Should rail staff give first aid to passengers?

[Firestarter]

What are peoples opinion on FCC staff not being even basic first aid trained?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-11385064

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/mindthegap/2010/09/should_rail_staff_give_first_a.html

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Probs more thre 'unnecessary' extensive training, and can you imagine if they got something wrong, the media would be all over it. Also probs due to insurance/H&S reasons, they can't perform on members of the public. Also, the man collapsed, with all due respect, its not basic first aid.

 

[scotsman]

I think they should, unless they can provide a very good reason why they can't. First aid saves lives and early intervention in some situations can mean the difference between life or death. However, I think it first aiders should be identified in some manner.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

I think VT plaatform staff and booking office workers can, hence the defribulators on stations. All booking offices also have first aid boxes I think

 

[jimrbrobinson]

These days it comes as no surprise to me, and I don't blame FCC or any other company. If the company provides training (which would have to be a Public First Aid certificate) they are responsible if an employee becomes the subject of a litigation claim. Unfortunately, these happen all too much thanks to the blame culture we now live in. This means that in this case FCC would have to fund the training, examination, certification, and re-eamination for employees AND provide Medical Indemnity Insurance to all such trained employees.

There are a lot of companies who at present are skirting the grey areas by using staff who are First Aid at Work trained and 'encouraging' them to treat the public. They are only covered, qualified and covered by insurance to deal with emergency first aid to colleagues in the workplace whilst awaiting an ambulance.

Unfortunately, in this day and age, that is what the 999 emergency services are there for, and if you undertake any level of 'medical' treatment you may well find yourself pursued by some company of ambulance chasers seeking compensation for their 'client', even if your involvement saved their life. I speak from bitter experience on this, though I was fortunate that a) I had medical indemnity insurance which covered me, and b) the court rules against the claimant. To be honest though, I think twice now before 'getting involved'. I don't like it, but that's what's become of the blame and claim culture.

 

[tbtc]

As a trained First Aider, I'm not convinced.

It's a three day course, plus refreshers.

You then have the complications about the role of the Guard. Are they there for passenger safety? For ticket collecting? To manage the train? To administer FIrst Aid?

Thankfully trains are relatively low-risk places, so this isn't an issue. I'd say you are more likely to need FIrst AId at stations - tripping on steps/ stumbling in the crowd/ heart attack when they see the cost of a coffee and a sandwich!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think twice now before 'getting involved'. I don't like it, but that's what's become of the blame and claim culture.

Sadly you are right.

I'm trained as a First Aider in my workplace, but I'd want to be pretty sure before I offered my services in the street.

You don't know someone's medical history, you don't know their background, it's very easy to do the wrong thing.

A lot of "health and safety" stories these days are more "fear of getting sued", and I think that applies here

 

[jimrbrobinson]

Sadly you are right.

I'm trained as a First Aider in my workplace, but I'd want to be pretty sure before I offered my services in the street.

You don't know someone's medical history, you don't know their background, it's very easy to do the wrong thing.

A lot of "health and safety" stories these days are more "fear of getting sued", and I think that applies here

Like I said, very bitter experience, but something where I knew far too many others who were put in that situation because people were out to make a fast buck (the no-win-no-fee lawyers included). After all, why do an honest day's work when you can drag some poor schmuck through the courts for saving your life because... you'll love this... I didn't give the casualty an aspirin when I suspected them of having a severe angina attack and this delayed their recovery and lengthened their time in hospital resulting in lost earnings. I was off-duty, I didn't have an aspirin to give, but they tried it on. They weren't the first but they were the last. Hence I stopped paying out my own hard-earned money on Medical Indemnity Insurance and training (I was qualified to EMT level at the time) and decided basically "sod 'em". Funnily enough, I didn't get anything for lost earnings or expenses for appearing at their (failed) hearing. Angry? Too right I was, and still I am eight years later!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-11385064

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/mindthegap/2010/09/should_rail_staff_give_first_a.html

Unfortunately this is the type of ill-informed, poorly researched journalism I've sadly come to expect even from the BBC today. For the reasons outlined in my other posts on this thread.

I don't like those reasons, I don't like the fact that those reasons exist, but a simple bit of research by these so-called journalists would reveal those reasons and perhaps the journalist could then turn their criticism on those who are really culpable for creating this situation - the legal industry - who have followed the American lead in their greed quest.

 

[Daniel]

On LU first aid is a voluntary training course. 4 day training course + 1 day for defibrillator plus refreshers. It's provided if you want it (and provided you can get released). It's not just for staff, insurance is actually provided by St. John's Ambulance as the training is from them. However it is the employees individual choice. By this I mean I am not legally or contractually obliged to provide first aid - to anyone. Doesn't mean I wouldn't try to help, but first aid can only go so far, I'd rather find a nurse or a doctor then try and deal with something myself which I'm not fully trained for.

 

[12CSVT]

Until railway staff are legally immune from being sued when things go wrong, this is probably best left to qualified ambulance crews.

 

[jon0844]

I have basic first-aid training (I will need to renew it shortly) and I am under no legal obligation to use it - but I would hope that I would and could if required.

When I was given the training, we were told about the fear of prosecution and was told not to worry about it. It's a fallacy that you'd be sued, and if you were the chances of a successful prosecution would be almost zero.

I think it's more likely an excuse, either by the staff member (or a member of the public) being scared to get involved - and I suspect I'd quite possibly clam up if put on the spot where I could potentially save someone's life, or not - or an excuse for an employer not to pay for the training to be given.

I saw a comment on the BBC site from someone that claimed to work for Heathrow Express that said about the risk of being sued. Well, surely they were told the same thing when trained? It's NOT an issue. If you broke or damaged some ribs giving CPR (which, by all accounts is quite likely) then you simply would not be prosecuted.

If staff are not reassured then you're not going to see them getting involved even for their own staff. They'll run away and be of no use whatsoever.

 

[Greenback]

When I joined FGW way back in the mists of time, a very basic session of FIrst Aid training was provided. As I recall, it lasted about five hours in all, and did not lead to being a First Aider (there was an extra day or two's annual leave for those who were, as an incentive!).

If we are talking about the basic training I received, I don't really think it was worth it. It was not enough to give me any confidence in what I was doing, being limited to very basic things like putting someone in the recovery position and don't move someone with a neck injury. If anything had happened I doubt I would have had the courage to do anything, especially if a proper first aider was there.

 

[O L Leigh]

Station defibrilators are not there for the use of first-aiders but for paramedic staff. Particularly in places like London where a First-Responder could arrive on a bicycle, having equipment like this ready at the scene for the use of those properly trained can save a life.

My wife is a trained first aider and it would seem that a lot of what she does is simply to assess and advise on whether or not to call an ambulance. About the only time she actually steps in to provide first aid is to do very basic things like cleaning up cuts and suchlike. She can provide CPR if the need is there, but she has never been called on to do it. Consequently the scope for being sued is miniscule and the threat of it is massively exaggerated.

In the event of a person collapsing there is precious little a first aider could do except ascertain some pertinent information to pass on to paramedics (e.g. is the patient in pain, are they on medication, do they have any conditions such as diabetes) and make the person comfortable. But then anyone with a calm head can do that.

O L Leigh

 

[jon0844]

I have basic first aid training and there are many more advanced courses, including being able to operate a defibrilator, but that is way beyond my 'qualification' which was just a one day course.

And, as said above, my fear is how I'd actually act if put 'on the line', so to speak. I'd hope that I'd be calm, but given that I am now unsure I can remember everything, I would probably not be of much use.

With first aid, it's certainly true that a little knowledge can be dangerous. It means I should book up for a refresher course as soon as possible.

I also think that if you're in an environment where the chances of needing to give first aid is higher, you would need more frequent refresher courses as you will forget (or think you've forgotten) if you aren't called to use first aid for any length of time.

I'm unlikely to be called upon in an office that employs less than ten people, but it's different when there are hundreds or thousands of people coming through every day.

That said, there's only so much a first aider can do and be expected to do. I do remember being told that your first priority is to establish if you need to call an ambulance/paramedic - and if that is established, you do that before anything else.

 

[YorkshireBear]

my opinion is anyone who regularly deals with large numbers of customers should have a fist aid qualification so they can administer basic care if needed. I have it never had to use it but i have just in case something happens (i work in a hotel)

 

[Aictos]

I'm not First Aid trained and am not likely to want to be as I rather let the paramedics get on with the job that they have been highly trained for - I don't know a passengers's medical history nor can easily check but a paramedic easily could.

 

[EWS 58038]

In Holland ALL train staff is first aid certified. Their main task on the train is not revenue protection but safety for all passengers.

 

[merlodlliw]

It is a sad fact, due to ambulance chasers,the US term for so called lawyers and the weak insurance companies that wont fight bent claims from them we have

"better let him or her die, than fear being sued," the world has gone mad.

The local giant base hospital here at Wrexham have thrown these ambulance chasers off site, where they sat in A&E reception.

Nothing wrong with the 3 day or beyond certificate, I also hold one, in my case
the human comes first, if its only to take the situation,if no one else as,until the ambulance arrives, sod being sued if I save a life.

 

[Geezertronic]

Depends on the situation. I personally couldn't live with myself if I saw a person dying and didn't help out. But it is unfortunate that this is not a scenario isolated to Railway staff.

The same (or similar) applies to schools for fear of being labelled as does helping an injured child in the street.

 

[The_Stig]

Unfortunately, in this day and age, that is what the 999 emergency services are there for, and if you undertake any level of 'medical' treatment you may well find yourself pursued by some company of ambulance chasers seeking compensation for their 'client', even if your involvement saved their life. I speak from bitter experience on this, though I was fortunate that a) I had medical indemnity insurance which covered me, and b) the court rules against the claimant. To be honest though, I think twice now before 'getting involved'. I don't like it, but that's what's become of the blame and claim culture.

When I received my first aid training I was told that in the UK there is a 'Good Samaritan' act that prevents any action being taken against the first aider.

It was brought in to stop people holding back when they could potentially help, and protect them if it went wrong.

There are no such acts in Europe or the rest of the world I believe.

 

[jon0844]

But it is a myth that helping someone will land you in court. Yes, it might be possible that someone would refuse any help (but they'd refuse that from a paramedic too) and threaten to sue, but in the first instance, how likely is that to happen? In the second, how likely is it that it would actually reach court?

Ambulance chasers have probably got the sense not to pursue someone who gave first aid. In many cases, first aid would be incredibly basic stuff anyway. It's hardly going to enable someone to start performing surgery at the road (platform) side.

 

[mumrar]

Why is this 'news' of any note. When I started with Central Trains in 1997, not too long after we passed out we were given optional first aid training. That has been the one and only time in my 13 years on the railway, CrossCountry, London Midland and doubtless many other TOCs don't give their staff first aid training, this is a slow news day story.

 

[me123]

There are two really important rules in First Aid. The first is never to put yourself at any risk (for example, always take standard precautions when dealing with blood, or to use a relevant example, never cross an active railway line to help someone).

The second is never to do anything out with your own competence. Just because you've had two days of training (and ten years of watching casualty) doesn't mean that you can go in with a swiss army knife and a biro to do a makeshift tracheotomy (as an extreme example). And your only job in a proper emergency is to try and manage the patient until a paramedic arrives.

But, if you know CPR, if you can manage a patient in shock, if you can clean up simple wounds, and small things like this you can make a difference. So I would suggest that rail staff should know a basic amount of First Aid. As long as they do everything within their abilities, they have no real risk of being sued.

(Interestingly, defibrillators in public places are often idiot-proof. I've seen one in use, and anyone who can follow a set of instructions would be able to use it, although I wouldn't recommend using one without training!).

 

[EWS 58038]

[rude mode]
So, If a real ale drinking English fat boy gets an heart attack on the train he will die because no one seems to be able to help him...[/rude mode]

Can't wait for the BBC or newspapers to have headlines such as: "Man died in train while staff watched and didn't help".

Good for rail image... You know what... Lets go by plane next time as stewardesses all have medical aid training.

 

[O L Leigh]

Can we try and get past a couple of things here? There is so much myth and opinion being touted as fact that is actually incorrect, and it does sadden me that a lot of it is being used as an excuse not to get involved.

Firstly, you don't need to know a person's medical history to be able to help. There's almost nothing a first aider could do that would interfere with any pre-existing condition. In any case, unless the person was unconscious they would almost certainly be able to tell you if they suffered with high blood pressure/angina/diabetes/fainting fits or whatever, and even if they were unconscious all you would be able to do is to make them comfortable and monitor their breathing. You would not be administering any drugs or making any interventions other than to preserve their life, so there is absolutely NO WAY that you're going to make any impact at all other than increasing their chances of recovery.

Secondly, it is almost unheard of for first aiders to be sued. Provided you haven't acted outside of your training or done anything stupid (e.g. staunching the flow of blood from a cut on the head by applying a tourniquet to the neck) then you're safe. The fear of being sued is far greater than the actual chance of it happening.

This is a non-news story. The only part of it that is in any way noteworthy is the part of the FCC statement that suggests that staff are trained in first aid to help other staff only. That sounds like policy and is probably a regrettable thing to have said. But the fact of the matter is that first aid probably wasn't offered because none of the staff on duty at that time had the appropriate training.

O L Leigh
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

[rude mode]
So, If a real ale drinking English fat boy gets an heart attack on the train he will die because no one seems to be able to help him...[/rude mode]

Can't wait for the BBC or newspapers to have headlines such as: "Man died in train while staff watched and didn't help".

Good for rail image... You know what... Lets go by plane next time as stewardesses all have medical aid training.

There's very little a first aider can do for a heart attack victim other than make him comfortable. The only real benefit there is that a first aider would probably spot the signs of a heart attack earlier and be able to alert the traincrew to the situation and get the train stopped.

 

[jon0844]

Well said!

I also agree that FCC was a little silly by saying staff should give first aid only to other members of staff. Clearly the person who said that was a believer of all the same myths.

Perhaps they can be seconded to FGW to give ticket advice instead.

 

[dk1]

As a train driver i have never had basic first aid training. When we started working some DOO services, i thought it very beneficial that i tried to learn some as i was probably the only member of staff on board. We had posters displayed at our signing on point requesting us to better ourselves with various courses & first aid was one of them. My immediate manager was very pro-active & arranged things for me even though it was 3 months away for the next placing.

Sadly i had my course cancelled the previous day due to one senior manager having panic attacks that all his drivers would then ask for the same as a 'jolly jolly' day off & bang goes his budget.

You then ask yourself what the point of trying to do anything for the good is?

 

[jon0844]

How the hell is doing a first aid course, which could save a life, considered a day off?!

 

[scotsman]

All Guards on the Strathspey are now required to take a one day course on first Aid. I will have to take it some time in the next two years. This even applies to a former Ship's Doctor who recieved his certificate while I was on duty with him. Much sarcasm all round that day...

 

[dk1]

How the hell is doing a first aid course, which could save a life, considered a day off?!

May cost £££ in overtime & free day working

 

[scotsman]

There's very little a first aider can do for a heart attack victim other than make him comfortable. The only real benefit there is that a first aider would probably spot the signs of a heart attack earlier and be able to alert the traincrew to the situation and get the train stopped.

Surely not stopped between stations, would it not be better to get the train held at the next station by activating the alarm upon the train stopping?