Author Topic: Question  (Read 11297 times)

Offline Del

  • Forum Firefighter
  • **
  • Posts: 37
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Question
« Reply #25 on: December 19, 2005, 12:32:51 PM »
On the introduction of PBI, it was only to be purchased as the NOMEX gear required replacing over the next 5 years. The NOMEX is still acceptable PPC for offensive structural fire fighting.

A lot of CFS staff i speak to agree that the PBI thing was not done well, and CFS has hopefully learnt from it.

SACFS has put in a cabinet submission for $500 000 to equip every SACFS BA operator with PBI over the next 5 years.

What to replace your NOMEX with when it needs replacing..... 1 set of PBI and 1 set of NOMEX... does get a little expensive and brigades are now saying no PBI till extra funding becomes available.

And really, do you think PBI would be on the top of the list for most of our guys on the Eyre Peninsula.....
Del

strikeathird

  • Guest
Re: Question
« Reply #26 on: December 19, 2005, 10:22:23 PM »
Quote
Playing devils advocate) Who are we to say the PBI is the highest priority in CFS at the moment. Stats show that approx 5 -8 % of the incidents we attend are structure fires - of that we probally attack 1 - 3% offensively!

To a point I agree with you, however it also needs to be understood that these fires are some of the most dangerous (if not the most dangerous) Fires that we encounter...

My biggest gripe in regards to PBI gold is the fact that we are vollunteers, risking our lives (without getting paid), and it always seems like we are looked after second..  Our paid counterparts get a grant for all there members (as all members are BA) for the gear... Yet, the CFS, who fight the same fires, risk their lives in the same manner, get duped ....  If one service managed the grant, why can't CFS see a piece of the Pie.. ???

Offline kat

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 324
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • Tailem Bend Country Fire Service
Re: Question
« Reply #27 on: January 03, 2006, 11:07:54 AM »
Reading above, with the (believed) non-compliance to Aus Standard, does that mean if you are injured, and put in a form, you aren't covered cause you didn't have Aus Standard gear on??  Like will you be told that you shouldn't have been wearing the gear, or that you should have worn PBI ??

From my previous experience as a WorkCover Claims administrator - please rest assured that, as an "employee" for WorkCover purposes,you will be covered regardless of whether you are wearing a strapless dress. Of course you will probably face disciplinary action from your employer for non compliance of procedures and never ride an appliance again  :roll:
There's a difference between genius and stupidity -- genius has it's limits.