I know someone who could facilitate that if she's not busy looking after her children.... re the tube.... don't blame it on the sunshine.... blame it on the bougie

I can safely say that I would never venture out into the side orders of Food Safety because I have no training and never so much as worked in a commercial kitchen. I do have NEBOSH, but it was pre-European six pack 92 so it would be a bit like an SEN telling an RGN what to do. Old knowledge. There was something I chose to keep current, and thank you for pointing out that by default, my students are not medicore and are in a league of their own. That is why they work where they do. We did not choose them. Their employers chose us to teach them. As for your quip about the chainsaw, some of our students do work with chainsaws and came to use because we can teach them what to do with regards to amputation at 20 feet in the air, and suspension trauma after waiting for those trained in rope rescue to bring them down. I am afraid that the most serious patients some people have treated are those they invented in scearios in the classroom.

Yogi, thanks for your comments both on thread and of board via the PM. However, I would much prefer it if the discussion could continue where the opposing opinions could be elaborated on as to why my way of doing things is not quite right and could be improved upon and vice versa. We are both of a similar originating background where discussion is allowed up to a certain point then its head down and crack on. In days gone past, there were a lot a decent threads on here moderated to insignificance or deleted because of it getting way too personal and its been good to see that since that time it hasn't been a feature. There is no way I would change what or the way I teach. Every one of my FAW students can bandage, do CPR and put someone in the recovery position and pass the exam on day 3. I make it my aim that they are more knowledgeable and capable than many others who pass the same exam when taught by other instructors. I don't think I am doing anything wrong in this but would like to keep the contructive debate going which I hope you will join in with!

We should not over-teach AEDs, don’t forget that most Resus changes simplify instruction and aid memory recall.

An AED is a lot less dangerous than a CRT TVs and yes, if used incorrectly they can kill. i.e. don’t use them in the bath!

People already have a fear of using AEDs because of films etc. If we teach people about ALL the possible dangerous then they will not attempt use them. All they will take away from a training program is “I’m not using that, it may kill me!” So unless they are highly likely to encounter a real and potential risk i.e. don’t use them whilst immersed in the swimming pool, then don’t teach it.

The ideal outcome of an AED training course should be that AEDs are safe to use, easy to use and makes the difference between life and death - and ‘Boss’ I think we should get one for work!



The capacitors in AEDs are safe. The amount of energy they hold is quite small and also they are charged from a source (electronics) that supplies even less power (that’s why it takes time to charge the AED). The most dangerous item in an AED is the battery as that holds a lot of energy that potentially could cause a fire. But that could be said of most electrical items. I’m not saying that capacitors don’t explode (I’ve seen a few connected the wrong way round!) but the amount of energy is low. They are also designed so the top flies off.



I am very surprised that stray shocks can occur as the voltage (current paths) are divided based on their resistance. Further if you are on a metal plate (and you are not touching the casualty) then there is no voltage difference and hence no shock. That’s why in most bathrooms, pipes are wired together, so that if an electrical fault occurs all appliances just jump up in voltage together and hence no voltage difference hence no shock (Equipotential bonding). Further AEDs are not ‘Earthed’ unlike the household mains so you can only get a shock through both AEDs leads and not by touching ‘earth’ + one lead. 

P.S. I used to be an electronics design engineer specialising in power supplies, mainly military missiles and the odd radar system.

HSE Meeting.

We had an Awarding Organisation (Ofqual) meeting with the HSE this week. - We have another meeting next week with my Association hat on.

 

I don’t think there is any doubt that we will be going the Lofsted route. Timescales, by the very nature of Legislation will be slow. (Will announce better times scales soon).



It looks as though the HSE will not be stating a set route to qualifying but just a recommendation. Because of this, the recommended route is Ofqual, simply because there are no other nationally recognised routes. There will be a caution to the employer that they need to be confident that training is carried out by a competent trainer / organisation. So as a ‘no-brainer’ the Ofqual route ticks all the boxes.

 

It is unlikely that the HSE will recognise an Association/tradebody as a mark of quality, simply because who regulates the regulator!

 

As for increasing costs, it may well reduce them, at least for the 3 day FAW course. The Ofqual route, will not demand the use of an Assessor, so that will save £100+ / course. You will need however, to pay for certificates, but at least this will offset some of the costs. Alternatively, you could also take the route of delivering totally non-regulated courses.



I guess, that if you look at say food hygiene which although is unregulated (??), employers still seek approved courses (Ofqual). This is likely to be the same for first aid.



I spoke to Professor Lofsted recently; his intention of deregulation does not mean reducing standards.

 

Keep in mind that everything above is far from fixed (although most is stating the bleeding obvious). The HSE will be going out for both informal and formal consultation on the Lofsted recommendations soon. As part of this, the HSE will be asking us to seek comments from members.

 

As a general comment, I note less resistance from training providers as to the Ofqual route. A significant number of FA trainers are already registered with awarding bodies for presenting other courses and do not have any major concerns.

so how much will the charges be for efaw and faaw under ofqual? and what about the about the 2 years remaining on my HSE approval.............refund??

Richard



I think you mean scary mate as the likes of the OFQUAL lot get you on board and then put up prices, or the cowboys down the road undercut your prices as there is no accredited value anymore??? the only people that will be getting anything from this is the awaring bodies and lets face it, we are supposed to have consultation through this system as a HSE provider. I have not been consulted at all.....



However as indicated meetings are already taking place with HSE and Awarding bodies.......................its a fix massive massive massive fix, and why do I find out on hear not from the HSE that my appraoval will be withdrawn on 1/10/13 even more of a fix...............

lol

I've just worked this is going to cost me annually about £20k as a company to buy certificates from one of these awarding bodies. Multiply that by say 100 providers like me and that's a nice little earner indeed. At that price the an awarding body could feasibly employ someone to monitor every course we deliver!



If the industry is opened up and OFQUAL is an option rather than mandatory I will probably go it alone and offer unregulated courses and arrange external peer audit on an annual basis by respected companies within the industry (The 2 Richards, I will be knocking on your door)



Interesting times

Thanks for the vote of confidence, Paul! Perhaps I could start a new business doing that! I could probably fit it in between about 1.30am and 3am if that's any good?



Richard