Increase in fire response times could be “difference between life and death”

[brumble49]

Fire and rescue services are taking longer to reach fires, according to figures released today by the Home Office. The Fire Brigades Union (FBU) has warned the “alarming” increase is evidence of the impact of fire and rescue service cuts.

Response times have slowed gradually over a period of decades, with fires in non-derelict buildings, involving casualties, or requiring more than five fire engines, also known as primary fires, the worst affected.

• Services take 11 seconds longer to reach a primary fire, compared with last year
  
• Response times are at the slowest since current records began in 2009/10, taking 52 seconds longer on average
  
• Firefighters take 2 minutes 42 seconds longer to respond to a primary fire, compared with 1994/5, under a previous recording system
  

Matt Wrack, FBU general secretary, said:

“In a fire, a matter of seconds could be the difference between life and death, so these figures are incredibly alarming. Services have been cut to the bone, and it’s obvious that with fewer firefighters and scarcer resources, firefighters are taking longer to get to fires, putting lives and businesses at risk.

“This is just part of the picture. Many services are not properly crewing fire engines, so there is no guarantee that there will be a safe number of firefighters on board when it arrives.

“The slowing of response times has been gradual, but the impact over a number of years is staggering. The government urgently needs to invest in our services and, crucially, we need national standards to set a required response time. Every second counts.”

Concerns were raised about the huge variation in response times in a major report from Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue Services (HMICFRS). The report noted “there are no nationally established response standards based on the risk of an incident or the likelihood of surviving it”, pointing to huge variations in responses to primary fires.

https://www.fbu.org.uk/news/2020/01/16/i...h%E2%80%9D

[knotty-san]

“In a fire, a matter of seconds could be the difference between life and death, so these figures are incredibly alarming. Services have been cut to the bone, and it’s obvious that with

Yet he's fine with co responding which would take crews away from fire response.
Hypocritical.

[bill.advanced]

Possibly putting your gear on before mounting the appliance adds to this.
I watched cowcaddens a while ago whilst sitting at the traffic lights at Milton st.
They took a good while to get on the move. I have no doubt this is a H&S issue, but it seems wrong to me.

[knotty-san]

Possibly putting your gear on before mounting the appliance adds to this.

In the last few years if we had got injured putting kit on whilst the motor was moving management would have hung us out to dry.

[bill.advanced]

In the last few years if we had got injured putting kit on whilst the motor was moving management would have hung us out to dry.

Well that shows where the priorities lie. I guessed that would be the case knotty.
When I think of us struggling to get dressed before arrival, putting on sets all to save a few seconds. You have to laugh the home office are complaining about response times, yet insisting on dressing before getting on the move. I reckon cowcaddens took around a minute that day. In all my years, I never heard of anyone being injured putting their gear on en route. Persons reported must put current serving members in a poor situation I guess.

[knotty-san]

Well that shows where the priorities lie. I guessed that would be the case knotty.

It's the health and safety exec who insist on it.
Plenty people, including myself, have pulled back muscles getting ready on the way to a shout in the past.
Nowadays it's not just a matter of booking off til it's better.
Rivo reports, capability stages, HR absence management interviews. The list goes on.
If you get injured en route to a shout and you don't have a seat belt on you're in bother and the union won't help you.
Some gaffers will still ask for sets whilst mobile but that was getting fewer and fewer before I finished. If they order you to put a set on and something happens they're right in the shit.
Changed days.

[bill.advanced]

It's the health and safety exec who insist on it.
Plenty people, including myself, have pulled back muscles getting ready on the way to a shout in the past.
Nowadays it's not just a matter of booking off til it's better.
Rivo reports, capability stages, HR absence management interviews. The list goes on.
If you get injured en route to a shout and you don't have a seat belt on you're in bother and the union won't help you.
Some gaffers will still ask for sets whilst mobile but that was getting fewer and fewer before I finished. If they order you to put a set on and something happens they're right in the shit.
Changed days.

Cheers for the input knotty, much appreciated.
Really sad, we allow a woman to perish down a hole, we are told that the 135 is to heavy for the modern fire service, and we spend precious seconds putting on our gear before leaving the station. As I said knotty I never injured myself in over 30 years, and I honestly cannot recall anyone being injured putting their gear on en route.
For me it’s all about common sense, and having a connection with the public we serve. It sadly seems that this has been lost in the madness of HR and the inflexibility of H&S. There is no balance here, no sense of urgency, next we will be told to take away the blue lights and drive within the speed limit to incidents.
Looking on from the outside now, it seems the dog is wagging the tail, and folk who have never attended an incident are laying down the rules.

[knotty-san]

For me it’s all about common sense

Common sense would tell me to wear a seat belt in a fast moving vehicle but we never used to do it.
Your pension is at risk now if you get injured en route and haven't been wearing one.

[bill.advanced]

Common sense would tell me to wear a seat belt in a fast moving vehicle but we never used to do it.
Your pension is at risk now if you get injured en route and haven't been wearing one.

My common sense quote was more referring to what happened to the woman who died, and talk about the 135 not being fit for purpose, and in general the culture being dictated to you by people who apparently have no common sense.
The fire service is all about risk and judgment based on experience and the situations put in front of you knotty.
Also knotty if it’s unsafe to get dressed en route, well the same would apply to fast moving vehicles running red lights. My point is where is this heading, will you all be wrapped up in cotton wool at some point in the future by you HR department and over zealous H&S, making it impossible to operate as an effective fire service.

[knotty-san]

Also knotty if it’s unsafe to get dressed en route, well the same would apply to fast moving vehicles running red lights.

Slightly different situation and we also don't run red lights now.
There's been a big red sign in the crew cab telling us to stop at them since Strathclyde days.