FireNet Community
FIRE SERVICE AND GENERAL FIRE SAFETY TOPICS => Operational => Topic started by: Matt Akers on August 26, 2005, 02:14:52 PM
-
With the change in helmet markings laid down by the OPDM, does this mean the shirt ranking will change? If so what are the Sub O going to have on there shoulders?
The changes to the helmets are as follows:
Station Officer (as normal, white hat, black stripe)
Sub O (White helmet, black stripe. The same as the station officers)
LFF (Yellow helmets with two stripes, like the old Sub O markings)
FF (Stay the same)
-
The FSC states that role insignia is for PPE only, this does rather suggest that there is no insignia for non-operational PPE so what shirt markings?
Mine, as with many other services have removed any markings
PS Matt you are wrong about the markings being for the ranks as you show they are for ROLES:
Watch Manager - white 12.5mm band
Crew Manager - yellow 2x12.5mm band
This means that whether you have changed depends on whether your watch managers were StnO or SubO. The crew manager on a two pump stn may have been a SubO, now WM(A) for pay purposes, but will likley be a CM under r2r and be on pay protection. Thus the correct role insignia is CM. The real question is about the LFf, are they CMs or Ffs really?
Also this corrects an inequality in the status (and hopefully the pay in time) of those SubO watch managers, especially where they have been in charge of two+ pump watches compared to their StnO peers in other FRS. There are many examples of SubOs in charge in one service and a StnO in the adjoining, but with the same levels of responsibility. The best example I have seen is Leamington Spa, Warks, where a SubO is in charge of a watch at a multi-pump and specials station, and down the road WMFRS have StnOs at simple 2 pump stns.............
This was a FSC in MArch 2004
-
Sorry, meant role. Been speaking to a few people in Kent FRS. All Sub O (in old money) are getting white helmets just like the station officers. On the fire ground you will not be able to know who is a Sub or who is a Station officer (watch manager or station manager in new terms)
Maybe I have the wrong end of the big stick. Just , don’t know why they have to keep changing things when it is not going to make a big difference.
-
Fireftrm,
There is guidence for rank/role markings.
Crew manager = 2 bars (formerly Sub o)
Watch manager = 2 Impellers (formerly Stn O)
This insignia may be worn on work-rig as well as PPE collers.
For info, my Brigade withdrew rank markings some months ago, and are now re-inroducing them. Probably as above.
Lee
Matt, I agree, change for change sake is never a good thing. How much do these new white helmets we are meant to be wearing cost nationally?
-
Station Officer is Watch Manager if that is their role, as would a SubO be, if they are flexi-duty then they are now Station Manager - which is 19mm band (as per old rank of ADO)
Lee
The FSC does not state what 'rank' is now the role it simply gives the role insignia. I am more than aware what the role insignia would have meant had they been rank markings, but they are not. They are ROLE INSIGNIA and the FSC says - FOR PPE ONLY, nowhere does it say on working rig or undress uniform.
Only those FRS who had SubOs in charge of watches have to buy white helmets, those who had StnO riders don't need to change anything.
Remember that rank to role is now agreed and therefore there are no ranks, the FSC gives no guidance for rank/role markings as there are no ranks and the FSC was a ROLE INSIGNIA notification. The role someone is presently being paid at is only due to the pay assimilation point they were put on at the end of the dispute. Now comes the assessment of the role they are in. The previously ranked SubO with a StnO rider as was, will almost certainly be a Crew Manager, no matter that they will be presently on Watch Manager A pay. After the role has been determined they will be on WM A pay for another three years, but will be in a CM role. As I said where that leaves some LFfs is in doubt as will there be two CMs on a 2 pump stn?
I have heard that role insignia may be extended to other items of clothing, but that is still a chinese whisper. My FRS withdrew rank markings 5 years ago, we cannot replace them as they no longer exist, we may introduce role insignia should this become a national policy, it presently is not.
Matt
You will be able to see who is a Watch Manager - white 12.5mm and who the Station Manager - white 19mm. You won't know what their prior rank was, but as there are no ranks and only roles why would you want to? It is the role that now matters.
The previously ranked StnO will only have changed to 19mm if they are flexi-duty as they are a WM otherwise.
This does correct some long term inequities between the higher-ranked services and their lower cousins. Here every watch commander was a SubO, there are many FRS where the same job attracted a StnO rank. That was never fair and was often based on the amount of money the FRS had. Mow you will be in the role these wrongs should be righted. What is clear is that those of us who have been spending less on our wage bills (by having lower ranks throughout in comparison to some) will be those having to buy the most new white helmets!
The choiceof white/12.5mm for WM was probably so as to placate the StnO riders who were now being classed as WMs..........
Out of interest is has cost us nothing (in real terms) to replace all the yellow helmets with white as the returned ones have since been isssued to new joiners.
Another example of an inequality - all our station managers are SM A (previously StnO flexi) many services had ADO station commanders who have ended up as GM A, or SM B seemingly dependent on the wealth of the FRS - so this should be another area that r2r assessments corrects.
-
Fireftrm
Your self opinionated, abrasive and aggesive style of communication, i'm afraid does yourself and your Brigade no credit.
Whether or not you personally are aware of the situation, some Brigades are using Rank/Role markings on workrig uniform. This has proved a popular desision at all levels within our service. I support the decision.
Lighten up, relax and try to be nice to people. People may not always agree with you, does'nt mean they are wrong.
-
Lee999,
I think the way in which fireftrm put the case across was simply factual. Nothing else, and the problem with the way we all now communiacte on forums, email etc the sentiement does not always come across as intended.
I think it is you that has the sole intention of coming onto this forum to bate people. Maybe it is you who should take it easy and chill out a little.
Everyone likes a debate and a colourfu exchange of banter, but then I don't think this is really your aim is it.
-
p
Thanks for the reply. Very useful. Far be from me to rattle the cage of the old boys network.
Lets keep this forum realistic, lets talk about issues that are relevent to our profession, not just you an four or five of your "mates".
Lee
-
Lee999 - mine was, as Paul rightly says, plainly and simply factual.
As I have the occasion to meet with other FRS around the country regularly I am extremely well aware that other FRS are still wearing either rank markings, or have adopted role insignia. Indded in my neighbouring FRS one uses rank markings (well did until last week and now r2r is here I haven't yet checked whether they have moved to role insignia) another two, role insignia all on their undress uniforms. That does nothing to change the FACt that the FSC states that role insignia is just for PPE. I happen to personally think that we should have them on all our uniform and PPE. I also simply stated that my FRS doesn't use them and hasn't for some time. When they become a national use on other than PPE we will no doubt return to having some insignia on non-PPE, but again what I stated was the facts. You had said that the guidance states "This insignia may be worn on work-rig as well as PPE collers" (sic). I was correcting that.
I must also agree with Paul (whom I have never met and whom I presently simply consider to be a colleague on here not, as yet, a "mate") about it being you who is needing to chill.
The issue that is being discussed is extremely relevant to our profession and what I have said is factual - from your comments to Dave Bev you appear to be in the dark on r2r so please lighten up and take what I have written as nothing more than a factual account. I think it is you and your FRS that are being done a misservice as you seem not to have fully appreciated r2r. I am not trying to be opinionated, nor, do I believe was my post aggresive just honest and practical.
-
Lee,
this too applies to you. Everyone has the opportunity to discuss any fire safety / operational / techno / general bull.
If you feel the forum is too restrictive open it up a little.
I think you'll always find someone on here that will be more than glad to help.
-
I only asked about Subs helmets in Kent going over to white hats!! Didn’t realise it was going to turn into hand bags at dawn. All I know it that the stores man/ladies in Kent have got a huge pallet load of white helmets that look very much like a station officers helmet. All these new helmets are going to be issued to all subs. That’s it.
As far as rank and role, in my eyes and only mine, it should stay the same as it has always been FF, LFF, Sub O’s and so on. On the fire ground when the poo holes are twitching you ask for the Subo in charge or the Station officer, not which crew or watch Manager is in charge. I’m not saying change is bad, we have to accept and embrace changes to move on. I see it as, the more toys the better.
But why change something that is not going to have a lot of affect. Maybe I have some old school in me. Soon they will ban the word Guv because it does not fit into the correct role!!!
-
Umm now what role would the Guv callers refer to now, I wonder. At least we don't have that problem outside the SE.
Roles are her now so remember that SubO StnO etc don't exist and the helmets refer to the role. Interesting whether they will be taking back those that have been isssued to SubO (as was) on WM A pay assimilation once their roles have been determined as CM, or will they be holding out until that determination has been done?
Do you have ex-SubO Watch Managers in KEnt? Maybe single pump stns, assuming you had StnO (as was) WMs at some? If so then those ex-SubO WMs should be the only ex-SubOs getting WM helmets, surely?
-
fred karno couldnt have planned it better
dave bev
-
By the time you've been flying down the road in the back of the pump the helmets are in a pile on the floor and noone cares whose they've got on any way do they? When you discuss it I just get a comical scene in my head.... I can see everyone squabbaling over how thick the stripe on thier helmet is and forgetting about the job in hand!
Sorry I realise there is a serious point in what your discussing!
-
I am just so impressed that the FBU know how to spell Karno. Most people get it wrong (as in Carnot, etc). As always, Davey, you go even further up in my estimation, even though you have, as yet, neither rank nor role.
-
I serve in Kent and I can tell you that my Sub doesnt want a white helmet cos it means that no one (apart from other white helmets and how dull are they) will want to talk to him at fires any more.
Sorry to lower the tone.
-
I got the feeling on a recent 7 pump property fire that the White helmets are almost beginning to out number the yellow ones anyway!
-
Can anyone confirm the new markings ( helmet and and any insignia) all the way up to Brigade manager?
Thanks for your help
-
Yep:
From DCOL 5/2004 Item C:
With the growing need for cross border operations, particularly in the context of New Dimension, it is expected that all UK Fire and Rescue Services will follow the same Role identification system. It is important to be able to identify the senior fire and rescue service officer present, particularly for fire and rescue crews and other emergency services or agencies attending the incident.
It is considered that the present helmet markings and collar insignia provide an effective solution being easily identifiable and interpreted. In moving to a role-based system the following insignia applies only to operational Personal Protective Equipment [PPE] and is considered to be the most cost effective and appropriate method of identification.
Fire-fighter
Helmet: Plain yellow fire helmet.
Collar: No marking.
Crew Manager
Helmet: Two 12.5mm black bands with 12.5mm separation on a yellow fire helmet.
Collar: Two 12.5mm silver bars with 12.5mm separation.
Watch Manager
Helmet: One 12.5mm black band on a white helmet with a black comb.
Collar: Two large impellers.
Station manager
Helmet: One 19mm black band on a white helmet with a black comb.
Collar: Three large impellers.
Group Manager
Helmet; One 19mm black band surmounted by one 12.5mm black band with 12.5mm separation on
a white helmet with a black comb.
Collar: One large impeller surrounded with a laurel wreath.
Area Manager
Helmet: Two 19mm black bands with 12.5mm separation on a white helmet with a black comb.
Collar: One large impeller surrounded with a laurel wreath with one 3mm bar below.
Brigade Manager
Helmet: One 38mm black band on a white helmet with a black comb.
Collar: The existing rank markings will be used.
MY NOTE: (whatever your FRS may be doing) the part that states
applies only to operational Personal Protective Equipment [PPE]
so these role insignia are for fire kit ONLY.
-
Thanks very much. guessed it would be you coming up with the answer. I mean that in a nice way. Thanks again
-
The brigade I serve in have just issued corporate uniform. This now means that everyone from cleaners(no disrespect) to office staff to senior officers all wear the same bland 'get-up'. This of course is worn with no role markings as are our fire tunics. Our Chief calls himself the chief executive.
-
so how do you know who is in charge? or does the loudest voice win all.
-
Costa and neal - we did the same about 5 years ago. We have never worn markings on our tunics anyway so we have always relied on the helmet marking. Still works.
Out of PPE we manage quite well, the person in charge, if you wish to use that experession, is the one who allocates manages. Just like many other jobs.........how do you tell the manager in a factory, because they wear a different marked tie? No. How about the manager at Nissan, where they all wear the same? No markings there either.
As an aside when I was a newly promoted LFf I was on a visit, leading my crew, when a member of staff at the premises asked what the bar meant. A quick witted crew member said 'oh, that's to show he is a new member and needs supervision'. They believed it and I got tea, biscuits and sympathy from the office staff while they had to carry out the inspection, slight backfire on the Ff. So role markings needed except on the incident ground? No.
-
Could not agree more. Tyne & Wear do not have insignia on tunics.
I am sure when we finally go rank to role we will ditch the insignia on undress uniform like our neighbours have already done.
-
Once again IPDS rank to role to nonsense strikes again! We can just about put up with being called managers but what a waste of time and money changing helmet rank markings. I be-grudged giving up my perfectly good old cairns metro helmet for a new cromwell because it was a waste of cash. This whole issue is daft! Lets just keep the same helmets, do the modernisation bit and spend the money on some new road cones or hoses or something of use. This is actualy the first I have heard of these new rank markings. Incidently, what do we call an Lff or a SubO on the fire ground now? Is it people friendly first name terms now and do we have to have a group hug before each tour of duty?
-
Well said Pete. Stations are in a poor state of repair in my brigade and yet the urgency is for all orders of white helmets and role markings to be sent in asap.
-
Quote Pete: what a waste of time and money changing helmet rank markings. I be-grudged giving up my perfectly good old cairns metro helmet for a new cromwell because it was a waste of cash. This whole issue is daft! Lets just keep the same helmets, do the modernisation bit and spend the money on some new road cones or hoses or something of use. This is actualy the first I have heard of these new rank markings. Incidently, what do we call an Lff or a SubO on the fire ground now?
Pete: The change to a different helmet had NOTHING to do with IPDS or rank to role - SURELY! That must have been a decision to improve the safety of the staff as the latter helemt is to a higher safety spec? For us the chnage to role insignia on PPE has cost basically nothing. For a start the helmet manufacturer has NEVER been determined by IPDS or role!!!!!!!!! Some people are so afraid of change they make up irrational arguments against it to suits themseleves, don't become one.
As to the purchase of WHITE helemts for some - this is completely different and ONLY applies to those where the WM is a SubO - bringing those services where they had SubOs in charge of watches into line with those who had rider StnOs. In my FRS this cost NOTHING as the new white helemts we issued resulted in the smae number of yellow ones being returend. These are used to satisfy replacements, or ne w issue, to Ffs and CMs. Thus it may have SEEMED a cost, but over a period was not. A bit of black insulating tape for the CMs who need a second stripe is not going to break any banks (even if high quality gloss 12.5mm tape one roll will normally do an entire FRS and I can supply it to them for around 99p should they want!)
To the issue of what you call previous ranks on the incident ground - it depends uopon their new role. A LFf is likley to be a CM, the SubO could be a Cm or a WM - usualy a CM where they were the deputy to a StnO rider (who is the WM) - seems quite straightforward - look at my list above.
It is disappointing (to say the least) that there are personnel in the FRS who have no prior knowledge of this. It was clear in the 2003 pay agreement that roles were here to stay and well documented before. The role insignia FS Circular was issued in March 2004 too!
As to 'just about put up with being called managers' - what a prehistoric picture you paint of yourself, what else should we be called? Officer is a fine 'title' but a manager shows what we really do, or do you not manage people and simply rely on some scramled egg to allow you to ORDER staff around?
Costa - your FRS is certainly costalot if it is allowing role marking replacements for rank markings, why do they not read the FSC and ditch them? White helmets should (as I demonstrate above) not have any medium term cost implications at all and for some FRS none short term (As they had StnO rider WMs anyway).
-
I realise helmet markings and designs had nothing to do with IPDS. My grudge was with the point of it all and the cost. Ok you maybe able to off-set issuing new ones with returning others but it still all seams a waste of time. Im all for change, I just can't stick all this endless management speak. So what your saying about a Lf being a crew manager is instead of calling him/her Lf I now addres them as 'crew manager'? I don't think its going to work. I am all for sensible change but it seems to be change for change sake and not much for the benefit of the service. I wouldn't regard myself as prehistoric, just very cautious about where the 'modernising' fire service is going. (along with many others)
As for my new Cromwell helmet, it maybe a higher spec but it spends more time in my hand or on the floor than it does on my head. I can't hear properly in it and its just to dam bulky. My old metro stayed on my head all of the time, most of the lads are the same. It also looks like it was bought in toys 'R' us!
-
We have had quite a few who say it doesn't fit and falls off - all (and I mean all) those who I have seen have the forehead strap tucked level with the edge of the helemt, it seems they came like that. It should be adjusted to be visible and across the forehead, worn up ONLY when wearing a BA mask. try that - worked every time here - more comfortable too.
As to calling the LFf Crew Manager, it will work, because that is what they are! They are not LFfs any longer (that is maybe in the short term until your FRS does r2r). Perhaps shouting "LF" seemed easy, but then why not "CM"? After all I am sure shouting "LF" seemed strange to you when you first joined? In a similar vein I hear people shouting "Sub", so why not "Watch/Crew"? Examples from outside the FRS abound - we do not shout "Sarnt" but the army seem to manage!
PS (excepting those where the StnO rider existed - and some of them may still use the SE 'guv') Station would be a good 'new' name for the SM (ex flexi StnO)?
-
If you think the new Cromwell helmets are bad you should try the Gallet heklmets. They provide excellent protection in fire scenarios, although you have to have it set to wear BA, which leaves it far too loose for other incidents. There's do much movement that wearing the built in safety glasses could snap your beek clean off.
-
Also find that your hearing is impaired with the Gallet helmet.
-
pardon?
-
IS the Gallet that difficult to change form normal to BA wear settings? The Cromwell takes around 2 seconds to alter (timed - but then it probably took a second to say go and stop!)
-
Oh yes Firey,
I think its a little better these days, but the original took 1 firefighter who had been trained by the suppliers 20 minutes. Generally it is only practical to have the Gallet in BA setting.
You can turn your head inside it without undoing it.
-
Oh for the Anglo-Saxon Cromwell and less gallic trouble!
-
i always found those benevolent fund helmets pretty useful. they were a lot cheaper, a lot lighter therefore ensuring neck injuries and transmited back injuries were kept to a minimum and perhaps best of all because they tended to melt near heat it kept firefighters away from dangerous fires!
you never saw many of them in white though did you. is that because children didnt aspire to being the 'boss' - although if that is the case why are some children now at the pinnacles of management of some uk f&r services, is it because they have never grown up or is it because they dont give a toss about reliability so long as they look good?
dave bev
-
Hi all, I'm a bit of a late starter here so please bear with me.
For all the rights and wrongs of Rank-to-Role it's here and it seems that FRS are going to have to learn to live with it.
It seems odd to me that the concept of rank-markings (sorry, ROLE-markings!) wasn't considered as an integral part of this process. Clearly it seems that there is a politcal will to try to remove the "paramilitary" appearance of FRS members that would put all managers in civilian business suits and operational members in undifferentiated working kit when not in PPE.
This seriously neglects the fact that, even with the move to roles, there is nevertheless an operational hierarchy and a genuine need to be able to recognise seniority of leadership within the organisation as well as on the incident ground. FRS *are* uniformed services and the public accept that. Other services need to be able to identify senior officers (I suppose we should call them managers now!). I don't see the police giving up their rank-markings anytime soon and although NHS ambulance services can be a bit variable as to what's actually worn (they've had exactly the same problems as FRS in this regard), the same general principles seem to apply.
If rank/role-markings are a desirable thing to have then surely it would make sense to try to have a scheme that is easy to follow for all FRS members and also intuitive to members of other services outside the FRS. What we have at the moment seems to be a bastardised scheme that retains some of the old rank-markings and fudges them a little bit with the new roles. My guess is that, at a National level, the great and the good are trying to work out how to fit the square peg of operational role recognition into the round hole of the all-new, non-paramilitary FRS. In time, I suspect that an all-new new and updated scheme of markings will be released, along with copious guidelines as to exactly how and where these should be used and applied! I for one have no problem with some form of role-marking being used on working kit. Let's face it, in many FRS the standard working rig for all roles is now the same for all members, with the addition of small clip-on collar patches where required. I see no reason why that couldn't continue.
On a side note, whether or not the full Undress Uniform, complete with tunic and cap (plus embellishments!) continues to be used in the long-term remains to be seen. I suspect that the current undress uniforms will ultimately vanish entirely (think of the cost savings... !). Personally, I don't see why it shouldn't be retained for use on formal occaisions when representing one's service; uniform clearly *would* be appropriate attire but working kit would also clearly be inappropriate. That's why I've continued to include these additional details in the proposals for now.
My intention was to NOT follow the new guidelines directly but to come up with what was essentially a whole new system, although I wanted one that was derived from existing traditional elements and would therefore be recognisable and understandable. I decided to use the "impeller" as the basic emblem of role as this is uniquely identified with FRS. Given the changes in R2R, it seemed reasonable to have a simple, integrated, sequential system that began at the bottom and worked its way up in simple, obvious steps. For example, the use of TWO bars for "crew manager" seemed a little pointless given that there was no longer a need to differentiate such an individual from someone wearing ONE bar - hence my use of a single impeller instead.
My suggestion would be to have the markings for Area Manager as [large impeller & wreath + one small impeller]. I believe this makes for a more obvious sequential progression from Group Manager to Brigade Manager than the current guidelines suggest, although AM should probably have plain silver peak embroidery and no lapel insignia, where caps and tunics are worn.
I've only shown one set of markings for Brigade Manager but, assuming that there should be *some* differentiation within this role between the BOSS (Chief Executive or however titled, where operational) and the "assistant" brigade managers (essentially the old DCFO and ACFO posts lumped together) then it might be appropriate for individuals in these two "sub-roles" to wear slightly different markings. One possibility would be to give the "assistant" brigade managers [large impeller & wreath + TWO small impellers] and to give the BOSS [large impeller & wreath + THREE small impellers]. This would be the most obvious way to maintain a simple progression of markings without adding in extra elements like "bars." For completeness, I would continue to associate these with the traditional cap embellishments of silver oak-leaves (thistles in Scotland) using one and two rows respectively. Lapel insignia would continue to be differentiated in the same way as the old rank insignia.
Anyway, these are my own thoughts - they're not a million miles from the current usage but I've tried to pull it all together into a new, integrated structure that modernises the old rank scheme but also retains the best of the recognisable traditional elements. I apologise if the images are a bit large.
The helmet markings would be reflective and the black comb for white helmets would no longer be essential as the red bands are now specific to each role, without overlap (no danger of mistaking Stn O for LFf, as was). I have deliberately used a VERY non-specific helmet shape as I realise that there are loads of designs and manufacturers out there but I hope you can see the general idea. I'll post a better version when I can.
Please feel free to comment - if you're interested, I can up-date this to take account of your suggestions.
Is this the sort of thing you feel FRS should be aiming to have?
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v467/BronzeGryphon/Fire-Rescue/UKFRS_Role_Undress.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v467/BronzeGryphon/Fire-Rescue/UKFRS_Role_PPE.jpg)
-
It is worth looking at the link tot he national uniform project:
Please find attached a link to the on-line questionnaire, penetrating to operational firefighters views on the stationwear and undress/ceremonial wear design solutions offered by the Tenderers. Could you please circulate this link amongst the Brigades in your region.
This link will also be sent nationally to the Chief Fire Officers Association, Fire Officers Association, Retained Firefighters Union, Fire Brigades Union, and Networking Women in the Fire Service. Please be aware that the closing date for entry on this website is June 3rd.
The questionnaire is for the attention of wholetime and retained operational firefighters only.
The link is:
http://www.icp-surveys.com
It has role insignia................
Also there was a DCOL in March 2004 detailing role insignia DCOL 5/2004
-
Yes, I read the circular and I agree that it works for now. I guess it just struck me as a fudged job to "make do" for the moment. I realise that in part this has a lot to do with the issue of utilising and re-distributing existing markings and helmets to minimise the initial cost impact on FRS budgets! It seemed that for the longer term, there was an opportunity here to develop an all-new and slightly more logical system that better fitted the "seven roles" and was also uniquely identified with them alone rather than continuing to use old rank markings that seemed to perpetuate the difficulties of "is this an old SubO made up to Watch Manager (A) or previous rider StnO...?" or "isn't he a non-rider StnO who's now Station Manager (A) not an ADO...?"
Thanks for the link, although it now seems to be off-line. If you feel it's appropriate, and if you're able to, would you mind pasing my thoughts on?
The updated picture below is now more or less what I had in mind. I wouldn't be too surprised if my suggestions for the markings for the Brigade Manager role were replaced by the old CFO and DCFO insignia; but then I guess that would work just as well.
The helmet stripes and spacings essentially use current dimensions. Use of reflective red markings seems a more modern approach than plain black and also highlights the change to a new scheme of role-markings but I guess this system would still work perfectly well with black stripes instead of red, plus the old black combs for white helmets. Alternatively, there's even the possibility of reflective red stripes with reflective red combs if you felt like being daring...?!
My apologies to those of you who don't like the Gallets...!
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v467/BronzeGryphon/Fire-Rescue/UKFRS_Role_NEW.jpg)
-
Your ideal of the single band for CM begs the question of why there is a need for this to be yellow, or for any of the others to be white...................
A sensible replacement for what we have, not having the bars and starting at one, not two, does make great logic, so it can't work!
-
LOL! Yeah, too much like common sense? I guess I should know better...!
I fully agree with your comments about helmet colour too! The point at which you could change from yellow to white (if at all) is, I guess, pretty arbitrary. I suppose I only kept it like that cos (a) it's kinda recognisable and marks out the Watch Manager as the leading role within what would usually be each operational unit and (b) it's a little bit traditional (which, I admit, goes against my stated aim, but there you go!). There are loads of potential variants but the obvious options are:
(1) as above.
(2) minor variation from above, just to bring the Crew Manager role into white so that all the "magager" roles are the same.
(3) a similar minor change but keeping all WATCH-based members in YELLOW, so that white only begins with the Station Manager role.
(3) all roles in white.
(4) all roles in yellow.
(5) something radically different like, say, all roles in red with white or yellow reflective stripes instead.
Red would certainly be new and different but it's a darker colour and therefore less visible at night, especially under sodium street lighting where there's a risk it'll just appear black. This may be less relevant these days with high-conspicuity PPE and with retroreflective tape on fire kit and hi-viz vests. The other factor, of course, is that sticking with white and yellow would obviously be cheaper than wholesale change so that's another argument in it's favour. Thinking about it in the light of my original aim, and trying to maintain a logical progression, I guess the two most likely options would be (2) or (3). The main problem I can foresee with (3) is that these helmet markings could lead some folks to associate the WM and CM roles with the old SubO and LFf ranks, which isn't really the idea [see below]. That therefore whittles it down to (2) as the sensible choice for a new, logical sequence.
The various patterns would look like this:
Option (5) - a bit way out there, and pretty unlikely!
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v467/BronzeGryphon/UKFRS_Role_RED.jpg)
Option (3) - I think this works, although I have reservations about how it would be received.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v467/BronzeGryphon/UKFRS_Role_YELLOW.jpg)
Option (2) - probably the most obvious solution.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v467/BronzeGryphon/UKFRS_Role_WHITE.jpg)
Finally, here's just *one more* concept that incorporates a bit of all of the above ideas. It looks a bit American or even European which, I admit, may tend to put a few people off but it's certainly all-new. Essentially, this scheme differentiates both "station-based" management roles and "senior" management roles and is in no way directly comparable to any of the old rank markings as the numbers and proportions of the bands have changed a little too: one impeller = one thin band; impeller + wreath = one thick band, and so on. This is rather different to what's gone before, but it would make the different roles pretty obvious and also very easy to spot, even at some distance.
I absolutely *promise* I'll stop posting huge images now - it's just that a picture is much easier to take in than a long, wordy description would be!
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v467/BronzeGryphon/Fire-Rescue/UKFRS_Role_YANK.jpg)
-
Im old fashioned...prefer the old titles keep the ranks as tehy are - rename them if possible but maintainthe current undress rank insignia.
Crew Manager or Crew commander - which is it? At some FRS in the UK a Sub Off is a Crew Manager whilst on station then Crew Commander on the fire ground. This is all a bit silly!
I dont like words like "Manager" I prefer "commander" or "officer" because the word itself leans to an operational hands on role and not a desk piloting role - and nope Ive nothing against white collar workers but you may see my point!
A Cheif Officer calling him/ herself "Cheif Exec" is seemingly causing confusion with the public too.
What on earth was this excercise all about? If it isnt broke why fix it?
I
-
In many ways, I agree - I thought the original purpose of defining the seven "roles" (and assigning names to them) was about *describing* what a person in that "role" actually did, rather than the rank that they held - I'm sure this has been discussed above or in a different thread, probably both! Having a National standard also only works if it's applied Nationally (!) and at the moment it does sound like there's still a huge amount of local variation. Some sort of overhaul of the career structure was long overdue; having a better framework to assess the skills and attributes needed to progress to subsequent jobs and also a system that better allows members to acquire those abilites is no bad thing - if it's implemented properly and if everyone understands what's happening and how it all works! Change is always unsettling but there is the opportunity for something positive here as well.
The role descriptions are really only just that - I'm sure they should never have been implemented directly as titles of relative grade. I therefore agree with you that they're just NOT the most "snappy" of titles; they may *describe* the "role" perfectly well (which is what they were intended to do), and this is fine for a paper exerise or a job-description, but they're pretty damn clunky when it comes to day-to-day use. Having said that, changing between "manager" and "commander" depending on whether you're on or off station, or the time of day or whether there's a R in the month just seems pointless - who thought THAT up?! Equally, if you were being pedantic, "Crew Manager" is, in reality, actually more of a supervisory role than a truly managerial role - but would "Crew Supervisor" or even "Team Leader" have been any better? I don't think so...
Remember, however, that just because these individuals are wearing two bars and two black bands on a yellow helmet, they are NOT sub-officers! Whether we like it or not, this is now the "role-marking" for a Crew Manager, not a Sub-Officer! That's one of the primary reasons why I believe it was a mistake to continue to use the old uniform rank insignia for the new roles: this kind of confusion was inevitable and could easily have been avoided if the roles of Crew Manager and Watch Manager in particular had been given distinct new markings of their own that weren't just a direct re-use of the old Sub-Officer and Station Officer rank insignia. I'm not saying that my suggestions are the only idea that would work but I put them forward to stimulate debate and get people to think about what *would* work. As I've said, my own feeling is that if you're going to introduce that sort of change then be imaginative and review the whole system and come up with a cohesive, logical system that covers ALL the roles.
For the other roles, I guess "Area Manager" and "Group Manager" just about work as generic descriptions: they could be applied to an "area" of service provision or managing a "group" of staff in a specialist branch of the service (e.g. fire prevention) as well as referring to groups of operational stations or management of geographical areas but any of the primarily watch-based grades run into the problem that, as descriptions, they make no sense once you try to apply them to jobs that aren't directly involved in day-to-day operational fire-fighting. In areas like Emergency Planning, Support Services, Fire Prevention, etc., "Station Manager" is an entirely pointless description - because that's actually NOT the individual's *role*! In the past, "Assistant Divisional Officer" was a suitably generic title of "grade" that effectively described the relative seniority of the individual - but was not tied to the specific post that they held - which is what the role titles should do.
Again, I'm sure this is all part of the political will to "de-militarise" the FRS. The bottom line, though, is that it's here to stay. Changes is happening and you can either try to influence that change or be carried along by it. It seems to me that if *firefighters* across the UK want to have any sort of influence on how things work, what their job titles are and what the different grades wear (as minor as these things are in the grand scheme of things) then they need to be pro-active and think about what they want!
_________________________________________________
On a lighter note, a mate of mine came up with an Army equivalent of Rank-to Role and another colleague, who's a bit of a senior TA bod (Lieutenant-Colonel, I think), saw it and said "F*** me! Don't show that to the MoD...!!"
(1) Soldier
(2) Section Manager
(3) Platoon Manager (A- or B- depending on size of unit)
(4) Company Manager (A- or B- depending on size of unit)
(5) Battalion Manager (A- or B- depending on size of unit)
(6) Brigade Manager (A- or B- depending on size of unit)
(7) Army Manager (current General Officer rank insignia to be retained for the time being)
-
heheh I like it
You are abosultely right Bravo Whiskey - change can be for the better - Im probably a bit old fashioned in that I always feel the Brigade sorry the service should retain it's militarised titles. :o)
But I do agree the rank system had to be modernised, simplified etc
The crazy thing is that after modernisation my brigade has doubled its amount of Div Officers - well I say Div Officers I mean Borough Commanders and area commanders etc. or what ever it is they call themseleves now ! :o)
-
I've said it before on this forum, whats the point of rank to role and how much is this costing the service?
The whole rank to role & 'modernisation' process has left me and countless others fed up un-interested and depressed!! Just before I left my old brigade[to remain nameless for thier sake] to join the DFS, I didn't know who was who, who did what and who my divisional commander was!! I have recently left my local retained station for similar reasons.
What happened to the fire service? What was the point?
-
humberside have changed from r2r for 18 months , we are now going through a process of job evaluation and sizing to equate rank to role , most have been accurate but i know of 2 posts that have been knocked down a role . wm to cm . and Gm to sm. (personnel getting 3 yrs protected , so no immediate pay drop and chance to move on befor their job gets a new role . when first implemented all rider Station officers were taken off ops onto other management roles , like it or not .
-
we finished our r2r and job evaluation a few months ago
FF-no change
LFF-CM with old Sub O markings
Sub (Ops)-WM 'A' with STN O markings
Sub TFS and Training-WM 'B' and STN O markings
STN O 42 (Ops)-WM 'A' with STN O markings
STN O 42-SM 'A' with ADO markings
STN O 42 (TFS and Training) SM'B' with ADO markings
STN O FDS -SM'B' with old ADO markings
ADO FDS-GM 'A' with old D.O. markings
D.O FDS-GM 'B' with old D.O. markings.
I thought we might lose the 'rank' insignia off our shirts, and have it replaced with'station manager' etc,but we kept the old insignia.
-
So it was pointless then?
-
well I don't suppose it would have happened so quickly (if at all) without the government so called 'modernisation' agenda.we have more white helmets than we used to.we have some happy ex sub officers and some unhappy ones-some have had a pay rise, some have had a pay cut, and some have been 'reduced' in stature.the same applies to old Stn O's and ADO's.I was fortunate, I was on the 'happy' side.But there is no consistency in the country.I have been told (rumour!) there are those doing a similar 'role' to me who are going to be 2-3 pay grades worse off than me.Yet we were told that the 'job evaluation' and 'rank to role' outcomes should be defendable/auditable.
-
Can anyone tell me if a WMB is an officer or a JO?
-
I'd say it's an officer .... it's the equivalent of Station officer in old money ......... although some may disagree!!
-
I'm a WMB!!! - A Watch Manager (Sub Officer) in charge of a station!!. So I would say a JO.
There has been talk of changing the markings to reflect the fact we run a station... but in my view a Sub is a Sub is a Sub is a Watch Manager! whatever his role.
-
Surely there should no longer be JOs or Officers, just managers? I thought thats what this whole waste of time & money was about?
-
Yes there are only 'managers' now-except for the chief and deputy chief who for some reason have(in our brigade) kept their old titles(as they explained-so as not to 'confuse' the public!).animal farm any one?!
-
Ally Firey I would suggest that if you are in charge of a station then you are in fact a station manager and thus an officer (and no doubt a gentleman).
-
I have been updating my page of Rank!!! Ahhh Role markings and an anomaly appears to have risen. Chief Officers appear to be still calling themselves CFO and should they not be using the role, Brigade Manager. Also because brigade is too militaristic :) and we now have a service should they not be calling themselves Service managers and CACFOA renamed the Service and Assistant Service managers and Area Managers Association.
-
No CFOA have not agreed their own role maps as yet, so they are still as before.
-
What about DCOL 5/2004 I thought that was the standard.