what is going on with cadets?

[rescue5271]

For sometime now I have felt that our CFS cadet's are being left out of CFS role's that they where allowed to do. The introduction of what they can or can't do has made it hard for those that train these young members and in many cases cadets are leaving because the fun has gone out of the CFS.
 
So tell me what do other people think about cadet's,do they still belong or are they being left out of things so as to remove cadet's from the CFS

[kat]

We had a few interested cadets who, I think, enjoyed training with the seniors more than when they were moved to a separate programme with less emphasis on fire related stuff. There was a lot of good work done by Tracy in ESAU in youth programs but it introduced a plethora of rules and regs and was generic and I consider more suited to a youth organisation than a fire service junior unit. It also caused a bit of a stir by sometimes seeming in conflict with our own services act, regs and SOPs. Our cadets are virtually now non existant - waiting to come back as firies at 16 as some have already done.

[corocfs]

i was a cadet for severla years and (luckily) became a fire fighter before they introduced many of the current rules about what cadets can and cannot do. weve had many of our cadets visibly lose a lot of interest in what they do since theyre not allowed to attend burnoffs or use RCR or HAZMAT gear. this takes out a lot of the fun that cadets are allowed to have. we havent had any resignations, but the loss in interest has been noticeable.

does anybody have any thoughts on wether the age of graduation from cadet to firefighter should be changed to 18?

our group has recently been having discussions about wether cadets are mature enough to join a brigade and attend incidents at the age of 16. not only do we have 16year olds that are not physically big enough wanting to attend incidents, but we also have 15 year olds that have birthdays coming up soon wanting to join brigades and they are quite definitely not mature enough in the way they act.

i know a brigade holds the right to prevent people from joining, but i feel age restriction to 18 may have its merits, because after all theses younger firefighters (under the age of 18) are not legally adults, and yet they are sometimes made to make descisions that may endanger there fellow crew members of members of the public.

any thoughts?

[Mike]

I could be wrong.... but the last i heard the brigade had the option of delaying the transition to a firie?? A good thing if maturity is of concern.

Anyways,

Having started at my brigade as a cadet, it has been interesting to see all the different rules and regs come through. Its come full circle since then, and im now also assisting in training the cadets.

The thing that most disapoints the cadets in our area is that they have joined to learn how to fight a fire, but thanks to the very few who dont put their brain into gear before acting, are now told fire (and almost everything else) is  "out of bounds"

Kind of defeats the purpose for them really.

As the future of the service, we should be giving them controlled exposure to what we do. It keeps them interested, and by the time they become firefighters, are well prepared to do the job......

There is a place.... we just need to sort out where that place should be....!

Cheers,

[joejarman]

well i am in alabama so i will say this our fire dept keeps us busy down here but we always have some kind of fun wheather it be sharing a storie from another fd on what some one said but otherwise let me know if you want some suggestions

[strikeathird]

To be honest, I think the move to change what they "can and can't do" is for the better.


Burnoffs for example.  I have seen them get out of hand with Fire Fighters running them, and believe they are no task for a cadet.  I agree the age of Fire fighter should be lifted to 18, despite what others may think, I belong to a brigade that is extremely busy, and attends a wide magnitude of calls, and frankly, after myself being a F/F at the age of 16, dont think those under 18 can honestly be mentally ready, or "experienced" for some situations.

But, we have to argue weather these things could make the youth of Australia less interested in CFS....   At the end of the day, I think it will be a lose lose situation.  Its either, take away things to keep them safer - making them lose interest, or give them these things, allowing them to experience things they shouldnt...

What are your thoughts?

[CyberCitizen]

I Think The Age Bracket Of 16 Is Fine.  I Do Think That The Brigade Needs To Make The Descision As I Still Believe They Still Have To Be Voted In By The Members.

I Think It Depends On The Person But The Person In Charge On The Job Needs To Remember That The Young Firey Might Not Be Able To Handle What They See/Experience, So Giving Them A Job Like Traffic Gives Them The Sense Of Involvement.  This Is Until They Are Ready.  Keep In Mind These Are My Views & Are Directed At RCR.

[strikeathird]

I do see what you are saying, but then you are taking some one to the job who you already know can;t totally fulfill the duties that may be required.  EG.  What if the duties requires them to see somehting they shouldnt!?   Having someone there, and taking a seat on a truck, who can "only" do traffic, is to me a little silly.

But i do understand what you mean, my alternative is they shouldnt go at all, untill deemed "capable", or "able" to handle what they may see / have to do etc.

[CyberCitizen]

But What If They Could Handle It Eg Not Yet, But After A Few Callouts They Can.  Eg It Could Be Classed As On The Job Training.

They Might Be Uneasy Or Unsure To Start With But After A Few They Become Used To It.  Without Them Attendings Scenes There Is No Way For Them To Get On The Job Training.  There Is Only So Much That Can Be Done At Trainings Sessions.

Eg You Start Them With Traffic So They Get Used To The Way Things Run, As They Start Learning More & More They Move On Into Other Things, While Getting Older & Mature At The Same Time.

[Firefrog]

Vehicle accidents or structure fires with persons reported are no place for young people. I remember Jill Scott saying once that it's unlikely that any person younger than 21 has attained the type of maturity and coping skills required to attend such an incident. I attended my first three fatalities when I was eighteen and all within one week ( I'm only slightly crazy) -
Although I coped fine I still agree with Jill.

However I have trained many younger people who are ready to attend grass fires and other less stressful incidents. It comes down to the individuals skill, maturity and willingness to learn and also the confidence the leadership of the brigade has in the person. I don't think it's a matter of policy, but an informed & considered decision on which incidents a specific individual should or should not attend.

[Good times]

There is a minimum age so lets stick to it, we all had to wait when we were cadets so lets just leave it that.

[strikeathird]

Vehicle accidents or structure fires with persons reported are no place for young people. I remember Jill Scott saying once that it's unlikely that any person younger than 21 has attained the type of maturity and coping skills required to attend such an incident. I attended my first three fatalities when I was eighteen and all within one week ( I'm only slightly crazy) -
Although I coped fine I still agree with Jill.

However I have trained many younger people who are ready to attend grass fires and other less stressful incidents. It comes down to the individuals skill, maturity and willingness to learn and also the confidence the leadership of the brigade has in the person. I don't think it's a matter of policy, but an informed & considered decision on which incidents a specific individual should or should not attend.

I understand what you are saying, but personally believe, if you can't do the whole job, you shouldnt be doing it at all.

What if you are mobile to a grass fire with one of the members who is "only ready for grassys" , and you get diverted to a double fatality, with 2 persons still trapped?   ....   Again, if not capable, either physically or mentally of doing the whole job, should not be doing it at all, untill ready.

[Mike]

Training is an aid to TRY to best prepare people for situations they may encounter. I agree that there there is an age limit for dealing with vehicle accidents. However saying they cant go to any callouts until they are ready for anything would mean that some people would never get to a call.

- 1. very disheartening for anyone wanting to be part of the service.

- 2. what about the people who know that they dont want to be involved in any RCR incidents.

The problem is that when we start saying you cant do something until you get experience.... is that you cant get experience until you do it!

Your wouldn't send a completely green crew to a strike team, nor would you make someone deal directly with a car at their first accident.

But protecting them from potential harm while letting them take part is an important thing. i have no problem with taking a 16yo to a fire... like wise to an accident. Diffenece being, I would let them help fight the fire...... I wouldnt let them go near the an accident..... traffic is an important part of our safety and is done a safe distance from the scene to be able to get an overall picture of whats happening with out having it "in your face"

Just think how did you really get to understand everything you do now? Was it all through training, or out there giving it a go?

Firefrog really said all that needs to be said. In the end we need to make an informed and considered descision based on the person...... just be sure that its EVERYTHING thats been considered.

[Good times]

Hence the reason for age limits in regards to wether or not you take someone, half the descision is made for you, and in regards to people not going to every incident we attend, not every station has that luxury, someone might be petrified of attending MVA's but is an ace firefighter when it comes to grassy's and structure fires, if your struggling for numbers (lets face it, we all are) then take them on, its the very nature of our organisation (I am not saying take on any Joe off the streets because some people clearly shouldn't be in the CFS).

[corocfs]

once in the service though, everyone has differant capabilities.

but at the end of the day it is the officer in charge of the truck who decides who gets on... besides even at an MVA with two trapped and blood everywhere.. someone still has to do traffic control (away from the "hot zone")...

[oz fire]

Age is only ONE factor. Maturity is another and then there's personal coping mechanisms/circumstances. They all vary and therefore it is ultimately the officers call - thats why they are the officer - they need to take the responsability for their decisions.

I know many long serving fire fighters who won't work in the hot zone at an MVA, the officers respect this and task them appropriately - there is a role for everyone, and until we are all flushed with members we need to accept that and work accordingly.

There is a duty of care for everyone, regardless of age, race, sex or alike, hence we need to be mindful of each individual and take them on their merit

[CyberCitizen]

That Is One Of The First Things We Are Told When Joining.  Eg If You Respond To An MVA & You Don't Feel Right With The Blood & So What Let The OIC Know So That They Can Assign You Another Task.  Traffic Control Is Usally The Default Option.

Everyone Have Raised Great Points & They Are One's That Need To Be Considered.

[TillerMan]

I am a cadet leader and i know the frustrations involved with the new rules on what cadets can and can't do eg: burnoff's.
Another issue is the age of going on the truck even after they are 16. For example we had a female cadet who moved up to firefighter at the age of 16, we were told by the cadet staff member ( can't remember the new one's name) that she could only go on the truck if there was two other female's over the age of 18 on the truck??? Her reason was that one of the female's may have to be incident controller or sector commander.
We nicely told her that it won't happen, but I guess it is a big issue these days with sexual abuse and the like.
It isn't much incouragement for female's to join the service if they are restricted like this right from the point of joining!!!

[strikeathird]

Thats right,  strangely enough, the rule also applies for blokes,  (EG - If under the age of 18, and its an all femaile crew, there needs to be 2 Males on the truck as " Carers " so to speak, of the person underage.  Altho, due to this being such a rare occurance, it has never come up.

I think it all boils down to OHS&W,  and sometimes, the legislation makes things harder than actually helping....

[Fire_Rescue96]

I think that the thing about having two other people of the same sex is stupid, even though it might be a policy that CFS has made sometimes its just impossible to have that kind of thing happen in some brigades.
Some brigades only have a couple of females and they dont always show up for a job, so therefore if you put this thing into place then the person wouldnt be able to ride the truck to jobs very often and more than likely they will get bored quickly and you will lose memebers.
My brigade is very active with cadets and as I am a supervisor and was a cadet at one stage, I know that all of the officers that take a job are very careful with taking a young cadet who has just come up but I dont think any of them even know about this same sex thing as I have never heard about it before and I have been a supervisor for about 5yrs

[strikeathird]

There is no doubting that officers or other members take care of the younger people, but at the end of the day, a policy is a policy.

And totally agree with you about people not being able to get on the truck, therefor they will lose interest and leave the service.  Its a problem, no doubt,   which goes back to my comment on some rules making things harder than helping.  But at the end of the day, it is a safety net that is provided, for the greater good.

[TillerMan]

Yes, it was when the state cadet co-ordinator first started so i think she was trying to do and say the right thing but backed off when we told her how impossible that would be.

[corocfs]

hate to say it, but all the comments about having to have "carers" for female and male members under the age of 18.. (at least i think thats what is being said), these are just good arguments for CFS to raise its joining age to 18.

anyone under 18 isnt a legal adult..

[strikeathird]

Thats when some common sense should be used tho.  How many years has it been done the way it has been    Then political nonsense makes its way to the table, and we have to change everything and do things differently to suit the do-gooders...

I apologise if that may seem controversial, but i'm sick of people (weather it be politicians, ohs, who-ever) making things more difficult and too involved, by bringing in useless legislation etc.   Sure, some of the legislation or rules, acts, what ever you want to call them, are great.  But there are some real no-brainers as well.

[strikeathird]

Sorry for the second post.

Prime example,  who decided cadets could not attend burn-offs

I attended some fantastic burn-offs as a cadet, you would look forward to the evening.  These activites kept you interested in the service!  But no, not for long, some one decided it was "Too" dangerous. 

With proper supervision by fire fighters and cadet supervisors, smaller scale burnoffs etc are a fantastic way to show the young ones about simple fire behaviour and to keep them interested in the service.

I am also a cadet supervisor, and wish I was able to show some of the cadets what I experienced.