FireNet Community
FIRE SERVICE AND GENERAL FIRE SAFETY TOPICS => Operational => Topic started by: Cut Fire Service Pay on September 26, 2005, 08:48:21 PM
-
I can't belive that I have only just read on the RFU's website that Durham & Darlington fire authority have appointed a female former chief excecutive as their new Cheif Fire Officer. It says, and I quote, 'she will receive the necessary training to enable her to undertake command duties'. What on earth is this all about? I have no problem with the fact she is a woman and it was always going to be the case, eventualy, that the chief gets knocked aside for a civilian but whats the command bit all about? Is she seriously going to don a white hat and PPE and take command at a make pumps 20?
Obviously then she will have to be BA qualified as she may be commiting Ffs into situations with BA? I very much doubt it.
What makes it worse is that the RFU seem to back this insane move. LAFBs can appoint a civilian as CFO but can't give thier own retained Ffs the chance to progress to wholetime. I maybe confused and lost about IPDS, IRMP, ADC & role maps ect.. But I think this is nuts!
O yes, times do change. I'm dealing with them ok, until now.
-
I know this has been aired previously; however, I'm curious as to the course these people go on. Is it at Moreton in Marsh?
-
Pete P.
The new person in charge at Durham & Darlington is a Chief Executive not a Chief Fire Officer.
I am not 100% behind the whole idea, but why shouldn't an outsider become a Cheif Executive of a company that they have no background in? It happens all the time in industry. Surely it is best practice to have a Chief executive in charge that can run a business properly?
And why shouldn't they have a command role. they would be at Gold Command away from the incident with the Police, Ambulance, County Council ete, etc head. The fireground Inc Commander would be in charge of the operational aspects.
As for Retained moving into wholetime. I suggest you research your facts. Certain brigades have already offered places to Retained FF to transfer into the Wholetime!
Once a TNA is completed it is only a transfer in duty system.
Without causing too much of a stir, the FBU, not RFU are the only union that have actually pushed things forward for the Retained for years.
-
I will confirm all that Rips says - the Chief Officer/Executive (whatever title they recieve) is a Brigade Manager role and this does not include taking operational command. It is as he says a role for liaison at Gold command level, where strategic managemtn decisons would be made, these would NOT be operational. The highest role with an operational command competence included is Area Manager. To give an example the CFO/CE/CO is like the CEO of a large manufacturing company (say a chocloate factory) they need no skills/knowldege in how to make chocloate, they will have production managers for that. What they need to be able to do is run a large business. Having been the various roles/ranks below that does not make for the best person to run the whole organisation. All I would question is whether the powers that be would consider the same direct entry for the Chief Constable/Chief of Staff etc?
As to the RT to WT, it has been done and with the full support of the FBU. I am not so sure that the RFU are pushing this - after all it depletes their numbers? I am not usre about any 'union' that restricts membership to people who work a particualr duty system, can you imagine there being a part-time engineers, part-time government employee only type union? No neither can I, but that is a different issue.
-
Fireftrm: but we're not talking about 'widgets' here. And how do you act as 'Gold' commander without taking operational decisions? My understanding of Gold command is that that's what it is for.
-
Well your understanding is wrong.
Operational command ceases at Silver, which would be close to (if not at) the incident. Gold is usually at the HQ of one of the services, potentially many, many miles away. Here desiions like the reallocation of service resources, long term planning (such as how many resources will be needed tomorrow, the days after and where from; post-incident clear ups), media interviews and the like take place. OPERATIONAL decisions remain with the commanders at the operation.
In fore service terms:
Bronze (initial IC, smaller incident) is known as Task
Silver (later IC at larger incidents sectorised) is Tactical
Gold (not IC and away from incident and a multi-service liaison location is Strategic
You will see from the role maps that a Brigade Manager does not include the management Unit EFSM2 - which is the incident command unit. They do have EFSM1 - provide strategic advice and support to reslove operational incidents - but the OPERATIONAL COMMAND stays with those on EFSM2
http://www.ipds.co.uk/efdm/reports/nationalstandardsrolemap.asp?role=BrigadeManager
http://www.ipds.co.uk/efdm/reports/nationalstandardsrolemap.asp?role=AreaManager
and the same unit EFSM2 applies down to SM:
http://www.ipds.co.uk/efdm/reports/nationalstandardsrolemap.asp?role=StationManager
PS I would be happy to talk about widgets as beer is one of my favourite subjects and "creamflow" one of my absolute dislikes.
-
you beat me to the reply fireftrm!
-
I see where you are going but I still can't see how anybody can make operational command decisions at chief fire officer/brigade manager/executive level, or whatever title they give themselves, either on the fireground or at Gold control without having spent time doing the basics of the job and progressing through. How can this help morale and confidence? Like I said before, CFOs have been in line to become civilianised for a long time, thats not the problem.
The fire service has far too many managers, pen pushers and idea makers. We are now faced with the 'modernised' service where everyone becomes a manager! We don't need an experienced business person manager playing at being a Firefighter. Let the brigade managers, manage and the firefighters command.
As for Retained transfering to WT, I don't know of one retained firefighter that has had a seamless transfer. I know of retained firefighters that have got into WT post by running the gauntlet of the public recruitment campaigns and getting in that way but then having to complete the FULL length of basic training despite being deemed 'competent' under IPDS on the retained. Yes there maybe brigades letting Ret into WT but very few. Im sure the RFU do alot for the retained in certain areas but the LAFBs I have been in, the RFU weren't representing the retained services interest, rather going along with the management like nodding dogs. Credit where credits due, in my opinion, the FBU did more to represent Ret Ffs and fought their corner on many an occasion (no im not an FBU rep or activist!).
O and I have checked out the IPDS site on many occasions to try and make sense of it all and it always sends me to sleep. We've had many discussions on my station to try and work out these role maps ect.. Its seems the only people that realy see the value & benefits clearly, are managers. (must be why they are managers) Im sure one day it'll all make sense. (possibly when I retire)
-
Pete the whole point is that Gold command (strategic) does not make any OPERATIONAL decisions.
As to RT to WT it has happened here - 12 posts filled with existing RT staff, a two week course on the new Draeger Merlin board, upgrading CS knowldege, Ff NOS input etc. Then straight to the station. Those who were already deemed competent (for pay purposes after the settlement) are on competent rate as WT, two who were still on development pay int he RT have to complete the NVQ to get competent rate. This proces sis now being examined by a number of other FRAs.
I know of RFU memebrs here but there is no true union structure so no real representation, they do have a seat for a democratically elected official recognition at consultative meetings (not negotiation rights) but as there is no democratically elected official there is no one to turn up!
-
hmmmmm, should i get involved or not. ok, not just yet. keep the dialogue going
dave bev
-
when are people going to realise that the reason FB are so poorly run is because most of there senior managers are just promoted water squirters ( no offence is mant by this). There are no real managers business or otherwise no creative thinkers no long term statergists. This is what they should employ let the FF and so on manage ops and leave the strategic management decisons to peope with proven records in the business community.
-
Perhaps we should make Richard Branson Chief of the General Staff and solve our defence problems.
-
john doe, very constructive answer!
i would be interested as to why you consider 'fire brigades' to be so poorly run, yet they were consistently congaratulated by both hmi inspectors and the audit commission as excellent performing organisations. firefighters go on strike and all of a sudden fire officers at all levels including principal officers cant run a p... up in a brewery!!
there is a lot of blocks being thrown at brigade management, and unfortunately some of them are even perpetuating the myth. of course there needs to be competency at all levels including at fire authority level amongst elected members, but that doesnt mean that those within cant perform at the highest levels.
if people continue to believe the propoganda of the odpm that our senior officers are crap then it can only lead to long term dissatisfaction within the organisition, which im sure you are aware is a dangerous position in terms of health of the organisation.
look at the nhs for the proposed model, managed by those who can manage yet dont understand the basic premis of the organisations existence. the ambulance service, unable to meet its attendance targets (set by govt, demanded by the public) is based on the same model.
railtrack, school dinners - all managed by good managers .........
need i go on?
as to the 'no offence' well youve caused some, no real mangers (what is a real manager - many senior officers already hold managerial qualifications and dms etc) no creative thinkers? no long term strategists, get real!!! see through the hype and crap - the fire service is well managed (even though i often disagree with the details, those at cfo/principle officer level are invariably VERY intelligent people and deserve much more respect than you afford them by your comments!)
dave bev
-
All the public service industries you mentioned that are badly run isnt it because they pay peanuts get monkeys. what about the commercial side with succesful managers that are judged on performance. my references about creative thinkers and strategists is because there is no fear of failure (i am not talking ops) but if they buy a wrong piece of euipment, computer system, appliances when they are unsuitable no one gets the sack no one is held accountable
i believe the fire service provides an excellent service in most areas BVPI bear this out but REAL improvements REAL modernisation will only come when the top structure thinks like a commercial enterprise.
-
seems like we disagree. its not the level of pay its about understanding of the FULL process they manage, not just the ability to manage. accountability doesnt make a better manager, neither does sacking anybody. REAL improvements - such as ? REAL modernisation - such as?
i fear this discussion could go on for ever, as i said - looks like we disagree!
dave bev
-
Why does everybody think that commercial organisations are better than public ones.
I've worked for both kinds and there are some good and some bad in each.
-
Real Improvements- reduction of fire deaths/injuries time to issue fire certs reduction in accidents in the workplace -reduction in false alarms better welfare for its employees
Modernisation - a shift pattern where 75% of the workforce are not on duty- where they expect someone to peform on the back of a 15hour night shift. real training /qualifications/ the full acceptance by senior management of a positive health and safety culture.
I am glad we disagree cos it would be boring if we all the same all I can say is I will listen to your arguments because I dont know everything and this is just my opinion.
-
In my time as a senior fire officer, I've had the pleasure of giving many talks to business groups/leaders in industry and commerce, both large and small organisations, within my county. I've often began by reminding them that the fire & rescue service provide the same level of response to them as customers 24 hrs per day 365 days per year - including cup-final day and millenium eve. I then ask them if they could do it for their customers. The response has always been: "No way - without huge increases in our charges." And even then some. of course, couldn't do it!
This usually sets the scene nicely for them and I've never heard any real moans or criticismabout the service provided - except about fire safety officers when they sometimes get it wrong or don't explain things properly!
-
In my time as a senior fire officer, I've had the pleasure of giving many talks to business groups/leaders in industry and commerce, both large and small organisations, within my county. I've often began by reminding them that the fire & rescue service provide the same level of response to them as customers 24 hrs per day 365 days per year - including cup-final day and millenium eve. I then ask them if they could do it for their customers. The response has always been: "No way - without huge increases in our charges." And even then some. of course, couldn't do it!
This usually sets the scene nicely for them and I've never heard any real moans or criticismabout the service provided - except about fire safety officers when they sometimes get it wrong or don't explain things properly!
Ian,
I think there have been quite a few topics on Fire Net where people have complained about the service from Fire and Rescue Services, particularly with regards to inspecting officers actions.
I can also think of at least one example where an insurance company has sued a Fire and Rescue Services for their actions while fire fighting.
Do the Fire and Rescuse services seek feedback from their customers asking for their opinions on their service and costs? As a customer myself, my views have never been sought. It's not really fair to compare the two as unlike a business your "customers" can't choose which service provider to use (unless they employ their own private fire brigade.)
-
Chris,
To answer your qustion: yes they do - and have done for many years (my brigade even did that over 10 years ago - before 'modernisation' was even considered by any politicians etc).
My County also carries out a survey of 'customer satisfaction', by asking residents about council services. The fire & rescue service always, without fail, come top! Can your company claim such satisfaction with it's service?
Also, most (if not all) brigades monitor 'complaints' - which, as I said, are usually about fire safety officers. I know this because I was responsible for helping draft my County Council's 'complaints' procedure and I had to monitor & report each year on it. So we don't disagree there. (I also know of more cases than the one you are probably thinking of re: litigation, however, hardly evidence of a badly managed service).
Regarding your last point: I have known and even worked alongside many "private fire brigades" (indeed, my father served in one) - all except one: Albright & Wilson Ltd, have beeen disbanded because of costs and/or difficulties in managing and/or supervising them. These companies, no doubt with some good managers themselves, opting to rely upon the services of the local authority fire service which they paid for in their rates.
Finally, the average council tax payer in my county pays less than the price of a loaf of bread each week for their fire and rescue service. None of this money goes to shareholders dividends.
I've never objected to criticism - and I think my earlier comments are quite fair.
-
There is no proof that you provide a bad service FB are only judged on certain things but your customers have no choice and there is nothing to judge you aganist apart from each other. What other business do you know where 75% of its whole time staff are not at work?
-
I had a thought earlier today, when Tony Blair finaly calls it a day and Gordon Brown takes over, Jonny Prescot is going to be looking for a new job! Why not stick him in charge of a fire brigade somewhere, after all he's had lots of management experience and all of the UKs Firefighters know him. He's come up with some blinding ideas in the past!
O and its good to see then that some of the retained boys & girls are getting in somewhere, lets make it everywhere. Perhaps Jonny could take up retained duties somewhere he seems to have alot of time on his hands.
-
john doe - Real Improvements
- reduction of fire deaths/injuries - agreed - so why is the ncfsc being systematically dismantled by the odpm?
- time to issue fire certs - not when the FSO comes in
- reduction in accidents in the workplace - agreed
- reduction in false alarms - i asume you refer to what i would call unwanted alarms - this gets a bit more complicated - to reduce false alarms remove every fire alarm system -inc thos in the home?? not sure that is achievable, im even more surer it is not the right answer. management of alarm sytems is a better option. of course the simple answer is not to respond. then it becomes a case of - number of flase alarms - none (because we dont respond) - the govt used to collectg a set of statistics referred to as HASS and LASS - they refered to accidents in the home and accidents in leisure activities (sorry if thats not technically correct) - they no longer collect them, so we now have no accidents in the home or in leisure???? i know of fire authorities who have employed a specialist person to work to reduce the numbers of false alarms by working with and alongside managers of business etc, and helped to reduce the numbers. its not in industries/businesses interest to have their business disrupted by false alarms, they dont do it on purpose, and ae there really the large numbers of rogue managers who dont care (ps the very same ones that are suggested as being rewuired to now run the fire service!)
- better welfare for its employees - agreed
Modernisation - a shift pattern where 75% of the workforce are not on duty - do you mean off duty? seriously?? do the sums, its a nonsense of a statement, used as headline grabber by those that should know better. if a brigade employs retained staff are 75% ever off duty? extend this to include day staff, flexi etc and you can see why the statement means absolutely nothing but is used as a headline grabber. if you were only referring of course to ops 42 hour staff, again do the sums 7 days - 24 hours = 168 / 4 = 42 hours. if you want to have them working at the same time then you need to either increase the hours or have periods when tthey are not all on duty ie more than 75% at some time - yet your statement wouldnt allow that to happen!!
where they expect someone to peform on the back of a 15hour night shift - so no more retained staff or flexi duty staff anymore then?
- real training /qualifications/ the full acceptance by senior management of a positive health and safety culture - all agreed
I am glad we disagree cos it would be boring if we all the same all I can say is I will listen to your arguments because I dont know everything and this is just my opinion - all agreed. my views are also my opinion but its a bit tiring to explain everything - you seem to want to challenge any statements made on here, yet not challenge statements made elsewhere (at work?) - ive no problem with people EVER challenging my views, i just ask they do the same to others when they make clearly untruthful and innacurate statements
dave bev
-
What 'leader of industry' would ever totally re-organise his business simply to give his customers more choice to shop elsewhere? Particularly when his customers are happy!
-
The Chairman of BT.
-
Aha....missed out the word "willingly".
-
LOIL just like that 5(4) Notice on city logistics. Not just entirely right!!!!!!(no offence intended!!!)
-
Interesting that we see mention of how well the FRS senior managers have been - because so many reports say they are and they understand the service. Well, stranger still then that in MAy 2001 the HMI published a thematic review of the way the service is managed, due to issues they had identified in prior reviews. They seemed to think that the management could be improved and it was only the firefighter's pay dispute that took the wind out of the sails of management refor. The lower roles became the bad guys and the failures of the senior management were forgotten?
Anyway to recap from that report (from its executive summary) the following tells it as it was then:
The study concludes that there is a need for a review of the present means for the development of brigade commanders and recognises that such a review will need to encompass consideration of the current single tier entry system and the present arrangements for appointment and promotion. Whilst these provide for successful
leaders to emerge they also dictate the length of time it takes to achieve senior positions and restrict the opportunity for the Service to benefit from the success of leaders outside of the Service. A high priority must therefore be to develop an alternative recruitment
and progression system fit for the 21st century which allows both the development of talented people at firefighter level and affords access to the best available leaders and managers for the Service. Nothing less will do to meet public expectation. A mix of new ideas from people with experience of success in leadership is likely to challenge
some of the present arrangements and perceptions. This challenge aspect is essential in developing a culture of continuous improvement throughout the Service.
Ian a couple of points to you..........
Where is the modernisation of the FRS leading to giving our customers the choice of going elsehwere?
Why, as you are a senior manager, are you unaware of the real purpose of Gold command and the need to change the way we manage the service?
You are not aware of the role of a Brigade Manager or the development modules/courses available?
Maybe this answers why we need to chnage the senior managers!
-
Were...not any longer Fireftrm (a lot's happened in 12 months too). And that's 3 points - not a couple.
However:
Q1 I don't know what you mean by this. I haven't raised the issue of choice - others have.
Q2 See first comment above. Also I'm not into quizzes any longer.
Q3 Yes...I am not aware. But tell me how someone with no previous fire service experience or training is 'suitably trained' to command fire service operational activities - at a strategic level - even in Gold command. Is it a one day course or two?
-
Oh fireftrm: if it only takes a little course to train someone 'off the street' (no offence intended to the lady in N East) to become a Gold Commander, surely it could work at the other end of the spectrum too? After all, some would say the soldiers soon got the hang of it! Now that might really be 'modernisation'. It can work both ways you know.
-
Strategic decision making is part of a strategic manager's day-to-day work and this would be part of normal development. The operation of Gold command is just like that that any business would put in place in an emergency - example a strike, a fire that has put the factory out of commission, a major flooding incident (been to such meetings as a FRS rep with only three Emergency Service personnel out of 20 at the meeting - they other managed rather well), a sudden failure of equipment (maybe a production line), a major financial problem.....the list is potentially endless. All of these require the same skill level and is taught/developed over the career of the manager. There are modules to assist such a person to understand the operational aspects, but there are alos operational personnel to advise.
Do you think that the emergency meetings at any of the above REQUIRED the managers to understnad the operational task, or could they cope with providing strategic support by utilising the knowldege and skills of their subordinates? The answer is in the way everyone else manages.
As it clearly doesn't take a few days to gain this skill then no person could walk in 'off the street' without already being a highly skilled strategic manager, I rather think that answers the pijtnb you were trying to score on the firefighter role.
As to the three Qs -
No1 - I thought you had, I can't see choice mentioned by anyone else, but am happy that you seem not to think there can be a choice - as there isn't nor has anyone suggested that modernisation is about offering the customer a choice, after all there is only one FRS still and no sign of alternatives!
No2 - Well, despite the wordings in your other posts, that you WERE a senior manager should still raise the same question. Gold command has never been different, however we did have CFOs/DCFOs/ACFOs still taking OPERATIONAL command. All that has changed is that the fire service standards now make clear that this is not their role, as it should not have been.
Q3 - The role is as it was, just clarified. Senior managers, from whatever organisation should understand the development routes that senior managers require, or can access. They should laso be able to find out such information should they not have it to hand, that you hadn't/couldn't is what I found mildly surprising. Out of interest the FSC is one, there are so many others. The only difference as it stands is the FSC is no longer THE way for the FRS.
-
john doe
75% of staff not at work???
no one in ANY job that works a set 42 hour week could possibly be at work for more than 25% of the week as all weeks consist of 168 hours.
its simple math.
i think you need to jump off the bandwagon , switch on and try and think about the junk you are spouting.
you are simply embaressing yourself.
-
He still hasn't answered my question.
-
Johndoe wanted some industries where 75% of the staff are not at work at any given time, well these (obvioulsy) need to be 24 hour operational businesses, so here are just a few:
Tesco
Asda
Sainsbury
The ambulance service
The Police
The Army (actually they have less than 25% on operational duty at any given time)
The RAF (ditto)
The RN (ditto)
Railway companies
Road haulage companies
Power stations
Transco/National Grid
AA
RAC
Green Flag
The media (BBC, ITV, Sky, Newspapers etc)
Corus
24hr telephone call centres
24hr petrol stations
Hospitals
Hotels
I am getting bored now, however he should note that, as buff says,, any industry that works 24hr must have enough staff to cover the shifts. As he says we are in a rather efficient mould in the FRS as we utilise considerably more than 33% of our staff at any given time to operate a 24hr 365 day business. We have some shift staff (25% utilisation - well above the 22.26% average for 24hr businesses anyway as we work 4.6hrs more than the national average week of 37.4hrs), we have around 33% of our staff on a virtual 24hr 365day working (retained), about 6% on 78hr week (flexi-duty) and the same on an average of 84hr week (day crewing). So hopefully that answers your rather ill thought out question?
-
john doe
75% of staff not at work???
no one in ANY job that works a set 42 hour week could possibly be at work for more than 25% of the week as all weeks consist of 168 hours.
its simple math.
i think you need to jump off the bandwagon , switch on and try and think about the junk you are spouting.
you are simply embaressing yourself.
I dont think I am "embaressing" maths is good but spelling not so good.
I think people ae missing my point and I must say I am only thinking of whole time. i feel they could be used better.
24 hr coverage whole time is not always needed.
I also think that they could make more of down time.
in other words increase in employees during the day (not all will ride an engine" reduce at other times to maintain cover.
I must also say that most of the occupations that were quoted do not have 75% off but flexible working patterns which is what I am advocating and I must stress not reduction in Fire cover.
-
johndoe, ok, now youve clarified your reference to 75% as only applying to whole time. can you further clarify WHICH whole time please? day crewing for instance are availabel for 50% of a week!
your thoughts on 'they could be used better' would be interesting
24 hour coverage is not always needed. the difficulty being of course when they are. are you confident enough to bet you career (assuming you are employed somewhere?) on it? always recognising of course that the other part of the gamble may be someones life!
interesting about not all riding an 'engine' during the day. i assume (though perhaps wrongl) that under your suggestions that all appliances will be crewed to the correct levels, none of this 75% of the time malarky. the rest will then do what? cfs, interesting. how do they get to where they want to go or are needed? ask a few fpo's how they manage to cope with no transport.
the reality is that the fire service is no different than any other organisations. its what we do that is different!
your final point re flexible work patterns is a bit 'cliched' but then again its no more than i would expect, but you do at least now appear to being a little more conscience of bigger pictures that may result from your 'thoughts'
dave bev
-
Thanks Dave - I had thought of replying but had lost the will, you have reinvigorated me.
Out of interest johndoe is right about some of those organisations not having 75% off - they do this by having the ability to accurately forecast demand and by having more poeple during the day doing bureaucratic work. Thus they often have in excess of 75% off.
jd - the requirement to have appliances crewed at night stems from the fact that fires are not diurnal, indeed fire deaths are predominantly nocturnal. Yes slightly lower incident numbers, but more serious. We already deal with this by having non-operational tasks done during the day and having less staff on duty at night, only whole-time shift personnel are 'at work'. Retained, day crewing and flexi duty system personnel all respond from home, thus avoiding any of that wasted 'down time'.
-
Out of interest doughboy
Doey eyed - .
I fail to see why you have to get so personal on a debate that I have found quite interesting you have opened my eyes to certain stuff I was not aware of never sais I was right, just an opinion you obviously have a better outlook/knowledge than me
and I have learnt things is that not what this forum is about.
If its just to throw insults no wonder certain people have in excess of 800 posts.
-
I apologise most sincerely - I just had read a certian negativity toward the FRS in your posts, as I misinterpreted that I can only withdraw my comments, which I have done by removing them. Again I apologise.
-
well said johndoe. I ask sincere questions too, as none of us can know it all!
-
Chris,
To answer your qustion: yes they do - and have done for many years (my brigade even did that over 10 years ago - before 'modernisation' was even considered by any politicians etc).
My County also carries out a survey of 'customer satisfaction', by asking residents about council services. The fire & rescue service always, without fail, come top! Can your company claim such satisfaction with it's service?
Also, most (if not all) brigades monitor 'complaints' - which, as I said, are usually about fire safety officers. I know this because I was responsible for helping draft my County Council's 'complaints' procedure and I had to monitor & report each year on it. So we don't disagree there. (I also know of more cases than the one you are probably thinking of re: litigation, however, hardly evidence of a badly managed service).
Regarding your last point: I have known and even worked alongside many "private fire brigades" (indeed, my father served in one) - all except one: Albright & Wilson Ltd, have beeen disbanded because of costs and/or difficulties in managing and/or supervising them. These companies, no doubt with some good managers themselves, opting to rely upon the services of the local authority fire service which they paid for in their rates.
Finally, the average council tax payer in my county pays less than the price of a loaf of bread each week for their fire and rescue service. None of this money goes to shareholders dividends.
I've never objected to criticism - and I think my earlier comments are quite fair.
Ian, I think we are quite far from disagreeing. I just don't think you can easily compare profit making companies and FRSs.
I also think its not very relevant to ask householders to compare them with council services. The most realistic way to measure customer satisfaction (I think) would be to seek objective feedback from those who have suffered fire losses, householders, businesses and insurance companies, and to seek opinions from informed tax payers comparing fire fighting against other countries.
I think the only fair comparison would be to compare FRS with each other and with ones from different countries.
-
john doe, the purpose of this forum - im not so sure myself sometimes! it does give the opportunity for discussion and debate, but in doing so it gives the opportunity for offending contributors, sometimes unknowingly so!
im glad you have learned something from the responses to your comments/views - but much as i suggested questioning others you must also question any answers you receive on here until you have enough information to take a better informed position (which might still be your original view!!)
some of us might have 'more information' as opposed to being 'better informed' - as im sure you are aware 'knowing stuff' in the frs is the basis of many a promotion! it doesnt make those with the info more intelligent - even those with 800+ posts!
chris -
compare, consult, challenge and compete - now that takes me back a few years!
-
Chris,
I detect a certain shifting of goal posts here!
My posting which you responded to was an attempt to inform johndoe that I've personally stood before 'customers' and not had the criticism levelled at the fire service that he inferred. These people were not shrinking violets and well able to air their professional views. I've never said the fire service is perfect (what organisation is?) and I'm well aware of weaknesses.
I then answered your criticism of a lack of consultation. At least my brigade clearly consulted with it's customers. However, I accept not all customers and maybe not 'customers who really knew what they were talking about' - which I guess is what you're now saying. Incidentally, these things are not cheap to carry out and there comes a point when a decision must be made about just how far these surveys go.
Finally, fire & rescue services are (or at least until recently) were compared with each other. And as I sit on the 'fire stats user group' I could spend the rest of the day explaining how your final point re comparing with foreign services is just impossible (mainly because 'they' don't compile anywhere near the level of fire statistics that we do in the UK).
PS there are lots of areas where the service could do better, however, surely we should try to get a fair perspective on this topic - and not simply bash management.
-
PS there are lots of areas where the service could do better, however, surely we should try to get a fair perspective on this topic - and not simply bash management.
Firstly, I hope I've not said anything controversial or offensive to anyone. I'm just saying that it's unfair to compare FRS to businesses, we appear to be agreeing on that.
I wasn't bashing management, I wouldn't consider myself qualified to even attempt to, I just pointed out that some people are unhappy with certain aspects of FRS activities, that's all.