It was interesting that in a recent practice event we had a new Resource Net control operator, who had done a brilliant job and trained well with their old organization. But a severe difference of opinion came up, and I thought it would be useful to see what the community-at-large felt.
When taking someone from resource net, and assigning them a tactical job, this is the flow I had expected:
Resource NC calls the operator, and issues location specific information ("X6ZY please go to 666 Benevolent St."). Once the operator has arrived, they respond with an 'on-scene' and wait further instructions. Resource net then informs the station manager that the requested resource is ready, and if all is well, issues a QSY command to the operator.
That is the point where we broke apart.
I had been using the resource net control(RNC) log as a replacement for needing to do T-cards, that is, if they were listed as active on RNC log sheet, then they were an item needing some level of attention in the field.
Our esteemed new operator had a different method, his point was that he was running a resource NET, not a resource clearing house (or some such thing.)
The wording was this:
His: 'Please check out of this net and check in to tactical 1..' (with he assurance that a operator can only be a member of one net at a time)
Mine: 'please change frequency and follow the instructions given by Tactical 1 net control'
The fine hair we are splitting is, who 'owns' a active operator. If it is allowed to go off the books of RNC, then how is the station manager to get this information? If instead, RNC has all the activated operators on his books, how is s/he supposed to know which ones are to be tracked, and which are to be recalled, etc.
In short, it seems that if there is no way for a T-card system to exist at our scale, we need clear ownership of active operators for if nothing else, shift planning...
So, soliciting opinions.