The Suffolk Fire Experience - Doc 226 Nayland Firefighter Vacancies
Interested in other Suffolk Firefighter tales then check out “The Suffolk Hyde Affair” at http://thesuffolkhydeaffair.blogspot.com/
Emergent Proposition (Doc 67) Reinforced by the events recorded in Doc 205, 224 and 225?
Doc 67 as stated below
Emergent Proposition Fire Service Command Power syndrome Theory (CPST)*
Fire Service CPST practitioner’s who believe they or their colleagues are threatened, undermined or subject to resistance by those of lower status are motivated toward collateral retaliation. Retaliation measures may be overt or covert.
*The proposition is generated from the development of this case study and the behaviour reported in Doc 65. Collaborating evidence is available pre Doc 32 “The Suffolk Hyde Affair” See: April 2005 Archives
http://thesuffolkhydeaffair.blogspot.com/
Therefore the proposition comes from hindsight and repetitive experience. Full knowledge of “what happens next”? So the proposition is not derived by some grand scientific theorising. It arises from real events
So are the events and actions recorded in Doc 67, 224 and 225 compatible with the emergent proposition? Is it sustained by reality?
One way of thinking about it, and we hasten probably not the only possible thought, is that:
On the one hand a Suffolk Fire and Rescue Service employee engages on long-term falsification of records and theft. And then on the other a Suffolk Fire and Rescue Service employee is alleged to have completed the wrong form and is Insubordinate.
Which is the worst offence in the eyes of Kenneth Seager the Suffolk Fire and Rescue prosecution officer?
Well strange as it may seem to the authoritarian personality it is the latter of the above examples.
So what is the crucial difference eliciting an extreme difference in the response?
Well there are numerous differences between the individuals that could explain the differential. Whatever, one to start the consideration of is that one has personally attacked, insulted or resisted the Suffolk Fire and Rescue Service Command Power clique and one has not.
It is argued that the events reported in Doc 205, 224 and 225 reinforce the emergent proposition above.
Just wait till you see the reference for SubO Davey supplied by Kenny Seager in 2001. Sorry you will have to be patient and wait for another 3-400 documents to be uploaded. Must keep the chronology correct.
Emergent Proposition (Doc 67) Reinforced by the events recorded in Doc 205, 224 and 225?
Doc 67 as stated below
Emergent Proposition Fire Service Command Power syndrome Theory (CPST)*
Fire Service CPST practitioner’s who believe they or their colleagues are threatened, undermined or subject to resistance by those of lower status are motivated toward collateral retaliation. Retaliation measures may be overt or covert.
*The proposition is generated from the development of this case study and the behaviour reported in Doc 65. Collaborating evidence is available pre Doc 32 “The Suffolk Hyde Affair” See: April 2005 Archives
http://thesuffolkhydeaffair.blogspot.com/
Therefore the proposition comes from hindsight and repetitive experience. Full knowledge of “what happens next”? So the proposition is not derived by some grand scientific theorising. It arises from real events
So are the events and actions recorded in Doc 67, 224 and 225 compatible with the emergent proposition? Is it sustained by reality?
One way of thinking about it, and we hasten probably not the only possible thought, is that:
On the one hand a Suffolk Fire and Rescue Service employee engages on long-term falsification of records and theft. And then on the other a Suffolk Fire and Rescue Service employee is alleged to have completed the wrong form and is Insubordinate.
Which is the worst offence in the eyes of Kenneth Seager the Suffolk Fire and Rescue prosecution officer?
Well strange as it may seem to the authoritarian personality it is the latter of the above examples.
So what is the crucial difference eliciting an extreme difference in the response?
Well there are numerous differences between the individuals that could explain the differential. Whatever, one to start the consideration of is that one has personally attacked, insulted or resisted the Suffolk Fire and Rescue Service Command Power clique and one has not.
It is argued that the events reported in Doc 205, 224 and 225 reinforce the emergent proposition above.
Just wait till you see the reference for SubO Davey supplied by Kenny Seager in 2001. Sorry you will have to be patient and wait for another 3-400 documents to be uploaded. Must keep the chronology correct.
posted by Bert Blythburgh at 12:30 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home