No one ever claimed that wearing a reflective vest makes you bulletproof, just more visible.
We go with whatever the scene dictates. Lots of times it's bunker pants, a denim coat, and a ball cap. But, like I said, it's whatever the scene dictates. As for the vests; if my company is on the highway, there will be at least four other companies, the highway is shut down, and will be for quite some time. If I thought it a good idea I'd wear it though.
Conspicuity research disagrees.Quote:
I think it just looks good on paper but in reality has about zero effect on an emergency scene.
Blocking vehicles and good situational awareness both help. So does making yourself more conspicuous.Quote:
I just don't put any faith in them any rely more on blocking vehicles and keeping a watchfull eye.
Seriously, is it all that painful to put on a vest?
To say that the vest doesn't make you more visible is to ignore common sense and science.
If we never got off the big ol' red truck, you would have a valid point.
This reminds me of the arguments against SCBA use and booster lines for structure fires.
Ignoring for a moment that we're required to wear them by law anyway, I personally think that the greatly improved conspicuity is well worth the infinitesimal bit of extra effort it takes to put the vest on.
Probably true. But that's no reason not to wear a traffic vest anyway.Quote:
Even if you have a jumpsuit covered with LED's, some moron would still try to run you over.
Everybody on the engine should have a vest with them regardless of what they happen to be wearing today.Quote:
(BTW, I'm driving the engine today so I have my vest with me, because my sweat shirt isn't reflective.)
Still haven't heard any good reason not to wear a vest....
"Not necessarily flaggers but, in addition to blocking off a buffer zone around them as well as practical, somebody should be watching their backs."
I agree. To me, this is much better protection than a vest.
Call me stupid, but to me, I would like to see Globe, MP, and the others develop the materials in the gear so that they can be ANSI compliant on their own. I don't think that it would be that great of a problem to do so, but I am not a textile engineer. As we are "supposed" to wash our gear any time that it becomes even slightly soiled, it should stay nice and bright.
Personally, I would still wear the vest so that I could take the coat off when prudent and still be able to be more visible.
I am sure that the additional cost will be pushed directly to us that will be purchasing the units as is the case with most unfunded government mandates, but it would be an option as I do not see all departments going with this (if it does ever become available) and going away from tradition.
I am asking for it to be done and I am in no way in any position to make it happen. Even if my department put its full purchsaing power behind the "movement" to accelerate the process, I doubt the 3 sets of gear a year will prompt much action. It is just something that I would like to see for all safety concerns.
I like the vests on all incidents, just to have the visibility among myself and the crews is enough reason for me, let alone the public. To me, being able to do a quick visual scan and see where people are and how many I can't see is a great parallel to other accountability practices.