FireNet Community
FIRE SERVICE AND GENERAL FIRE SAFETY TOPICS => General Interest => Topic started by: creamegg on April 12, 2004, 08:53:43 PM
-
can anyone tell me how a brigade can just give a brigade car to to whole time firefighters that will be use it for community fire saftey, school talks etc. which is fitted with a blue light/sirren,the firefighters carry a retained alerter and will have to turn into station under blue lights when the retained alearter goes off. they will then take their place on the pump if they beat the retained into station. the brigade can just give out a blue light/sirren to that car so why cant the retained have them for their cars. do the retained have to pull over if they see a blue light in their mirror or just carry on to station as they are going to do the same job. if the retained had blue lights/sirren they would get to the station quicker and safter. does any brigade let the retained use blue lights/siren on their cars?
-
Ah - but will the firefighters using the car be required to have EFAD?
You can't just chuck someone in a vehicle with blues & twos and expect them to safely use it (it may be currently legal, but not good for liability)
Brigades cannot afford to send every retaineed firefighter on EFAS or DDSA-CC equivalent training.
Plus having several people bluing from several different directions at once towards the station is going to cause an accident.
Retained stations and their recruiting area are supposed to account for distance to station and traffic.
If it's taking too long to get to station then either:
a) you need to recruit staff living/working closer to the station; or
b) reassess the risk to the area and if high enough to justify a staffed station (& assoc costs) do it, if low risk then the delay isn't as important; or
c) move the station if you cannot get the people
The dedication of a resource to community safety in itself good as if successful it will through education reduce domestic fires or at least the number with "persons reported" (detectors, escape plans, prevention) so it shouldn't matter as much if you are delayed to the call as it is more likely then to be car/bin on fire, industrial or domestic property only at risk
-
the station involved has just gone from full time manning on 0900 till 1700 mon to fri and is now fully retained. the authority has said that they will keep 2 personnel on the books may be for 12 months. i would have thought that you would have to have been blue light trained for the car. the station has been covered by the retained for a good number of years during the day when their has not been enough full time on. the public have complained that its gone fully retained but its the retained that have been covering it for most of the time
-
Sounds like cutbacks are already biting.
Any person driving a blue light vehicle who may be expected to have to use them should receive training, but unfortunately it's not (yet) a legal requirement.
-
so going by your comments about not being a legal requirement to be trained in using blue lights. Does this mean that a retained firey could fit blue lights to his own car and use them to proceed to a station?
-
If they do that they would be driving without insurance - as blue lights are an alteration to the vehicle and the usage isn't strictly SDP.
Also the vehicle may fall foul of the vehicle lighting regs as it is not strictly an emergency vehicle defined as "A motor vehicle of any of the following descriptions-
(a) a vehicle used for fire brigade, ambulance or police purposes;"
although you could argue that it is fire brigade purposes, there is case law where ambulance personnel used blues to collect an ambulance and were fined and pointed.
and in the unlikely event you get away with it being "fire brigade purposes" then you'd better be using magnetic lightbars because if you permanently mount them the second you use the car to go to the shops, or to your normal employment, etc you are commiting an offence as they are not fire brigade, ambulance or police purposes - its the fitting that is the offence, even if you never switch them on
It's a notoriously grey area for which you must have a lot of spare cash for legal fees if you get caught up in it.
-
lol i dont think ill bother then ;)
-
In my brigade area the traffic police followed a retained firefighter to the station as he was driving to fast and dangerous, he had a blue light fitted to the visor. they gave him a warning and told him under no circumstances was he allowed to use blue lights. He was informed if they caught him again they would press charges.
-
How does my ADO get away with using a magnetic light bar on his own car to proceed to incidents?
-
Using the "fire brigade purposes" exemptions in the lighting regs and RT Act.
-
In some certain remote areas retained personnel are authorised to use blue lights where it is just impossible to get to the station within 3 minutes.
Use of the blue lights is normally sanctioned by the local Police Superintendant or in some cases the area Traffic Commissioner (DVLA)
They for instance normally approve agencies such as St John Ambulances to use blue lights.
You dont need any training to use a vehicle with blue lights however I understand that the SUperintendant will impose that
a) Untrained personell can only exceed speed limit by 10mph
b) vehicles may not overtake - driver can only proceed when drivers in front have pulled over or travelling at a suffiecitly low speed to allow a safe take over maneouvre.
c) In some cases the Superintendant may insist the drivers have done atleast an advanced driving course
The police can not stop any vehicles using blue lights even if they suspect they are suing those blue lights illegally. Instead they have to either take down the registration number and if necessary follow it to ensure they are being used legitimtaley.
A police officer once stopped a local Search and Rescue team travelling in their landrover ambulance who were using blue lights to get a casualty to hospital. As a result the casualty nearly died. There was uproar that the police had stopped the. Again the police either have to follow the anyone they suspect is using blue lights illegally to see where they go (in the case of search and rescue if theyd had follwed them they would have ended up at the hospital and would have seen the casualty being rushed into A & E)
or take down the registration number , trace the vehicle and then approach the owner afterwards to determine why theyu were being used.
An intresting point to mention here also is that a police officer might actually the law if he stopped a retained firefighter using blue lights legally or indeed illegally. The reason being that the police would be obstructing a firefighter from undertaking his / her duties which is an offence under the fire service act 1947
Again if they thought that the fire fighter was using blue light illegally they would have to approach him when NOT responding to an emergency
Its a very grey area.
-
is this just in England or does it apply in scotland as well? Which brigades do this?
-
As far as im aware this applies in the whole of the UK but scotland might be different. You'd need to contact your local police
-
I'm an Auxillary Coastguard.
We are allowed to use blue lights when racing to our station.
I don't see why Fire fighters can't do the same.
Picking up on the point of Police stopping blue light drivers. I was once stopped when I was using my blue light. We had just been given permission to use them on our private vehicles, and I don't think word hadn't got out to the officers on the beat so to speak.
The copper cthat stopped me couldn't have been older than 23 and he kept calling me "sonny" cheeky little brat!. Top and tail of the story was that I gave him blue murder for stopping me, got back into my car and rushed off to answer the call.
He pursued me to the station and then finally arrested me for failing to stop. I was taken to the police station where the young constable got a right ear bending off his Sergeant when they realised I was genuine and permitted to use blues and twos.
I think he was also disciplined although I stressed I didn't think it was fair that he did get repremanded so strongly.
So no the police cant stop any vehicle using a blue light is the answer
-
Forgot to mention that the Police Officer who stopped me could potentially have been dismissed from the force because he caused an offence by stopping me from undertaking my duties. Thankfully common sense prevailed afteral he didnt stop me to be akward.
-
Forget blue light training. A course in spelling and grammar might not be amiss. Can we be truly confident that some of the contributors can read and understand the Highway Code, Road Traffic Act, Fire Services Act or even road signage given the lack of basic literacy skills demonstated herein.
As for the individual 'racing' to the coastguard station. Get a grip. I feel a more accurate statement would be to say you were 'responding'. Otherwise if you truly do race you are in reality making the case against blue lights for non-qualified emergency services personnel.
-
STEADY ON!
This is an imformal chat room and there is no need to get personal about other people.
The guest who rather cowardly didn't leave his name is certainly one to talk. Perhaps he should look at his own grammar before criticising other peoples.
I remind everyone that this is meant to be a friendly informal pleasant site
-
Perhaps the idiot who chooses to criticise and judge someone because of their ability to spell would tell us what he does for a living.
I think any fool could see it was just a throw away nasty comment.
Someone's spelling doesnt affect their ability to drive with or without blue lights
Is this person a policeman I wonder??
I think the coastguard used the word "raced" tongue in cheek.
Shame some people dont grw up on here isn't it.
-
Guest above is a serving LA wt Ff who has spent 8 of his 15 years on a day staffing station where he has both responded to shouts on an alerter using his own vehicle and witnessed the lunacy of other Ffs who do the same. Never mind saving lives they have been lucky not to take some.
My own experience suggests that the desire for blues come from only the retained side of the service. I have never, ever heard a wt day staffing member seeking to have flashers and nee-naws on their own private vehicle, even when responding from their home address.
Bravado and Machismo were the names of 2 Ffs who instigated a similar debate on the subject on a station i once served on.
-
"Flashers and nee-naws"????
Are these the same as blues and twos?
Perhaps the "Guest" comes from an area where flasher means something different.
Or is he just auditioning for C-Beebies!
Gio.
-
I use the terms 'flashers' and 'nee naws' to reflect the childlike desire of some to look flash in their privately owned DIY emergency vehicle.
As for 'blues and twos' this is no better than 'flashers' and 'nee naws'. The correct terminology should in fact be 'visual and audible warning devices' and to be fully beneficial they should be used on vehicles with sufficient and suitable high conspicuity vehicle markings.
I prefer to leave the sad emergency service slang as the preseve of those who lack the knowledge or expertise to use the correct and more more professional technical expressions.
And, i never knew it could still be this easy to wind some individuals up on this forum. :lol: :lol:
-
Touchy, Touchy! Who is it that's getting wound up?
Perhaps if you didn't hide behind your anonymous 'guest tag', knowledge and expertise could indeed stand comparison.
Conspicuity!!!??? (you're making this up!)
I rest my case M'Lord.
Gio.
-
Oh yeah great wind up that was mate.
Absolutely hilarious.
Some sad people around isnt there.
Retained emergency services officers do not make it there ambition to get neee naws, blues or toes, flashers, sirens, audible and visual warnings etc,they are not sad individuals who only joint the service to wear a uniform or pose, they are commited members of the community whom give up their time to save life.
So I think as we have shown "Mr Guest" you are well outnumbered here as being an Idiot.
Grow up please or find another chatroom to terrorise.
-
Outnumbered on this forum yes. Outnumbered in the real world no. But never mind, the fact that it will have to be a month of Sundays before you ever get your toys means i shall continue to be entirely satisfied with my lot while you whinge about your inability to race to the station like Starsky & Hutch. Concentrate on addressing the major issues facing the retained service such as IRMP & IPDS and put this old chestnut to bed.
I shall no longer be referred to as the anonymous guest but by my new alias.
Oh, by the way when the new world order comes into force and attendance times go out the window there will be no legal requirement to 'race'. Or, are we advocating that 15 retained fireys can break the speed limit simply in order to attend run of the mill non-life threatening 1 pump incidents under the guise of responding to an emergency. What actually constitutes an emergency?
90% of what you attend will be non-life threatening and you can not modify your driving style to suit the nature of the incident as you won't know the nature of the incident until you arrive on station and view the turnout information.
How many lives have been lost due to deficiencies in the current system, put this against the potential for lives to be lost by the element of over zealous FS personnel exceeding the speed limit in built up areas.
A risk assessment by your employer would state that there is no justification for blue lights on your cars as the gain will never outweigh the risk.
-
ps One mans terrorist is anothers freedom fighter. Hence the alias. The Z fights for justice, freedom of speech and the right to remain anonymous.
-
Hi "Zorro"
I dont quite understand your argument really.
I think you need to re-assess some of your comments. Whilst we can't allow people to have blue lights just for the sake of having then, some retained personnel would be able to provide a much more rapid response with blue lights on their vehicles.
I think its a sad state of affairs to label all retained firefighters as blue light freaks whomjust want them to pose with.
As one person said here, blue light use is approved by the local police.
They stipulate that an untrained driver can only travel 10mph higher than the speed limit. In some case they may also insist that the driver undergoes advanced driver training with the IAM.
Firstly speed is of the essence when responding to an emergency.
Secondly you ask "What is a life threatening emergency?" The answer is "pass", "I dont know", because we can never 100% be sure until we get to the incident if anyone is at risk regardless of what information is gleened by control staff during the initial 999 call, as you well know.
Thirdly someone's house is burning down, no persos are reported,but we take our time getting there and as a result half the house has been burned down. The occupants are extremely angry that we didnt save their property.Brilliant!
Somewhere down the line you have been disillusioned by the work of the retties and part timers, and I don't know why, but you rather under estimate their value and I think thats very sad.
There is always an element of risk when responding to an emergency either at speed or under normal conditions, but control measures can be put in place to greatly reduce that risk.
We are not saying ALL retained firefighters need blue lights, just those where because of traffic or remoteness of an area firefighters can man the engine quicker and respond in good time.
The subject of this debate
-
In my Brigade retained firefighters are authorised to use Blue Lights when making for the station.
The purpose of them having blue lights is not for them to race about but simply to clear traffic out of the way during periods of heavy traffic such as rush hour for example. This allows them to continue at normal road speed without encountering obstruction.
I know one of the officers from that staion very well indeed. He sums it upo in a nutshell -firefighters are their to save lives, not kill them, therefore you will find any blue light user will drive with extra care when using them on a highway.
Nobody wants the death of another human being on their conscience and I think Zorro should have more faith in our emergency personnel in being reponsible enough to use blue lights properly.
-
Graham & Crazy SO
Well put but I fear your wise words will be wasted on the still 'anonymous' Zorro whom it appears has no logical argument and merely wants to knock the retained. The area covered by Strathclyde Fire Brigade for example could not be met unless retained units were employed, many of which come into the larger towns to assist wholetime and in essence can face the same hazards.
Zorro?
Freedom Fighter? Right to remain anonymous? Good to see you have the courage of your convictions. :?
Disney must have a bulletin board that would be right up your street!
Gio. :lol:
-
Can only speak from the experience of having been overtaken on a blind bend in a 30 limit by a retained Ff who was in all honesty known for racing to get a turnout as opposed to an attendance. He was one of 3 in a retained establishment of 12 known for his shall we say' bold and aggressive' style. Not scientific but indicative of some of the real issues affecting some but not all retained personnel. Ironically we were both responding to the same shout and we both got the turnout.
-
bit of a generalisation I feel though wouldn't you say Zorro?
Next you will be telling us that all Policemen are corrupt, that a certain race of people whom follow a certain religion are all terrorists etc etc
You always get the odd few who let the side down but speaking from experience myself I would argue that most if not 99.9% of all retained firefighters are responsible law obiding people fully equipped to deal with hazardous situations which includes driving to the station with or without the use of blue lights
-
Not going to disagree one bit about the attributes of retained personnel and that 'not all should be tarred by the same brush' etc etc.
I disagree in principle to horns and lights on non emergency vehicles, whether or not Superintendents say otherwise. And furthermoreI shall not yield to the arguement that a private vehicle owned and insured as such is a vehicle in use for emergency purposes when responding to an alerter. Remember, just cause the local bobby says its ok doesn't mean you won't get done in court if the magistrates say otherwise. The bobbies word is not law and you might still, in fact you most probably will be in contravention of the Road Traffic Act even though the 'soup' says otherwise.
-
Erm who mentioned " Local bobbies?"
Erm nobody!!
I think in one of the original threads it mentions that aproval comes from either a superintendant or an official of the DVLA. Both of which are fully authorised to approve whom or who should not use blue lights. We arent talking about PC Plod here.
I also pick up on the point about insurance. Retained firecrews would have to have correct insurance - that goes without saying. Normally domestic insurance brokers can provide this at very little extra cost.
And I again stress that blues and twos are used to get traffic out of the way, not to speed!!!
Now behave yourself Zorro its not good for your superhero image if everyone disagrees with you old chum!
-
Pleasing to end on a chummy note. No offence is ever intended on my part and as this could go round and round in ever decreasing circles i shall sign off on a positive note by wishing you all the very best . Whether or not you all ever get the flashers remember one thing. Stay safe.
Z.
-
I reckon giving every Tom, Dick & Harry flashing lights & nee-naws devalues them and anaesthsatises (spelt wrong - sorry Zorro) the public to their effect. If every time they go out in their car they are overtaken by a blue Golf GTi or brown Mondeo sporting blue lights and sirens, Joe Public is going to wonder why he is the only one around here who doesn't have them, and eventually is going to start ignoring them, which, I think you will all agree, is at a bad enough level already! :shock:
I fully appreciate the argument that they should be used to clear traffic out of the way so the user can proceed at legal speeds, but come on fellas,this is the real world here and we all know that a good many retained, not a majority I agree, but a good many all the same, drive like bloody loonies to get on the big red fire engine.
Ten mph over the limit doesn't sound like a very good idea, given that most fire stations are in built up areas (at the moment...) that means 40 instead of 30, with kids running out to see the fire engine/cop car/ ambulance that they think is coming and liable to run out in front of the the brown Mondeo which they haven't even seen 'cos they are looking for a 'proper' emergency vehicle, I think most people on here have seen what 40mph does to a human body, especially a small one. :cry:
There are, unfortunately, people who joined the brigade because blues & two's give them a hard-on, I know it and you know it. One of them was driving for me once and while I was somewhat preoccupied with the radio I still noticed that we were barely under control. When I looked across at my driver I saw that he had one hand on the wheel and one on the control box for the nee-naws so he could switch through the different sounds (from woo-woo & nee-naw to wowwowow & blip blip blip) while we were at the time negotiating a tight left hander at a crossroads with traffic everywhere.
I told him to "kindly place both hands on the wheel if you please" or words to that effect. :x
What I should have said of course was "stop the ****ing pump, get the **** out and **** off back to the station you ****ing ****!"
:evil: :evil:
-
Well I think thats more a management issue and requires perhaps a little more in depth discussion when talking to your crew.
You should point out that crazy driving is unacceptable, that they are a responsible person serving their community someone whom is tasked to try and prevent accidents not cause them.
You will always have hotheads in the job unfortunately, but threaten them with the choice of calming down or leaving the brigade normally has the desired affect.
You mentioned built up areas , most built up areas have wholetime crews. The blue lights are used where it is absolutely impossible for ANY member of a crew to reach the station in the requisite time.
This used to apply to mainly remote rural areas but can also equally apply to other areas with significant traffic problems.
It would be a good idea for retained firefighters using blues and twos to display a reflective "FIRE" sign at the back of their vehicles to prevent others from becoming complacent about unmarked emergency vehicles.
-
:o
Ladies & Gentlemen,
Haven't posted anything for some time now but that is not to say I don't read the comments, most sensible, some complete and utter guff.
The whole point of being a retained firefighter is to respond to the station within a specified time. In order to do that you must live/work within a certain catchment area, and that is assessed on recruitment. Travel times and distances are assessed travelling at normal roadspeeds under normal traffic conditions. Obviously, there will be times when traffic conditions are 'abnormal', but these will be the exception rather than the rule and in no way carry the argument in favour of fitting unsuitable vehicles with visual and audible warning devices.
These recruitment restrictions are made in order to either be 2nd pump to a 'B' risk, usually in support of the wholetime pump, or 1st responding pump to a 'C' or 'D' risk and meet the attendance times for those risks. If the pump isn't meeting this standard then alternatives will have to be considered by the Fire Authority, such as upgrading the pump to wholetime status, mobilising an adjacent station, etc. Each case has its merits and needs to be treated individually. There is no blanket solution to this problem but it is for certain the resolution is NOT to fit private cars with blue beacons and two-tone horns, etc.
I have no axe to grind with retained firefighters, They do a wonderful job under very trying conditions with much sacrifice to their personal lives. Having said that I am certain they wouldn't do it if they didn't derive as much satisfaction from the job as I did as a w/t firefighter. I just don't believe it is right or appropriate to go down the track of putting the responsibility of 'blue light driving' on inexperienced and untrained personnel, whoever they are.
Cheers.
:D
-
In the words of 'Sir Clive' just being in a minority of 1 didn't make me wrong'.
Pleasing to see that the fight for freedom of speech and common sense is gaining supporters. Now 1 has become 3.
-
I can accept in part some of the arguments Zorro is saying but not all.
Zorro the point of this is that we aren't saying ALL retained firefighters should have blue lights, we are saying that certain areas it is, as "Crazy SO" said, impossible to reach the station in the alloted time.
Recruitment for retained service isnt popular in some areas due to a whole host of reasons.
Its ok saying the fire authority should be recruiting people who live close enough to the station but in some areas Zorro this is not possible. Typicaly retained stations willhave enough volunteers to cover evenings and weekends but not during the day,
Then you have the problem of growing traffic where firefighters did live within the allotted time limit but due to traffic were taking increasingly longer to respond as time went on.
So no one is saying this is easy, no one is saying EVERY last retained firefighter should have a blue light we are saying that it is the best all round solution for a growing problem.
Some communities do not have the luxury of a wholetime crew protecting them, but they still deserve the same level of cover.
You are making this personal again go to pains to point out how many people agree with you.
Relax and take it easy don't be so defensive we aren't criticising you for having an opinion we are just putting forward ours.
-
Pugh made some excellent points.
I agree that the sun shines out of the retained etc etc but we simply cannot have everybody careering about under blues & twos because local conditions are difficult regarding the retained FFs getting to the pumps.
Let's look at this from the perspective of local authority been-counters and politicians (ie - the real world).
Situation:
The town of Much-Piddling-in-the-Wold is served by a wholly retained station.
Due to changing local conditions of housing/employment/prosperity etc etc recruitment of retained FFs is difficult and has resulted in people getting in who really live and/or work too far away.
Eventually responce times are going to fall below what is acceptable and fires are going to be more serious and people are going to die.
This will eventually put pressure on the local council bods (long after the local FFs reputations have been unfairly destroyed) and the decision to go to day-manning will have to be taken, but only AFTER an "unacceptable" number of fatalities.
In short: If response times cannot be met by retained FFs, then the LA must provide at least day-manning.
Sorry if none of this make sense- I've been on the sauce... :?
-
Hiya Colt
Yeah I don't disagree with your comments there - if response times are suffering the local authority would have to look into making that station wholetime perhaps - thats assuming they have got the funding.
Day manning may be an option as you pointed out, but may still present similar problems to the retained situation.
But its what you do in the interim whilst wholetime is being sorted out. Plus like I've pointed out in several occassions remote areas won't be selected for wholetime stations because there just isn't the demand.
Again I would point out we are not talking about EVERY LAST retained firefighter having blue lights here guys :D
-
Sounds like Zorro has a large chip on his shoulder about the retained. I have met whole time FF like him before normally around the later stages of the serving career and some have a problem with the retained. Hopefully they will all retire soon and not parse on their narrow-minded thoughts onto the new recruits. I really can not understand why the whole time FF think they are above the retained. May be you can answer that one Zorro?
-
Sounds like Matt is a little disturbed rather than Zorro. Z has made reasoned, sensible points. Suggesting he is anti-retained is ludicrous. He has shown that he respects the work and role of the retained, at no tim edid he suggest that any Ff is above another. Matt you are reading either too much into this, or are type likely to cause distress between our personnel on different duty systems, unhelpfully.
The issue of warning devices is a long-running one. It was there when I joined the retained 20 years ago so it is nothing new. The trruth is that many (but no not all) retained Ffs do race to the station. They do sometimes drive unreasonably, there are accidents so caused. I know of one serious accident and at least three red-light jumpings personally - at two different retained stations; one of these a Wt/Rt station where the Wt pump was sent to the fire and the Rt was redirected to cut out the stupid Rt driver! BUT I am not tarring anyone with any brush, merely stating facts. It is also true what Colt and Pugh state. The retained are meployed to get tot he station, mainly based on their statements as to how long that takes. The satff should be honest in that and then no need to race, or for warning devices. Also the times are now gone so we no longer need to race at all!
Now sense please, no more fighting.
-
In relation to the points YOU make i think you have anwered them for me. You seem to view the w/t and retained as being one and the same and they most obviously and honestly are not. Maybe its you with a persecution complex that views me as having a chip on my shoulder that is the cause of your obvious angst. But here are a few objective reasons for why the 2 sides of the service are different.
W/T have a greater amount of time to spend developing their skills and obtaining new ones whilst the retained try valiantly but in vain to do the same within the short time allocated to them (2 hours per week on average).
W/T spend on average a much greater part of their time at incidents thereby demonstrating and developing their skills in the workplace as opposed to the retained who often are employed to provide fire cover in areas which recieve fewer fire calls due to the nature of the risk (IPDS implications here relating to demonstration of competence in the workplace).
W/T have always had to pass through a more rigourous and discriminatory selection process due to the high applicant - vacancy ratio, whilst many Brigades just can't get the public to want to be retained Firefighters and therefore unfortunately recruitment is done on a local basis with those who wouldn't get through w/t selection often being successful as retained applicants.
W/T promotion has historically been based on the need to pass promotion exams and participate in rigourous selection testing whilst promotion in the ret. is nowhere near as demanding to attain.
I could go on but i feel should redress the balance. I would never question the dedication and valuable contribution that retained Firefighters make in providing an essential public service within their communities and yes when the crap hits the fan fire doesn't discriminate between one Firefighter and the other. However we all need to be honest and say that sometimes the operational demands placed on retained Firefighters are way beyond their skills levels due to no fault of their own. To continue to say otherwise to avoid offending some is to continually place retained firefighters in harms way by asking them to perform tasks they have had only the most rudimentary of training to accomplish and its not fair on them.
-
Ok, I appreciate your points and they are valid and maybe I was a bit over the top. You guys do have longer to train and do have to go through bigger hopes to get into the job. I just wish some not all W/T FF would appreciate our skill and knowledge. We do have a small amount of time to do our training amongst our normal jobs, but all the R/T FF I have come across all put in 100% and do there upmost to keep up to date with things. In my Brigade the promotional exams are 60-70% the same as the whole time and they are looking into making the training courses longer. They wont to make the exams the same, promotional and entrance.
There has always been a divide between W/t and R/T, I think with IPDS and a few other things it will make it narrower. We all have to work together it is job that we all enjoy and value each other’s knowledge and experience.
:lol:
-
Peace and respect.
-
Ahhh look at this fellas - there's alot of love in this room
Yep have to stick up for Zorro for the most part here for a changer - he certainly mentioned on numerous occassions that he values the good old retainers.
On the subject of lowering standards for retained personnel to atract new recruits I happen to think this isn't a bad thing.
Theres a lot of people who wanted to join the brigade wholetime for all the right reasons, but cant due to perhaps sometimes just being borderline on eyesight or some other condition.
To those people doing the job was their dream and being retained allows them to forfil that dream. Im talking people who are serious about the job here , not some joe who just wants to play with fire engines or look the hero.
Whilst wholetime personell do indeed get more training I have to say the standard of the retained crews on our brigade patch is awe inspiring - yes they only have 2hours a week training, but he has to be said that operational experience can really bring a crew up to scratch, you find retained crews are very experienced as well as their wholetime colleagues.
Anyway this perhaps needs a new topic if we are to discuss this further.
Our retained colleagues do a truly fantastic job. Whilst they dont receive the training they truly need, I firmly believe these guys and girls do the job proffesionally , safely and with one thing imprinted on their minds - to save life.
Now ill stop making my over the top dramtic speech and well and truly get of my soap box
Alpha three one - out!
-
In the future i think the issue of percieved lowering of standards and lack of training will be adequately addressed by the targeted recruitment and training of personnel to meet the needs of both the IRMP and the IPDS. In some areas this is already happening by streamlining the role of the retained to take into account the risks within their area and the time available to train. Why ask them to be the jack of all trades when they can truly specialise to meet the risk profile of their area. An example might be the removal of CPC, GTS and decontam eqpt in areas with little likelihood of hazmat incidents occurring. This will reduce the training requirement in these skills areas leaving personnel to concentrate on the nuts and bolts of BA, RTA etc.
Getting away from the thread here sorry.
-
I agree, a station near our patch has no cutting gear but has a lot of big canals and water ways so they have been given the go ahead to start there water safety course and been given extra equipment to specialise in this area.