When is work on the roading corridor not dangerous? When can you ignore the Code of practice for Temporary Traffic Management (COPTTM) and Traffic Control Devices manual (TCD)? When can basic workplace safety practices be superseded? According to Simon Smith’s article: Health and safety rules stop firefighters checking fire hydrants published in late June 2018, it can all happen if you are a firefighter.
Yes, I am being sarcastic. To be fair, I’ve seen exemplary temporary traffic management deployed by volunteer firefighters around Central Otago. Especially when dealing with some hairy motor vehicle accident sites (think the Kawarau Gorge on an icy morning).
I also need to caveat this blog by saying I haven’t talked to anyone in the New Zealand Fire Service about the issue. This blog is an example of what happens when the media mangles a story and labels something a workplace safety issue when it’s really not.
What does the article say?
- “Firefighters have not been checking fire hydrants due to a lack of a traffic management plan. One in five hydrants across the country might not have been inspected in eight years.”
- Ian Duncan, the Fire and Emergency New Zealand safety manager said routine checking of each hydrant every five years stopped three years ago. “Duncan said the suspension had not impacted firefighting yet.”
- Firefighters were told they must comply with COPTTM by the NZTA
- “A West Auckland laundromat had a lucky escape on June 11th, when firefighters turned up to battle a blaze and could not find the nearby hydrants.”
- Council-owned Watercare has a road painting programme so that 47,000 hydrants across Auckland could be found and all of them were also marked on a GIS mapping system, which firefighters had access to.
What’s Wrong with the Article?
- Having been a professional writer, words are important to me. I’m not a fan of shabby journalism in mainstream media outlets. Unsubstantiated emotive language such as might, yet and lucky needs to be kept to the blogging world.
- Firefighters are flesh and blood. If they are involved in a high impact motor vehicle accident they will die (like any other worker on the road). If road workers, landscape gardeners, civil engineers, surveyors, services specialists and everyone else on the road corridor can get their head around temporary traffic management, why can’t the NZ Fire Service (NZFS)?
- When dealing with motor vehicle accidents the NZFS has demonstrated they can reliably conduct TTM.
- This is a PR nightmare. A National Safety Manager and Brigade Fire Chief, give the NZTA a verbal smackdown in the media. Firefighters also admit that they couldn’t find a fire hydrant when they had the GIS technology to do so.
- All firefighters are subject to a Code of Ethical Conduct that includes:
Professionalism and Integrity: Work is to be carried out with care and diligence and acting objectively and honestly.
Why didn’t the Brigade know how to find a fire hydrant?
Confidentiality: Information of a confidential nature relating to the business activities or processes of the client is not to be divulged.”
If there was a problem, why wasn’t it dealt with internally before it was put in the media?
What’s the Workplace Safety Solution?
Section D of the TCD Manual Part 8 talks about how a single vehicle with one crew person can operate in a built-up area. All they need to do is mount a Light Arrow System, and sign saying ‘Road Inspection’ and ‘Pass with Care’ to allow for the check to be completed.
The driver and crew person must have a communication system (radio) and where suitable Hi-Viz protective clothing. The paperwork to make this happen is not hard and anyone who has got their Safety Traffic Management Supervisor (STMS) ticket will be able to make it happen.
Resourcing Issues vs. Workplace Safety: What Else is Wrong with All This?
In my opinion, this is not about workplace safety, it’s a resourcing issue.I’m curious as to why the NZFS does not have the resources of technical ability to complete TTM paperwork?
In a privately-owned organisation, this article would also be an example of an immature safety culture. Since when has a safety manager been allowed to trash talk another government department (NZTA) in the media. I just can’t imagine Fulton and Hogan’s safety team or any other roading company doing this!??!!
Peter Cullen in his article Emergency volunteers juggle work demands summed the issue up nicely when he stated, ”Eighty per cent of New Zealand’s Fire and Emergency Service are volunteers.” Despite New Zealand being a ‘developed Nation’ and member of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), we have woefully under -resourced our emergency services.
Another practical example, of the emergency services being under-resourced is in Queenstown. In May 2018, its monthly number of guest nights reach 226,130 and the permanent population was recorded at 15,300 (June 2017). Yet, there is no full time firefighting team in Queenstown. There is also no Ladder Truck (Bronto), despite the number of multi-story buildings popping up like mushrooms (think Ramada and Five Mile).
What are the key learnings from all this?
- It is highly unlikely that anyone will walk away intact if struck by a motor vehicle.
- Workers have a right to ‘work in a safe workplace with proper training, supervision and equipment’ If you are an employer and there are industry standards for keeping workers safe in hazardous environments like the road corridor.
There is legal precedent demonstrating that you will be prosecuted for failing to meet your duties in relation to traffic management Broadspectrum (New Zealand) Limited (Formerly known as Transfield Services (New Zealand) Limited), and NZ Traffic Hamilton Limited.
- It is worth having a media and communications policy explaining who can talk to the media in your organisation and make sure that there are consequences if workers breach a code of conduct.
I have no doubt that this blog is going to get a massive backlash and all I can say is bring it on. I’d be interested to know:
- Have you had a worker speak out in the media and what was the consequences?
- How exempt should New Zealand Emergency Service’s be when it comes to meeting basic workplace safety protocols?
- Does your view change depending on whether it is an emergency, or day to day work?
Have a safe and productive week.
SB