SA Firefighter
General Discussion => Country Fire Service => Topic started by: fireblade on May 21, 2007, 08:17:29 AM
-
So whats the go up at Mt. Barker when are MFS building a station there. Will there be a full-time MFS crew there 24/7 or full-time during the day and retained after that?
-
Probably just Retained...probably not enough callouts for 24/7 or even a fulltime during the day.
The development near steamranger and st francis college seems to be huge...some multistorie retail stores down there....might warrant further pumper...or hence MFS with 2 pumpers...
-
ok going off track but anyway.
A Retained station will never take over a volunteer station. Why?
There is no improvement in service.
If MFS ever take over Barker it will be 24/7. Now back to the stations.
-
There is no improvement in service
So going by that statement, all retained stations could be converted to volunteer run as there would be no loss in service with the benefit being that there is no need to fork out for wages? Thats going to make a couple of Compton members unhappy wouldn't it?
If MFS ever take over Barker it will be 24/7
That's right, because the Mets station down in the mount went straight to 24/7 didn't it? Oh wait it didn't and still isn't. Then again Mt Barker is larger than Mt Gambier... Oh wait its not.
-
Like i said this isnt the place for it but if you persist.
Sure a volunteer service in Mt Gambier may not provide as good as service as a retained service. but if you look to the north of adelaide at places like burra where the cfs provide a better service then the mfs.
Just depends on the location and who is willing to volunteer. In Barkers case who have no problems getting out the door then where is the improvement going to be in a retained service?
In relation to your 2nd comment. The MFS wont move into Mt Barker for a long time until they could sustain a full time service...you would have pretty hard time convincing the government otherwise....why spend the extra money when its not needed?
and Mt Gambier has nothing to do with it....Mt Gambier was orginally a retained station....Mt Barker would be a brand new station.
-
cant imagine there would be any new retained stations around the place...
butthen again who knows... everything is crazy.
probly worth remembering though, retained doesnt garauntee a crew will roll, same as vollie...
-
ok going off track but anyway.
A Retained station will never take over a volunteer station. Why?
There is no improvement in service.
If MFS ever take over Barker it will be 24/7. Now back to the stations.
I think the point Camo is trying to make is they (a retained station) wouldnt get out any quicker than a CFS brigade. I think Mt Barker do an excellent job of looking after the town. Why change to a similar system if it costs more?
-
See your point 24P, probably would be a waste of time and money putting a retained MFS station there. If Mt. Barker is getting so big a single 24/7 MFS station would be worth it but I'm guessing it wouldn't take to much pressure of the CFS there as they would have to still respond. The positives I guess is the public are always guaranteed a quick response and more fire stations = full-time jobs for people that want to head that way.
I guess the real invasion of MFS into CFS area is Seaford. :evil:
-
I think the point Camo is trying to make is they (a retained station) wouldnt get out any quicker than a CFS brigade. I think Mt Barker do an excellent job of looking after the town.
Thanks :-D We do try!
-
There are several stages between a full volunteer station and a fulltime staffed station, look at the CFA for example. In fact there was an interesting article last week in the Hills and Valley Messenger where the Sturt Group was asking for a paid daytime crew. This was in response to an article the week before by an independent politician whose argument was that the locals pay full ESL and thus deserve a fulltime staffed station both in the Sturt Group and another in Mawson Group's area.
Anyway the point here is that Sturt Group is pushing for a day time staffed crew, however the article didn't make it particularly clear that it would be a staffed CFS crew running CFS appliances not an MFS station. As we known, unlike the CFA (that the CFS basically follows and rips everything off), the CFS doesn't have such a system for retained or paid staff instead leaving that to the MFS. In the coming 2-5 years, the line between CFS and MFS will become so blurred you wont know which is which aside from the colour of their trucks. The first step in this process is CFS closing its operations centre and moving it across to the MFS in a couple of months time. Also its now looking like the CFS will start getting work done at the MFS workshops and a lot of the admin will go to a combined SAFECOM. So while at the moment there is a paid service and a volly service soon it will basically be one service with a range of crewing models.
Ever wondered why the SAFECOM logo looks so much like a service logo?
-
Yes it is about time we became one service, the money saving would be huge.
E.g Mt barker are due for a new station so SAFECOM should build a station that is able to house full time crews so that when the day comes paid staff can just move in with only a few minor changes. Thats what CFA are doing in larger towns that may go full time in the next few years. Also places like Mt Barker could have the same appliances as full timers so that instead of buying 2-3 new trucks when they go full time they can use the existing trucks.
-
Like i have said before why not have 1 full time truck and the rest crewed by vollies.
In Barkers case this would be perfect. There is no need for a 2 or 3 truck MFS station because of lower call numbers but they would need back up at decent jobs and this is where the vollies get the gig.
Also anything that is rural could be done by the vollies instead of sending the fulltimers out of the city and the vollies having to do COQ.
This model could be applied in a few areas of the state. Seaford for one.
-
Camo,not sure if the union would agree to paid and volunteers in the one station like they have in CFA. Mind you not sure why CFS has not looked at having paid CFS staff and Volunteers in some of its stations.
-
In my opinion, the issue with Part time staffed CFS/MFS/SAFECOM stations is what this would do to the brigade moral.
I can tell you, I would not be showing up duiring the day if i know that there is a team of paid firefighters that are more than capable of doing the job waiting to go. I think we would be much better offering incentives for the current vollies to turnout more often, eg. CFS retained style system, paid part time for time spent at calls ONLY. Providing funding to employeers that allow worker to leave for firecalls. actually listen to vollies in terms of what they want (if burnside want a scania, give them a scania - dont just play the copout line of "the funding doesnt allow it" we work for free for F&*^s sake!! If people are physically and mentally apt to undertake training - let them, if they are old enough to see dead bodies at car accidents, why cant they participate in a BA course???
End Rant*
Just my humble opinion,
Pixie
-
In my opinion, the issue with Part time staffed CFS/MFS/SAFECOM stations is what this would do to the brigade moral.
I can tell you, I would not be showing up during the day if i know that there is a team of paid firefighters that are more than capable of doing the job waiting to go. I think we would be much better offering incentives for the current vollies to turnout more often, eg. CFS retained style system, paid part time for time spent at calls ONLY.
That might not be a bad idea - but it would seem in some areas of the state, where MFS utilise this system, they still have trouble raising crews - while the CFS in the same area generally don't have the same trouble....so will it get more people to calls?
Providing funding to employers that allow worker to leave for firecalls.
I like that idea....not sure how it will work, but if employers don't lose money, or there is some incentive to allow staff to go, than just feeling good about it, it may assist in getting more crews out to incidents
actually listen to vollies in terms of what they want (if burnside want a scania, give them a scania - don't just play the copout line of "the funding doesn't allow it" we work for free for F&*^s sake!!
Cool. I'd like an aerial appliance. I reckon it'd be good fun to play with. Makes a good platform for taking photos. So, when do I get it? Oh yeah. there are no buildings more than 2 stories in my area, and getting the appliance into most of the driveways & half of the roads around the district, but I want one because I'm a volunteer :evil:
Pip
-
Camo,not sure if the union would agree to paid and volunteers in the one station like they have in CFA. Mind you not sure why CFS has not looked at having paid CFS staff and Volunteers in some of its stations.
Doesnt really matter what the CFS or Union say as it will be SAFECOM and known as the South Australian Fire & Rescue Service :-D
-
Well if we are all going to become one Fire Service start dishing out the RED TRUCKS :-D :-P
-
I did hear someone say that we will all be called MFS the other night not sure if he was joking??? But if MT BARKER are happy doing the number of calls they do and can get out the door what is the problem??? Just because there is large housing going up in the area does not mean an opening for MFS,if the current brigade can meet their requirements then good on then. Lets face it the MFS are having more problems getting some of their country brigade's out the door and that is why we are seeing a lot of dual respose from CFS at the moment....
-
I heard from a little birdy that MFS are seriously looking obviously at Seaford, Mt. Barker and maybe even a station somewhere in between Glen Osmond and Mt. Barker so there is not such a gap between stations. :-o
In one way i guess more paid stations are not a bad thing. More paid jobs for CFS guys that want to turn what they like doing into a career. Plus a quicker turnout for the public.
I know both MFS/CFS brigades sometimes have trouble getting crews it's just the nature of the beast unfortunately. If it's not their full-time job hard to get there sometimes.
-
a little birdy... i have heard from a very high up birdy (not mfs, cfs or safecom)(think even higher than the individual services) that the seaford MFS station wont be hapening in the near future...
-
Maybe not the near future but it will happen. :-D
-
in between glen Osmond and Mt Barker has such a high density of CFS brigades as the population is spread over a large area an MFS brigade would be pointless.
-
What the MFS want and what the MFS get are two different things. All comes down to what SAFECOM & the government have to say.
Considering Stirling are doing 300ish? calls that really isnt a big warrant for a paid crew sitting there 24/7. Considering a 1 truck MFS station requires about 16-20 staff at roughly $40,000 a year (Maybe more maybe less but its a benchmark) $40,000 x 16 = $640,000. Thats alot considering the CFS costs $0!
So MT Barker MFS, Crafers MFS & Seaford MFS are probaly further away than most people think.
-
a little birdy... i have heard from a very high up birdy (not mfs, cfs or safecom)(think even higher than the individual services) that the seaford MFS station wont be hapening in the near future...
The only person higher who is not in the CFS/MFS/SAFECOM is the Minister for Emergency Services, who reports to the Premier.
-
Considering Stirling are doing 300ish? calls that really isnt a big warrant for a paid crew sitting there 24/7.
Consider that Gawler MFS (24/7 station) did less calls last year than some CFS stations i wouldnt think call rate would come into it.
-
The only person higher who is not in the CFS/MFS/SAFECOM is the Minister for Emergency Services, who reports to the Premier.
you just hit the nail on the head... she didnt say the exact words, an MFS station will no be going in... but she told us that they had researched and that it will be required in the future and that SAFECOM has purchased land... i was led to believe that it was found that it wouldnt be feasible (yet)
-
Look this state could not afford a staff station every 10kms in high urban areas and lets face it when volunteers are willing and able to do the job and are better trained then paid time firefighters why would a state want to have staff stations... I have a video here that what is going on here in SA is the same as what the union did in Victoria many years ago and it backfired as in the end the new stations that CFA did open where staff/volunteer stations....
-
Considering Stirling are doing 300ish? calls that really isnt a big warrant for a paid crew sitting there 24/7.
They would also extend the response areas if there were paid crews at Mount Barker and Crafers. Call numbers could be dramatically higher if you're sending 2 trucks to anything between Mount Barker and Glen Osmond...
-
... but she told us that they had researched and that it will be required in the future and that SAFECOM has purchased land...
Thats interesting seeing as SAFECOM has been looking for land to house the local SES unit and havent found anything yet. With land so hard to get in the area house the two - be it MFS or CFS with the SES on the same block so there is more money available to purchase.
-
dont forget i think SAAS are on in it as well....
So MFS/CFS/SES/SAAS in one big building...i reckon they could fit in a 3 x 2truck bay station...and probably on the Land that SAAS already occupy...
-
dont forget i think SAAS are on in it as well....
So MFS/CFS/SES/SAAS in one big building...i reckon they could fit in a 3 x 2truck bay station...and probably on the Land that SAAS already occupy...
But would a volunteer service be willing to pay a share of the sleeping quarters and kitchen facilities that a full-time staff require, but would never use ?
Serious question (& not bashing full-time paid staff) because it is a lot of extra money to build in a station.
Fully agree with shared facilities by all emergency services (incl Surf Life Saving & marine rescue if they are local).
-
Your funny pixie....but very misguided.
Politicians will tell you what they want you to hear, there will be a staff station down there, it will happen because you cannot support the town seaford/moana has become.
As for Sturt group CFS will never get staff in their stations, the union will not allow it. It has been said many times MFS is the paid fire service in south australia and it will not change.
-
See topic State Budget 2007 re Seaford.
-
I hear Seaford struggle to get a crew especially during the day and thats from paid CFS staff.
Whats the problem? the community comes first if a volunteer brigade struggles to cover their patch and a paid station is put there to do the job I say good.
You must have what is best for the public, anyway nothing wrong with having both services in an area. Suburbs north and east of Adelaide have had both services for several decades now.
People have got to learn to stop pushing their own little agendas MFS stations will be put up in CFS areas over the years as the urban sprawl continues its called development. As will MFS areas become CFS areas as things change.
I've got mates in both services that don't like some of the changes but it's not about them or you, its whats best for the communities of South Australia.
Who cares if the appliance going is red or white as long as one gets there!
Just something to think about than worrying about our own little worlds.
-
Very good point fireblade.
-
But are we assuming that the that the only way to solve crewing issues during the day is to put an MFS station into the area..?
A bit of lateral thinking may well come up with some other ideas that allows CFS to fully serve its area regardless of the time of day....
Pip
-
How many more years do we put the community at risk while we try and think laterally ?
-
Well it will fix the problem if there is a crew sitting in the station 24/7.
-
Pip I'm not sledging Seaford CFS at all I hear that they are a dedicated bunch trying to achieve what they can.
Lateral/ imaginative what ever you wish to call it thinking does not solve any crewing issues why can't CFS and MFS exist in an area?
How do you tell CFS crews to think lateral and put CFS before more important issues like work and family.
If work and family does not come before CFS, commitments to CFS will suffer.
I know for a fact my station only survives during the day to the dedication of our shift workers and generous local employers and you have to ask how much productivity a local employer should have to loose when he already pays his emergency service levy.
You see it now on the pager site stations asking for more crew. Brigades being defaulted for others. We are in a changing world where the individual has more work and family commitments than ever before.
I enjoy my commitment to the CFS but sometimes I know when I'm heading to the station I'm not going to get those guys that have been around for a while and are good operators due to more important things in their lives.
-
what's this got to do with "MFS in Mt Barker"? and anyway you guys are all arguing round in circles over this crap, it's been done to death already.
-
The bulk of the posts that talk about crewing issues, the solution to the problem is to put in a paid service in the busier CFS areas. Then posts go on about how dedicated the members are etc etc (and I have no doubt about their dedication or the commitment of the members, or their families, or their employers.)
BUT their may be other ways to solve some of the crewing issues, without putting major stress on those trying their best.
I often get emails & phone calls from people who live in MFS area. They are very keen to join CFS, but are generally excluded from membership in many cases, due to their location.
Why can't we utilise those people for particularly busy brigades, who may have crewing issues (temporary or otherwise).
Train them up, and roster them at the busy brigades. They can sit at the station, perhaps during specific times, and respond as necessary.
Similarly there are many existing CFS members (and when I was a Uni Student, with too much time on my hands, I really really wanted to do this ) - roster them onto those busy stations - and they can respond to those calls.
You also have the local members who can respond to the call - and you have a fully crewed appliance, all ready to go in a short space of time.
Obviously things like training, facilities, rostering would need to be addressed (and I would hope it doesn't land on the shoulders of those already in the brigade).
A system like this means CFS can fully provide the level of service required, the local community still supports its local brigade, and its local members...
This idea is not specifically aimed at Seaford, but aimed at busy urban fringe brigades - who may have a temporary crewing problem, or a longer term one. Some areas may not need to persue this idea, for others, it might solve some problems...
Pip
-
I like the idea of using Uni students. We have excessive summer holidays so you could train them up for rural work and then when a big fire starts page the Uni brigade who more than likely have spare time and instant crews are formed to fill gaps.
Ok it would need more thinking out but it's a start.
-
I like the idea of using Uni students. We have excessive summer holidays so you could train them up for rural work and then when a big fire starts page the Uni brigade who more than likely have spare time and instant crews are formed to fill gaps.
Ok it would need more thinking out but it's a start.
dont forget the Tafe people who should already have Part time jobs by now :P like myself :lol:
yeh ive got too much time on my hands...YET most of the jobs occur while im in a lecture!
-
How many more years do we put the community at risk while we try and think laterally ?
Well we best put a MFS station in evey town asap then if the community is at risk from the CFS :?
-
Now that the budget has come down one would say that there will be no MFS in MOUNT BARKER for sometime or at all......
-
How many more years do we put the community at risk while we try and think laterally ?
Well we best put a MFS station in evey town asap then if the community is at risk from the CFS :?
Don't take what I said out of context...
Some have to get over their own CFS ego sometimes and realise that the communities they are protecting are a heck of alot bigger than they were 20 years ago, and the need for gaurenteed protection has risen to the extent of a fulltime service..
Dont ge me wrong, im the last person who wants to see a Vol station shutdown or 'minimised' in their role.. But im the first person to put the community first and acknowledge that some areas need better protection...
-
There is only so much the volunteer can do...simply if you do not have crew you do not have a fire brigade...you cannot afford to tell the community oh hang on we are just getting some new members who are volunteers and do not live in the area trained up so if you could just hold all house fires until then would be greatly appreciated...If you have crewing problems now and i know seaford and other brigades have had this for some time now then it is time to put the pride aside and let the paid crews do their thing.
I often question why some people on these forums fight so much against the best service offered to their community.
-
...
I often get emails & phone calls from people who live in MFS area. They are very keen to join CFS, but are generally excluded from membership in many cases, due to their location.
Why can't we utilise those people for particularly busy brigades, who may have crewing issues (temporary or otherwise).
..........
Pip
In the meantime Pip, can you pass those contact details for potential volunteers to the local SES Unit or 1300 364587.
If they are in a MFS area, then the SES can do with the volunteer.
I would hate to think a person interested was not being given all options :|
-
Already doing that....we explain the CFS options to people, but for those who it doesn't work for, we refer them to the SES recruiting line........ no point in letting enthusiastic people go unnecessarily! :-D
Pip