SA Firefighter
General Discussion => SA Firefighter General => Topic started by: pumprescue on December 01, 2005, 12:45:34 PM
-
I just want to see what others think about Group Officers responding priority one to jobs, passing fire appliances and driving above the speed limit. Is this really required when they are not actually fighting the fire. Your thoughts?
-
I think they should only go to 2nd alarm jobs or greater or at the request of the incident controller and then it should be up to the incident controller whether they go priority 1 or 2.
-
im not really sure what is going on with this PUMPRESCUE but it all comes down to the urgency of the incident requiring priority one response
Say for example there was a scrub fire near Penola on the Riddoch Highway going towards Nangwarry and it was moving at a fast speed, Wattle Range Deputy 1 would have to respond priority 1 and above the normal speed limit to get there and give a full sitrep to Wattle Range base so they can dispatch the right amount of trucks
It all comes down to safety of the crew and other road users in an emergency situation ..... also speed limits apply to volunteers who are responding to the fire shed in reciept of the dispatch message if a volunteer is caught by SAPOL speeding to a pager call they will get booked and a kick up the donkey by either their GO or RC
-
Ok if your deputy one is responding to a possible scrub fire on the riddoch highway, he will see the fire quite clearly from a distance if it is going and if he knows his local area should be able to uprgade accordingly. He can always upgrade quickly and stop trucks, i still see no reason for most intial jobs for them to go priority one, they are not an appliance and will only need to be there if a job is upgraded for the use of a command vehicle or incident control role.
-
I guess this depends on Group Structures and policy, why wouldn't you want an officer of any rank arriving sooner rather than later. This person can conduct a size up, provide sitreps and upgrade or downgrade as required.
I understand that sometimes there's a sense that this is cutting the officer in the truck out of the loop but the focus should be on the incident and IMO less focus should be on internal politics. :-)
Having said all that, if the Group car reponds to every job then that is overdoing it and should be stopped. Brigades have officers for a reason and Group Officers need to let the brigades function. If the GO is doing all the arrival sitreps and command decisions how can any brigade officer gain the experience needed to one day become a GO. GO's need to be carrying out succession planning.
But Group Officers have a role to play and just like appliances should be responding P1 until the incident is declared contained.
Long answer to a simple question :-D :-D
-
i think the main question here is priority one or two...
i stand with prioprity 2; as PUMPRESCUE pointed out, once they get there, what can they do other than provide a sitrep???
-
I have to agree... Even in the case of an upgraded alarm.. Them getting their 5 mins quicker isnt going to do anything to the job.. (That being said as long as the officer is capable I don't think the GO being on scene could change a whole lot.. Just confuse things or make it harder as the OIC has to explain everything!)..
Also, if the GO is coming P1, their is a greater chance of being in an acident, etc etc...
I think it should be up to the OIC to decide.. A) Whether they are needed... B) P1 or P2.
-
Sometimes it is faster to get car 1 out the door with the GO/DGO rather than the fire appliances and this does in some cases work well with a sitrep back to base. The only issue I have with this is that they need to remember to take people with them to do the job in the car(radio operator-scrib)Should they go p1 or p2 well that would depend on the job and where it is how far they have to tracel to the job,but once out of town they can down grade to p2.
-
There was an incident I heard of with a car fire no real fixed address and the GO went P1. They found the car full engulfed did not radio back to the truck, did not give directions or tell them how to get there via a short cut track until the truck got there then told them about it. Not right procedures as far as I'm concerned.
-
In regard to a GO taking crew with him before an appliance can be dangerous, a rescue brigade i can't name had a truck rollover 40km from their station, the GO took 3 brigade member in his command vehicle but failed to tell any in coming crews that he had taken them, one more member rocked up, sat in the rescue for sometime waiting for crew to respond and did not go mobile because he did not know the GO had taken his crew. SAAS had to remove the patient themselves because the rescue appliance never arrived, but the Group car did, not a lot you can do with a few maps and bottles of water....
-
That's outrages !
-
One would hope that the GO and that crew got its rear kicked and that they now have apolicy in place so that it never happens again.
-
i mean don't get me wrong i am not saying that we don't need group officers, i am worried we are sometimes missing what we should be sending to incidents like fire and rescue appliances
-
Even a pumprescue would be good............... :lol:
-
you wish brother
-
yea there aren't many around unfortunately...
-
May be some group officers dont know there role?? they are there only to support the brigade captain or an officer at a job it should be noted that the captain or snr officer is the OIC of any job unless they dont wont to run the show.
-
My 5c worth:
The GO should go P1, but not drive dangerously. ie, why does he need to overtake a pumper on the way to the structure fire, when he could just sit behind them, and take command when they arrive? If the structure fire is so bad it needs to be upgraded, theres no saving the house anyway, so the extra 5 minutes won't really make a difference. And if the fire is only small, whats the GO going to do when he arrives? Try to blow it out?
-
My 5c worth:
The GO should go P1, but not drive dangerously. ie, why does he need to overtake a pumper on the way to the structure fire, when he could just sit behind them, and take command when they arrive?
because a lot of GOs are whackers?
too much adrenalin and power for vollunteers?
-
because a lot of GOs are whackers?
too much adrenalin and power for vollunteers?
I'm not going to risk answering that... :P
-
fair call
-
And a lot of GO aren't whackers. :-D
-
And a lot of GO aren't whackers. :-D
agree with that too.
-
.... There are some fair whackers out there !!
-
A lot of GO's and DGO's put up with a fair amount of crap too (From above and below), so it's nice to get to a job and do something every now and then.
-
Maybe there is another side - Chain of Command.
A GO arrives prior to the fire crews and directs activities - thats a fair call for their position in the Chain of Command. All be it that this could be left to the first arriving officer (in an appliance) therefore allowing the upgrade to include the GO to commence the AIIMS process.
As a brigade officer it is frustrating, when you arrive and the GO (hopefully in PPE, although not always) is on site barking orders, rather than assisting to coordinate.
Maybe put the shoe on the other foot - how would the GO feel if a Regional Officer reponded (due to the nature of the call that was received) arrived first and then directed them, and the brigades what to do - now I don't think to many GO's would appreciate that.
Ultimately though (from my view) if they respond, they should support the OIC of the first appliance, mentor them, guide them and then only step up if required and requested too :-D
-
You are right oz fire. The role of the GO, DGO is, as i see it a support role initially, assisting the OIC of the first arriving appliance. Until the incident escalates and the GO / DGO assumes the role of Incident controller or Operations officer. There is huge advantages in having an officer on scene minutes before the arrival of an appliance.
The Fire and Emergency Services Act, States, "....an incident controlleror, if an incident controller has not been appointed, the most senior member of SACFS in attendance, may assume control..." I guess its a mater of brigades ensuring they communicate with their Group Officers and have a plan in place of how incidents will be handled in relation to the response of Group Officers to incidents. At the end of the day it is the Brigades that elect their Group Officers.
-
Why does the IC Or OPS roles have to be a group officer or his/her dept,there are some GROUPIES out there that have not done the courses to take on these roles. If you have done the course and you know what you are doing then the OIC on the first arriving appliances should be the IC...
-
I think you'll find that the new COSO / SOP's about to be handed out say something like 'Paid staff and Group OFficers can only respond priority one to jobs that are second alarm or above'. That should mean no more Group officrs responding to every job they think sounds exciting.
It is unnecessary for a Deputy to respond to a Private alarm or MVA just because they were sitting at home bored.
-
had a group vehicle turn up to a private alarm at 0100 the other day, no upgrade to alarm or anything like that... was like "what the hell???"
-
I'm sure some GO's attend for the wrong reasons to some of these small jobs, but had you considered that some might attend to be seen by the brigades and have a working presence in the group.
If GO's don't occasionally come to small jobs how do new people get to know them and understand how they work.
We can't have a situation where GO's are relegated to big jobs only. The key here is the attitude of the GO's and the brigade officers, it needs to be a working cooperation not an adversarial relationship.
In my opinion if the GO or Deputy wants to come & say high at a fixed alarm in the morning then that's fine as long as the person has the attitude of I'm here to say high lend a hand if asked but not here to take over.
-
If I saw the GO for nearly everycall I would start to think he questioned my ability as an officer, and thats why he kept coming.
I think this was created as a whinge because obviosuly some ones GO was coming to either, Small things, when he wasn't needed, or coming P1 to jobs he either A) Wasn't needed for, or B) the use for P1 driving and coming before the fire appliance was useless..
Any way, this could drag on for months...
At the end of the day, they are GO's, and as much as we may not like it, they have the right to pick and chose, and come to what ever they wish. That is why, they are a Group officer.
If you don't like that, it's simple, vote them out.
-
We have had GO respond to small jobs to get to see how we do things ie can we do better, I have no problem with this ( they sit back and just observe)
and other times when they are new to the position and want to see how other brigades work.
This only happened for a short time, all was fine.
But going to every call with no real reason who be a problem
-
Once we had the kind of Group Officer who, if he showed up at 2am to a fixed alarm, we would welcome with open arms. Unfortunately he's gone the way of many of our really good people and left the service.
I guess the GO's span of control is the whole group and if they choose to come and have a look see at an incident it is completely withing their "operational (and other) responsibilities".
And if the OIC of the single Brigade involved believes that the GO is taking over control unecessarily I guess they can advise the GO of that :-)
And if the GO wants to take over anyway, maybe they don't trust the Brigade OIC.
And if the Brigade OIC's think the GO is an annoyance and a siren jockey I guess they don't vote him/her in next time round. :lol:
-
And if the Brigade OIC's think the GO is an annoyance and a siren jockey I guess they don't vote him/her in next time round. :lol:
If they can find someone who is willing to stand for election :P
-
Not sure where I should ask this question but this spot will do. Was responding to a incident the other day in to samfs area and they told us to change to a code green responce? not sure what that is can any one help.
-
Code GREEN is Priority 2 = NO light, NO siren, normal driving conditions.
Code RED is Priority 1 = Lights and Sirens.
(Also called Code 1 (Priority 1) - Code 2 (Priority 2)
-
Thanks now I can tell the other members.
-
Or maybe we could start the debate in this thread about whether they should have just told you to continue priority two, or even plainer continue with no lights and sirens.
If an accident were to occur after continuing at P1 after being advised to downgrade it could be an interesting investigation.
"Why did you continue to drive under lights and sirens after being advised not to?"
"cos we didn't know what the transmission meant and were too embarrassed to ask"
Reminds me of about 17 years ago when I first joined and was on the radio when asked to respond second rescue. Didn't know what it meant and too embarrassed to ask over radio(before mobiles days). Just as well next transmission within a few minutes was to stand down second rescue.
-
Code GREEN is Priority 2 = NO light, NO siren, normal driving conditions.
Code RED is Priority 1 = Lights and Sirens.
(Also called Code 1 (Priority 1) - Code 2 (Priority 2)
From what I have heard, the majority of the SAMFS commcen staff now use priority one and two as colours have other meanings - probally just an older commcen officer, struggling to change.
Does make you think how easy it would be if we all had the same prowords and communications standards - but thats another topic, story and ..... :wink: