Confused re: Defence and Contract Fire Service

[BigD]

Hello All,

Need some clarification on a few issues regarding the above.

1. Why won't LA brigades recognise the training the DFRS recieve at Manston, it looks better than some LA facilities. Surely taking a defence firefighter is cheaper and easier to do a conversion course.

2. Serco have a Fire Service they are trained at CTE Manston to the same standards but it appears cannot transfer to DFRS although this can happen the other way round.

3. Serco are a defence contract Fire service trained at CTE Manston, yet why is there a training college at Tesside that is owned by Serco? Is it because the Firefighters need to be trained to government standards in order to work on their site?

Ta in advance

[class of mp81]

Big D,Some LAFS do accept DFRS transfers,this has been much debated in the past on firenet and is best left there.Contract staff cannot just transfer into the DFRS,as these jobs are part of the civil service and as such are open recruitment,they can apply like any one else.Contracters are private companies and will as such will go for the cheapest option ie a trained Ff who can go quickly on the run.As for Teeside Serco manage and run the school,saying that serco also run anything from prisons to airfields!

[Clevelandfire]

lot of confusion about the contract serco lads and defence crews.As far as im concerned defence firemen should be able to transfer to local authority. I did hear a nasty rumour that senior cheifs in the LAFS didnt think Defence guys had enough experience to directly transfer, cos they dont attend the same ammount of shouts as Local authority guys do and are therefore a bit like probationers, trained to the hilt but little to no on job the experience. Hope that isnt true cos it would be extremely unfair. In my experience defence firefighters are very professional, well trained and more than capable of tackling everything their LA counterparts would.

[Mr. P]

Per station, they [MoD] may attend less big than a LAFS, but they have a wide experience in specialised fire types, i.e structural, aircraft, underground & CBN.  They usually have the equivalent of a medium sized town but in a more compact area.  The civilian members also went to support British Troops in Iraq & Afghanistan, working 'under fire'. They had some pretty large oil fire jobs by all accounts. I know of some who have successfully transferred into LAFS and did conversion orientated courses. I think this transfer buisiness depends alot on each LAFS own criteria and regs for employment. But, from people I have met there are always good and bad comments each side of the coin.  The training and standards all seem to be heading in the same direction and courses have been mixed of FF's from different employers.  In LAFS, there are different training schoolsfor different brigades, so is there a cry 'one better than the other ' there also?  At the end of the day, it gets dark (in most paces) and all will do a pretty good job when called.

[Yeebsy]

Hello All,

Need some clarification on a few issues regarding the above.

1. Why won't LA brigades recognise the training the DFRS recieve at Manston, it looks better than some LA facilities. Surely taking a defence firefighter is cheaper and easier to do a conversion course.

2. Serco have a Fire Service they are trained at CTE Manston to the same standards but it appears cannot transfer to DFRS although this can happen the other way round.

3. Serco are a defence contract Fire service trained at CTE Manston, yet why is there a training college at Tesside that is owned by Serco? Is it because the Firefighters need to be trained to government standards in order to work on their site?

Ta in advance

To answer question no.3, Teeside trains firefighters for the civilian airports around the country where as Manston trains military firefighters, the basics are the same but the tactics and techniques are completly different. Rolling upto a 747 on fire with 400 pax is a different ball game than rolling upto a fighter aircraft on fire that is armed to the teeth carrying all sorts of nasties.

[Mr. P]

Yeebsy wrote;

[To answer question no.3, Teeside trains firefighters for the civilian airports around the country where as Manston trains military firefighters, the basics are the same but the tactics and techniques are completly different. Rolling upto a 747 on fire with 400 pax is a different ball game than rolling upto a fighter aircraft on fire that is armed to the teeth carrying all sorts of nasties.]

Yeebsy, I agree with you as to different types of aircraft incident tactics. An aircraft is an aircraft is an aircraft... However, the MoD deal with all of these. Their 747's will have 400 pax plus a whole hold of hazardous cargo.

[Yeebsy]

Mr. P, sorry I'm not sure what you are getting at. The OP asked why Serco train at Manston when they run Teeside, so what is your actual point here.

[Mr. P]

Yeebsy, just pointing out that MoD also deal with a/c other than fighter jets.
Serco personnel train at Manston if they are employed to work at certain MoD establishments. Other buisiness' Serco have fire involvement with may get trained at Teeside or elsewhere. Like most employers, cost of training is a factor so, if something is available from another source that meets requirements, they often use that even if they have facilities themselves.
Having spoken with, and read others comments, I was trying to paint a broader picture as the info appears to me.

[Yeebsy]

Sorry Mr P (slightly embarrassed now) I was reading it a completly different way.

[class of mp81]

whilst going off track a little bit,i feel that at the end of  the strike when ipds and nvqs started up, the uk fire services wasted a huge chance for change.prehaps it could have looked at the usa stlye of Qs  and training courses, ie nfpa firefighter 1 and 2,hazmat tech,rescue tech,airport firefighter etc and added any it needed usr,cbrn,water rescue,etc.then everyone would have been singing off the same hymn sheet,open this up to everyone,lafs,mod, airport,industrial,etc and then if the brown stuff did ever hit the fan(9/11 style,or another british summer like last year)we would have a huge rise in the number of assets to deploy,plus it would make transfers etc easier and save  on  repeated training costs.
any comments?

[Midland Retty]

whilst going off track a little bit,i feel that at the end of  the strike when ipds and nvqs started up, the uk fire services wasted a huge chance for change.prehaps it could have looked at the usa stlye of Qs  and training courses, ie nfpa firefighter 1 and 2,hazmat tech,rescue tech,airport firefighter etc and added any it needed usr,cbrn,water rescue,etc.then everyone would have been singing off the same hymn sheet,open this up to everyone,lafs,mod, airport,industrial,etc and then if the brown stuff did ever hit the fan(9/11 style,or another british summer like last year)we would have a huge rise in the number of assets to deploy,plus it would make transfers etc easier and save  on  repeated training costs.
any comments?

Ohhh no no no no no, tut tut - that sounds way too much like common sense to me.

There certainly should be a more joined up way of thinking and more standardised training. I'm not overly convinced the the US Model is the way forward but i does go in the right direction.

[fireftrm]

- at the end of the strike, when IPDS and NVQs started up???

CORRECTION. IPDS, the NOS and the NVQs were there long before the strike. They were the result of over 10 years of work, where the UKFRS looked at the competence (training/skills and knoweldge) required of firefighters. This was due to the deaths of staff duringt he early 1990s and the HSE improvement notices. The NOS, part of the process, were (and still are) the standards for the Fire Sector, so apply to the CAA, DFS and industrial (eg JOIFF) firefighting staff too. Indeed these organisations are on the group that sets the standards and DFS staff complete the exact same NVQ, some ARFFS do too.

There is no reason why anyone with the relevant NVQ cannot/should not be considered for transfer to another organisation that recognises it...............

See http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/fire/pdf/143162.pdf if you still think IPDS and the NVQ are results of the strike

[class of mp81]

I stand corrected,it was not in anyway meant to be a dig at the hard work that has gone into ipds etc,just was there anyway of doing it faster and cheaper? and using any saving to keep pumps on the run and stations open,in this time of budget cutting.

[firefightercw1]

I am a ex Raf Fireman, and now a private company firefighter after turning down the chance to join DFS because of location they offered me. I have just finished my NVQ level 3 in firefighting in the community and have shed loads of qualifications. My dream job is to join local fire brigade but some dont accept transfers or mod certs. anybody konw of any local authoritys that do. Im fully qualified, and would prefer transfer rather than becoming a trainee again and sitting another 14 week course.

[Midland Retty]

I think your NVQ 3 Firefighting in the community qualification will tick a lot of boxes and stand you in good stead with many LA Fire Services.

What Id be tempted to do is contact the brigades you would like to go for, speak to their respective HR depts, get some feedback as to whether they will accept a straight transfer across.

If they point bank refuse transfers in this way then it may be worth asking them to explain why and also put it in writing the reasons why.

I think the moment you ask for that they will back track a little, as some brigades give the " no we wont allow you to transfer " statement as a standard reply, because they have been doing it for years and have not bothered to review it to see how it fits in with current employment law. Its certainly a case with one of the two brigades i serve with currently.

As a sort of loose example a retained firefighter I know was told he couldnt transfer directly into wholetime. Yet another one of his colleagues who was also retained was allowed to transfer because he had gone through the new National Firefighter Selection process.

My chum argued it was unfair his colleague could transfer but he couldnt, he also argued that retained staff do the same job as wholetime staff with very few exceptions. He was ultimately succesful in his argument and got in.

Id argue you do exactly the same job as a LA Firefighter, and that transfer decisions could be challenged if possible, just depends whether you want to go through all of that hassle! As far as Im aware the standards of training in RAF and Defence FRS are all very similar to LA. Infact training can differ between brigades, but the bread and butter stuff is all very much standard

RAF firefighting of course does take on a more aircraft biased role I suppose, but is that an obstacle to you undertaking duties in a LA FRS? I dont think so.... just my opinion of course