« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Confidentiality  (Read 13262 times)

Offline mengcfs

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 678
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Confidentiality
« on: October 20, 2006, 09:36:52 AM »
When signing a new member the CFS does not have a confidentiality clause for the member to sign. Should the CFS have one? Do Brigades make their own?
Logged

Offline bajdas

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,745
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Confidentiality
« Reply #1 on: October 20, 2006, 10:15:02 AM »
The new SES Induction & Basic Skills course has a large section on confidentiality. This is of the emergency incident, perople involved and all aspects of the service. It has been requested that all existing & new SES members complete the course in the next 12 months.
Logged
Andrew Macmichael
lives at Pt Noarlunga South.

My personal opinion only.

Offline oz fire

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 597
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Confidentiality
« Reply #2 on: October 20, 2006, 12:08:19 PM »
Yes CFS should have one - we have access to places normally we wouldn't, we see people i their time or need - or at their worst and YES people like to talk over a beer and tell war stories - most keep exact locations and names out but some dont - which discredits the individual, the brigade and the service
Logged
Courage is not the absence of fear, but rather the ability to control it.

Offline 5271rescue

  • Forum Group Officer
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,064
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Confidentiality
« Reply #3 on: October 21, 2006, 07:05:30 AM »
Sounds good to me but how would you  enforce it??? and if we where to sign one we would not be able to chat in this forum :roll:
Logged
blinky bill
my view only

Offline squiddy

  • Forum Senior Firefighter
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Confidentiality
« Reply #4 on: October 21, 2006, 10:03:09 AM »
Quote from: bajdas on October 20, 2006, 10:15:02 AM
The new SES Induction & Basic Skills course has a large section on confidentiality. This is of the emergency incident, perople involved and all aspects of the service. It has been requested that all existing & new SES members complete the course in the next 12 months.

Yes, and for those of us who have done our basic, it is going to be several nights of complete boredom as everything is rehashed that we covered ages ago.

It is also written in the MOGI and SES Code of Conduct that all members will not breach confidentiality.
Logged

Offline CFS_Firey

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,250
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Confidentiality
« Reply #5 on: October 21, 2006, 02:40:48 PM »
Quote
Sounds good to me but how would you  enforce it??? and if we where to sign one we would not be able to chat in this forum


Depends what is supposed to be kept confidential. If it was just specifics of peoples names and rego's etc, this forum would be ok...

As far as enforcing it goes, how to do enforce anything?  It would be so that if you catch someone blabbing, you can do something about it... (Other than telling them not to)
Logged

Offline SA Firey

  • Forum Group Officer
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,967
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Confidentiality
« Reply #6 on: October 22, 2006, 03:32:40 PM »
A lot of brigades transmit sensitive info from incidents for fire reports via the GRN to radio operators for all to hear via scanner, instead of waiting till they return from the job too :evil:

Names,Addresses,Rego's and even phone numbers etc
Logged
Images are copyright

Offline CFS_Firey

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,250
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Confidentiality
« Reply #7 on: October 22, 2006, 03:42:01 PM »
^^ I've heard brigades do that, and never really understood why...
Logged

Offline medevac

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,659
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Confidentiality
« Reply #8 on: October 22, 2006, 03:48:52 PM »
why not?

i agree there are certain things that can be written down and taken to the station after the job.

but people really seem to forget that the GRN is our means of communication. who cares if we transmit information about fatalities, vehicles, persons involved?

people get really worked up about this, but forget that it is why we have the radio system in the first place
Logged

Offline CFS_Firey

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,250
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Confidentiality
« Reply #9 on: October 22, 2006, 04:13:41 PM »
Why does the station need to know the contact details of the people involved?  It ties up radio bandwidth (if you can use that term) for no reason, and doesn't actually achieve anything.... So in my opinion, its not a case of "why not", but rather "why"?
Logged

Offline medevac

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,659
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Confidentiality
« Reply #10 on: October 22, 2006, 04:27:54 PM »
its called communication... nevermind
Logged

Offline Alan (Big Al)

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,609
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • CRUMPETS
    • View Profile
Re: Confidentiality
« Reply #11 on: October 22, 2006, 05:21:17 PM »
Got in the filtered a few months back when said a vehicle rego over GRN because the townig company was asking for it???? As for injuries/fatalities being transmitted i think it's fine as long as you keep to those two words and no genders, children/adults etc.
Logged
Lt. Goolwa CFS

Offline medevac

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,659
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Confidentiality
« Reply #12 on: October 22, 2006, 05:30:26 PM »
Im not saying to transmit exact details such as ages, gender, etc...

information such as fatalities and injuries need to be sent so that appropriate people can be notified. vehicle regos can be sent so that police can run them if need be and confirm stolen vehicles. there are all sorts of reasons...
Logged

Offline 2090

  • Forum Senior Firefighter
  • ***
  • Posts: 112
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Confidentiality
« Reply #13 on: October 22, 2006, 07:07:19 PM »
Doesnt it depend on what heppens at a job? In our area, SAPol are usually on scene, even if its a single car to take details, plus the drive back to our station wil be 15 mins max. Around here I don't agree with the transmission of names/rego details, but details of the incident are fine. Two people dead, on injured and trapped? Its part of a STIREP so needs to be transmitted.

If you are in a rural area and SAPol can't attend for what ever reason, then I see no reason why not to transmit info, but you should probably try to use a phone.

Ofcourse discretion is needed.
Logged

Offline 5271rescue

  • Forum Group Officer
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,064
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Confidentiality
« Reply #14 on: October 22, 2006, 09:06:39 PM »
Why not pick up the mobile phone in your appliance?
Logged
blinky bill
my view only

Timbo

  • Guest
Re: Confidentiality
« Reply #15 on: October 22, 2006, 11:03:38 PM »
Quote from: 5271rescue on October 22, 2006, 09:06:39 PM
Why not pick up the mobile phone in your appliance?

not all appliances have mobiles do they?? - I know our 2 dont
Logged

Offline Robert-Robert34

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,429
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Confidentiality
« Reply #16 on: October 22, 2006, 11:13:53 PM »
I think its about time we adopt MFS k-code system as well as use phonetic alphabet when it comes to transmitting info such as fatalities,injuries and other stuff like vehicle regos and so on that way people listening via scanners wont be able to figure out what is being said unless they have MFS k-codes & phonetic alphabet on a sheet infront of them  :-)
Logged
Kalangadoo Brigade

Offline CFS_Firey

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,250
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Confidentiality
« Reply #17 on: October 22, 2006, 11:56:16 PM »
I don't have a problem with people transmitting potentially confidential information if its required (like SAPol needing the rego), but if its just for the incident report, I see no need at all!
Logged

Offline Pipster

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,269
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Confidentiality
« Reply #18 on: October 23, 2006, 01:00:58 AM »
Quote from: Robert34 on October 22, 2006, 11:13:53 PM
I think its about time we adopt MFS k-code system as well as use phonetic alphabet when it comes to transmitting info such as fatalities,injuries and other stuff like vehicle regos and so on that way people listening via scanners wont be able to figure out what is being said unless they have MFS k-codes & phonetic alphabet on a sheet infront of them  :-)

And all the real scanner freaks and the media all know what the K-codes are, and the phonetic alphabet, so using them doesn't keep anything secret!!

I use codes at work all the time, but I would hate to see them in CFS....way too confusing, and easily messed up....

Pip
2AD71 generally attending 406, 604, 501, 505,  504, and the odd 108, 113 and 201, 701 and 702 703, and anything else that Comms sends me...although I avoid 104's, and try and keep away from 101's, 202's & 204's, 602's and the 801's - I hate them but you gotta help....

It means nothing to you, if you don't know the codes, but if you have the codes in front of you, you will know all of them....   :evil:
Logged
There are three types of people in the world.  Those that watch things happen, those who make things happen, and those who wonder what happened.

Offline LFB06

  • Forum Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 17
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Confidentiality
« Reply #19 on: October 23, 2006, 04:11:29 AM »
I know 801  :mrgreen:
Logged

Offline 5271rescue

  • Forum Group Officer
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,064
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Confidentiality
« Reply #20 on: October 23, 2006, 07:40:06 AM »
It is true that we do come across some information that should not be sent over the radio and its true that we see things that we really don't want to.Most work places make you sign a confidentiality agreement as do sites that people may work on like any Government work place.So may be its time all new and old cfs members did.....
Logged
blinky bill
my view only

Offline SA Firey

  • Forum Group Officer
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,967
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Confidentiality
« Reply #21 on: October 23, 2006, 09:48:32 AM »
It is normal for info given for SITREP's but we usually keep the sensitive info out.What im saying is some brigades give way too much detail on the radio, just for the purpose of doing the report before everyone gets back which should be done and checked by the OIC anyway.


SITREP
2 vehicle collision Police and SAAS on scene minor injuries,nil entrapments.Crews isolating batteries

No need for names addresses or phone numbers in that :-)
Logged
Images are copyright

Offline medevac

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,659
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Confidentiality
« Reply #22 on: October 23, 2006, 09:52:53 AM »
*sigh* - oh well..... :roll:
Logged

Offline oz fire

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 597
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Confidentiality
« Reply #23 on: October 26, 2006, 09:12:27 AM »
Easy really - communicate what is vital and requires transmittion - the extra and background can wait until later.

Pip agreed - codes while good if you use them all day everyday, are not so good when used infrequently!
Logged
Courage is not the absence of fear, but rather the ability to control it.

Offline RescueHazmat

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,174
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Confidentiality
« Reply #24 on: October 26, 2006, 09:32:33 AM »
Once you know the Ratel it's one of those things thats difficult to forget ;)


If it is starting to become such an issue, have the powers that be ever considered an encrypted network? - Much like SAPOL's digital network.


Like everything it has pro's and cons.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
« previous next »