Author Topic: Minimum Response Standards.  (Read 8428 times)

Darren

  • Guest
Re: Minimum Response Standards.
« Reply #25 on: May 17, 2010, 01:53:47 PM »
I think this is where a lot of problems stem from, you have some "good ol boys" in charge of groups who pretty much do what they like with no come backs. So those "good ol boys" teach the brigades bad habits, so when a young bloke like that gets told to do something he knows no better, and learns that its ok to do that.

Until these "good ol boys" get hauled over the coals then it will continue to happen.

Sorry, I forgot, can't upset the volunteers.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2010, 02:55:30 PM by Darren »

Offline Zippy

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,540
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Minimum Response Standards.
« Reply #26 on: May 17, 2010, 02:45:28 PM »
Political correctness vs the safety of those in that hospital?

rescue5271

  • Guest
Re: Minimum Response Standards.
« Reply #27 on: May 17, 2010, 03:01:37 PM »
Darren, you are so correct and Heavey rescue it happens at lots of jobs....change is good at group and brigade level....

Offline SA Firey

  • Forum Group Officer
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,967
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Minimum Response Standards.
« Reply #28 on: May 17, 2010, 05:11:43 PM »
A mate of mine was in a brigade in a fairly well known grape growing district, one job he told me about was at a call to a fire alarm at the local hospital.

He was the only one to respond to the station so he rang the Group Officer to confirm that another brigade was being responded. The Group Officer's response was to tell him to take a drive in his own vehicle out to the job and reset the panel. This was when my mate was new to the CFS and didn't know any better. Scary to think that this was only a year or so ago.

Thankfully there has been a significant change in personnel in that Group and things are starting to slowly improve.

It's interesting as another story told from up that very region, is a fixed alarm goes off and the primary brigade is short on crew, whereas the brigade they defaulted to had a full compliment of BA operators and crew, get told to respond to the station to do the radio while they go to the job with less crew than them :? :-o
Images are copyright

Offline BundyBear

  • Forum Senior Firefighter
  • ***
  • Posts: 130
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Minimum Response Standards.
« Reply #29 on: May 17, 2010, 10:45:23 PM »
I think this is where a lot of problems stem from, you have some "good ol boys" in charge of groups who pretty much do what they like with no come backs. So those "good ol boys" teach the brigades bad habits, so when a young bloke like that gets told to do something he knows no better, and learns that its ok to do that.

Until these "good ol boys" get hauled over the coals then it will continue to happen.

Sorry, I forgot, can't upset the volunteers.

This is one of the biggest items that cripples the CFS and holds it back in advancement and prevents correct succession planning within a lot of brigades.

The cavalier attitude towards response plans, tribalism (my Brigade/Group must respond) or the lack of realisation that the CFS is more than just a “bush fire brigade” needs to be weeded out of the system. If not it permeates down through the brigade into up and coming rank holders and can be very detrimental to brigades growth as an effective emergency service.

One of the problems is most CFS fire fighters begin and end their fire fighting at the one station so they’re limited in their exposure to how other brigades operate and don’t have the ability to objectively assess their own brigades performance.

This attitude also causes a poor attitude to training where you see a lot of these brigades if they are responded to more than a grass fire they are readily out of their depth. This is due to the fact the current leaders will stay in their comfort zone in regards to training and operational preparedness and barely graze the surface on such disciplines as structural fire fighting, road accident rescue or hazmat and you’ll hear the age old cry “We don’t do that so we don’t need to know!” If you have the chance or the offer go train with another busier brigade or one that may be hazmat, rescue or have CABA and your brigade does not you will pick up a lot.

The answer will never be easy but if you have these issues in your Group or Brigade you must act by pointing out these issues in a constructive way in debriefs etc or it will turn around and eventually bite your brigade you know where.



Offline Alex

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 675
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Minimum Response Standards.
« Reply #30 on: May 17, 2010, 11:00:57 PM »
One of the problems is most CFS fire fighters begin and end their fire fighting at the one station so they’re limited in their exposure to how other brigades operate and don’t have the ability to objectively assess their own brigades performance.

Exactly!! Good point.

Offline Alex

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 675
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Minimum Response Standards.
« Reply #31 on: May 17, 2010, 11:07:52 PM »

While I agree that we should be following SOPs and playing it safe for our community, we also need to remember that many brigades are struggling for volunteers and crews, so we don't want to burden them unnecessarily. You know, the boy that cried wolf etc. etc.

Yeah.. i'd much rather keep a few brigades quiet and happy, than service the community properly.

WE'RE A FIRE SERVICE NOT A SOCIAL CLUB!

Offline CFS_Firey

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,250
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Minimum Response Standards.
« Reply #32 on: May 18, 2010, 12:32:13 PM »
WE'RE A FIRE SERVICE NOT A SOCIAL CLUB!

Couldn't agree more!

..but we're also a fire service that is struggling with low membership, poor training, low morale and next to no funding.  If we don't keep the members we have happy, it's going to be even worse for the community.

If someone can only have an hour away from work per week to attend fire calls, would you rather they used that up coming to an alarm call, or helping out at a cranking structure fire that needs all hands?

(By the way, I'm not saying we shouldn't send 2 appliances to all alarm calls, I'm saying the brigades that don't may have good reasons not to).

Offline whitecloud

  • Forum Firefighter
  • **
  • Posts: 49
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Minimum Response Standards.
« Reply #33 on: May 18, 2010, 06:43:47 PM »
A lot of strong points. Tribalism and a lack of good rapport between neighbouring brigades certainly hamper the communities involved. A couple of the larger hills brigades for example have members who have done little else with their lives than spend time in CFS, and are quite happy to foster this poor attitude, as well as an inability to ask for adequate assistance in newer brigade members. As Darren said, poor example begets poor experience for recruits.

It will be interesting when SACAD comes in. Accountability for stupid decisions, rather than the curtain excuse of 'just a volunteer with poor training' would go a long, long way.

Offline bajdas

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,745
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Minimum Response Standards.
« Reply #34 on: May 18, 2010, 08:40:57 PM »
....
It will be interesting when SACAD comes in. Accountability for stupid decisions, rather than the curtain excuse of 'just a volunteer with poor training' would go a long, long way.

But who is going to hold them accountable ? SACAD might provide the information & facts about a incident response, but someone has to do something with that data. SACAD wont.
Andrew Macmichael
lives at Pt Noarlunga South.

My personal opinion only.