Operational Training and Development in the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service

288. OC provides essential command, control and communication functions across its centres in Edinburgh, Johnstone and Dundee. Although linked to fireground operations, OC has distinct technical Learning and Development (L&D) needs focused on mobilising and command and control systems. Historically, OC has been somewhat separate from station-based processes, creating gaps in policy, systems and procedural alignment, an issue also highlighted in our recent OA thematic inspection.

289. It should also be noted that OC have been engaged in the process of developing and implementing a New Mobilising System (NMS) for a number of years, which has had a high impact on resourcing and capacity in the teams. Allied to this has been a high turnover of staff, which has required considerable effort to recruit and train new operators on a continued basis.

290. It is clear that OC staff fall under the same strategic requirements for health and safety, professional standards, and long-term organisational vision and strategy as the wider Service. While bespoke technical training and leadership development are required, the existing TFF would seem to be written primarily for station-based and fireground personnel. The training function reported that the production and publication of a new Training Standard for OC is a component part of the project plan within the Training Standards Review Project, which will be completed in the future. As a result, there is a clear gap as no dedicated OC training policy, procedure or guidance currently exists.

291. OC previously had six dedicated training staff, but a recent restructure reconfigured the team, redistributing posts into functional roles supporting routine OC management, trainee work and NMS projects. A SC and two WCs are now permanently based within the Learning and Electronic Development team to produce bespoke OC training packages. While additional support from functional officers is planned on a project basis, staff expressed scepticism that this will be achievable given existing capacity pressures.

292. Historically, OC training relied on Microsoft-based presentations and pdrPro materials, which were adequate but with many considered outdated. The Service is now migrating this content to the LCMS/TfOC platform to support a more modern learning approach, though progress is slow due to limited capacity. This shift is positive, aligning OC watch-based training with the station TfOC model and placing routine training delivery with watch-based WCs. That said, watch-based staff within OCs reported concerns that they had not been developed to be the main provider of training and that current systems and material were inadequate to do this effectively.

293. It should be noted that the actual staffing for OC as reported in the FSOS was 171. This gives a rough training instructor to staff ratio of 1:57, which is in excess of the 1:37 calculated for other uniformed staff. Staff reported concerns about this aspect of the change as they were concerned that the three dedicated training officers in OC are assigned to Learning and Electronic Development and are not routinely instructing or able to provide support. In addition, they also expressed concern that the reassigned training staff now in other roles would find it difficult to support routine training, given the management workload and various large-scale projects OC have ongoing.

294. We could find no performance management process for OC training. When we asked staff, we found that there was no clear process for measuring and monitoring training and could find no reporting either quantitative or qualitative. This seemed in part due to recent changes but also a lack of historical process. As such, we were unable to definitively say whether training was being delivered in quantity and to what quality.

295. Training was normally conducted at OC in dedicated training rooms utilising personal computers that also have the mobilising system installed to allow for practice. We found that due to the ongoing changes to the NMS, many of the training facilities, hardware and access to systems were restricted. Staff were understandably frustrated by this situation but understood that improvement would be ongoing as the NMS was delivered.

296. It is clear that the management of OC had a strategic direction and altered structures to meet the need of ongoing operational management as well as projects. OC is essential and staff are proactively working to develop training for the teams into a contemporary TfOC model. However, there is no OC-specific training framework, insufficient training capacity, outdated or incomplete training materials and no performance monitoring. All of which is exacerbated by operational disruption caused by the ongoing NMS roll-out, high staff turnover and consequential trainee course. This creates a significant risk that OC staff may not receive consistent, adequate or assured training.

Recommendation 6

We recommend that the operation control training model and structure be reviewed following the implementation of the new mobilising system project to identify where improvements could be made and whether the current systems and structure provides enough capacity to support watch-based teams in operations control.