Bad driving - Fire these idiots

[Miss Sasha]

To fast for road conditions. Second car for following to close especially for road conditions.

I'm assume you always drive perfectly, especially running l/s?

It was a spin out due to bad road conditions, I'm not sure how you managed to pass judgement that they were driving too fast, it's nearly impossible to tell how fast they were driving in the video.

It was an accident, not something worth termination and name calling.

[crotchitymedic1986]

We had a safety poster in our station that stated: "Bad weather does not cause accidents....... bad driving does". Snow on the ground means ice on the road, you have to drive slow. As far as the ambulance crew, they were probably driving too fast for conditions, but it may have been their jake-brake. But the guy in the car behind them was driving to fast for conditions, and following too close, no ifs ands or buts. He was lucky there was not kids playing in the snow where he slid off of the road.

[fiznat]

"Too fast for conditions" is such a BS term in my opinion. Its a label thats always applied after an accident has already occurred, for the specific purpose of assigning blame to an event that we did not actually witness. Just because there was an accident or something happened doesn't mean that there was driver error, or that the specific error was speeding.

[spenac]

I'm assume you always drive perfectly, especially running l/s?

Actually running lights and sirens has no affect on the speed I drive. I drive at speeds safe for the road conditions. Even in perfect weather Lights and sirens does not mean I'm going fast. Anyone that thinks Lights and sirens gives them the right to drive fast is a danger to those on the road way. Honestly EMS should do away with driving lights and sirens as it actually saves very little time and if anything probably does more harm than good.

[JakeEMTP]

"Too fast for conditions" is such a BS term in my opinion. Its a label thats always applied after an accident has already occurred, for the specific purpose of assigning blame to an event that we did not actually witness. Just because there was an accident or something happened doesn't mean that there was driver error, or that the specific error was speeding.

Too Fast for conditions is not a BS term IMHO. Remember, there are no such thing as accidents, only collisions. Hence the change from MVA to MVC. During my previous career as a Long Haul semi-driver, I amassed almost 2 Million miles accident and ticket free driving in all kinds of weather and witnessed numerous acts of stupidity.

In the case in the video, there was definite driver error. Either they were driving to fast, or applied the brakes to late. Either way, they were operating the ambulance in an unsafe manner. I wouldn't fire them. I would have them remediated before the driver could resume that privilege.

[spenac]

I see no accident that happened just a spin out.

Maybe too fast for conditions but maybe not.

Case in point, we were responding to a mvc out in our county. It was icy. We had to go. We were going about 5-7 miles per hour and we hit a patch of ice. WE spun out and ended up sideways in the roadway like these guys did. Were we going too fast for the road conditions, yeah probably so, do we deserve to get fired, NOPE NOPE NOPE.

So without a proper connotation to this incident we have no way of knowing what to think. We can sit here as a collective judgemental group, which we are by the way, and say fire the driver etc but until we know all the particulars there is no call to fire these drivers.

As always Ruff makes a post that gets me thinking. Yes it hurts to think. Ok so maybe I over reacted. I still feel the follow car was to close. This becomes obvious as he has to go off the road not to hit the ambulance. I have also found in my lifetime that when a second ambulance, car, etc with L&S going is close as even a block apart often has to hit breaks as other cars pull out thinking first ambulance was only one there. So even when cops offer escorts I stay way behind. Again we in EMS use L&S way to much and use them to excuse what in all honesty is dangerous driving.

[VentMedic]

Since that is a dash cam running in the vehicle following, I wonder if it is LEO, FD or another ambulance.

If one knows the distance between the utility poles, one could estimate the speed of the vehicles.

[Christopher.Collins]

This accident could be as a result of using the Jake Brake in slippery conditions. There is contradictory information regarding whether or not the use of the jake brake in slippery conditions will cause your vehicle to spin. When you go to the owner's manual, the instructions for driving in slippery conditions are written in a way to suggest that there could be a problem, that they do not want to admit to.

http://www.jakebrake.com/products/docs/Operators-manual.pdf

Im in agreeance. We have no facts on what really happened and what crotchity said could be just as likley a scenario. Ive driven a large rig like this regularly which was equiped with a jake brake... with experience and time I have learned there are both good and bad times to have it turned on. Using something like that when its not reccomended is still driver error but IMHO is not nessecarilly negligence. I could also venture a guess that maybe cruise control could have been a factor... I highly doubt they were using it but you never know. Its another mechanical "convinence" for lazy drivers that if not used properly can be just as much a danger. I personally never use it while driving an ambulance (especially while transporting) as that sudden jolt of it kicking off can be a bit frightening. On top of that I think that cruise control just takes some of your concentration away. Cruise control like the jake brake its not reccomended for use on wet or icy roads.

Regardless, without being in that ambulance we have no idead as to what really happened. Of course when push comes to shove, the driver would likley be thrown under the bus (no pun intended) come the investigation. And frankly I cant think of many non-driver errors that could have caused this. If the roads were dry them maybe it wouldnt have happend. It all comes down to situational awareness.

As far as firing? I dont think it is entirley nessecary in this siuation per say. At least based on what Ive seen. And that being said I am a huge SAFETY NAZI when it comes to stupid cr@p. Just remember that no one is perfect, even a seasoned driver with a perfect record could have gone through this. That dosnt mean that they were not at fault nor does it mean they were. I recall an instance when my uncle worked operations for a small commuter airport, along with ARFF he plowed and did maintainence. Even someone as responsible as him, not even screwing around or driving fast (I know you guys dont know him) spun a plow and damn near flipped it. Point is sometimes (no matter how unexcusable they are) things can happen beyond our control. If that same situation in the video happened in clear dry conditions then I would probably be less linient and most likley terminate.

[HellsBells]

I agree with the above posters that this is a situation where its really hard to assign blame, based on the video. Since it was just a spin out and no one was hurt, no property damage, I'd say that firing would be a huge overeaction, if not an outright abuse of power. In my service we would fill out a risk management or near miss form, describe how we would avoid the error next time, then carry on with our lives.

Oh, and as for the MVA vs MVC rhetoric, its utter bullshit. No matter what it is called the outcome is the same.

[Christopher.Collins]

...

Oh, and as for the MVA vs MVC rhetoric, its utter bullshit. No matter what it is called the outcome is the same.

Accident vs. Collision, Beauty Mark vs. Mole... gatta love euphamisms. Man I miss George Carlin sometimes.