Author Topic: MFS COMMS STRIKES AGAIN (Read 57297 times)

big bronto · « **on:** April 25, 2009, 12:58:39 PM »

Is it just me or does something seriously need to change with the operators in MFS comms in the way they handle both call receipt and dispatch of both CFS and SES jobs. In standards of Comms centres they are very poor in service delivery and accountability for wrong responses.

Like the following do you apologise to the person that died in the car from serious injuries because someone just could not join the dots, know your job and know your responses:

11:24:11 25-04-09 MFS: *CFSRES INC051 25/04/09 11:23,RESPOND RCR,BALD HILLS RD,NAIRNE MAP 161 K 12 TG128,CAT VS TREE NEAR FREEWAY UNDERPASS FROM,SAAS P1,OBA020 NAIR00

11:29:24 25-04-09 MFS: *CFSRES INC051 25/04/09 11:28,RESPOND RCR,BALD HILLS RD,NAIRNE MAP 161 K 12 TG128,BALD HILL RD NAIRNE NEAR FREEWAY UNDERPA,SS,STRL19

11:29:43 25-04-09 MBKR: *CFSRES: RESPOND MT BARKER STATION MANUAL TURNOUT 25-04-09 11:29

11:30:05 25-04-09 MFS: FROM OAKBANK, STOP MESSAGE FOR INCIDENT, STIRLING RESCUE TO ATTEND, FROM ADEL FIRE

11:33:16 25-04-09 MFS: *CFSRES INC051 25/04/09 11:32,RESPOND RCR,BALD HILLS RD,NAIRNE MAP 161 K 12 TG128,NEAR FREEWAY UNDERPASS,MBKR19

11:37:48 25-04-09 MFS: FROM MT BARKER CFS STOP MESSAGE FOR INCIDENT 51

I am sorry but i think that this needs to have a investigation into the service delivery standards to make sure things are done as they should be.

RescueHazmat · « **Reply #1 on:** April 25, 2009, 01:48:15 PM »

Do you actually know the details of what went on in Comms?

Do you know if they got different information at various stages of the dispatch?

Do you know if they were told the info they responded, then it got changed or updated after the initial turnout?

Do you have ANY facts, that aren't from the paging website?

safireservice · « **Reply #2 on:** April 25, 2009, 01:49:37 PM »

Quote from: RescueHazmat on April 25, 2009, 01:48:15 PM

Do you actually know the details of what went on in Comms?

Do you know if they got different information at various stages of the dispatch?

Do you know if they were told the info they responded, then it got changed or updated after the initial turnout?

Do you have ANY facts, that aren't from the paging website?

Do you?

RescueHazmat · « **Reply #3 on:** April 25, 2009, 01:52:28 PM »

I'm not the one making accusations and calling for an enquiry.

My point is, don't take a pager message and run with it as it if were gospel. Pager messages certainly dont portray the actual happenings of what goes on - out side of the brick walls many of the 'scanner/pager jockeys' of the world occupy.

It happens time and time again (~grabbing a pager message off the site). I just hope Bronto might have some facts, (other than pager messages) before they continue to publically 'oust' an Emergency Service Comcen, and basically call the operators and the service they are providing, incompetent.

safireservice · « **Reply #4 on:** April 25, 2009, 01:57:17 PM »

Was just asking a question, but the comms officer did sound quite dumbfounded on the radio though (ie he had no idea what was happening)

RescueHazmat · « **Reply #5 on:** April 25, 2009, 02:00:28 PM »

To re-enforce that; There is no problem discussing what is potentially a big problem.. But, I just hope that those in the discussion will use facts, not run with hearsay and pager messages.

Cheers.

safireservice · « **Reply #6 on:** April 25, 2009, 02:08:34 PM »

I think it needs to be asked why on this occasion that it attracted this response.
11:24:11 25-04-09 MFS: *CFSRES INC051 25/04/09 11:23,RESPOND RCR,BALD HILLS RD,NAIRNE MAP 161 K 12 TG128,CAT VS TREE NEAR FREEWAY UNDERPASS FROM,SAAS P1,OBA020 NAIR00
Any other time it would have responded Nairne & Barker.
Maybe this was the problem?
**CAT VS TREE**
You would hope not due to the response being put in as a RCR.
I think the issue as well is they tried to remedy the situation but then responded the wrong rescue resource (again without knowing the facts it looked like they "guessed" the response.)
Who knows maybe the people on here who work in comms can shed some light?

big bronto · « **Reply #7 on:** April 25, 2009, 02:23:01 PM »

Yes i do have many facts about the job and phone calls were made, this comes down to an operator not knowing his job and when things do go wrong still not knowing how to fix it...Seemed to work ok when cfs were running both services with just 2 people...

Zippy · « **Reply #8 on:** April 25, 2009, 02:57:02 PM »

It was reported as Car Vs Tree.

The particular operators thought SES were Road Crash Rescue.

And thinking Mt Barker...SES...were flat out, they defaulted to what they thought was a road crash rescue brigade, balhannah, hence not, who corrected the page to stirling upon notification from adelaide fire "Mt barker" were flat out.

After correcting Adelaide Fire's confusion and stuffups...Mt Barker CFS and Nairne CFS responded.

This particular shift at comcen really does need to shape up. SES dont do RCR in CFS Region 1. That is more concerning, Comcen changed what BOMS recommends.

The rest of the comcen staff seem to do there job very well.

Would a review of procedures etc be worth it for comcen...Indefinately...Just so everyone can work from the same book for a change.

For future purposes, i think the entire forum needs to ease up on the flamming.

safireservice · « **Reply #9 on:** April 25, 2009, 03:11:00 PM »

"That is more concerning, Comcen changed what BOMS recommends."

If this is the case then the operator in question "should" face the reprecussions of their actions. But as with anything like this it will be swept under the carpet / hushed up. Hopefully the group concerned along with region will push to have this sorted.

Baxter · « **Reply #10 on:** April 25, 2009, 03:44:49 PM »

Quote from: Zippy on April 25, 2009, 02:57:02 PM

For future purposes, i think the entire forum needs to ease up on the flamming.

Oh my god what do we have here I ask as my head slams in the table yet again. Is this some region 1 thing where by stopping and thinking, what is written on the pager before taking action or asking more questions by an OIC got overlooked - answer yes. The process of answering a pager is no different to the dynamic risk assessment - STOP , THINK AND ASK.

Yes Zippy we have the big one it found on safirefightier.com where their more flamming hot spots that I saw in January. Maybe a bit of calm and careful thought before posting something would be better. If this does not soothe the hot ones try conspiracy theories as I heard they be quite profitable.

bajdas · « **Reply #11 on:** April 25, 2009, 03:57:20 PM »

Quote from: safireservice on April 25, 2009, 03:11:00 PM

....But as with anything like this it will be swept under the carpet / hushed up. Hopefully the group concerned along with region will push to have this sorted.

Having met with some of the ComCen people & management in the past, I would state that this would be actioned. If you have proof that 'things are swept under the carpet', then go through your official process.

Yes, I can think of a process where that accusation could be made & the process is being resolved. But the above is not part of that...

Zippy · « **Reply #12 on:** April 25, 2009, 04:23:38 PM »

Quote from: malleefire on April 25, 2009, 03:44:49 PM

Quote from: Zippy on April 25, 2009, 02:57:02 PM
For future purposes, i think the entire forum needs to ease up on the flamming.

Oh my god what do we have here I ask as my head slams in the table yet again. Is this some region 1 thing where by stopping and thinking, what is written on the pager before taking action or asking more questions by an OIC got overlooked - answer yes. The process of answering a pager is no different to the dynamic risk assessment - STOP , THINK AND ASK.

Yes Zippy we have the big one it found on safirefightier.com where their more flamming hot spots that I saw in January. Maybe a bit of calm and careful thought before posting something would be better. If this does not soothe the hot ones try conspiracy theories as I heard they be quite profitable.

So who wants to be the Level 3 Incident Controller for PIR 69696969 "SAfirefighter Flamming battle"

Pipster · « **Reply #13 on:** April 25, 2009, 04:35:27 PM »

Quote from: Zippy on April 25, 2009, 02:57:02 PM

It was reported as Car Vs Tree.

The particular operators thought SES were Road Crash Rescue.

Isn't this why we have BOMS - to avoid operators guessing, or being forced guess about which response is correct?

It seems odd that in the last two or three days there was another crash at pretty much the same location as this crash, and the correct response appears to have been made then...

Pip

jaff · « **Reply #14 on:** April 25, 2009, 05:12:24 PM »

Maybe.............NO DEFINATELY Heysen group officer needs to ask some questions as to this particular incident. None of us are above being accountable!.
We debrief after every incident, its not about blame, but LEARNING from mistakes!

pumprescue · « **Reply #15 on:** April 25, 2009, 06:17:41 PM »

I think the title should be changed to B shift strikes again.

This is a classic case of having NO IDEA, its been 2 years now, no excuses, this is the same shift that thought it was a good idea to send all of us a weather warning at some ungodly hour, they need a good talking to, the response makes no sense what so ever, and its not up to them to decide who is busy or not, and where is the 9 in that page, seriously, don't have anything go wrong when B shift is on.....

By the way RescueHazmat, they royally screwed up, no ifs or butts. There is no excuse for this second rate service.

Zippy · « **Reply #16 on:** April 25, 2009, 06:33:47 PM »

Quote

weather warning at some ungodly hour

ahhh, the memory...i think it was about 1.15am??? you'd nearly want to push that responsibility onto CFS SCC

A big part of todays confusion was also duely because of the way CFS & SES systems dont blend well together.

I dont think anything will happen in regards to this, but i can see Mt Barker CFS bring strong enough to push the issue.

RescueHazmat · « **Reply #17 on:** April 25, 2009, 10:25:53 PM »

Quote from: pumprescue on April 25, 2009, 06:17:41 PM

I think the title should be changed to B shift strikes again.

This is a classic case of having NO IDEA, its been 2 years now, no excuses, this is the same shift that thought it was a good idea to send all of us a weather warning at some ungodly hour, they need a good talking to, the response makes no sense what so ever, and its not up to them to decide who is busy or not, and where is the 9 in that page, seriously, don't have anything go wrong when B shift is on.....

By the way RescueHazmat, they royally screwed up, no ifs or butts. There is no excuse for this second rate service.

Again, as long as facts are being used in the discussion, thats fine. As long as its not hearsay etc.

boredmatrix · « **Reply #18 on:** April 26, 2009, 09:55:51 AM »

Quote from: big bronto on April 25, 2009, 02:23:01 PM

this comes down to an operator not knowing his job and when things do go wrong still not knowing how to fix it...

welcome to the world of pain that SAAS paramedics in metro adelaide deal with every day my friend!!

the country ambo's are luckier - they have the smart operators looking after them...us poor cousins in metro have to put up with substandard co-ordinating, missed messages and a distinct lack of any brains to make a rapid decision......

to be fair -there are a handful up there who do a reasonable to good job - you guys know who you are.....and these decent guys are also not there for long because they actually have brains they get sent off to manage other projects or TG's.....

rescue5271 · « **Reply #19 on:** April 26, 2009, 11:40:54 AM »

Its not the first time and it wont be the last,If there is a problem you need to follow the chain of command fill in the paperwork and send it all the way up the ladder. Now there must be a big problem in MFS comms as their own staff are saying its not working so what hope have we got if we have a major job??? We can only hope and i do mean hope that when and if SACAD gets up and running that those who run it do a better job,it will only work if its taken over by a private firm like in Victoria.....

Zippy · « **Reply #20 on:** April 26, 2009, 12:45:50 PM »

Quote from: boredmatrix on April 26, 2009, 09:55:51 AM

and these decent guys are also not there for long because they actually have brains they get sent off to manage other projects or TG's.....

Thats actually a good thing to note, once you become an asset you get shipped up the ladder, when actually your "perfect" for the current job your doing...a pay rise for the same job should be done for the above average performance level

Quote

Now there must be a big problem in MFS comms as their own staff are saying its not working so what hope have we got if we have a major job???

Depends who recieves the paperwork...lol....MFS Comms District officer would be a good person to send it to.

CFS_Firey · « **Reply #21 on:** April 26, 2009, 04:17:11 PM »

I know this situation was a total screw up, and it's not an isolated incident, but I think it's worth acknowledging that had the operator been correct in his (or her) fist assumption about rescue coverage, we'd probably be praising them for their forethought and initiative. Maybe that operator had just been flamed by someone for responding an SES unit that was already busy, and they were trying to make up for it with the next response. Or maybe they'd just got a lecture about how BOMs might not be right, and they should be checking it.

"The greatest harm can come from the best intentions".

Let's just hope it doesn't happen again!

6739264 · « **Reply #22 on:** April 26, 2009, 06:18:12 PM »

Is it such a huge problem that an incorrect response was made, yet Mt. Barker, as the correct rescue resource was turned out manually 19 seconds after the page to Stirling, and turned out by MFS 4 minutes later?

The problem was solved, and in a very timely fashion. Yes things could have been better, but at the end of the day, when things are flat out in comms, things can go awry. (Well, only in SAMFS, as they apparently never ever did when the SACFS heroes ran everything out of SOCC

)

How can we criticize the people in comms one day about their lack of initiative and the fact they should be using local knowledge, but the next day we smash them for not following BOMS?

Grow up ladies and gents...

Baxter · « **Reply #23 on:** April 26, 2009, 08:49:04 PM »

Quote from: Zippy on April 25, 2009, 04:23:38 PM

So who wants to be the Level 3 Incident Controller for PIR 69696969 "SAfirefighter Flamming battle"

I think that you are the master incident controler for this one and I am only the grass hopper who has no control yet

Zippy · « **Reply #24 on:** April 26, 2009, 09:17:09 PM »

screw that...ill let someone else stuff up incidents thanks, out to you mr. mallee

Author Topic: MFS COMMS STRIKES AGAIN (Read 57297 times)

pumprescue

rescue5271