FireNet Community
FIRE SERVICE AND GENERAL FIRE SAFETY TOPICS => Service Training OR Recruitment => Topic started by: Tiswas on April 25, 2008, 01:01:21 PM
-
Hi new here,
I just have the one question for the moment. I will be applying for a place as a retained firefighter shortly however I live a bit of a distance from the station and i'm not sure if I could get there in the obligatory 5 minutes. I was wondering if there is any lee way on the time, or as I am only working part time whether or not I could stay at the station when (IF I get in) i'm on call?
Thanks
-
Hi folks can any 1 please tell what is emtailed ant a medical for the northern ireland fire service i asked this question yesterday and got a reply from compulsor but i not sure what i have done this is my first time on this forum but i can not get back to his answer i think i have unsubcribed to the topic and not sure how to get back to it any help and advice would be great. or has any recently done or passed a medical for the nifrs get in touch.
-
Hi new here,
I just have the one question for the moment. I will be applying for a place as a retained firefighter shortly however I live a bit of a distance from the station and i'm not sure if I could get there in the obligatory 5 minutes. I was wondering if there is any lee way on the time, or as I am only working part time whether or not I could stay at the station when (IF I get in) i'm on call?
Thanks
Best thing to do is have a word with the Officer in Charge down at your local fire station. Policies on response times differ from brigade to brigade so wouldnt be able to give you a definitive answer
-
So are you not automatically discounted from applying if you live too far away from the station then?
-
Not necessarily , it all depends to be honest Tiswas. If you chat to the Officer at the Station he / she will be able to give you more advice.
-
Hi folks can any 1 please tell what is emtailed ant a medical for the northern ireland fire service i asked this question yesterday and got a reply from compulsor but i not sure what i have done this is my first time on this forum but i can not get back to his answer i think i have unsubcribed to the topic and not sure how to get back to it any help and advice would be great. or has any recently done or passed a medical for the nifrs get in touch.
Ryan,
Just click on "mc6699" and it will show you the messages you posted. Or take a look in any of the sub headings and there is a dot to show the threads you have posted in.
Cheers,
Chris.
-
If they need staff to stay on the run, you may be okay.
If they have plenty of staff, then it will more than likely be a no. If you live more than 5 minutes away from a station with plenty of staff, and the appliance turns out in less than 5 minutes everytime, you wouldn't want to be there anyway, I wouldn't have thought.
-
Hello,
At the end of the day if a 999 call is recieved then peoples lives could be at risk, do you really think it is appropriate that its going to take longer than 5 mins just to arrive at the station.
-
Hello,
At the end of the day if a 999 call is recieved then peoples lives could be at risk, do you really think it is appropriate that its going to take longer than 5 mins just to arrive at the station.
Probably not no, but unless you can come up with an answer to address shortage in recruiting retained personnel then whats the alternative?
Far better to go out a few minutes later with a full compliment of crew than struggle with bare minimum.
-
If the choice is an appliance turning out in 6 minutes in my community or an appliance taking 15 minutes coming from the next town over, I know which I would choose.
-
agreed, but does that choice exist in some places it doesnt. Sometimes your local retained station could be off the run. Sometimes they might be engaged at another incident. it isnt that black and white
-
Oh, of course, but the above fellow questioned if it was appropriate taking longer than 5 minutes to turn out, when of course it all depends on circumstances.
However where you said: "Far better to go out a few minutes later with a full compliment of crew than struggle with bare minimum." my brigade disagrees and feels it better to turn out with no BA capabilities, than wait an extra 30 seconds.
Fortunatly for everyone the training for reatined has recently changed and there will no longer be on the run firefighters without BA training.
Anyway... good luck openng poster. Consider moving if you have to. It's worth it at the end of the day.
-
Oh, of course, but the above fellow questioned if it was appropriate taking longer than 5 minutes to turn out, when of course it all depends on circumstances.
However where you said: "Far better to go out a few minutes later with a full compliment of crew than struggle with bare minimum." my brigade disagrees and feels it better to turn out with no BA capabilities, than wait an extra 30 seconds.
Fortunatly for everyone the training for reatined has recently changed and there will no longer be on the run firefighters without BA training.
Anyway... good luck openng poster. Consider moving if you have to. It's worth it at the end of the day.
Im not sure I understand you
Retained firefighters do go on the run woithout BA training in most counties
And how do you wait 30 seconds if second truck is 15 mins away?
So are you saying 5 mins is any better than 7 mins when the next nearest truck is 15 minutes away?
-
So are you not automatically discounted from applying if you live too far away from the station then?
Not neccesssarily. You will probably find that it is not the distance you are from the station that matters but the time it would take you to get there from your home address driving within the speed limit for the shortest route.
You could live within 2 miles from the station but your route to get there could be 4. Fine if you are a crow.
-
Im not sure I understand you
Retained firefighters do go on the run woithout BA training in most counties
And how do you wait 30 seconds if second truck is 15 mins away?
So are you saying 5 mins is any better than 7 mins when the next nearest truck is 15 minutes away?
It is common practice in many brigades for control to give the nearest retained station to a fire ( lets say station A) 5 minutes to turn out, and if they fail to get sufficient crew will mobilise the next nearest station B instead, and will stand down the two or three firefighters at station A.
I think Toby is saying that if station B is 15 minutes away from the fire it may be better still to mobilise station B but also to give station A a bit longer to try and raise a full crew. not to stand station A down until it is clear that they will not be able to respond faster than station B.
Something like that anyway.
I too would be interested to hear of new arrangements for the training of firefighters on the RDS please Toby
-
Why not just mobilise both immediatly?
-
Because theres not an unlimited budget available. If you have a station that is 95% reliable and through preplanning of availablity is showing available in control it would be wasteful to double up and send double the resources needed just in case they fail to turn out- for ecxample someone could break down or an alerter may fail. Plus it would lead to a lot of unnecessary blue light runs increasing the risk to road users.
-
Yes I appreciate that Kurnal
But lets say it takes 6 mins instead of 5 Im not sure where toby is getting his 15 minute fire engine 30 seconds after
-
Because theres not an unlimited budget available. If you have a station that is 95% reliable and through preplanning of availablity is showing available in control it would be wasteful to double up and send double the resources needed just in case they fail to turn out- for ecxample someone could break down or an alerter may fail. Plus it would lead to a lot of unnecessary blue light runs increasing the risk to road users.
Remember that the F&R Service need only give 75% efficiency in attending specific risks within the specified time.
No individual is entitled to a Fire & Rescue Service. It is there for the community and it is the service to the community, not the individual, that they are answerable for.
So John (Bulimia Nervosa or, I've written a book and I want everybody to buy it) Prescott said.
-
The 30 seconds was a comment saying that my brigade would seemingly rather an appliance turned out with 4 people and without any BA capabilities in 5 minutes, than turn out after 5 minutes and 30 seconds with a full compliment. The next nearest station gets mobilised after 5 minutes. I think two seperate observations have been combined somewhere here.
Proceeding to different subject.
Someone mentioned if it was pertinent to be a retained firefighter if it takes 6 minutes [edit: he actually said "more than 5 minutes", but ho-hum] to get to the station, and I was suggesting that its better to be taking 6 minutes to turn out, if staffing forces, than to have to wait 15 minutes (or however far it is) for the next station to respond. Obviously this would only happen if the staffing levels are so low that without this person getting to the station after 5 minutes, they would be off the run. Working on the basis that a 6 minute turnout is better than no turnout at all. Basically me stating the obvious in a crap way and confusing everybody.
And on Kurnals request for the RDS training, the staff will be fully trained before going on the run. BA, first responder, the lot. It'll take five months worth of weekends and three 5 day weeks of BA. As well as attending the weekly drill periods at the station where they will serve. This replaces the old one week of hose running and you can ride system, which is what I got three years ago.
If that doesn't make sense then forgive me, I'm just too dim for this writing stuff and will stick to squirting water around.
-
The 30 seconds was a comment saying that my brigade would seemingly rather an appliance turned out with 4 people and without any BA capabilities in 5 minutes, than turn out after 5 minutes and 30 seconds with a full compliment. The next nearest station gets mobilised after 5 minutes. I think two seperate observations have been combined somewhere here.
Proceeding to different subject.
Someone mentioned if it was pertinent to be a retained firefighter if it takes 6 minutes [edit: he actually said "more than 5 minutes", but ho-hum] to get to the station, and I was suggesting that its better to be taking 6 minutes to turn out, if staffing forces, than to have to wait 15 minutes (or however far it is) for the next station to respond. Obviously this would only happen if the staffing levels are so low that without this person getting to the station after 5 minutes, they would be off the run. Working on the basis that a 6 minute turnout is better than no turnout at all. Basically me stating the obvious in a crap way and confusing everybody.
Now i see what you mean and wholeheartidly agree
-
Thanks Toby.
We always used to find it difficult to find recruits for the retained service. Sounds like it will be impossible in the future.
-
I thought the same thing Kurnal. I'm assuming they will see how it goes for a while then cut it if it puts too many people off.
-
Because theres not an unlimited budget available. If you have a station that is 95% reliable and through preplanning of availablity is showing available in control it would be wasteful to double up and send double the resources needed just in case they fail to turn out- for ecxample someone could break down or an alerter may fail. Plus it would lead to a lot of unnecessary blue light runs increasing the risk to road users.
With regards to the blue lights on roads, I agree. But in terms of budget, aside from the fuel costs, what extra costs would be involved in sending the wholetime as a backup?
-
In the brigades I was in the system worked that if a retained station did not turn out in 5 minutes then another pump would be mobilised. If the retained station then got a crew it would still proceed. Whether or not the other pump also still proceeded was up to control.
As far as mobilising a whole time pump as well it depends on the geography of the brigade. A brigade I was in was able to fulfil the attendance times with a wholetime crew over almost all of its area, however some brigades do not have that luxury (or may not in the near future!)
The whole thing about the 5 minute turnout was to meet the standards of fire cover requirements hence for the old D risk it associated 5 minutes to turnout and 15 minutes travelling to acheive 1 pump in 20 mins. There has to be a cut off somewhere as control has no idea whether a station will get a crew in 5 minutes and 30 seconds or whether they will be waiting for ever.
Remember the name of the game is getting an appliance to the incident in a reasonable time, not to ensure turnouts for retained firefighters.
-
Hi Chris
Costs vary from Brigade to Brigade but to use my brigade as an example everytime a fire appliance responds to an emergency it costs £350 for a wholetime pump.
This is based I pressume on fuel, wear and tear, insurance, etc etc.
-
What do you mean? Costs who? Where does the £350 go?
-
Everytime the engine goes out it costs the fire service £350 (i.e; the money is taken from their annual budget).
How exactly the £350 figure is calculated Im unsure, but I presume they will have matrices which will tell them cost of maintenance per mile travelled, cost of fuel, etc etc
-
Let's say a pump costs £250,000 and annual insurance for a brigade costs £200,000. Theses costs are fixed costs, they do not vary depending on how many times it is used. Like wages, they will be paid if the pump is in use or not. This is accountancy gone mad.
How much does it "cost" to do one of these smoke detector visits then? Why not save loads and stop doing them?
-
Let's say a pump costs £250,000 and annual insurance for a brigade costs £200,000. Theses costs are fixed costs, they do not vary depending on how many times it is used. Like wages, they will be paid if the pump is in use or not. This is accountancy gone mad.
How much does it "cost" to do one of these smoke detector visits then? Why not save loads and stop doing them?
I agree
As you say certain costs are fixed regardless of how many times the appliances are used
I was just guestimating how they calculate the costs, perhaps someone here will know a little bit more about it.
But it is possible to break down what those fixed costs relate to per incident if you really wanted.
Lets imagine for example it costs £100,000 per year to insure the brigade for operation duties, and they attended 100,000 incidents you could say the insurance costs £1 per incident.
Then do the same with wages, fuel, maintenance etc to get total cost of all these factors per incident
-
With regards to the blue lights on roads, I agree. But in terms of budget, aside from the fuel costs, what extra costs would be involved in sending the wholetime as a backup?
I can only see the cost being possibly leaving a major risk area without local fire service cover.
I'm not sure how it works elsewhere, but when a wholetime station in my county has all it's appliances in use, then a retained station heads there on standby. I always assumed it was the same everywhere on that respect. Seems silly to send a wholetime pump to cover a retained pump, and send a seperate retained pump to that wholetime station...
Would be a nice money spinner for any retained involved though.
-
Let's say a pump costs £250,000 and annual insurance for a brigade costs £200,000. Theses costs are fixed costs, they do not vary depending on how many times it is used. Like wages, they will be paid if the pump is in use or not. This is accountancy gone mad.
How much does it "cost" to do one of these smoke detector visits then? Why not save loads and stop doing them?
I agree
As you say certain costs are fixed regardless of how many times the appliances are used
I was just guestimating how they calculate the costs, perhaps someone here will know a little bit more about it.
But it is possible to break down what those fixed costs relate to per incident if you really wanted.
Lets imagine for example it costs £100,000 per year to insure the brigade for operation duties, and they attended 100,000 incidents you could say the insurance costs £1 per incident.
Then do the same with wages, fuel, maintenance etc to get total cost of all these factors per incident
But if they attend 100,001 incidents, it does not cost £1 more.
On the basis that maintenance is done in house, that staff are salaried, that insurance is not milage dependant and that fire engines wear and tear based on time, not miles, the only variable cost is fuel, but is fairly insignificant.
On the basis that the road safety risk is significantly lower than the risk of injuries to the public from fire, I still think it makes more logical sence to send both, as I said a wee while back.
-
Let's say a pump costs £250,000 and annual insurance for a brigade costs £200,000. Theses costs are fixed costs, they do not vary depending on how many times it is used. Like wages, they will be paid if the pump is in use or not. This is accountancy gone mad.
How much does it "cost" to do one of these smoke detector visits then? Why not save loads and stop doing them?
I agree
As you say certain costs are fixed regardless of how many times the appliances are used
I was just guestimating how they calculate the costs, perhaps someone here will know a little bit more about it.
But it is possible to break down what those fixed costs relate to per incident if you really wanted.
Lets imagine for example it costs £100,000 per year to insure the brigade for operation duties, and they attended 100,000 incidents you could say the insurance costs £1 per incident.
Then do the same with wages, fuel, maintenance etc to get total cost of all these factors per incident
But if they attend 100,001 incidents, it does not cost £1 more.
On the basis that maintenance is done in house, that staff are salaried, that insurance is not milage dependant and that fire engines wear and tear based on time, not miles, the only variable cost is fuel, but is fairly insignificant.
On the basis that the road safety risk is significantly lower than the risk of injuries to the public from fire, I still think it makes more logical sence to send both, as I said a wee while back.
Fuel fairly insignificant - grrrr dont get me started on fuel prices Mr Houston!!!!!!! Sore subject at the mo!
A diesel fire appliance isnt the most economical of beasts so the fuel prices will be reasonably significant particularly as they either remain on tick over during incidents or are pumping.
Despite in house maintenance etc there would still be costs involved spare parts / employing mechanics / equipment / 24 hour support for front line appliances etc etc. And that isnt cheap.
Plus then figure in all the support staff costs, fire control staff, equipment, PPE, fuel, maintenance, and everything else that goes into making sure the fire service can actually respond to incidents I guess thats where the figures come from.
But i agree they will generally be fixed costs not variable. They must take an average from the year before to base their calculations on I presume.
So its not always viable to send out two appliances if sending one is only £350 and can deal with the incident why send out two at £700. As you can see forecast that over a year and by keeping to one pump attendance (where that is appropriate) saves a considerable sum of money
Im not saying its right, but you can see why they do it!
-
Just to add to this thread, I saw a file today in which quoted the cost per turnout of an appliance as £4,000.
Ouch.
-
Was there a breakdown of the costs???
Not getting away from the fact that it is expensive I cant see how it would cost £4000 for one call out.
-
Toby it is one of those statisticians over simplifications.
All they have done is take the total fire service budget and divided it by the number of incidents turned out to.
You dont do any other useful work so fire safety costs, community work and the rest dont need to be considered.
And Vicars only work on Sundays.
And 87.576434% of statistics are made up on the spur of the moment.
-
And 87.576434% of statistics are made up on the spur of the moment.
Was that a spur of the moment? Just curious