Fire - Unit D

[Mikejames161]

Hi all

When identifying hazards in the workplace I noticed a lot of issues if a fire broke out the lack of training, no fire wardens etc so I have put fire as a hazard as it has the potential to cause harm due to the lack of training etc

however I'm worried as it can also be the result of another hazard such as faulty electrics etc.

Do any of you guys think that it would be acceptable to put fire as the hazard?

[bernicarey]

Technically, I would say Fire is the potential outcome of other factors, i.e. the Risk, not the initial hazard. It's often referred to as a hazard, but it's the other factors that lead to it which, IMHO, are the real hazard.

This is one of the things about the English language that confuses foreigners.
I did read somewhere years ago that one of the problem with H&S Law across the EU and getting equal interpretation, was that some other languages don't really have separate words for Risk and Hazard. I've no idea if that's true.

I mean, we do a Fire Risk Assessment, but we detail all the things that could cause it and increase the risk to life; such as lack of training in Fire Awareness, which then leads to things like blocked Fire Exits, and so it builds up to the eventual Risk to Life, which gets referred to as a Fire Hazard.

I had an argument with my Tutor over one of my Hazards. I did my Unit D while in the Nevada desert, and listed 'sand storms' as a Hazard, with the outcome as eye injury from flying sand particles.
My Tutor said 'Eye Injury' was the hazard, not the sand storm; but without the wind blowing the sand up into mini whirlwinds, there wasn't the potential for eye injury from the sand/dust. So we fell out big time over that, and I listed Sand Storms as a Hazard, which required goggles and Eye Wash to be available to reduce the risk of Eye Injury.

[Tyban]

Hi Mike,

I would agree with Berni in that Fire may be the result of other problems and hazards such as overloading of electric sockets or extension cables or storage of flammable liquids near ignition sources.

[Mikejames161]

Thanks for the replies! Min appreciated

[Mat]

I also don't think you can have fire for a hazard, any more than you could have cut fingers as a hazard.

However, You can still get fire, and the issues related to it, by identifying whatever it is in the workplace that is the most significant cause of fire, and choosing that as your most significant hazard for your report. You can then bring blocked exits, lack of training etc. into your assessment.

I hope it helps.

[tinamorgan991]

I would argue that you can have fire as a hazard, after all it has the 'potential to cause harm' and that is the definition of a hazard. I think we sometimes get caught up with terminology and overlook the real reason for the risk assessment in the first place. On some risk assessments they are worded 'who could be harmed and how'. It would be reasonable to have a fire as the hazard with smoke inhalation/burns etc as the outcome. If you want you could always state the hazard as fire due to poorly maintained electrical equipment, overloaded sockets, poorly managed hot works etc. Spread of fire could also be a hazard due to failure to install FFE/train staff and undertake a FRA. Go with your instinct and don't be put off by terminology.

[Mat]

I would argue that you can have fire as a hazard, after all it has the 'potential to cause harm' and that is the definition of a hazard. I think we sometimes get caught up with terminology and overlook the real reason for the risk assessment in the first place. On some risk assessments they are worded 'who could be harmed and how'. It would be reasonable to have a fire as the hazard with smoke inhalation/burns etc as the outcome. If you want you could always state the hazard as fire due to poorly maintained electrical equipment, overloaded sockets, poorly managed hot works etc. Spread of fire could also be a hazard due to failure to install FFE/train staff and undertake a FRA. Go with your instinct and don't be put off by terminology.

I would very much agree with you Tina.

The world would indeed be a better place, if a little bit less time was spent by us sitting at desks everyday, agonising over which word to use on a bit of paper that will (probably) never be read out of the office, and a bit more time was spent it the workplace working out how to make workers lives better (although I am an old cynic, that is kinda the point of the H+S profession).

However,
When it comes to Unit D, things are a little different. When working on the submission, i feel it is worth remembering that it is a 'fantasy document', that is being produced to conclude a massive amount of study and work, and all that really matters is milking it for every possible point.



There are 10 points riding on the assessments attached each to the two Hazards, and the assignment brief mentions that poorly selected hazards attract poor scores. Personally, I would therefore steer away for anything 'borderline' in case the person marking your script fails to agree with your selection.

Cheers,

Matt

[Mat]

Whenever I go to the Nebosh website, I always think this must have been how I looked.....

.... taking my 'concise' Unit D submission to the post office.

[bernicarey]

So I started my previous post in this Topic with a 'Technically', because it is a point of discussion and angst for Unit D submissions, which hazard to choose for your Risk Assessments!

I didn't actually say you Can or you Can't use it..., but I guess I did give the latter as an impression.

Now it's time for me to eat a bit of Humble Pie, even thought I'm not changing my opinion about Fire being a very difficult choice, for the reasons I mentioned.

Over the weekend, I got a Deja Vu feeling about this problem and went back and looked at my Unit D files, because I couldn't remember what I'd submitted as the two actual Risk Assessments in it; well it was 7 years ago and I've been busy since then...

I have to admit I used Fire as my Physical choice!

I only had 6 Physical Hazards:
Fire
Road Transportation
Electrical Supplies and Distribution
Slips and Trips
Falls from height
Blowing sand and dust

I also looked at the Post Submission Feedback sheet.
That physical 'Hazard Identification' selection only scored me 4/8, Including the previously mentioned sandstorms. I did struggle with finding 'Physical' hazards.
So Fire was the only thing really worth using; thinking back and reviewing some of my initial drafts, I agonised over the choice; at one time I had started writing up the Road Transportation.
I actually got 6/10 for that Fire Risk Assessment.

Meanwhile I had 13 Health & Welfare choices, which for 'Hazard Identification' scored me more with 6/8; yet the one I picked for the Risk Assessment only scored me 4/10. What did I choose? Occupational Stress.

So if you feel Fire is your strongest Physical Hazard, then it has to be your choice, but make sure you pick whatever Hazard has the most you can write up.

For example, I even included Lightning as one of my ignition sources, because we were in the desert, and we did get 'Dry' Thunderstorms come across from the mountains giving some great lightning displays (only appreciated if inside a building) and the buildings all had lightning protection. I was even able to pick up that the Grounding Rods were not installed in accordance with the relevant US Fire Protection Standard.

[Jack Kane]

Just to throw a quick comment into the mix, I think it depends on what context we define a hazard - 'something with the potential to cause harm'.

Fire fighters by the very nature of their work will tackle fires. To me the hazards here are pretty obvious, i.e. fire. The risk assessments used by the fire and rescue service will also include other hazards such as electricity and other examples given above.

[Mikejames161]

Think I've started a debate lol.

[Mat]

Think I've started a debate lol.

I wouldnt worry about that....


the real question is "whatcha gonna do?"......



Are you 'pro fire' or 'no fire'