Opinion 
 Blogs 
 Out Here 
 Killing the volunteer spirit 

Killing the volunteer spirit

Our small eastern New England bushfire brigade was unusually thoughtful after meeting in the local hall at the weekend.

We’d been told that from July, we will all need “Basic Firefighter” certification just to be allowed aboard the fire truck. If we plan on operating a chainsaw—and who doesn’t, in a fire?—we’ll need a chainsaw operator’s certificate.

The captain will have to acquire enough certificates to paper a good-sized wall.

Until recently, the NSW Rural Fire Service seemed pretty relaxed about certification. If it wasn’t relaxed, then the Service didn’t pass its concerns onto volunteers.

That seems to have changed following the Victorian fires, and the subsequent hunt for backsides to kick. Evidently, the RFS has a case of “there but for the grace of God go us”, and is getting accountable.

From July, a veteran of our brigade, one of its founders in the late 1960s, will need to sit through three nights of theory and a weekend of hands-on practice to get his BF, so he’s qualified to sit in the CAT 7 fire truck.

The whole brigade—all landholders in high cold timbered country where cutting firewood is part of life—will have to get a chainsaw operator’s certificate.

(Rumour has it that there was a short-lived proposal from HQ to remove chainsaws from trucks unless all brigade members carried operator certificates–a small piece of madness that could have been very nasty for a truck on a steep track in gorge country, with fire to the fore and fallen timber to the rear.)

Something has subtly shifted. Instead of “our” brigade, it has begun to feel like “their” brigade.

Bureacracy is toxic to the volunteer spirit that has shaped bushfire brigades around Australia.

Faced with something bigger than our own self-interest, like a bushfire, most people show their best qualities. To voluntarily give your time to the community good, enduring hours of smoky boredom interlaced with moments of fiery fear, connects us to our neighbours and communities in the best possible way.

Being a volunteer marching to the drum of a bureacracy changes the equation. Some of the free choice goes out of the arrangement. You have volunteered to serve the interests of your community, but find yourself satisfying rules made up elsewhere.

After our weekend meeting, the mood was, “Should I bother?”

Here’s a prediction: RFS membership will suffer as a result of these new requirements. Maybe not in overall numbers–the RFS is something of a club in more closely-settled areas–but in loss of experience.

Around the table at the weekend, the feeling was that mandatory training will see landholders drift away from the RFS because of a disinclination to jump through hoops to certify what they already know.

Cranky at the thought of lost weekends, some said the new rules will only appeal to people who take on RFS training because they are unemployed, bored or have a uniform fetish.

There are plenty of hard-working and worthwhile volunteers within these categories, and the disgruntlement wasn't directed at them or the trainers who devote so much time to their task.

But it is true that uniforms and shiny red trucks have brought a new element to volunteer fire services everywhere, and that element is not always useful at a fire. A proportion of recruits—a growing proportion?—are looking for self-worth inside a uniform.

So, is the RFS administration at fault for making further demands on its volunteers? Yes and no.

In today’s society, there must always be someone to blame. The bumper sticker says that “Shit Happens”; but in these litigious times, if shit happens, someone gets their nose rubbed in it.

From the Emergency Services Minister down, people are sensibly making sure that it’s not their nose that gets the treatment—and so bushfire volunteers find themselves at the end of a long line of paperwork designed to protect the interests of those above them.

In the long run, though, any bushfire service's greatest asset is hordes of happy and willing volunteers.

As a volunteer, admittedly one who hasn't seen a fire for a while, I thought the NSW RFS has so far kept the balance roughly right.

We can take training courses if we choose to, and choose not to at our own peril. But we’re volunteers. That should be our choice.

Now the State's bushfire volunteers are being asked to give a bit more; not much more for most, but not necessarily to further their own interests either.

As a result, it will be a little harder to put together the numbers at some brigade meetings, and probably a lot harder to find someone to shoulder the load of a captain.

Friction is being applied to a community activity that once flourished of its own accord.

Australia’s volunteer bushfire services are an admirable achievement: the NSW RFS is the biggest fire-fighting organisation in the world.

Having invested so much on getting the equipment and command chains right, it would be a shame to now lose the interest of the volunteers that make it all possible.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size
Page:
1

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
What pack of wankers thinks this sort of rubbish up? Oh my god how did we cope before them? Next they will have the CWA ladies doing catering training.
Posted by THE FARMER, 28/05/2009 11:14:22 PM
Volunteering is about choice.
Posted by Common Sense, 29/05/2009 10:25:25 AM
I am a volunteer Fire fighter and have been through BF and other courses and I find it necessary as the courses are there to improve safety. We have moved away from the days where we all fall out of the pub. We are profesionals at our job. If you don't like it build a bridge or get out!!!
Posted by Fire fighter, 29/05/2009 7:49:16 PM
Wait until you see how they blow money on aircraft. Then wait and see how they pass the bill to your insurance premiums. There have been improvements in the provision of equipment. There have been improvements in off-season burnoffs, in our area at least. But this rule still applies: The more money you give them the more ways they will find to spend it.
Posted by Ted O'Brien, 30/05/2009 7:51:49 AM
What a sad, sad story! I would have thought that the old tried and proven practice of giving the job to bloke who can do the job would always be the way to go, particularly in this sort of organisation. If he does it better than anyone else, promote him. Stuff me, I have been a volunteer fire fighter in the past and have used a chainsaw all my life without some glad-arsed certificate. I learned to drive a Cat D4 at the age of 16 at the height of a fire to push firebreaks because there was no-one else. These modern turkeys would probably let the fire continue to burn in that instance if there were no 'qualified' driver. I have a great idea that will make millions. Does anyone want to finance me into starting an iron foundry. The ready market will be to all those bureaucrats in these sorts of organisations, politicians and the like to sell our freshly made cast iron underpants.
Posted by Trugger, 30/05/2009 3:28:05 PM
Firstly, hats off to the people who do give their time and effort. I don't know what motivates them to continue in the face of an overzealous backside covering bureaucracy. We are also farmers in the Northern New England and have given up any notion of formal volunteering, most neighbors the same. A group of us have a pact to assist each other should the need arise but other than that, the RFS who says my tank is not mounted in accordance with their specifications, my overalls are the wrong colour and I don't have a PHD in firefighting can sort it out themselves. If the RFS were measured as a corporation on their ability to motivate and get buy-in from their staff (the army of rural people, who, properly lead, would go to hell and back as volunteers) they would fail miserably. Hundreds of experienced locals who have looked to the RFS for facilitation and support, and representation not RULE, are now saying "no, too bloody hard to deal with". This is a classic case of Lions lead by Lambs.
Posted by chops, 1/06/2009 2:20:27 AM
The State boss of the volunteers and paid staff said he wasn’t told. The scientist produced the maps that indicated destruction and death. The community liaison saw the danger and asked for the alert to go out to the poor public but the boss said not our area. No communication with other command centres. No one knows where the fire is. AND VOLUNTEERS NEED TRAINING.
Posted by Tom, 1/06/2009 5:54:47 AM
As a volunteer, I put my life on the line and consider it's fair enough that other volunteers SHOULD be required to demonstrate that they ARE competent to fight fires and lead. The fact that elected brigade members are done so as a popularity contest rather than skill, is frightening when they don't have the skills to keep themselves safe, direct fireground action or lead people - stick with your sheep or do the training. The process of demonstrating competency doesn't have to be horrendously hard - but it is necessary to keep the rest of us safe - remembering that some people believe they were born with firefighting skills and don't need to train. I've seen these same people put their crews in danger and then whinge that the 'bosses' don't know what THEY are doing.
Posted by Ngobody, 1/06/2009 8:58:47 AM
Ngobody, for the record, I'm happy to do training. I grew up with grasslands fires in WA, and sometimes feel out of my depth at the forest fires our brigade deals with.

And I agree; no-one wants to be part of a crew of clueless heroes. But even more so, no-one wants to be on a firefront where there is a complete absence of local knowledge. That can be more dangerous than not knowing how to prime the pump.

The RFS's top-down approach to competency may endanger that pool of local knowledge. Instead of being seen as a condition of RFS membership, training should be something that people *want* to do, just as they *wanted* to volunteer in the first place. The RFS has to harness the natural altruism of the volunteer movement if it wants training to be accepted as part of the system.

In short, more carrots, less sticks.

Posted by Matt Cawood on 2/06/2009 7:31:13 AM
All the comments thus far are valid and ones that, as a volunteer bush fire-fighter, I agree whole heartily with. That is except for the comment from “Fire-Fighter” who suggests that if we don’t like what is happening we should get out. Well there’s a point however, he or she makes this point from the position of a “Professional” volunteer. So how much does this job pay ??
Posted by Dr Bob, 1/06/2009 11:42:12 AM
The reality is that the volunteer fire services will diminish, exactly for the reasons outlined in the article. Not many are willing to put themselves through the procedures that are now expected from volunteer fire agencies as in the past the adage was "all care but no responsibility" when it came to the staffing, response and training of volunteer fire services. This has changed, and as can be attested by the Victorian Royal Commission someone, somewhere is accountable. If the Commission's findings are the need for better training more accountability from organisations and individuals, the ability to attract sufficient staff to volunteer agencies will be compromised. If this is the case (and I believe it will be) the reality is that we go down the road of the American model which is contracted, highly trained individual firefighters or teams who are brought together to combat fires utilising aircraft on a far greater scale than previously used.
Posted by The Firefighter of Bondi, 1/06/2009 1:57:57 PM
1 | 2 | 3 | 4  |  next >
Out Here
Out here, with Matt Cawood, wondering how it all works.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES
POLL
Q: Do you believe human activity is the cause of climate change?

Yes
(43.6%)

No
(48%)

Undecided
(8.4%)

Total Votes: 1138
Poll Date: 24 May, 2009

Most popular articles

SPRAY AWARDS NEWS MREC

Irwin Hunter 160x160
 
Banjawarn Station


Farm Weekly







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...