Meta Title:

 

For decades, the PPE and workwear industry has approached sizing through a narrow lens. Most systems were built around a standard male body shape, with “female fit” often treated as an afterthought. In practice, this has typically meant shrinking existing men’s garments rather than fundamentally redesigning them for different body types.

That approach no longer reflects the reality of modern workforces.

Across industries such as firefighting, utilities, manufacturing, logistics, and construction, workforces are becoming increasingly diverse in gender, ethnicity, age, and body shape. Yet many PPE systems still rely on outdated sizing assumptions that compromise comfort, mobility, and, most critically, safety. The conversation can no longer remain focused on “male versus female” sizing. Instead, the industry must embrace a broader and more inclusive “fit-for-form” model driven by anthropometric data, digital technology, and real-world user needs.

The recent PCIAW firefighter safety roundtables repeatedly highlighted that ill-fitting PPE is not simply an inconvenience; it is a risk factor that can contribute to injury, exposure, fatigue, and even long-term health consequences.

The Problem with Traditional Unisex Sizing

The term “unisex” has often been used as a cost-efficient solution for manufacturers and procurement teams. However, in many cases, unisex sizing has effectively meant designing for the average male body and scaling garments down proportionally for everyone else.

This approach ignores fundamental anthropometric differences. The July 2025 PCIAW Round Table noted that male and female body structures differ significantly in areas such as waist-to-hip ratios, shoulder width, crotch depth, hand shape, and foot structure. These differences are not cosmetic; they directly affect how PPE performs in operational environments.

A glove made simply smaller without considering hand shape may slip during use. A jacket designed with overly broad shoulders can extend sleeve length and compromise movement. Boots built from a reduced male last may fail to support the structure of a female foot properly. These issues become amplified in high-risk environments where PPE is expected to provide seamless protection under pressure.

One active female firefighter participating in the roundtable described how an ill-fitting glove fell off during operations, creating an immediate safety hazard. This example illustrates a broader issue: PPE that does not fit correctly cannot perform as intended.

Modern Workforces Demand Modern Design Thinking

The workforce itself has evolved faster than PPE systems. Fire and rescue services, for example, are seeing growing participation from women and people from diverse ethnic backgrounds. Procurement teams are now being challenged to account for changing workforce demographics alongside operational safety requirements.

Yet many organisations still operate with limited size ranges and outdated assumptions about body types. Female firefighters in some UK services continue to wear male kit due to cost or procurement limitations, despite evidence that poor fit can increase exposure risks.

Importantly, the issue is not exclusive to women. Participants in the 2025 roundtable stressed that fit challenges affect everyone. Some male firefighters fit better in traditionally “female-designed” garments, while some women prefer garments traditionally labelled as male fit. The problem is not gender itself. The problem is relying on rigid categories instead of designing around actual body forms.

This is where the “fit-for-form” paradigm becomes essential.

Moving Beyond Gendered PPE

The “fit-for-form” approach reframes PPE design around body diversity rather than binary gender labels. Instead of asking whether a garment is “male” or “female,” the focus shifts to whether it fits the wearer’s proportions, movement patterns, and operational needs.

Roundtable participants argued strongly that “a firefighter is a firefighter,” and PPE should be available in enough variations to accommodate any body type effectively. This is a significant shift in thinking because it acknowledges that body diversity exists across all demographics.

Traditional sizing systems were built around limited datasets that no longer represent modern populations. Expanding from 30-size systems to more adaptable 60-size systems was discussed as one possible route forward. However, increasing size ranges alone is not enough. Garments must also account for proportional differences in hips, shoulders, chest, torso length, and limb structure.

A truly fit-for-form strategy requires a combination of inclusive design, flexible pattern engineering, and better data collection.

Data Is the Future of PPE Fit

One of the most important developments discussed during the PCIAW roundtables was the use of advanced body scanning technologies to create more accurate sizing systems.

Through collaborations involving PCIAW and Women in the Fire Service UK, active firefighters were digitally scanned to gather real-world anthropometric data. The results revealed significant diversity even among participants of similar height. For example, 66% of scanned women had waist-to-hip ratios below 0.8, while 57% had shoulder measurements narrower than 16 inches across all sizes.

These findings demonstrate why simple scaling methods fail. Two individuals may wear the same nominal size but require entirely different garment proportions to achieve safe mobility and protection.

Digital scanning also enables manufacturers to create predictive sizing systems and digital avatars for fit testing earlier in the design process. This reduces guesswork, improves consistency, and allows PPE systems to adapt to a much broader range of wearers without relying on expensive customisation for every individual.

The implications extend far beyond firefighting. Any industry relying on protective clothing can benefit from data-driven fit systems that reflect real workforce diversity.

Poor Fit Is a Safety Issue, Not a Preference Issue

Historically, discussions about PPE fit have often been framed around comfort or inclusion. While both matter, the roundtables reinforced that fit is fundamentally a safety issue.

Ill-fitting PPE can increase smoke ingress, reduce thermal protection, restrict movement, accelerate fatigue, and create operational distractions. Research presented during the discussions also linked poor upper-body fit to increased cancer risks due to exposure around lymphatic areas.

In environments where firefighters are already facing elevated cancer risks, heat stress, and exposure to toxic particulates, poorly fitting PPE becomes another avoidable hazard. The WHO’s classification of firefighting as a carcinogenic occupation has intensified the need for better garment interfaces and more effective protection systems.

This is why the industry can no longer justify outdated sizing models based on convenience or legacy procurement practices.

The Industry’s Next Step

The move toward fit-for-form PPE represents more than a design trend. It signals a wider cultural and operational shift within the professional clothing industry.

Manufacturers, procurement teams, and fire services all have a role to play. The roundtables repeatedly stressed the need for education across the entire supply chain so decision-makers better understand the importance of anthropometric data and inclusive sizing strategies.

The future of PPE will likely combine advanced body scanning, predictive measurement systems, smarter garment engineering, and more flexible procurement models. However, technology alone will not solve the issue unless the industry is willing to abandon outdated assumptions about who PPE is designed for.