blue light driving

[Guest]

Not going to disagree one bit about the attributes of retained personnel and that 'not all should be tarred by the same brush' etc etc.
I disagree in principle to horns and lights on non emergency vehicles, whether or not Superintendents say otherwise. And furthermoreI shall not yield to the arguement that a private vehicle owned and insured as such is a vehicle in use for emergency purposes when responding to an alerter. Remember, just cause the local bobby says its ok doesn't mean you won't get done in court if the magistrates say otherwise. The bobbies word is not law and you might still, in fact you most probably will be in contravention of the Road Traffic Act even though the 'soup' says otherwise.

[Guest]

Erm who mentioned " Local bobbies?"

Erm nobody!!

I think in one of the original threads it mentions that aproval comes from either a superintendant or an official of the DVLA. Both of which are fully authorised to approve whom or who should not use blue lights. We arent talking about PC Plod here.

I also pick up on the point about insurance. Retained firecrews would have to have correct insurance - that goes without saying. Normally domestic insurance brokers can provide this at very little extra cost.

And I again stress that blues and twos are used to get traffic out of the way, not to speed!!!

Now behave yourself Zorro its not good for your superhero image if everyone disagrees with you old chum!

[Guest]

Pleasing to end on a chummy note. No offence is ever intended on my part and as this could go round and round in ever decreasing circles i shall sign off on a positive note by wishing you all the very best . Whether or not you all ever get the flashers remember one thing. Stay safe.
Z.

[Guest]

I reckon giving every Tom, Dick & Harry flashing lights & nee-naws devalues them and anaesthsatises (spelt wrong - sorry Zorro) the public to their effect. If every time they go out in their car they are overtaken by a blue Golf GTi or brown Mondeo sporting blue lights and sirens, Joe Public is going to wonder why he is the only one around here who doesn't have them, and eventually is going to start ignoring them, which, I think you will all agree, is at a bad enough level already! :shock:
I fully appreciate the argument that they should be used to clear traffic out of the way so the user can proceed at legal speeds, but come on fellas,this is the real world here and we all know that a good many retained, not a majority I agree, but a good many all the same, drive like bloody loonies to get on the big red fire engine.
Ten mph over the limit doesn't sound like a very good idea, given that most fire stations are in built up areas (at the moment...) that means 40 instead of 30, with kids running out to see the fire engine/cop car/ ambulance that they think is coming and liable to run out in front of the the brown Mondeo which they haven't even seen 'cos they are looking for a 'proper' emergency vehicle, I think most people on here have seen what 40mph does to a human body, especially a small one. :cry:
There are, unfortunately, people who joined the brigade because blues & two's give them a hard-on, I know it and you know it. One of them was driving for me once and while I was somewhat preoccupied with the radio I still noticed that we were barely under control. When I looked across at my driver I saw that he had one hand on the wheel and one on the control box for the nee-naws so he could switch through the different sounds (from woo-woo & nee-naw to wowwowow & blip blip blip) while we were at the time negotiating a tight left hander at a crossroads with traffic everywhere.
I told him to "kindly place both hands on the wheel if you please" or words to that effect. :x
What I should have said of course was "stop the ****ing pump, get the **** out and **** off back to the station you ****ing ****!"
 :evil:  :evil:

[Guest]

Well I think thats more a management issue and requires perhaps a little more in depth discussion when talking to your crew.

You should point out that crazy driving is unacceptable, that they are a responsible person serving their community someone whom is tasked to try and prevent accidents not cause them.

You will always have hotheads in the job unfortunately, but threaten them with the choice of calming down or leaving the brigade normally has the desired affect.

You mentioned built up areas , most built up areas have wholetime crews. The blue lights are used where it is absolutely impossible for ANY member of a crew to reach the station in the requisite time.

This used to apply to mainly remote rural areas but can also equally apply to other areas with significant traffic problems.

It would be a good idea for retained firefighters using blues and twos to display a reflective "FIRE" sign at the back of their vehicles to prevent others from becoming complacent about unmarked emergency vehicles.

[pugh]

Ladies & Gentlemen,

Haven't posted anything for some time now but that is not to say I don't read the comments, most sensible, some complete and utter guff.  

The whole point of being a retained firefighter is to respond to the station within a specified time.  In order to do that you must live/work within a certain catchment area, and that is assessed on recruitment.  Travel times and distances are assessed travelling at normal roadspeeds under normal traffic conditions.  Obviously, there will be times when traffic conditions are 'abnormal', but these will be the exception rather than the rule and in no way carry the argument in favour of fitting unsuitable vehicles with visual and audible warning devices.

These recruitment restrictions are made in order to either be 2nd pump to a 'B' risk, usually in support of the wholetime pump, or 1st responding pump to a 'C' or 'D' risk and meet the attendance times for those risks.  If the pump isn't meeting this standard then alternatives will have to be considered by the Fire Authority, such as upgrading the pump to wholetime status, mobilising an adjacent station, etc.  Each case has its merits and needs to be treated individually.  There is no blanket solution to this problem but it is for certain the resolution is NOT to fit private cars with blue beacons and two-tone horns, etc.

I have no axe to grind with retained firefighters,  They do a wonderful job under very trying conditions with much sacrifice to their personal lives.  Having said that I am certain they wouldn't do it if they didn't derive as much satisfaction from the job as I did as a w/t firefighter.  I just don't believe it is right or appropriate to go down the track of putting the responsibility of 'blue light driving' on inexperienced and untrained personnel, whoever they are.

Cheers.
 

[Guest]

In the words of 'Sir Clive' just being in a minority of 1 didn't make me wrong'.
Pleasing to see that the fight for freedom of speech and common sense is gaining supporters. Now 1 has become 3.

[Guest]

I can accept in part some of the arguments Zorro is saying but not all.

Zorro the point of this is that we aren't saying ALL retained firefighters should have blue lights, we are saying that certain areas it is, as "Crazy SO" said, impossible to reach the station in the alloted time.

Recruitment for retained service isnt popular in some areas due to a whole host of reasons.

Its ok saying the fire authority should be recruiting people who live close enough to the station but in some areas Zorro this is not possible. Typicaly retained stations willhave enough volunteers to cover evenings and weekends but not during the day,

Then you have the problem of growing traffic where firefighters did live within the allotted time limit but due to traffic were taking increasingly longer to respond as time went on.

So no one is saying this is easy, no one is saying EVERY last retained firefighter should have a blue light we are saying that it is the best all round solution for a growing problem.

Some communities do not have the luxury of a wholetime crew protecting them, but they still deserve the same level of cover.

You are making this personal again go to pains to point out how many people agree with you.

Relax and take it easy don't be so defensive we aren't criticising you for having an opinion we are just putting forward ours.

[Guest]

Pugh made some excellent points.
I agree that the sun shines out of the retained etc etc but we simply cannot have everybody careering about under blues & twos because local conditions are difficult regarding the retained FFs getting to the pumps.

Let's look at this from the perspective of local authority been-counters and politicians (ie - the real world).

Situation:

The town of Much-Piddling-in-the-Wold is served by a wholly retained station.
Due to changing local conditions of housing/employment/prosperity etc etc recruitment of retained FFs is difficult and has resulted in people getting in who really live and/or work too far away.
Eventually responce times are going to fall below what is acceptable and fires are going to be more serious and people are going to die.
This will eventually put pressure on the local council bods (long after the local FFs reputations have been unfairly destroyed) and the decision to go to day-manning will have to be taken, but only AFTER an "unacceptable" number of fatalities.

In short: If response times cannot be met by retained FFs, then the LA must provide at least day-manning.

Sorry if none of this make sense- I've been on the sauce... :?

[Guest]

Hiya Colt

Yeah I don't disagree with your comments there - if response times are suffering the local authority would have to look into making that station wholetime perhaps - thats assuming they have got the funding.

Day manning may be an option as you pointed out, but may still present similar problems to the retained situation.

But its what you do in the interim whilst wholetime is being sorted out. Plus like I've pointed out in several occassions remote areas won't be selected for wholetime stations because there just isn't the demand.

Again I would point out we are not talking about EVERY LAST retained firefighter having blue lights here guys  

[Matt Akers]

Sounds like Zorro has a large chip on his shoulder about the retained. I have met whole time FF like him before normally around the later stages of the serving career and some have a problem with the retained. Hopefully they will all retire soon and not parse on their narrow-minded thoughts onto the new recruits. I really can not understand why the whole time FF think they are above the retained. May be you can answer that one Zorro?

[fireftrm]

Sounds like Matt is a little disturbed rather than Zorro. Z has made reasoned, sensible points. Suggesting he is anti-retained is ludicrous. He has shown that he respects the work and role of the retained, at no tim edid he suggest that any Ff is above another. Matt you are reading either too much into this, or are type likely to cause distress between our personnel on different duty systems, unhelpfully.

The issue of warning devices is a long-running one. It was there when I joined the retained 20 years ago so it is nothing new. The trruth is that many (but no not all) retained Ffs do race to the station. They do sometimes drive unreasonably, there are accidents so caused. I know of one serious accident and at least three red-light jumpings personally - at two different retained stations; one of these a Wt/Rt station where the Wt pump was sent to the fire and the Rt was redirected to cut out the stupid Rt driver! BUT I am not tarring anyone with any brush, merely stating facts. It is also true what Colt and Pugh state. The retained are meployed to get tot he station, mainly based on their statements as to how long that takes. The satff should be honest in that and then no need to race, or for warning devices. Also the times are now gone so we no longer need to race at all!

Now sense please, no more fighting.

[Guest]

In relation to the points YOU make i think you have anwered them for me. You seem to view the w/t and retained as being one and the same and they most obviously and honestly are not. Maybe its you with a persecution complex that views me as having a chip on my shoulder that is the cause of your obvious angst. But here are a few objective reasons for why the 2 sides of the service are different.
W/T have a greater amount of time to spend developing their skills and obtaining new ones whilst the retained try valiantly but in vain to do the same within the short time allocated to them (2 hours per week on average).
W/T spend on average a much greater part of their time at incidents thereby demonstrating and developing their skills in the workplace as opposed to the retained who often are employed to provide fire cover in areas which recieve fewer fire calls due to the nature of the risk (IPDS implications here relating to demonstration of competence in the workplace).
W/T have always had to pass through a more rigourous and discriminatory selection process due to the high applicant - vacancy ratio, whilst many Brigades just can't get the public to want to be retained Firefighters and therefore unfortunately recruitment is done on a local basis with those who wouldn't get through w/t selection often being successful as retained applicants.
W/T promotion has historically been based on the need  to pass promotion exams and participate in rigourous selection testing whilst promotion in the ret. is nowhere near as demanding to attain.
I could go on but i feel should redress the balance. I would never question the dedication and valuable contribution that retained Firefighters make in providing an essential public service within their communities and yes when the crap hits the fan fire doesn't discriminate between one Firefighter and the other. However we all need to be honest and say that sometimes the operational demands placed on retained Firefighters are way beyond their skills levels due to no fault of their own. To continue to say otherwise to avoid offending some is to continually place retained firefighters in harms way by asking them to perform tasks they have had only the most rudimentary of training to accomplish and its not fair on them.

[Matt Akers]

Ok, I appreciate your points and they are valid and maybe I was a bit over the top. You guys do have longer to train and do have to go through bigger hopes to get into the job. I just wish some not all W/T FF would appreciate our skill and knowledge. We do have a small amount of time to do our training amongst our normal jobs, but all the R/T FF I have come across all put in 100% and do there upmost to keep up to date with things. In my Brigade the promotional exams are 60-70% the same as the whole time and they are looking into making the training courses longer. They wont to make the exams the same, promotional and entrance.
There has always been a divide between W/t and R/T, I think with IPDS and a few other things it will make it narrower. We all have to work together it is job that we all enjoy and value each other’s knowledge and experience.  
 :lol:

[Guest]

Peace and respect.