Fire Fighters, Neighbourhoods and Social Identity: the relationship between the fire service and residents in Bristol
Association with health and safety
Download 0.87 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Interfering fire fighters
- Easy targets
- Doing their job
Association with health and safetyIn this section, I will explore another range of minor grievances directed towards the fire service, mostly by people who, as with speed and sirens, would have thought they were broadly sympathetic towards the fire service. A number of participants referred to ‘health and safety’ almost as short hand for the type of mean spirited health and safety concerns associated with preventing children from playing conkers, rather than the more reasonable gains in health and safety in relation to, say, industrial accidents. This is largely intended to cover where residents and participants feel that they have been legitimately engaged in some activity which the fire service subsequently declare verboten. In this sense, participants felt that the fire service over reacted and interfered with what they were rightfully doing. This also extends to the attitude of the fire service towards hostile groups, and in this instance is linked to political correctness. A further strand in this theme relates to participants feeling that the fire service go too far in the advice that they give and that people have a right to be in control of the safety of their own home. Interfering fire fightersMany participants felt that the fire service had more or less legitimate claims to tackle fires, and many participants were particularly concerned that fire fighters could come and put out a bonfire on private land. Ed: What? They put out bonfires? Moderator: They can do Ed: and they’d just come and do it? They wouldn’t ask? Ed, Pilot Group Ed in particular was horrified at the prospect, even when it was explained that in such an (imaginary) scenario, the bonfire might be causing aggravation to neighbours. For many participants, the ‘right’ to have a bonfire on private land harked back to a more innocent time, where having a bonfire was seen as emblematic of an idyllic country childhood. In this respect, the fire service is seen to be clearly interfering. Although in practice, the fire service would likely engage the householder in dialogue whilst deciding what to do about a bonfire, Ed is concerned that ‘they’d just come and do it’, interfere with his activity, and by imputation, insult his manhood (Bachelard 1964). In this instance, there are a number of quite primordial claims to masculinity involving the right to fire, its control and its ownership. Female participants, it should be noted, tended not to worry too much about fire fighters putting out their fires. It’s all a bit health and safety, and people don’t like safety Bryan, Pilot Group Bryan sums up this sentiment, explaining why people might be agitated by the fire service involving themselves in their lives. This highlights a core tension for the fire service ‘people don’t like safety’. Although no one wants to have an accident, or see their family have one, they also don’t like to be told what to do on the grounds of safety, where fire fighters can potentially be seen to be interfering. This distrust of health and safety extends to the actions of the fire service themselves, who are seen as being somewhat beholden to ‘health and safety’ in their operation, and – worse – caught up with political correctness. And why they would attack them. I mean that disgusts me, when they go to a place, and I can’t understand, or you can’t say because of all this PC racket, why one of the pumps couldn’t just turn on them and wash them down the street. Morris, Upperfield Like Morris, a number of participants thought that health and safety had gone too far when it extended to stopping the fire service turning their hoses on people attacking them. Although this would compromise them in a number of ways, and make future community relations particularly difficult, this was seen, to an extent, as emasculating the fire service. The PC reference reiterates some of the underlying racism that emerged in this group, and in others, reinforcing the idea of the impermeability of communities, and the closedness of a number of these neighbourhoods to (perceived) outsiders and newcomers. Easy targetsAnother group who expressed concerns about the fire service were those who had come into contact with them through, for example, through HFSVs. So I had three fire fighters in my house, early one evening in their aertex shirts. They fitted new smoke alarms in my house, they made sure they were working properly, then they gave me a mini lecture on fire safety. And by the time they left, I was absolutely shitting myself because I thought everything was about to burst into flames. Now I have to sleep with my phone in my bed in case I need to phone them during the night. Claire, Pilot Group Claire felt that the level of message she received from the fire service was disproportionate. As a conscientious parent and non smoker, she felt that her home was not all that unsafe, and that the fire fighters had gone somewhat over the top in the strength of their message, and that this level of scaremongering might be more appropriate for a higher risk audience, an issue which is discussed at greater length in the next chapter. Further, this was seen as something of a waste of resources, as if the fire service were preferring to deal with precautious householders, rather than reaching out to more vulnerable client groups. This was seen as having the potential to alienate more responsible householders, who might feel that there is no point getting in contact with the fire service if they would only criticise them. Further, and as with other issues mentioned above, this is also a highly intrusive approach, so that even the responsible, proactive householder is left feeling dissatisfied. Doing their jobA number of participants also had quite fixed ideas about what the fire service should be doing with their time, and this tended to be responding to emergencies. Participants in some instances were concerned that local stations were stopping being crewed twenty-four hourly, rather moving to shift patterns which reflect need, and allowing for the fact that other, neighbouring stations would provide cover if need be. Although this had not actually occurred, there was a degree of outrage that it could even be a possibility. However, this was countered by the old stereotype of fire fighters hanging around the fire station playing pool for the majority of their day. Their job is to do fires and that, and all this is extra stuff. To me, they’re doing it on top of their job. And they shouldn’t have to do that. Nigel, Upperfield HFSV Group For Nigel, the fire fighters’ job is to deal with fires and emergencies, and that anything else they do is an optional extra. This is a very literal view of the fire service, where, even at one of the busier stations in Bristol, it is not unusual to have a whole shift with no emergencies (and not unheard of to have a whole tour without one). If fire fighters are solely employed to fight fires, and fires do not occur with such great regularity, this then feeds further into the old stereotype of the fire fighter. If they were out at a fete or something, they’d have to get away from there to get back to their real job… they always had a bad image of smoking cigarettes and playing snooker all day, which I’m sure isn’t all that true. Sid, Hilton HFSV Group As Sid says, there is an image of the fire station akin to a working men’s club, rather than a place of work (Myers 2005, Yarnal, Dowler et al. 2004), although for this participant, the ‘real job’ is still the fire fighting (Childs, Morris et al. 2004), rather than any community engagement work. He is willing to give the fire fighters the benefit of the doubt that the stereotype is not all true, but clearly, at some level, he feels there is truth in it. Download 0.87 Mb. Share with your friends:
|