SA Firefighter

Does anyone know the tool in the subject line as it is named here?

Believe it or not, I can't find a reference to this tool anywhere in the MFS recruit development folder, it refers only to the Hooligan tool. I feel a bit sad for Mr Halligan that as the creator of this nifty little device his name has been forgotten as the bastardised (yet completely apt  ) name Hooligan it seems has taken over.

Why not RescueHazmat? It's good fun!
Don't say they've stopped that now for some OH&S reason!! 

True Pip, you don't have to have previous fire experience to apply for a position with MFS. I guess what I was saying is that if you want to get ahead of the other 999 applicants, you would find out about it all before hand, including getting experience wherever you could. For example, it would be much easier to pass your physical aptitude testing if you'd actually raised a ladder and held a hose under pressure before.

http://www.samfs.sa.gov.au/recruitment/fulltimeff.asp

As an avid Holden V8 fan (counting down to race start today), general revhead and rally event attendee, I rang CAMS to organise a license so I could be trackside support - and surprise surprise I got told to join the Women's Auxilliary  I tried on two different occasions and this was always the answer even though I was with CFS. So I gave up.

But it's been good down here cos I've been a ForestrySA Warden for the SEAC events, and you get to drive all over the place dishing out fines to people that are beyond the observation points, finding the best photo locations and checking out the pit areas 

i love a good discution

Spelling nazi!   

This program involved individuals taking part in physical fitness and being shown firefighting techniques prior to applications being open. Does this not therefore disadvantage the average person (whatever their gender or ethnicity) off the streets whos applying to join whos had no experience in firefighting?

Just like applying for any position, if you are really intersted you will go the extra yards. You find out about the organisation, find out about the job, the roles you would undertake, etc etc. So if anyone was keen to be in the MFS, they would know every criteria for selection, they would know they need to be fit, and perhaps would try and do some fire training in any way they can, be that CFS, a warden for their workplace - whatever.

So from what you've said it doesn't sound like an overly huge amount of support - as I said before, simply redressing the imbalance.

Mt Gambier's Most Wanted 

if it's down then does it need to be felled again?

Ha ha ha!  Love it, true true, there is much skill involved in cutting trees down, especially when you wish to prevent disease and decay in the tree that is still standing and of course ensure that it doesn't drop on someone's head. But cutting a tree up once it is down is another kettle of fish.

Yes I can see you all about to type "but the tree could be hung up" etc etc, and yes it still requires skill, but more in using the chainsaw itself rather than technique 

I've subscribed three times for the Volunteer Magazine. I'd get it for a while and then I'd drop off the list. Maybe it will be fourth time lucky 

MFS didn't respond because they were assured that CFS were being paged and the job was confirmed to be well inside CFS area (unless of course the CFS shed was on fire too LOL).

As to why MFS were paged in the first place, who knows, it's a discussion for the Members only section I reckon as some have had their pride dented by miscommunication and a process that was out of all of our (the individual brigades) hands.

It therefore should be asked that as a female firefighter in the MFS Blue, do you support the removal of this program meaning that you and other females would (if you wanted to become a fulltime firefighter) have to fight for a place against the many hundreds of males that apply for what is a physically demanding job and therefore, in most cases, would make it extremely difficult for women to join and entirely possible that none would "make the grade".

Very interested in my personal opinions on things aren't you, I should be flattered. Well, the 'equal opportunity people' as you put it are there due to a ground swell of support for equality in our society, and a push for this in government particularly - government, being representative of the people, should be 50/50 gender balanced reflecting our population's statistics, and also involve a reflective percentage of people from other backgrounds, etc. We know this has been difficult to obtain, and the reasons are varied and complex, and sadly a level playing field is not always applied due to personal bias and stereotyping in an application process.

Partly the blame lies with us - it is often a self-imposed glass ceiling, with women believeing they can't do things and generally having less confidence with certain job roles or activities that have been more accepted as masculine endeavours. So not even applying in the first place. The burnt chop syndrome runs riot.

I believe programs such as the one you have brought to our attention are an effort to redress a severe imbalance. I'd say it was based on a directive by government as a whole, and MFS is simply playing its part. The same issues are felt by other specialist employers - look at the airline industry, at a guess I'd say the vast majority of attendants were female, and it has been debated that this is due to height and weight restrictions that simply favour women.

A similar thing could be argued for the MFS - physical capacity is a factor and at the end of the day this may favour males. I would also suggest that the program discussed would still apply the same selection criteria, but perhaps provides extra support in terms of preparation for testing for those minority groups that they would like to see increased in the service. At the end of the day this won't result in a bunch of puny, pudgy or mathematically challenged females and ethnics fighting fires, it simply means that a group of individuals is given a stable platform to work from and hence given the best possible chance of succeeding in an effort to redress the balance.

Surely it wouldn't be too hard to add emergency services vollies to the list of concession receivers for the ESL. Or we could make the whole thing based on how safe your property is, and charge property owners twice as much ESL if they don't clear up their properties coming into fire season 

Sorry Ath, a bit off topic but still on the cash flow query folowing on from Pip's comment - what happened to fund raising? Does anyone still do it? Or more to the point, is anyone still allowed to do it?

In region 1 there was an issue with fundraising a while back because the ESL was brought in and they though people might be upset at 'paying twice' (which is blah cos not every one owns a house) any cash raised from sausage sizzles, etc would go to the group to be divied up as they see fit rather than given to the brigade that did the hard yards (great incentive)...so I think we pretty much packed it in for a few years.

For me the value of fundrasing wasn't just about getting cash for the brigade - it was also a meet and greet with the community, creating a presence by getting your trucks and logo out there, and putting fire safety and awareness back on people's agendas. So I'd like to see more of it.