Author Topic: Region 1 group boundary rationalisation proposal  (Read 23317 times)

Offline crashndash

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 256
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Region 1 group boundary rationalisation proposal
« Reply #50 on: September 24, 2009, 01:22:21 PM »

Q.  isn't March 2010 a state election ?

cheers

ahhh....what guy Al....always with the salient points..lol

does this mean that the next working bee at Salisbury the boys had better have clean PPE for the media camera run?

Offline bittenyakka

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,342
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Region 1 group boundary rationalisation proposal
« Reply #51 on: September 24, 2009, 01:48:37 PM »
Are the libs offering anything better?

ltdan

  • Guest
Re: Region 1 group boundary rationalisation proposal
« Reply #52 on: September 24, 2009, 02:14:46 PM »
Are the libs offering anything better?

Anything is better than what we are getting now.

Remembering that the leader of the libs is from the hills area.

I think we would be better off.

Offline CFS_Firey

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,250
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Region 1 group boundary rationalisation proposal
« Reply #53 on: September 24, 2009, 03:22:38 PM »
Remembering that the leader of the libs is from the hills area.

I think we would be better off.

Yeah, and the Labor leader is a CFS vol.  Don't get your hopes up.

Offline Baxter

  • Forum Senior Firefighter
  • ***
  • Posts: 163
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • ho ho ho its fire fighting time
    • View Profile
Re: Region 1 group boundary rationalisation proposal
« Reply #54 on: September 24, 2009, 06:37:15 PM »
If memory serves me right we had a few minsters and leaders who have been members of an emergency service we are lead to believe or have lived in CFS area like

Brokenshirer
Brown
Olsen

and the list can go on beyond my blank memory or interesting pollies
keep it simple for sanity skes please

Offline Alan J

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 516
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Certified Flamin' Nuisance
    • View Profile
Re: Region 1 group boundary rationalisation proposal
« Reply #55 on: September 24, 2009, 06:45:34 PM »
Are the libs offering anything better?

Tweedle Dee & Tweedle Dum.
So probably not.
However, I am merely suggesting that any push to change is unlikely before the
end of fire season 09/10. Not good electioneering to have the non-metro
electorates with their dander up & crying "Foul!!"  Quite aside from the
admin nightmare which the Act says is the responsibility of the Chief Officer
to arrange, chair & sign-off. I'd suggest Euan may have other issues on his
plate at the moment.

On top of that, the Act says that every Group WILL have a Group Officer and
from 1 to 3 deppitty GO's. Kinda hard for a group to comply with the Act if no-
one puts their hand up to be elected.  Would look slightly egg-on-face-ish
if the CFS had a very public (by law) party, and were very publicly told to
stick it where the sun don't shine...

Of course, after the election, IF the minister is involved, expect the corporate
gloves to come off...

Perhaps the real plot is to abolish Groups altogether ?  As in: "Divide & Conquer".

Isn't this second-guessing game fun !!?

cheers
Alan J.
Cherry Gdns CFS

Data isn't information.  Information isn't knowledge. 
Knowledge isn't wisdom.

Offline jaff

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 848
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Region 1 group boundary rationalisation proposal
« Reply #56 on: September 25, 2009, 12:47:57 AM »
Jeeeez, it got political real quick, arent we just looking at the pro's and con's of a group boundary rationalisation proposal?, not bringing the government to its knees!
Just Another Filtered Fireman

Offline Zippy

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,540
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Region 1 group boundary rationalisation proposal
« Reply #57 on: September 25, 2009, 07:53:54 AM »
how many bikies can we rustle up out of the cfs ;)

Offline Alan J

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 516
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Certified Flamin' Nuisance
    • View Profile
Re: Region 1 group boundary rationalisation proposal
« Reply #58 on: September 25, 2009, 07:34:27 PM »
Jeeeez, it got political real quick, arent we just looking at the pro's and con's of a group boundary rationalisation proposal?, not bringing the government to its knees!

Not exactly.
More like the GO's were handed a map at the very end of a weekend conference &
told "this is what we want - make it happen".  I heard this instruction/request
was repeated the following weekend at another gathering, but have no details.

Political ?
Money supply to government departments is always political.

I note in the Act, by omission rather than by expression, that the community
and organisation consultation palaver can be avoided if the volunteers go up
to the CFS with a request for a boundary change. Whereas, if the CFS officially
initiates the change, it has to be 'sold' to the community, the brigades AND the
sitting member for the area.(politics again - right there in the Act!!)

So, CFS attempts to convince the volunteers that they want to initiate the
change.  So far, not terribly successfully...

cheers
Alan J.
Cherry Gdns CFS

Data isn't information.  Information isn't knowledge. 
Knowledge isn't wisdom.

Darren

  • Guest
Re: Region 1 group boundary rationalisation proposal
« Reply #59 on: September 25, 2009, 07:40:20 PM »
Mr Martin tells us that he was brought into region 1 to shake things up and put us back in our place, also to save money. I guess this is all part of the grand plan.

Offline crashndash

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 256
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Region 1 group boundary rationalisation proposal
« Reply #60 on: September 25, 2009, 08:55:18 PM »
Mr Martin tells us that he was brought into region 1 to shake things up and put us back in our place, also to save money. I guess this is all part of the grand plan.

given the crapfight in the media in the last 6-12 months....I'd be guessing whoever is doing his annual reviews SHOULD be putting lots of crosses, not ticks down then wouldn't they./.

Offline Baxter

  • Forum Senior Firefighter
  • ***
  • Posts: 163
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • ho ho ho its fire fighting time
    • View Profile
Re: Region 1 group boundary rationalisation proposal
« Reply #61 on: September 25, 2009, 09:58:13 PM »
Politics only creates the smoke screen that something would of or had happen all for reelection. The result is what we have now and instead  of art it is all in the eye of the beholder. If volunteers are meant to do then it will never happen were to busy complaining about the problems rather than looking for solutions and then making it happen
keep it simple for sanity skes please

Offline jaff

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 848
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Region 1 group boundary rationalisation proposal
« Reply #62 on: September 26, 2009, 12:23:48 AM »
posture posture posture, so as an organisation that works in a dynamic environments and constantly(as per SOPs) evaluating our safety(sic) and situation, does this discussion paper have merit! Teritorial and grandiose plans aside! :-)
Just Another Filtered Fireman

Offline Alan J

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 516
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Certified Flamin' Nuisance
    • View Profile
Re: Region 1 group boundary rationalisation proposal
« Reply #63 on: September 26, 2009, 01:37:46 PM »
G'day Jaff

As Region/HQ are proposing the change, it is up to them to do the cost/benefit analysis.

So far, it would appear that all which has been presented is a demand for
change for its own sake.  And a demand that volunteers put up the time, effort,
& costs of developing both the change and the business case for it.

Not good enough.

Remember too, that CFS volunteers already did a major rearrangement of Region 1
Groups only 10 years ago. While there may well be a case for some minor
alterations to that restructure, have things *really* changed so much that we
need to do all that again?

cheers
Alan J.
Cherry Gdns CFS

Data isn't information.  Information isn't knowledge. 
Knowledge isn't wisdom.

Offline crashndash

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 256
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Region 1 group boundary rationalisation proposal
« Reply #64 on: September 26, 2009, 07:15:08 PM »
G'day Jaff

As Region/HQ are proposing the change, it is up to them to do the cost/benefit analysis.

So far, it would appear that all which has been presented is a demand for
change for its own sake.  And a demand that volunteers put up the time, effort,
& costs of developing both the change and the business case for it.

Not good enough.

Remember too, that CFS volunteers already did a major rearrangement of Region 1
Groups only 10 years ago. While there may well be a case for some minor
alterations to that restructure, have things *really* changed so much that we
need to do all that again?

cheers

maybe our life would be easier if we re-arranged Regions  :wink:

Offline Zippy

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,540
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Region 1 group boundary rationalisation proposal
« Reply #65 on: September 26, 2009, 07:38:58 PM »
finally the best idea has shown itself!!

Offline Baxter

  • Forum Senior Firefighter
  • ***
  • Posts: 163
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • ho ho ho its fire fighting time
    • View Profile
Re: Region 1 group boundary rationalisation proposal
« Reply #66 on: September 27, 2009, 12:41:24 PM »
Now were on the money change the regions.

If memory serves me right this may be a bit of a problems not for the volunteer for the paid staff members. Government boundaries have shifted already except for the CFS in Regions 2 and 4 where some staff might of been displaced. This has it own problems those that are displaced what do you do with.

Considering the liner between the services (SAAS, SES and CFS) is blurring rapidly for me maybe we should start thinking about a new services. This is no mater a case of through the baby out with the bathwater so to speak but a matter of improving the bathing of that baby.
keep it simple for sanity skes please

Offline Darius

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 668
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Region 1 group boundary rationalisation proposal
« Reply #67 on: September 28, 2009, 02:13:51 PM »
Not exactly.
More like the GO's were handed a map at the very end of a weekend conference &
told "this is what we want - make it happen".  I heard this instruction/request
was repeated the following weekend at another gathering, but have no details.

the story now is that it is merely a proposal or a starting point for discussions (who can say if that's back-pedalling in the face of many grumpy GOs).  Anyway here's the map, had to reduce it quite a bit so it's not very good quality.

 

anything