NFCC Direct Entry Scheme Officially Launched

[Aspire]

8 hours ago, Messyshaw said:

This maybe a controversial point but the NFCC press release states one aim the scheme is the scheme will ‘play a valuable part in diversifying senior management in fire and rescue services’. I am not 100% sure what that statement means, but if the scheme is designed to increase minority diversity into the fire service by arguably cutting corners and lowering standards, this cannot be great news for anyone. I may have interpreted that statement wrong and am happy to be corrected. Its also completely unfair on the individual to be dropped in the deep end.

Messy, this can mean all manner of things. The first thing that came to my mind was diversity of thought (which is a good thing), rather than minorities and ethnically marginalised. That being said, I acknowledge that diversity of thought generally comes from those who are different to the middle-aged white male Fire Service status quo, but it could also mean those who come from completely different industry and offer the service something we lack.

I’m not sure why you’d then suggest there could be corner cutting in relation to the minority thesis?
 

This is, and has often been frustrating to hear people say about underrepresented groups because its sets an unhelpful tone that is perpetuated through the service and usually manifests in lots of bias and micro aggressions towards those on said schemes, or even those who aren’t. I spent my first couple years as a young black officer having to convince all of my generally white male peers that I was not on a targeted development scheme or being told ‘you will get it because you are black’, so I speak on this with great experience of being on the other side.

Though, it may not have been your intention, the rest of your post could easily be interpreted to suggest that LFB’s direct entry was a disaster and that they were from underrepresented groups so let me be clear, all 4 of them were white and 3 of them are GC’s. I wont comment on whether they are good or not, thats not my place and i’ve not worked with them enough.

I hope you don't see this as an attack, but more as honest and open conversation because those that look different get a rough ride but if we dont tell our story, others wont understand because they dont/haven’t lived it.

[Messyshaw]

@Aspire. Let me be clear on this as its very important 

My dislike and distrust of this entry system falls into two parts

1. Its unfair on the individual to be dumped - perhap ill prepared or under prepared - onto station and into operation scenarios (this definitely happened in the LFB attempt that was soon abandoned

2. Its unfair on staff (from all backgrounds)seeking promotion and operational crews who will be expected to work and take orders from someone on the fireground who has little experience and may - just may - create unnecessary risks

The diversity bit was a direct lift from the NFCC press release. It was not clear from those few lines what it meant, which is why I asked if anyone could clarify

I am slightly miffed that you decided to launch a patronising lecture about diversity and underrepresented groups. I don't see it as an attack, but your assumptions that I am as thick as a brick when it comes to diversity matters and maybe against the plan due to a racist rationale is 100% incorrect regrettable 

To be absolutely clear, my opposition to the direct entry scheme is wholly process based and nothing to do with the colour of the skin or DNA make up of those applying or being sought to apply

Your assumption led reply on this thread is a pity as it has turned out to be wide of the mark. I have lots of respect for you from reading previous posts.

I am not angry as you clearly have personal experiences throughout your life that I could never have had. But with respect, you really do need to tread a bit carefully with your words as iMHO those words you chose for your reply were inappropriate and clumsy

I am happy to discuss further by PM but I do not wish to hijack this thread any further 

[Percy]

Aspire, you’re obviously a very intelligent youngish man who is doing well in this chosen vocation which is why some of what you have said is all the more disappointing. You are the ‘future’ of LFB and clearly by where you are now will at least be a DACO if not even higher when you call it time, and good luck to you. But please reflect on your own unconscious, even conscious biases which are clearly there.

Being in higher positions with any biases, especially ones where race is concerned, regardless of one’s own ethnicity, is more than worrying. How they have formed obviously I do not know, but I can probably imagine growing up and even in your early career you will have sadly witnessed and endured some shocking and revolting experiences. We are all products of our environment and experiences at the end of the day.

But to state that ‘I acknowledge that diversity of thought generally comes from those who are different to the middle aged white male Fire Service status quo’ screams bias and an elitist arrogance, as if only people like you and think like you are capable of it - it is also a ‘micro aggression’ in itself and I am sure that was the last thing you intended. It is only your subjective opinion though, which we are all entitled to have of course, but it infers that ‘diversity of thought’ and all it’s constructs such as ‘progressiveness’ are the preserve of non white males. Now if you cannot see how dangerous that bias is, being in a position that interviews regularly just one example when this can manifest itself, then please reflect.

Make no mistake, being a white male, in many sectors is currently a massive disadvantage and statements like yours only serve to reinforce that, because believe me, there are many who share the same belief. No, this is not ‘white fragility’ (I will come back to that) this is fact. Look at the recent recruitment campiagns of Cheshire Police and the RAF for just two examples of this. These are not small private companies where discriminatory recruitment decisions based on biases could be less obvious, these are huge organisations with teams of people and decision makers who had no doubt discussed the matter and signed off as a good idea, to actually embed discrimination into its campaign against white males. Now pause for a second and imagine if that said black males. It’s not the fact that both were rightly lambasted and shown up for what that are, it’s the fact that people in high positions have deluded themselves into thinking this was a good idea and that they will get some form of ‘pat on the back’ for it and recognition.

Don’t get me wrong - white males in the Met, LFB, South Wales FRS etc. and their abhorrent behaviour, have certainly brought much of this latest negative spotlight on us all and in those cases who can argue, however, I will not sit back and allow myself to be demonised or excluded, directly or indirectly from having an opinion simply due to the colour of my skin and my sex by anyone or any organisation when it is not deserved, no this is not ‘white fragility’.

White Fragility. WF is the very literary definition of a Kafka Trap. However, many people, mostly white people to be fair and especially in the public sector, my organisation included, were falling over themselves not long ago to be seen to agree with Robin DeAngelos highly controversial and since widely criticised claims. Despite ultimately it being a no win concept, white males, desperate for further career enhancement usually, were queuing up to be seen to be handwringing apologists. It was embarrassing to be honest. I am white but I am not fragile. I make no apologies for that and I will not remain silent when anyone makes inferences that due to someone’s sex or colour of their skin they are largely incapable of enhancing a chosen workplace with their ideas and presence within it.

[Aspire]

I am on this site frequently because I am eager to learn and I think there are man good posts from people here. Of course I will reflect, I am a reflector and not the finished article per sé so will receive the replies in good faith of being better, I respect what you have both said.

That being said, if I made the connection I did on Messy’s post, others may have done so too, so I challenged. I remember a few years ago, somebody who didn't get through an interview come on here and post that maybe they’d have faired better if they were black or gay.

On the diversity of thought, it was not intended to be exclusive of middle aged white men as they are a key contributor that we have in abundance.

I spoke my lived truth.

[Messyshaw]

I am glad we got that out of the way and it didnt descend into a big Messroom row

This conversation says a lot about this forum and those who use it, in that a chaotic free for all was replaced by sensible debate and an inferred agreement to disagree.

What ever happened to sorting things out behind the tower? I miss those days 😉

[Kinmel]

The problem you identify is entirely of the service's own making, it never used to be that way.

First of all... up until the nineties, every officer mixed with officers from elsewhere at the Fire Service College and if nothing else, it caused a "bottom up" modernisation. 

One example was extraction from crashed vehicles, we did not have powerful enough cutting gear then to remove a car roof. We cut off the doors and worked from there.I was at Moreton on a F.P. course and word spread that during an exercise, a Leading firefighter from Bedfordshire had simply cut the A pillars, secured a strop from the steering column, across the bonnet and tied it off to a front axle.  Inflating an air bag under the strop pulled the dashboard off the victims, greatly speeding up the release time.  Months later it was common practice everywhere and I doubt any of the top brass knew about it. It was one of hundreds of simple improvements.

Equally important was the ease with which you could change brigades.  I went from a Borough to a County whilst a firefighter, and twice afterwards on promotion. It happened all the time and was a simple process.

[Percy]

Can I ask some of our more experienced colleagues, the former Fire Service College in Dorking Surrey purely for Officers - was this beneficial of was it an unnecessary them and us?

[Kinmel]

The Fire Service Staff College was a left over from World War 2, on the formation of the NFS there was a large influx of inexperienced officers and they received Staff training at Dorking, or Brighton.  There was no Central Technical College.  After the war,  the Brighton College was closed and Dorking became the only National College, it concentrated on officer management and F.P. courses.   When I attended a course there in the late 1970s it had a total of about 50 students on 3 courses, everything was classroom based.   There was no them and us, because Sub Officers attended FP and other specialist courses there.  The biggest drawback was it's location south of London, no M25 in those days, just the dreaded South Circular.

In the 1960s, it was clear that that the service urgently needed training for junior officers and in 1968 The Fire Service Technical College began at Moreton-in-Marsh and getting that up and running was a huge task on it's own and so the Staff College stayed at Dorking, but all training below ADO rank moved to Moreton.  When Dorking closed everything moved to Moreton, which was then renamed the Fire Service College.  

I attended Dorking twice and Moreton six times.  Dorking was gentile, Moreton was much more dynamic; even the Command Courses were better at Moreton.

[Kinmel]

19 hours ago, Percy said:

was it an unnecessary them and us?

Thinking overnight, it was the Technical College that was very much "them and us", because daily life there was based on the protocols in place at RAF Brize Norton !

No matter how hot it was, summer dress was not allowed until Norton changed over.

The Edinburgh Bar was officers only, the Cardiff bar was junior officers only, but the Belfast Room upstairs was mixed ranks.  Catering was the same, officers sat in their own section of the Dining Hall.  Each course had designated seating at the dining tables, with different ranks veering off to their own Mess.

It is 30 years and more since I last visited the College, no doubt it is now completely different.

The Staff College was the opposite, brave Sub Officers would walk into the Mess, or bar and sit next to very senior officers and both enjoyed the chance to hear from the other.

[Percy]

Just loving Leicestershires inclusive picture chosen/signed off as a good idea on which to launch their DE scheme.

For reference - please read my previous post where I mentioned the RAF and Cheshire Police ‘recruitment’ strategy in an attempt to ‘diversify’ by blatantly and unapologetically discriminating against males… in print!

I am sure thought that Leicestershire FRS will treat all candidates fairly, but when I see photos like that linked to a recruitment campaign, one can’t help to draw one’s own inferences of the behind the scenes/unofficial directions and overall competency of the people who thought the pic was a good starting point 🙄🤷🏻‍♂️

[Jet]

We can delve all we want into the rationale, let's just call a spade a spade.

Load of bollocks.

[Kinmel]

As late as last week the civilian CFO of North Wales FRS was extolling the calibre of their Direct Entry candidates. Yesterday they announced they were dropping out of the Direct Entry Scheme because the candidates had not passed selection.

NWFRS is facing so many problems, yet they have wasted 2 years on the D.E.S.

Let us hope their future manglement decisions learn from this debacle.

[Jet]

It's almost as if having a 2:2 in Fine Art doesn't qualify you to take charge of complex incidents 🤔

[Messyshaw]

2 hours ago, Jet said:

It's almost as if having a 2:2 in Fine Art doesn't qualify you to take charge of complex incidents 🤔

I reckon these arty DE guys and girls would be fine if the job was Gauguin well or perhaps at Degas leaks jobs.

If think you disagree, you are talking Pollocks, as compared with art jobs its good Monet, and stops you going Bacon forth to the dole office. 

It won't be long before they are Gainsborough Commander and taking bags of cash to the Banksy or maybe they will buy a new Citroën Picasso ?

Mind you, they could earn more being a Constable 🤔

 

(Don't blame me. I am on a boring train journey and in any case, Jet started it 🙄)

[Jet]

Well at least they gave it a Gogh...🙄

[Br9mp81]

and all we do is take the picasso

[Carl]

And so it continues ?

[LFB92]

What a joke. They are not firefighters and have no business anywhere near a fireground. Lunacy.

[C_Iain]

If the great benefit that these people are going to bring to services is the industry experience they can bring to the business and management side of services (the article talks about the candidate that wants to help change their services handles recruitment), then why do they need to be grey book SM’s and not just green book equivalent?

Basically, if their expertise is going to benefit the service in non-operational ways, why not make them non-operational staff, ie green book?

[BurtMacklin]

just to play devils advocate here, there are plenty of SCs running around already who lack significant operational experience who went through the traditional promotion route. IF the selection criteria is stringent enough isn’t it reasonable to find people who can be brought up to the standard through a rigorous development and mentoring system? I know that example of previous recruitment/HR experience isn’t the best, but if we flip that, should a former army captain be going in as a recruit with diamonds? we want the best people working in the fire service, if they are already advanced in their current employment to equivalent SC level and we don’t offer an entry route we are leaving good talent on the table.