Much of this comes down to the fact the people coming up with the measures in the Air Cadets are far too detached from the place it will be implemented and have zero or little knowledge of those places/activities or the people in those places, other than a perception that they are dangerous. It would be most useful if all those taking a salaried role in the Air Cadets did 2 years as a volunteer prior to taking up the post, in the hope they acquire knowledge of what we have to endure and act favourably when in post.
Contrast with the workplace where the people involved have a direct attachment, knowledge and develop processes that are sympathetic and cover all the necessary requirements.
3 Likes
(Outside of the shooting world) Most of my problems actually come from wing or region volunteers and are nothing to do with hqac desk officers. Volunteers are largely not trained to in planning and training policy making so make a bit of a mess of it when they feel like they need to show they are doing their job.
1 Like
To be fair, HQAC, the broader MOD or the Government themselves haven’t got a great track record at paying people to do it either!!
2 Likes
Just saw an article in the news where a care home refused to share their Defib as it wasn’t for public use. So it’s all well and good knowing where the things are, but if you can’t get your hands on it it’s still not much use!
1 Like
There was a similar incident involving Tesco a while ago where someone was refused access to it as the person on cardiac arrest was outside the store. They since made sure all staff know anyone can use them. If you see a defib in Tesco now (normally near the entrance) it will have sign next to it making clear it is for anyone to use.
Absolutely illustrates my point about trying to anticipate where the nearest device might be…
A call to 999 to be given a What 3 words reference of the nearest functioning unit would far more appropriate!
Frankly 999 would be the first step in any emergency anyway - we’ll, after everyone has exhausted the list of known expletives!
2 Likes
This most recent example seems to have been published just yesterday:
Hope they sue the care home. Disgraceful.
Unfortunately, I cannot see they can. They have no duty of care over members of the public at large.
1 Like
Does a defib or other first aid equipment fall under any special provision. Especially for life saving first aid?
I dont know so asking.
If not, that’s a shameful part of our law.
It should be legal for anyone to request access to a defib etc.
If it’s an NHS care home, maybe.
If it’s private, why? Who picks up the bill?
Nope, the law is very careful about where and upon whom it imposes duties of care, i.e. duties upon people to act. You can create a duty by acting, but ideas for a Good Samaritan law never took off here. I think they apply in other places, like France.
Good Samaritan law - Wikipedia
In short, the care home has done nothing legally wrong in refusing access to the defib. Morally, they’re monsters.
5 Likes
Now, I’m not saying they were right or wrong, but if they have a large number of residents which cardiac conditions, their First Aid Risk Assessment may require them to have one available on the premises at all times. If one of the residents needs one and it is not available they they would fall foul of First Aid Regulations. Just playing devils advocate.
They really wouldn’t.
There is no regulation requiring AEDs.
IF their First Aid Aid Risk Assessment specified that there must be an AED available at all times, then they most surely would have one available, and a spare, just in case one of their residents needed the first one. But then how far do you go? A personal AED for each resident, and one spare?
I’m firmly in “Morally, they’re monsters” camp.
5 Likes
Regardless of the stance on AEDs, the requirement to have them available for cadet activities as outlined in this thread is overreach and it’s not at all surprising that OP feels the way he does.
4 Likes
If your Risk Assessment for a business requires a AED and you don’t have you, you are breaking the first aid regulations are you are not meeting your risk assessment:
Assessment of first-aid needs
Employers are required to carry out an assessment of first-aid needs. This involves consideration of workplace hazards and risks, the size of the organisation and other relevant factors, to determine what first-aid equipment, facilities and personnel should be provided.
Employers’ legal duties
The Health and Safety (First-Aid) Regulations 1981 require employers to provide adequate and appropriate equipment, facilities and personnel to ensure their employees receive immediate attention if they are injured or taken ill at work. These Regulations apply to all workplaces including those with less than five employees and to the self-employed.
What is ‘adequate and appropriate’ will depend on the circumstances in the workplace. This includes whether trained first-aiders are needed, what should be included in a first-aid box and if a first-aid room is required. Employers should carry out an assessment of first-aid needs to determine what to provide.
The Regulations do not place a legal duty on employers to make first-aid provision for non-employees such as the public or children in schools. However, HSE strongly recommends that non-employees are included in an assessment of first-aid needs and that provision is made for them.
In short - if your risk assessment says you need one and you don’t, you are breaking the law.
But they do have one. They just refused to let someone use it. That’s like saying how my workshop RA requires us to have a certain FA kit available, and me refusing to use it to help someone if there’s an accident next door or a crash on the road. Of course I’ll use it!
1 Like
Well, that depends on whether your RA is reasonable and proportional (unlike the RAFAC ones, it would seem).
Even if the RA demanded a AED for the use of its residents, do you think that the HSE would prosecute them for not having one available because it had just been used? What if two residents went into cardiac arrest at the same time? Would they still get prosecuted? I don’t think so…
Going slightly off topic, compared with my original post - but - with regards to whether AEDs are to be made available to members of the public…
Chatting to a very esteemed colleague, he pointed out a few things - first, there may be no legal requirement to publicly advertise / register your AED.
I came across an instance of this when looking at a route - and realised that we were walking right past a private hospital… which SURELY would have an AED device - but, it didn’t appear on any of the device registers…
Similarly, a large residential / activity centre, similarly didn’t appear on any of the lists…
This could be because they don’t have them - or, could be because they don’t want anyone outside their organisation using it…
Why…?
Bear in mind that this is a piece of equipment between £800 and £2000…
If it was yours, and a member of the public rushed in, asking to take an extremely expensive piece of equipment away with them - would you say “here you go…!” Or, would you want to verify the legitimacy of the need…? Would you go with the individual? Would you be worried about ever getting your device back…?
What if someone rang you, using a withheld number, claiming to be an emergency chief operator, telling the site owner that a member of the public was on their way to collect your expensive device… would you trust the veracity of the caller…?
And - even if you did let someone take the device - and they DID return it… who pays for the replacement pads - if required…?
Just hypotheticals - but it made me think.
Now let’s consider the scenario where a worrywort / hypochondriac decided that they NEED an AED to feel “safe”… but can’t afford to buy their own…
We see s as a
Rather than call 999 to get the code for a public box - rush in to a private location and say there’s an emergency up there road and you’ve been sent to fetch their AED…
—//
Bringing it back to my original concerns - as activity staff, we were being ordered to establish the location of the nearest available AEDs….with the intention of getting a head start in going to retrieve the unit, while the call to 999 was placed.
However, with no guarantee that the unit in question was definitely available and functioning - I stand my initial response that the first action should have been to call 999……!!! This is not rocket science. The 999 operator would be able to tell if we were close by for starters.
Arguably - in circumstances, such as the incident on a cadet camp at an air station, where an on site medical team / accessible AEDs were available, it greatly increased the response time.
But - this should have been thought out by HQAC before awning out the orders.
A more appropriate order might have been - “it would be good practice to familiarise yourself with the locations of publicly available AEDs that might be close by.”
It could go further to suggest that a Wing owned device is available on request, subject to advanced booking and availability.
If HQAC / Region or Wing are so insistent that these devices be used at all events that might include a “risk to life” factor / then the expense of getting such equipment to the activity commanders should be met by Wing / Region / HQAC - and I’m NOT just referring to the mileage allowance!!!
I understand the cost factors involved - but, HQAC, or whoever made this decree needed to think about how it was going to be implemented. There aren’t the funds to provide replacement pads for my Wing’s current pair of devices - let alone to meet the cost of providing a device per Sector or per unit!
So, what about seeking a third party provider - one where devices can be hired - with that expense going to Wing / Region - booked in the same way as White Fleet…?
But no - the responsibility was passed directly to the activity commanders to figure out!
As far as risk assessments go - one could state that the risk of requirement of an AED for Rod Marching is realistically EXTREMELY low. To all intents purposes, it is just walking… albeit a relatively long way - but this distance would be built up to, as per the PTS.
The incident involving the cadet that collapsed on their way to breakfast, was as a result of an undiagnosed cardiac condition - a freak accident! Should we be issued with Atropine auto injectors, just in case a cadet picks up a perfume bottle, that’s not actually perfume…? Or should first aid kits include aspirin and nitro-glycerin sprays for angina…? What about tourniquets in case of haemorrhagic blood loss or traumatic amputation, following a RTC…?
So much for Venture Adventure… more like Mitigate Delegate…
7 Likes
