Built-in Fire Protection— The Answer to Productivity
features
The Editor’s Opinion Page
Out of a conference of the nation’s mayors last month came a chorus of moans inspired by reports that the federal government was looking unfavorably on its role as sugar-daddy to the cities enmeshed in fiscal crises. In both large cities and small towns, the search for more municipal funds is desperate and the fire departments in these municipalities are among the departments feeling the financial squeeze.
The difficulty in the fire service is that when the municipality has reduced engine company manning from five to four and then to three, the meat—not the fat—is being squeezed out of the budget. The candid chief will declare that three-man engine companies cannot provide the effectiveness of five-man or six-man companies. The same holds true for truck companies—which in many cities are reduced to two men.
Industry is reducing the payroll burden while maintaining or increasing productivity by introducing sophisticated machine tools and turning over various operations to computerized robots.
The greatest part of fire fighting is rugged manual labor. No one has yet come up with a way to automate the hand work required on the fireground. However, city manager types are constantly voicing the word “productivity” when they talk about the fire service, even though they are not quite sure of its implications. Granted, some productivity can be attained through fire prevention—particularly through code enforcement and the installation of early-warning alarm devices.
Emerging from the financial plight of municipalities, however, is the proposal to place more of the responsibility for fire protection on the private sector. We predict that you are going to hear more of this and the idea is going to be taken off the speaker’s rostrum and put into factories, warehouses, apartment buildings, hotels and even single-family homes.
Built-in fire protection that is paid for by the private sector rather than the municipality is the road to the future of the fire service. Chief officers, company officers and fire fighters will become the authorities in the business of installing and maintaining fire protection in buildings.
There isn’t any fire protection system—whether it be automatic sprinklers, a halon or carbon dioxide system or a fire wall—that is not far cheaper than a working fire. Fire walls—and we mean true fire walls built to code requirements—can limit fire area to a size that can be contained by a reasonable number of fire companies. Sprinkler systems with an adequate protected water supply can limit fires to a modest size.
Regardless of w’hat we think, the road to the future fire service is becoming clearer every day. The risks of fire must be limited to sizes that can be handled expeditiously by the fire department.
The citizens will not stand still—nor will government—if massive fires involving hazardous materials force widespread evacuation of residents. Built-in fire protection is increasingly going to be the answer.
This need not diminish the fire service. It should increase the stature of the fire service as the authority for providing the advice and inspections that the private sector will need to reduce the risks of Fire.
