Report - Fire Brigades Union

SECTION B — FIRE AND RESCUE SERVICE POLICY
which provides written data concerning the incident and
which resources are being mobilised. if there is a fault with
the system this will be done by telephone). If the crews
are not present at the station they will be contacted via the
radio in the appliance. At all times the crews are together
in one place. They differ from wholetime firefighters in the
evening when they are mobilised in the same way as
firefighters working the retained duty system (RDS).
Retained duty system (RDS) firefighters are rarely at the
fire station together (other than, for example, on the
weekly drill night for a few hours). This varies across the
country but is invariably required to be 5-10 minutes or 1-2
miles travel distance. An RDS firefighter (when available for
calls) must be located within a given radius of the fire
station whether at home, work or undertaking other
activities. An RDS firefighter will invariably be at a separate
location when alerted from other members that will form
the appliance crew. They are mobilised by multitone pagers
(alerters). Once paged the RDS firefighter will promptly
attend the fire station and take details of the call there.
RDS firefighters can change their status throughout the
course of the day subject to having provided availability for
an agreed (minimum) total number of hours for the week.
FBU submission
The FBU is informed that the Station End Equipment fitted
into fire stations to mobilise crews will be exactly the same
in a retained station as it is in a wholetime duty (or day
crewed) station. This means that unless crews are actually
on station to hear the turn out system they will not
respond. (This is why RDS firefighters have to have a
separate alert and mobilising arrangements.)
This has led to CLG having to patch up and rethink how
FiReControl will cope with turning out (mobilising) RDS fire
crews.
We are informed by CLG that it is envisaged that changes
to the availability status of RDS crew members will be
done by internet or telephone. This pre-supposes that the
RDS member will have a telephone and/or internet access.
It is very common if not universal that local controls have
one control operator monitoring the availability of RDS
personnel at all times including in those control rooms
where availability is integrated into the system. This matter
has not been considered in the CLG staffing model. We
are informed that CLG are now asking EADS to devise a
solution to retained availability management systems and
that they are writing a programme. This will be similar to
some existing systems used now in controls such as the
Rappel System or Garton systems.
If it is correct that such systems already exist and if both
CLG and EADS had had clear understanding of end user
requirements regarding availability and mobilising of
retained duty system personnel then why did they not
incorporate it into the project initially? What is the
additional cost of this work?
Information provide by the Fire Brigades Union to
CLG Select Committee
24 February 2010
Specific Examples of End User Requirements not being
met by FiReControl
3. Matters arising from the Equality Impact Assessment
Terms and Conditions
The FBU can broadly support the recommendations,
however not without some qualification. These being:
1. The report concludes (page 9)
Even if a gender equality impact assessment had been
undertaken at the earliest possible stage, it is unlikely
that the potential adverse gender impact identified
would have altered the course of the project. CLG would
have needed to balance the requirement to improve
national resilience and enhance the capability of fire
control against the potential equality impacts identified.
The issue of whether FiReControl will/could provide
improved national resilience and enhanced capability aside,
the fact that it is intended that staff will be removed from
their current employer (on transfer) and be placed on
transferred terms and conditions which are vulnerable to
change will mean that these workers – predominantly
women – face the prospect of worsening conditions
including pay. This was made clear to us by an ex-Chair of
the West Midlands LACC who publicised the fact that the
intention of the proponents of the RCC project was to
slash costs by changing pay rates to those in call centres
as soon as is practicably possible – which are
approximately 50% less than current salaries. This could be
avoided if staff were employed by application of the staff
retention model commonly used in the NHS.
2. The report encourages changes to shift patterns. The
current shift patterns which should transfer are widely
regarded by staff as being satisfactory.
RCC Building Design Specification
In December 2009 CLG published an Equality Impact
Assessment (EIA) for the project. In relation to the
buildings this highlighted for example: EIA – para 3.7.2
Concludes that an Access Defect Rectification Plan is
implemented by CLG. This is in response to the realisation
that eight out of nine RCC buildings do not conform to the
DDA in relation to access, door switches/swipes and
hearing induction loops etc. CLG were given a blank piece
of paper at design stage and the department’s persistent
failures in managing the project included a failure to
oversee these points in the first eight buildings blaming
contractors for interpreting the act wrongly! Only London
RCC escaped as it had not yet been completed.
Recommendations
3.7.1. That immediate steps are taken to ensure the
required access standards are met first time in the
construction of the London Regional Control Centre.
74 FBU Annual Report 2011