Physiological responses to treadmill exercise in size- and fitness-matched male and female firefighter applicants.

Physiological responses during a standardised treadmill test for structural firefighting employment were compared in 41 pairs of size-matched, male and female applicants. Applicants wore personal exercise clothing, running shoes, and fire protective ensemble with self-contained breathing apparatus (added mass 21.2 ± 1.0 kg). Applicants walked at 1.56 m·s-1, completing a 5-min warm-up, 8-min at 10% grade, and then, progressive 1-min stages to exhaustion. The cut-score required completion of 13-min of exercise. Up to the cut-score, no differences in heart rate, oxygen uptake or minute ventilation were detected between sexes. At time 12:30-13:00 min, V̇O2 was 45.7 ± 0.6 vs. 44.2 ± 0.5 mL·kg-1·min-1 (body mass) for males and females, respectively. Despite similar physiological responses at minute 13, females worked at higher fractions of peak than males (p < 0.05). A second analysis compared a subset of 27 fitness-matched (V̇O2peak) male-female pairs. Fitness-matching further reduced or eliminated most observed differences in physiological responses, except small differences in breathing pattern. Practitioner Summary: Physiological responses during a standardised treadmill test for firefighter applicants were investigated in male and female applicants matched on size and fitness. Absolute responses to exercise were the same for both sexes when size-matched, but relative intensity was higher for females. Fitness-matching reduced or eliminated most previously observed differences. Abbreviations: NFPA: National Fire Protection Association; V̇O2: rate of oxygen consumption; V̇O2peak: rate of oxygen consumption at peak exercise; PAR-Q+: Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire Plus; SCBA: self-contained breathing apparatus; ANOVA: analysis of variance; V̇E: minute ventilation; V̇Epeak: minute ventilation at peak exercise; V̇E/V̇O2: ventilatory equivalent for oxygen.

The Validity and Reliability of a Treadmill Test for Structural Firefighter Applicants.

OBJECTIVE: This 2-part study evaluated validity and reliability of a treadmill test for structural firefighters. METHODS: Wearing fire protective ensemble, 260 participants walked at 1.56 m·s-1, completing a 5-min warm-up, an 8-min stage at a 5.71° incline, then graded stages to exhaustion. In Part 2, 21 participants completed the test on 3 separate days under standardized conditions. RESULTS: Average (±SD) oxygen uptake () during minutes 1-13 was similar to reported values for simulated fire-rescue work. During the 13th min, was consistent with recommendations for firefighters. in Part 2, exercise duration increased between trials 1 and 2 before stabilizing but was consistent. CONCLUSIONS: Congruence with reported during simulated firefighting and recommendations for confirmed validity. Acceptable test-retest reliability was demonstrated. We conclude that the test is valid and reliable for evaluating cardiorespiratory endurance for firefighting.

Evidence for Validity and Reliability, and Development of Performance Standards and Cut-Scores for Job-Related Tests of Physical Aptitude for Structural Firefighters.

OBJECTIVE: This multi-part study aimed to revise an existing battery of physical aptitude tests for firefighter applicants. Test validity and reliability were evaluated and performance thresholds were determined. METHODS: In Part I, 49 structural firefighters rated the similarity between the physical demands of the tests and corresponding work activities. In Part II, 23 participants completed the tests on 3 separate days. In Part III, cut-scores were determined using the Bookmark method by an expert panel of 25 firefighter supervisors. RESULTS: Analysis revealed high levels of validity and reliability. The expert panel provided invaluable direction through a combination of independent and group work, leading to consensus on acceptable completion times. CONCLUSION: Rigorous processes established scientific credibility for the revised battery of tests. Expert knowledge from firefighter supervisors contributed to determining cut-scores following established scientific methods.

The law of food allergy and accommodation in Canadian schools.

BACKGROUND: There is ongoing controversy surrounding the appropriate standards and limits of accommodation of children with food allergies in schools. We identify and explain how relevant Canadian common law, legislation, constitutional law and human rights policy can inform future school policy around allergy, disability and food bans. MAIN BODY: The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms applies to governmental laws or policies, including the policies of schools, and grants every individual the right to freedom from discrimination based on, among other things, disability. Canadian constitutional and human rights law define disability broadly including perceived disabilities. Provincial human rights tribunals in both Ontario and BC have explicitly found allergy to be a disability requiring accommodation, even in cases not involving anaphylaxis risk. However, the cases most pertinent to the scenarios faced by schools have found that food bans may not be required, due to recent scientific evidence that they do not render allergy sufferers safer. CONCLUSION: Anaphylaxis-level allergy constitutes a disability under both the Charter and human rights legislation, despite the fact that higher courts have not definitively ruled on the matter. Accordingly, schools must make careful decisions about how to deal with life-threatening allergies among their students. Food bans are generally not legally necessary, and, in the absence of new legislation, are only likely to become so if sufficient scientific evidence demonstrates that they increase safety for students. School policies should be substantially informed by evidence-based research in order to ensure ongoing congruence with human rights law.

Human rights at work: Physical standards for employment and human rights law.

This review focuses on the human rights dimensions of creating and implementing physical standards for employment for prospective and incumbent employees. The review argues that physical standards for employment engage two fundamental legal concepts of employment law: freedom of contract and workplace human rights. While the former promotes an employer's right to set workplace standards and make decisions of whom to hire and terminate, the latter prevents employers from discriminating against individuals contrary to human rights legislation. With reference to applicable human rights legislative regimes and their judicial interpretation in Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia, this review demonstrates the judicial preference for criterion validation in testing mechanisms in the finding of bona fide occupational requirements. With particular attention to the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Meiorin, this review argues that an effective balance between workplace safety and human rights concerns can be found, not in applying different standards to different groups of individuals, but in an approach that holds employers to demonstrating a sufficient connection between a uniform physical standard of employment and the actual minimum requirements to perform the job safety and efficiently. Combined with an employer's duty to accommodate, such an approach to lawful physical standards for employment conceives of worker and public safety and workplace diversity as emanating from a shared concern for human rights.