store all this.” Maybe it is time to look at what you carry and get rid of the items you haven’t used in forever. Look at what you do regularly and address those calls, but don’t forget about your primary responses. If you are going to say yes to all added workloads, then do it right and request the proper equipment to protect your firefighters. Stop trying to put a square peg in a round hole.
The same discussion could be made regarding responses to vehicle crashes. Adjustments have been made as firefighters mostly wear reflective vests as required by law when working on the roadways. Of course, this did not happen overnight, as there were concerns regarding what may happen if there were a fire. There were also others who tried to fit their reflective structural PPE into the requirements of roadway reflective vests, mostly to no avail. There is now discussion in some circles regarding the use of firefighting helmets on automobile crashes along with the rest of the ensemble. Questions are being asked regarding the appropriateness and effectiveness of the helmets. Others are looking at the real need to wear the structural PPE while providing service on these incidents. Yes, we should question everything we do as we expand our services to see if we are protecting the responders as they deserve to be protected.
At a recent conference, a couple of presenters asked whether anyone had read the literature that came with PPE. It has information on what the PPE can and cannot do along with maintenance instructions. Most in attendance did not read it and relied on what others told them or just figured they would keep doing things as they always had. There was no need to “read the label.” It may be time to rethink that. There is a lot of valuable information and things that can make a difference in protecting firefighters in those instructions. I am not naïve enough to think that all firefighters will look, but organizations need to designate personnel to take the steps necessary to learn as much about their PPE as possible.
The job of firefighting has become much more complex because of taking on additional responsibilities. This occurs as the number of calls increases and more information is available to assist with job performance. This requires training, research into best practices, and study of industry progress. The challenge is getting greater as many departments are spread thin because of inadequate staffing and loss of training time from run volume increase. Further, there is more of a need to prepare for structural firefighting, even as the reports indicate the number of building fires is decreasing. Certainly, there are a lot of factors that go into providing quality service while offering the best possible protection for firefighters.
The job of firefighters continues to evolve with more responsibilities. With this comes more risk to firefighters. Whether it is carcinogens or coronavirus, there are more things to consider when protecting firefighters. Today’s PPE is arguably the best it has ever been, but it is not perfect in every situation, and it has limitations. Individuals and organizations need to understand as much as possible about their gear including what it is designed for and how it is maintained. Departments need to do what they can for their most valuable resource and look at all the threats and minimize each as best they can. Safety equipment is a part of this equation, and its benefit is maximized through education and proper use.
RICHARD MARINUCCI is the executive director of the Fire Department Safety Officers Association (FDSOA) and chief (ret.) of the White Lake Township (MI) Fire Department. He retired as chief of the Farmington Hills (MI) Fire Department in 2008, a position he had held since 1984. He is a Fire Apparatus & Emergency Equipment and Fire Engineering Editorial Advisory Board member, a past president of the International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC), and past chairman of the Commission on Chief Fire Officer Designation. In 1999, he served as acting chief operating officer of the U.S. Fire Administration for seven months. He has a master’s degree and three bachelor’s degrees in fire science and administration and has taught extensively.
