Brigade Fire Safety Officers

[Midland Retty]

I am intrested to know if any brigades out there are re-employing retired fire safety officers as civillian (some people do not like that term - some prefer the title 'non operational') fire officers.

Our brigade is doing this.

One of our most experienced chappies with  15 years in fire safety, a fire engineering degree, and the kind of fire safety knowledge and wisdom that even the great godmother of fire safety Rose Everton would envy retired recently

The plan was that he would be re-employed as a civillian inspector.

He had to submit an application form but got spring-boarded into oblivion when Human Resources looked at it, and told the dumbstruck officer "Sorry you dont have the necessary experience and didnt make it to interview"

Fortunately a cataclismic explosion of common sense occured somewhere at HQ and he was eventually re-employed (much to the relief of the officer concerned because his wife had already spent a hefty chunk of his lump sum on a few luxuries).

Has anyone on these forums has similar experiences of woeful non sensical personnel related cock ups or is this kind of thing the preserve of just my brigade?

[jokar]

No many other do the same.  The problem is that equalities deem that the interview has to be that and staff employed have to fight their way through a process that they may never have done before.  Many have fallen by the wayside by not completing the application form correctly and do not even get shortlisted.  Then others faced with fire safety technical questions about legislation do not know the answers as they just do the job.  then there are the questions about risk and risk assessment that many from a prescriptive background do not like, as often seen demonstrated on this forum.  The answer is do the background stuff and ask many questions, the truth for many officers is that whilst they do the job very professionally the people in HR are not interested in that they want the forms and the interview to go in a certain way.

Just as a by the by, why should this person get a job in front of anyone else just because he has doen the job already, tere may have been someone better out there even from another Brigade.  That is not a bad statement it is just a factor.

[Midland Retty]

Hi Jokar

Yes I fully agree other people with equally good experience / desire to do the job should get the opportunity to apply too without having to come across "an old boys club" etc

I think what got our goat in this instance was that the officer concerned was well reknowned for being an excellent officer technically and also popular with staff and punters alike. Our line manager, our colleagues and everyone agreed there was no one as knowledgeable - the kind of guy we need to help the newbies in the dept and train the next gen of Insp Officers as it were.

Im just worried sometimes we loose a damn good skill base with some officers leaving through ignorance and red tape. The re-employment system doesn't allow for the retiring officer's lien manager to be able to comment and say " this guys is no good dont re-employ him" or " we need to retain this person"

But i do see where you are coming from in terms of ensuring a level playing field.

Anyone esle's procedures similar?

[Clevelandfire]

At risk of sounding a wee bit cynical the post about your brigade seems to reflect our brigade's mentality and policies to a tee Retty!

Im amazed how little response there has been given to this posting. I think it raises some extremely important questions.Im very much for "equal opportunities" in the proper sense of the word. Without "equal ops" I wouldn't have got my job in the Fire Service so Im very grateful for it.

But I think we have to be careful that we do not allow "Equal Ops" to muddy the waters too much, especially where it prevents good people with excellent experience, commitment and service from being retained. When good skills knowledge and experience are lost just to 'tick a box' to satisfy the "Equal Ops" crowd Im afraid I do tend to get a little frustrated.

It is all well and good saying that someone else should be given the chance, but on the flip side to that is the fact that they might not be any good or as commited to the job. Getting rid of a good employee just because they are holding someone else up from having a chance isn't the right way to look at this. Common sense should previal but alas at times it doesn't which only fuels the cyncism of old farts like me Im afraid.

[messy]

We had the same situation in my team when a very able guy retired and then failed to jump through the necessary hurdles to get a non-uniform job.

Meanwhile we had two non uniform recruits from non fire service backgrounds arrive who needed considerable training. One left in under a year.

I too reckon that equal ops is very important, but for a specialist role why employ a butcher, baker or candle-stick maker when a qualified fire safety IO applies?? It's plain daft!

[finsp]

We have done the opposite, phased out the wealth of technical knowlege by not replaceing the civilian posts as they become vacant, the se guys are mostly working as consultants, but!!!! as mentioned earlier, these guys have a vast knowledge of prescriptive fire safety! not a great deal of knowledge on risk assessment therefore a lack of an understanding of 'Suitable and Sufficient' they are more comfortable with the 'belt and braces approach' which ultimately will lead to the client spending well over the top for solutions that are not neccessary based on the risk identified. Only time will tell if they are successfull in there new self employed capacity.

I mean no malice at all and hold these guys in high esteem, I also wish them well in the future, however there is a time when the new replaces the old.

[wee brian]

OK so this guy gets to retire early because he is a fire service officer. In that 15 years did he breathe a lot of smoke whilst checking Fire Certificates?

I'm not too keen on the idea that these guys get a wadge of tax payers cash and then get a job back on the same firm.

[Midland Retty]

Fair comment.

More applicable perhaps to the ancient mythical code hugging fire officer type of old whom would behead anyone who hadn't got a fire extinguisher in exactly the right position as shown on the fire cert plans and then display the severed heads on big stakes by the local pub.

The Engagement is off now by the way Wee Brian...

[wee brian]

Story of my life!

I'm not bitter and twisted about it but if theres a FPO who is good at what he/she does then why pension them off?

There must be some way of retaining them without this silly nonsense of re-employing somebody you just pentioned off.

[Midland Retty]

Yes agreed - The brigade doesn't seem geared up for that type of thing as yet.