FireNet Community
FIRE SERVICE AND GENERAL FIRE SAFETY TOPICS => General Interest => Topic started by: dave bev on August 24, 2005, 04:45:05 PM
-
apart from the issue of movement from b-a. fbu officials will be receiving the documents in their mail VERY soon. joint njc circulars 9/2005 and 10/2005 provide the info
dave bev
-
Is this written in code? What does it mean? Is it the signal for the start of the revolution??
-
those who need to know will understand!
-
As a paid up member of the FBU, do I qualify as someone who should "need to know" ?
I am very concerned about moving from b-a. Why wasn't I ballotted?
9/10 firefighters (when given a preference) choose the a-b route in my experience
Hope this is clearer for you Colin
-
All I need to know is does it mean the gutters will soon run red with the blood of the enemy. Does the Rack have secret plans that I should know about.
-
as a member you have the right to the information. whether you 'need' to know is a matter for you to decide, not me. at firefighter role there is no a-b or b-a - does that help, oh, and you were balloted, you just didnt know it at the time!!
colinski, the enemy take on many images!
-
Dave,
Im a member, what are you on about?
-
often lee im not so sure myself? - any information is already in the public domain re rank to role (r2r) and available via the fbu webby!
a or b payscales are not within the range of pay for those at firefighter role, r2r was agreed FOLLOWING a ballot - the detail was not known at the time, but most of it is now known - other than the detail of moves from a b pay scale to an a in n terms of protectionary arrangements.
does that help - if not ask your fbu rep (possibly brigade rep as opposed to branch rep who might not have all the info yet?)
dave bev
-
Lee
I am a member and knew all about it from reading the FBU literature (sent to every station), the joint and employers circulars (freely availble on the net as well as usually sent round - joint ones are always sent by the FBU) and by having signed for email notifications from the FBU. It has all been there to read.......sometimes we have to look ourselves and not simply rely on others telling us, not meaning to be harsh, but sometimes people need to be woken up!
-
Fireftrm
A fair comment, maybe you are right.
I admit to not being a model FBU member over the last couple of years. Not something im proud to say after what we all went through together.
perhaps I should do more to find out about union matters, but I and others have lost the complete total confidence we once held in the FBU.
The fact remains that I never recieve any of the litriture you refer to above.
Perhaps the union is not performing at the same level in my region.
The reps in our Brigade are less than ideal, still, cant grimble if im not willing to do it.
-
As the FBU send all fire stations copies of all their literature maybe you should check closer to home (in your own station/branch or FRS) for where the failure is? It won't be at regioanl or HO level I am sure.
PS I am not an FBU official of any sort before you think it! I just know that they do post to every work location that they have knowledge of, addressed to the FBU rep, maybe he/she is reading/filing/binning it without letting you all see. Posting it on a board, or passing it at the tea table, as happens here and should happen everywhere too, obvioulsy doesn't with your station/service?
-
lee, go to the fbu website and sign up for electronic mail - im sure its on there - if not - contact head office or the web master (fbu site, not this one) and you will start to receive regular correspondence.
as for not being a 'model' member - im not sure what that would constitute but my personal opoinion is that all members of ANY organisation should contribute to that organisation (in terms of support and participation) and be prepared to accept that there are alternative view points, even if you dont have that view yourself. above all accept democratic arrived at decisions again even if they differ from your own. in saying all that no doubt others may have an alternative view!! LOL
dave bev
-
r2r, mmmmm
So does that mean that we all refer to roles and not ranks from now on?
My Brigade do this now in quite a disorganised messy way, apart from the CFO and DCFO who still use their rank in correspondance.
Im confused!..... again
-
I think you should all call each other mate, or maybe brother(and sister of course).
-
Lee to answer your question - yes we should be using roles, where the FRS has carried out the assessment. The ranks no longer exist (legally). Typical that the CFO and DCFO still use their prior ranks?
-
wee b, you make no mention of using the term 'comrade'?
lee, roles are based on the activities firefighters undertake, or can reasonably be expected to undertake. (apart from the rolls they eat of course) i believe the rolemaps can effectively still be applied to ranks if anyone has the will. it seems as if some chief fire officers have already recognised this - why not therefore continue the process?
dave bev
-
Hi,
This "rank to role" issue seems mainly a semantic issue. Rank = military = nasty. Role = non-military = nice. It stretches the usual definition of "role" and confuses most people (me included). You could call "Station Officer" a "role" if you wanted.
Are CFOs now Brigade Manager Cs?
This (inventing new words for perfectly good existing ones) is one of my pet hates - IDPS (Iddly Diddly Piddly Squat) = training. Proactive = active or is sometimes used meaning to "anticipate".
Steve
-
I appreciate that there are probably good reasons for the changes that I'm not even going to pretend to know anything about but it can seem a little bit stupid.
Our brigade must have spent alot of money changing everything that said Somerset Fire Brigade to Somerset Fire and Rescue Service! in essence the same bloody thing surely? and why can we not call it an RTA any more but instead an RTC? Does it really matter?, does it change the way we respond to it?? Can we not say the same thing about Station Officer to Station Manager does it really make that much difference at the end of the day?
-
andy, thats why it is so confusing - station officers may not be station managers - some may be watch managers! i have been involved for quite some time in this process and still believe that all the benefits of ipds (not idps steve!) and role maps could have and still can be applied to the existing rank structure. role maps effectively replace the old firemans job description (with them now being extended into all 'jobs') and i also struggle to see why the statutory exams were ditched instead of being updated. all those years of 'brigades' complaining no-one was taking the statutory exams and therefore reducing the numbers available for promotion didnt help. i wont even start talking about the flaws with adc's and selection processes!
dave bev
-
Thanks for the ipds correction Dave.
I think that detailed job descriptions are a useful way of defining what job we are supposed to do. However there should be a real commitment to use plain english; the role maps are useless if we cannot understand them. I have a suspicion that sometimes these things are deliberatly made obscure. This could be because the people who develop them dont actually understand them themselves or they want to be in a position to "interpret" them in different ways.
Are we trying to lump together; rank (level of authority), job description and pay grade under one heading (role)? Maybe we should separate them out.
Steve
-
I think it makes sense to move from military sounding names to ones that describe what you do. Of course in the airforce they have, Pilot Officers (Pilots), Flight leuitenants(in charge of flights), Squadron leaders (incharge of squadrons) etc.
-
Careful Brian. If your policy were adopted there might need to be a new role of a 'Not very mucher'.
-
Yes Brian but there are many other jobs in the RAF with pilot officers etc who are not pilots. Generally "ranks" are found in organisations that work in stressful, dangerous, fast changing situations. Off the fireground, decisions can be mulled over, argued, different options explored. On the fireground things are usually getting worse and the speed of our reaction is vital to save life and property.
We have got bogged down with rank; mainly because we have tied it to our pay. We make Inspecting Officers SubOs not because we want them to be in charge of an incident but because they deserve SubO money.
Incidently, there is no need for more than 6 levels of rank: 1st (Firefighter - usually works in pairs). 2nd looks after up to 3 pairs of firefighters (1 pump). 3rd looks after three of 2nd rank (3 pumps). 4th looks after three of 3rd rank (9 pumps). 5th looks after three of 4th rank (27 pumps). 6th looks after three of 5th rank (81 pumps). Simplistic I know but it would be a good basis for incident command.
Steve
-
Good thinking, now what shall we call these new ranks?...........................mmm........................I Know, how about - Leading Firefighter, Sub Officer, Station Officer, etc, etc
Then we stop anyone above the rank of SDO coming on and messing up jobs! Oh, and just so we know who everyone is - why dont we all wear markings on our uniform?
I jest, but then again im serious.
The system works for us, why change it?
I personally am perfectly happy with rank structure and markings. And in my experience i am in the majority.
-
Yep Lee you may be happy, but ranks have gone and roles (with their insignia) are in - we will have to wait of rthe 'what comes around..............@