Author Topic: Fitness - Interstate incidents (Read 6845 times)

Mike · « **on:** March 03, 2005, 01:39:37 PM »

Do you think the service should adopt a minimum fitness standard for crew wishing to partake in interstate incidents???

I like the fact that they have set minimum training requirements, however, i wouldnt mind seeing them adopting something like the pack hike test as well.

A once a year assessment that could be conducted by an officer perhaps.......

Both Parks & Wildlife and Forestry use it as a basic fitness test...

What's everyone else's thoughts?? Maybe even extending an easier version to strike team crews?

MCFSFF · « **Reply #1 on:** March 03, 2005, 07:03:49 PM »

hi mike
yeah i agree to a point as after all your life can depend on one of your crew and if they slow the team down that may be a problem..
however If yous start having fintness levels as part of a requirement then crews will be even harder to fill

Interested in others thoughts on this!

Think it would be great to incorperate somesort of fitness training as part of trainings on seperate night maybe???

MATTE · « **Reply #2 on:** March 06, 2005, 07:47:06 PM »

Gday Guys

Sturt group has already addressed this problem and has devised a comprehensive group fitness sessions. The session's run for around an hour once a week. We average 15 people per training session and there are always new firee's coming and joining and addressing the fact that Firefighting is a physical task.

its a win/win situation!

MCFSFF · « **Reply #3 on:** March 07, 2005, 06:31:12 AM »

Hi Matte
sounds cool
What type of trainings are they?

like a fitness course/obstacle/combat type thing
Just running and push ups etc
Interval type training
Running with fire gear etc?

Can you give us some more info please
Thanks

Mike · « **Reply #4 on:** March 07, 2005, 08:17:33 AM »

Its good to hear that its already happening......
Do the group use this as a basis for attending callouts?
How did you decide what standard to get everyone to?

CFS_Firey · « **Reply #5 on:** March 07, 2005, 04:21:58 PM »

I agree that there should be a minimum fitness requirement, but really, who in their right mind would want to go on a taskforce when they aren't fit enough... I know I wouldn't...

Mike · « **Reply #6 on:** March 08, 2005, 04:18:05 PM »

I take it you didnt goto Syney or Vic then?

? Take a look around you next time.... they're there. The majority are cool, but the few were still there....... Its scary when you sit back and look at the bigger picture!

CFS_Firey · « **Reply #7 on:** March 08, 2005, 05:43:39 PM »

Your right... I didn't go to Sydney or Vic... And when I stop to think about it, most members aren't fit enough, especially for the steep alpine fires in Victoria...

Mike · « **Reply #8 on:** March 09, 2005, 02:18:47 PM »

The fitness of some of those that went was definately to be desired, and the main point of me starting this thread was to query the safety and well being of those involved.

However as another side issue, how does it reflect on the professionalism and appearance of the service as well?

JamesGar · « **Reply #9 on:** March 09, 2005, 05:01:37 PM »

Sturt Groups Fitness sessions are reasonably flexible. I've only been to a couple but have found them to be challenging physical (and I think I sort of fit!). They involve a couple laps of an oval, usually followed by a team based sport (Gaelic Football, Soccer, Cross between Crocket and Baseball, etc) Stretching and a couple more laps to finish. Run by a PE instructor and enjoyable by all. Hope other groups look at a similar program.

rescue5271 · « **Reply #10 on:** March 27, 2005, 03:39:10 PM »

I would have to agree to some parts of this talk about fitness of members but lets not take this too far or we will find that no one will get to join the service.I CFS is at the moment seeing a drop in CABA members due to the height and weight issue and its funny that this state is the only one that uses guide as a rule but if we where really pushing for it then I could see a number of paid staff not passing the test. As a large size member I no my limites and those of my crew members and I can tell you I have lasted longer on the fire ground than some of our younger and lite weight members.

I have been to NSW and Vic and both areas where the same but I was also able to adapt to the area as i grew up in the high country of VIc,as for the saying that older and larger members are a rish well young people have had heart attacks and died more so than older members.I also dislike that the last training meeting that I went to that a PAID STAFF member quoted tha in the USA XYS members die or are killed a year because of being un fit?? Well hello this is AUSTRALIA the last time I looked and we here dont put our firefighters in area's like they do.

Tell how many CFS members have died in the past 10 years wearing CABA?

Come on wake up and get with it,members need to have some fitness but how far shall we take it???

Mike · « **Reply #11 on:** March 28, 2005, 08:38:35 PM »

A few points i believe need to be clarified:

CFS may be the only service using a BMI for BA operators, however we do not have to do fitness testing (level 9.6 on the shuttle run alone, not to mention the rest) to join or a medical that even compares to he MFS! It is interesting that stamina is also included in testing to a certain extent.

If paid staff dont pass that test, then the same rule applies for them as does everyone else.

For anyone interested in calculating it:
weight(kg) / height^2(cm) * 10000

How many BA operators (as part of an emergency service) in Australia have died period?

and did fitness have anything to do with it?

I dont know the answer, but i would tend to think it didnt......

Quote

Come on wake up and get with it, members need to have some fitness but how far shall we take it???

I agree there are 2 sides to every argument, we can offer the same comment for anything we do as a service. The thing that pops to mind straight away is OH&S. But, the more important side is how far do we let it go before we decide something needs to be done?

At a local level, any person willing to put time aside to asist the community (for the right reasons) is a welcome asset, and should be encouraged in every way.

But when talking about large, exended, long distance jobs where our service is on show, and we may not be working with a crew that knows everything we are capable of, I dont find it unreasonable to ask that all personel wanting to participate pass a fitness test (parks use something like: 4.5Km on level ground carrying 11Kg in 45minutes. ~i think~ Feel free to correct me!!!!)

I dont believe a test to exclude is appropriate, mearly to set a benchmark. So, if its requested that i be part of an interstate team, that i can have confidence that the person sitting next to me is capable of doing the same thing i had to do. In all honesty i dont give a rats arse what they look like be it short, tall, built like a broomstick or a brick S...house as long as i can have the confidence they can do the job....

Anyways... thats my 2c for today....

Hope everyone have a good easter

MCFSFF · « **Reply #12 on:** March 29, 2005, 07:30:47 AM »

Well put Mike and I agree I would like to have the same confidence in my crew as well as they could have in me!!

slightly off topic but you may find if you increase the "" appearance / fitness requirement of the CFS "" you may actually attract more members. People wanting to be a part of something that keeps them fit and has a recognition in the public eye that these are fit people... I know that's taking it two steps to far just a point I thought I would throw out there!!

strikeathird · « **Reply #13 on:** April 05, 2005, 04:50:04 PM »

I think Basic fitness standards should be imposed.

CyberCitizen · « **Reply #14 on:** April 20, 2005, 04:42:32 PM »

I think that if you could pass the necessay fitness requirement for BA you should be fine for interstate jobs.

Mike · « **Reply #15 on:** April 20, 2005, 06:14:23 PM »

I disagree, BA has a 20min stint at the most...... there is potential to be working much harder, for longer when away

strikeathird · « **Reply #16 on:** April 24, 2005, 12:27:10 PM »

I think every job has to be treated differently, and yes, interstate deployment has to be on the upper end of the scale with training requiremenmts, service history etc etc....But indeed, fitness should also be a key aspect to that selection...

And when choosing interstate deployment, remember - You have to keep enough of the 'committed' firerys back home, to crew ur truck too, dont sent all your day timers, or all your firerys that rock up consistently, as you wont have a crew for your own area - But, dont send the people that come once every 3 months, as there are more deserving people, and quite frankly - the once every three monthers, i dont believe have training levels that would be up to scratch..

firefighter_sa · « **Reply #17 on:** April 24, 2005, 05:46:47 PM »

Well it been a really topsy turvey documented discussion above.

Fitness is an issue - with my work we now have to partake a fitness assesment every year, part of my paid employment.

With the volunteer services how far do we go (Mike I do agree with what you have stated above). As a brigade - group leader you have the final say with who goes and stays. An incident is the same you know the people within your crew whom can handle some things and others whom canot.

I was asked when commiting crews to interstate (Group level) the question of fitness - it was asked at region level before commitment.

There is a job within the CFS for everyone.

Thanks

Wayne

Author Topic: Fitness - Interstate incidents (Read 6845 times)

MATTE

rescue5271

strikeathird

strikeathird