What are the UFU up to now?

[chook]

The fires aren't out yet and this appears:-
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/02/25/2501174.htm
Victoria 'too reliant' on volunteer firefighters
Having dealt with the various unions over many years I find this statment stunning coming from a union official-"The union's Greg Pargeter says the over-reliance on volunteers is a burden to business."
Unions don't give a toss about business,this is all about getting rid of unpaid volunteers(the unions hate volunteers - "they are a useless joke" senior union official at a dinner before he realised I was a volunteer!In their eyes we are Scabs) Now this guy wasn't from the UFU but a much larger more powerful union that still has some muscle!
Experience from NSW does not show a better response & they are in towns! Various towns across rural NSW are looking for retained staff, & retained are not treated any differently as far as being allowed to take time off to fight fires. Industrial Instruments don't differentiate between retained & volunteers so to say that they are more available is just crap!
If the Victorian Premier had have called a State of emergency early Sunday morning, then the protection measures provided to volunteers would be enacted & there would not have been a problem - if there was one in the first place!
He has got one thing right though - a national approach, even better take emergency management & combatant roles of the states and give it to the federalaries to look after. Do you know that it is usually volunteers who are also shop stewards & managers who get Emergency Services leave put in to EBA's?
Anyway enough of my rant, & this is not an attack on UFU members(or unionist in general - I'm a great supporter of unions when they focus on looking after their members), just on an organisation who are trying to get extra union fees!
Anyway cheers & please don't come & rock house

[Alan J]

"The union's Greg Pargeter says the over-reliance on volunteers is a burden to business."

He is absolutely correct.
The modern volunteer system is definitely a way of transferring cost of fire &
emergency response from the community onto individuals & businesses. 

Not intended to be that way, but that is what in fact happens.

And yes, he is banging the drum to put money in his members pockets, not out of
concern for vols or business.  Or even justice.

Gosh, look at the time !!
It's time to restart the income support / paid-vs-unpaid thread again... 

[Zippy]

It would be easier to just retain volunteers.  And create a working condition for these volunteers that are under the retainment program, that they are allowed to leave work unpaid by there employer, upon call out.  And the government would also give an incentive per employee released.

Of course...the employer would have to agree to this for the firefighter to be put under the scheme.

only an idea


fat chance of the moolah existing tho.

[bittenyakka]

The system works, It does have its down sides but it does work. You can't really pay anyone as then there would be other reasons for being in CFS and employing CFS members.

As much as the UFU would like it would cost way to much to have enough staff to fight these fires.

We all need to consider our employers and jobs before we engage in firefighting activities some jobs will be great and others wont that is life and we have brigades of 20 plus members to enable us to roll trucks all the time.

[Alan J]

The system works, It does have its down sides but it does work.

reaction #1  Does it actually 'work', or is it simply not broken enough, yet ?
reaction #2  It only 'works' for those businesses who don't mind wearing the cost of
paying for their community's emergency response.  There are plenty of businesses for
whom it doesn't 'work'.

You can't really pay anyone as then there would be other reasons for being in CFS and employing CFS members.

Everyone's motivation for being a member or supporting members is different.
Why would 'income support' or 'wage reimbursement' be a bad reason ?  Not everyone
has the financial security to lose pay, or lose the services of an employee.

As much as the UFU would like it would cost way to much to have enough staff to fight these fires. 

ABSOLUTELY !!

We all need to consider our employers and jobs before we engage in firefighting activities some jobs will be great and others wont that is life and we have brigades
of 20 plus members to enable us to roll trucks all the time.

Thein lies of the problem. Already 20+ members is not enough to ensure business hours
coverage for some/many brigades. 

What happens when employers of the 4 or 5 members who can get time off to respond get
sick of them being gone for -every- job ?  Businesses have to manage their costs.  If
one business gains a competitive costs edge by banning emergency reasponse, eventually
all others have to as well to remain competitive and in business.  The load needs to be
spread around, preferably around the whole community, not just the willing few.

Methinks we need a system similar to ADF reserves, where the govt pays employers the
employee's wage (or a substantial percentage towards it) for the period that they are
out of the work-place responding. We are, after all, technically employees of the crown
whilst responding & training.

cheers

[Zippy]

Integrated stations which can do Fire/Rescue/Hazmat....spread apart to cover maybe a Entire Group and a Half could be the answer.

One full time 7-5 crew of 4....at places like Stirling, Mt Barker, Woodside, Mt Pleasant...

Infact nearly the same locations as SAAS.

[bittenyakka]

The system works, It does have its down sides but it does work.

reaction #1  Does it actually 'work', or is it simply not broken enough, yet ?
reaction #2  It only 'works' for those businesses who don't mind wearing the cost of
paying for their community's emergency response.  There are plenty of businesses for
whom it doesn't 'work'.

It works, many employers and other staff at business recognize the needs of communities and therefore allow firefighters time away. Yes there is a cost and this cost that is burdened by business should really be given more credit in society. 

this cost is defiantly less than any other option that Pays the firefighters.
I would like to see any good research into a reimbursement for employers programs. 

We all need to consider our employers and jobs before we engage in firefighting activities some jobs will be great and others wont that is life and we have brigades
of 20 plus members to enable us to roll trucks all the time.

Thein lies of the problem. Already 20+ members is not enough to ensure business hours
coverage for some/many brigades. 

What happens when employers of the 4 or 5 members who can get time off to respond get
sick of them being gone for -every- job ?  Businesses have to manage their costs.  If
one business gains a competitive costs edge by banning emergency reasponse, eventually
all others have to as well to remain competitive and in business.  The load needs to be
spread around, preferably around the whole community, not just the willing few.

Methinks we need a system similar to ADF reserves, where the govt pays employers the
employee's wage (or a substantial percentage towards it) for the period that they are
out of the work-place responding. We are, after all, technically employees of the crown
whilst responding & training.

cheers

Mabey we need to accept that there will be a need to allow brigades to be bigger. this may cost to expand stations and PPE but more people in brigades will help.

Already there is the simple 1 day version of BF1 to get members onto the truck quickly solely for bushfire. Or do more with the SOSB type of brigade than answering phones and IMT. there could feasibly be a North, South an central brigades that are able to add to the long term pool of resources.

these would work to spread the load to a broader range of employers.

cheers

[Darren]

I wonder if the CFS has actually sat down and looked at what position we are in, I wouldn't like to see it, it can't be pretty.

But the UFU could use a little bit of sensitivity and at least wait a few months, there is a case for pushing their barrow, but not right now.

[bittenyakka]

Well were do they want to end up? with more paid firefighters that don't really get used? a 5th shift so all current FFs get a pay cut but we have more people to use at bushfire?

[chook]

Like Alan J's idea - compensation to employeers like the army reserve. Not sure of your "super size" stations, but who knows.
The other way to look at is instead of trying to have a station in every little hamlet, have properly maintained "passive" systems (like fire breaks)- heaps of people have commented on the fact that you don't see the big ploughed sections next to fence lines like you used to.
Interestingly the deputy of the RFS said they were struggling in some areas of the state to get members, due to the decline in the rural population. This was after he opened a joint RFS/SES facility between Wagga & Albury and the comment was made "it's great because we have people who are members of both"
And asking the UFU to be sensitive is a waste of time - they just don't have that type of mentality (it's all about more money for our war chest comrades  ). However in a time of global crisis & unemployment growing maybe there is another solution for the current volunteer shortage.
cheers

[jaff]

Hamlet......Hamlet, Chook your worrying me now, wrap alfoil around your head and come straight back to SA , aliens or interstaters must be interferring with your limited grey matter...... do it before its too late.

[Alan J]

Mabey we need to accept that there will be a need to allow brigades to be bigger. this may cost to expand stations and PPE but more people in brigades will help.

Already there is the simple 1 day version of BF1 to get members onto the truck quickly solely for bushfire. Or do more with the SOSB type of brigade than answering phones and IMT. there could feasibly be a North, South an central brigades that are able to add to the long term pool of resources.

these would work to spread the load to a broader range of employers.

cheers

Assumes that there are waiting lists at brigades. 
True only of some metro fringe brigades, & probably not many of them
Most brigades I know of are short-handed on their existing SFEC, &
can't attract people to become fire-fighters.  Mostly not because of
onerous training requirements either.

cheers

[bittenyakka]

No that doesn;t assume there are wating lists, It assumes that brigades are keen to have more members for just a fire season, or can get members when they try which are both usually wrong.

[chook]

Sorry Jaff, it was really early in the morning - should have said village