Flat out wrong search and rescue content

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21934077

I heard this on the radio this morning and, whilst I admit it made me feel uneasy, I’m not really sure why.

What’s wrong with it?

(please can we stick to the facts of the proposal, and stay away from ‘Tories want to privatise everything, Dave won’t be happy until the NHS is in private hands’ ranting…)

Seems like they’ll be more coverage and a quicker response time? I assume the people on the front line will be the same, just transfered?

I assume the people on the front line will be the same, just transfered?

I doubt that, I’m not sure you can TUPE someone out of the armed forces to a private provider

True, but you’ll get guys moving for better pay?

I suspect this will end up with better response times and certainly better aircraft, our search and rescue fleet isn’t the best.

The test of time will be the issue here. If the Government realise they can’t put pressure on them when they start under performing, it’s a ten year contract that will be tough to get out of.

The other option is that the actual crews will remain the same but the running of the system and and the aircraft will be what is privatized. That would probably be the best of both worlds.

I’m not sure you can TUPE someone out of the armed forces to a private provider

Yes you can.

You do wonder how much commitment the S&R people will have as private employees as opposed to Military personnel. You could also imagine the whole thing becoming a Health & Safety nightmare and refusing / not being allowed out when the conditions are anything other than perfect.

Does seem a bit daft as any logistic change they make, they could also make under the current ownership.

True, but you’ll get guys moving for better pay?

I understand Wills is negotiating right now – after all with a baby on the way things are going to get a bit tight.

Larger coverage
Faster response times
More sophisticated equipment
Same cost to tax-payer
Fixed price contracting de-risking overspend
Reduced management overheads

aracer, that was my first thought too. New wife, first kid on the way. Not long since moved into a new gaff. This couldn’t have happened at a worse time for him. Hopefully he will have a good family network to support him.

That was my thinking too, are civvies really going to be able/allowed to put the machinery into some of the “interesting” situations that the RN/RAF do?

Seems odd that Caerarvon will be a S&R base when RAF Valley is pretty close. Better location for Snowdonia though I guess.

Plus new equipment being built in UK, one bit of privitisation that actually looks good.

Probably cheaper pensions too…

Yes you can.

Fair enough.

are civvies really going to be able/allowed to put the machinery into some of the “interesting” situations that the RN/RAF do?

This is a valid point.

The other option is that the actual crews will remain the same but the running of the system and and the aircraft will be what is privatized. That would probably be the best of both worlds.

Isn’t that what would happen anyway?

You do wonder how much commitment the S&R people will have as private employees as opposed to Military personnel

I think that’s rather insulting to the Bristow employees. That’s quite a grave insinuation there.

Stoner – I’m not sure it was meant as an insult, more as another way of putting

are civvies really going to be able/allowed to put the machinery into some of the “interesting” situations that the RN/RAF do?

and

You could also imagine the whole thing becoming a Health & Safety nightmare and refusing / not being allowed out when the conditions are anything other than perfect.

How many private companies purposefully put their employees in harm’s way? And, especially, risk the lives of their employees to save the lives of others? It must be a bit of a contractual minefield.

Larger coverage
Faster response times
More sophisticated equipment
Same cost to tax-payer
Fixed price contracting de-risking overspend
Reduced management overheads

All that and they still expect to turn a healthy profit for the shareholders/owners/management bonuses. 🙄

I’m wondering if the raf/navy actually bid for the contract? With all their cuts coming in, chopper fleet up for renewal and the need to keep experienced pilots and crew in the UK, is it really in their best interests?

Its a good thing that all the advantages claimed for any service about to be privatised always materialise without a hitch. And that prospective bidders don’t make unrealistic claims during the bidding process, that then fail to materialise, or cost considerably more than first suggested.

I’m sure I’m just being cynical, and worrying unnecessarily as the bidding process was so open and transparent

My knee jerk reaction was that it is wrong.

If it delivers what they’re promising it should provide a better service with considerably better aircraft.

I’m struggling to work out which station will cover the patch that Boulmer previously covered.

It’s a two-part sting. First the service is privatised, then the privatised SAR service will bill the rescued, or the insurance company of the rescued for the rescue…

It’s a two-part sting. First the service is privatised, then the privatised SAR service will bill the rescued, or the isurance company of the rescued for the rescue…

Actual fact, or conspiracy theory?

It will deliver shiny helecopters and lower cost.
As above though, will civilians and a profit-driven company allow the risks that the military currently accept and step up to the plate for, even when the costs can be massive?
Memories of Ben More and the Wessex Crash on 1 Feb 1987.

What do you think?

I think conspiracy theory, I was giving you the chance to admit it 🙂

That’s quite a grave insinuation there.

No, it’s a genuine question.

Working for Queen and country is very different to having your shifts messed about and working short staffed so you can boost profits to make this quarters targets and get your CEO his performance related bonus.

You can take a highly dedicated professional employee and completely demotivate them with the right (or wrong) management style. Up to now S&R works for the good of the country, however from now on it’s sole purpose is to make a decent return for the investors (no different to Tesco, Amazon etc).

Don’t be suprised if it happens.

I heard that they will have performance goals, like traffic wardens, and have to rescue at least 5 people a day…

See what’s happening with the New Improved police helicopter service and worry

I wonder what it it’s latinized name will be?

Salvata, anyone?

IIRC the Coastguard SAR helicopters are already outsourced.

Double post

I heard that they will have performance goals, like traffic wardens, and have to rescue at least 5 people a day…

If it’s a fixed price contract then the motivation will be to minimise call outs to maximise profitability, so you can see more arguing between the services as to who should attend, eg S&R insisting the Police turn up and verify the call out before they wind up a chopper.

Its a good thing that all the advantages claimed for any service about to be privatised always materialise without a hitch. And that prospective bidders don’t make unrealistic claims during the bidding process, that then fail to materialise, or cost considerably more than first suggested.

^^^^these were pretty much my thoughts on hearing about this along with….

‘Tories want to privatise everything, Dave won’t be happy until the NHS is in private hands

Bristow already provide SandR services in a number of countries, including Holland and Australia so I wonder how they’ve performed there?

Correct – SAR in various areas has already been outsourced, CHC took over a contract that Bristows had run successfully in 2007 for four sites. As companies they also run SAR in other countries as well.

You do wonder how much commitment the S&R people will have as private employees as opposed to Military personnel. You could also imagine the whole thing becoming a Health & Safety nightmare and refusing / not being allowed out when the conditions are anything other than perfect.

Nobody questions the commitment of Mountain Rescue which is staffed by volunteers.

Secondly, I would imagine that the operation will largely be staffed by ex-forces sar, so would expect a similar degree of commitment.

Nobody questions the commitment of Mountain Rescue which is staffed by volunteers.

Because they do it for a sense of duty.

Very different to doing it to make your CEO rich.

Motivation is as much to do with the reason for doing the job as it is about the job itself. Being a volunteer / soldier is very different to being a private employee whose sole purpose if to make a return for shareholders.

Nobody questions the commitment of Mountain Rescue which is staffed by volunteers.

err, because they do it for free to save people rather than as employees of a company do it for profit.