gamewell45

1939 Construction of the new firehouse.

Greenville used to have the coolest fire horn. Sounded like a tugboat whistle when it went off. Not sure if its still in service or not.

The threat of privatization may in the end bring about what years of talking, studying and arguing over hasn't...consolidation.

Cogs

Let me expand on that If I may. The chances are very real that this may not be just a veiled threat, it may become reality as municipalities and fire districts look for other ways to shift the burden of fire protection to private corporations and thus move the responsibilities fire protection, payroll, benefits, pensions and so forth on to fire protection corporations; while they are very few in numbers at this time, they could grow as time marches on.

While consolidation may reduce costs short/long term, still there is the private sector to compete against and if the cost is lower then that of the public sector it will be presented to the taxpayers as such and we all know how the taxpayers feel about taxes these days. If its sold to the public by the politicians that it'll save money, the public will embrace the concept and we will be witnessing some of the most radical changes in the fire service that we've ever seen.

I'm not saying that I agree with the concept, but it is something that all of us in the fire service need to consider, especially those in career or those seeking career positions.

What will happen when the "senior guys" fade away? They'll be replaced by new "senior guys" just as they always have been. I think alot of concern comes from notion that the new guys of today aren't up to the challenge of becoming the senior ones tomorrow. Now I share that concern to an extent, in fact it was the topic of a rather lengthy discussion the other night around "the firehouse table". But I think every generation for at least the last 50 years has shared that concern and been proven wrong in having it. Society is different in many ways than from when I joined, just as it was for the senior guys of my early days and low and behold us "new guys" stepped up to fill the void...and so they will as we fade away. But that brings us to the heart of the matter..at least in by book. Maybe instead of asking what will happen when we fade away, we should be asking what example are we setting, or in other words what shoes are we leaving behind for our guys to fill?

In the end new guys will always become senior ones but it is the foundation we set that will determine what will happen once we've faded away.

Cogs

You are correct; its all cyclical.

My views start in 1993, when I first started training at the facility.

Do you remember when Westchester County Fire Control, with only Gordon and Marilyn as full time staff?

Do you remember when the new addition was built? The disaster that was?

Do you remember when a warehouse in a nearby executive park was purchased for DES, and the County decided to use it as a surplus warehouse?

Do you remember when they had to use the old Anthrax mail trailer and convert it into the the REMAC office?

Do you remember when Dep Chief Gerardi had to build temporary partions in the old large classroom to accomodate new staff?

Do you remember when the County planned a new Support Services facility that was already past capacity when it was planned?

Do you remember the oil leak from the oil pit that it took to really get the propane props?

Do you remember when instructors slowly lost any proper prep or meeting areas in the facility?

Does the training center have the capability to hold a large conference which was one of the purposes of building the SS building?

Have Dutchess and Rockland's facilities ALWAYS been way ahead of Westchester?

Do you remember all the leadership changes that have pushed DES in all different directions?

Do you remember the summers where 60 Control didn't have air conditioning?

Do you remember when 60 Control went down, compelty, because a redundant power system wasn't properly planned, maintained, or spec'd?

Do you remember the security gate which never worked right?

Or configured right so large apparatus could get in or out easily?

Did you note any real bathroom, rest, or instructional areas near the area where the training was taking place?

Do you remember how the SCBA bottles used to have to be lugged all the way back to the main building to be refilled, and all the time that took

I remember when 60 Control was staffed by volunteers and parkway police when they were at Hawthorne Traffic Circle.

Agree totally !! (Except it has to be a total countywide consolidation, no omissions of any cities, for it to work properly)

I agree completely; if they are going to consolidate, it has to be all county-wide; none of these so-called exceptions. All firefighters should be fungible was well if its going to be a county fire department.

Those trains aren't called vomit comets for nothing! At least the regular weekday commuters will get a pass this year as it falls on a Saturday.

I feel bad for the cleaners from Metro-North who get stuck cleaning those cars on Saturday; they'll most likely have a real mess on their hands.

Just wondering what logic if any went into this ruling. The firefighter puts water on the driveway, the water freezes, the firefighter falls and the homeowner is liable. I am missing something here.

I think probably to have a full understanding of the issue at hand, one would need to have a copy of the court transcripts to fully see what the circumstances were as provided by both sides in the matter. Otherwise its most likely speculation on our part; tho' i admit that it would be interesting to see the rationale on why this was filed in the first place.

While I agree with you, there are lots of people in Jail, the ER's or the ME's office, that clearly do not.

Likewise I agree. That is why most of them who do not agree are guests of the government at this time.

As always the information passed along here has proven useful and educational. Unfortunately it is as evident as ever that a middle ground is unreachable and we are still consumed by a contest of which side is "better". And as informative, interesting and entertaining as that contest may be in the end ultimately it doesn't matter which side is better, all that matters is how the fire service that serves any given community meets the challenges it faces. For those communities served wholly or in part by volunteers, nominal fees and/or stipends are another tool those communities can and should use to help ensure the challenge of recruiting and retaining members is met head on. Now for those who see this as a problem or inequity there is only a few choices.

1) Hit City Hall or the State capital and promote another agenda that forces communities to be served exclusively by "superior" career FDs only...good luck with that.

2) Petition the DOL for a change in the law.

3) Accept that these programs offer an opportunity to stabilze or maybe even reverse the trend of a diminishing volunteer fire service

4) Go have a beer and forget the whole mess and let nature takes it's course

What ever choice is made fact is these types of programs are fast becoming a proven and acceptable option for many communities across the nation to provide for quality fire protection to their citizens. Time we here in the Northeast moved into the 21st century and proactively make the best of what such opportunities offer.

Cogs

Cogs, I have to agree with you on this; attempting to "force" communities to be served exclusively by paid firefighters is not going to be viable since in the public's eyes, the cost outweighs the benefits regardless of ISO ratings or any other benefit which is fed to the public. The politicians aren't that stupid; they know that they'd be strung up by their thumbs by the taxpayers.

We could attempt to petition the DOL for a change in law, but at this time and juncture (at least in NY & the Feds) both houses are not really in a very cooperative mood with each other, so its unlikely that they'll be able to make changes in the labor laws.

I think that the programs will offer an opportunity to revitalize the volunteer fire service, tho' the term "volunteer" should go away if they are being paid for responding to calls. The terms "volunteer" and "career" are really nothing more than terms of division; hence the term "firefighter" for all regardless of employment status. Obviously training standards will have to be reviewed and increased where deemed necessary (city/industrial vs. rural); indeed the concept could help the so-called combo & "volunteer" departments in improving manpower staffing and at the same time possibly reducing overtime costs to the taxpayers in the combo departments.

While i can't forget the whole mess, I'd love to have a beer.

And I have worked EMS a lot closer to home than the middle east, where they settle things with a knife and gun

Using a knife and a gun are not accepted mechanisms to settle disputes in this country regardless where you have worked.

Live Free or Die....and if that does not work for you....SUE.

This is the accepted mechanism used in our country to settle disputes when they arise. Of course we could use the mechanism used in some Mideastern countries where you settle your differences with a gun or knife.

This is my point. Cogs can pontificate all he wants about other definitions for volunteer, the volunteer fire service for years has associated it with no pay. To call a person a paid volunteer is just confusing to the public. Cogs, you may understand it perfectly but the average local resident isn't reading your blogs on the subject.

Why can't we just call them "paid members" or "call firefighters" or something else so we don't confuse the point?

I'm not trying to start a career volunteer issue here, I just think the term is an oxymoron and confuses people who don't understeand us anyway.

I think that replacing the term "volunteer" and "career" with the generic term "firefighter" regardless of employment status would be appropriate.

Although I have only seen the quote above from the article something tell me this has the potential to devolve into quite a contentious thread, especially since I am one who supports the idea of "paid volunteers" in accordance with the LAW not a definition found in a dictionary.

This is a subject that I have spent many hours researching. In the course of that excercise I have to come to the conclusion that since Federal law (FSLA) allows for certain cash incentives or stipends as a means to assist in the recruitment and retention of volunteer FFs, there is absolutely no reason why we, as a service, don't utilize such programs to the fullest extent allowed. Those FDs that have instituted such programs have seen at worst only modest sucesss, while most have seen far better results. This conclusion is based on my dicussions and correspondence with over 60 FDs and Fire Districts thus far nationwide (with more pending)**. Of those only 3 say that the succes has been only modest and that all things being considered they would not implement such a program again, but they would also not get rid of the one they now have either. And this had more to do with administrative headaches than anything else.

Now while I have heard all the arguments against such a move including the expected "once you get any money your no longer a volunteer" which by one definition would be considered correct:

(b. a person who does some act or enters into a transaction without being under any legal obligation to do so and without being promised any remuneration for his services), there are other definitions that also apply such as:

a. a person who performs or offers to perform a service of their own volition.

I will do my best now to be brief and and without my usual long wided diatribe in explaining my views on this....

As so many have repeatedly pointed out on this very site, bottom line here is that the world in which we live has changed considerably since the heyday of the volunteer fire service in the mid 20th century. As such the volunteer fire service and those served by it have got to adapt to the new realities of today. Many types of incentive programs have been tried to adapt and overcome this trend, tax abatements, LOSAPs, beach or dump stickers, civil service testing points ,gym memberships ect ect, but the most successful programs have been those more atuned to the immediate needs of the members and their families (and let's face it in 2012 those needs are a reality we all face). The most common of these being pay per call, mortgage assistance or monthly stipends. Fact is the demands of time for training, responses and other department activities as well as that of a generally high cost of living have grown considerably for volunteers in the past 30 years, while programs to help volunteers meet those challenges and thus join and stay members have not. IMO based on the research conducted, help in the form of legally allowed nominal cash stipends offer a small measure of relief from that dilema. In fact it could be argued that such programs offer a win win. For the volunteers the win takes the form of nominal fees to offset the immediate cost of fuel, food, clothing and other living expenses associated with their commitment to serve their community. And for the community there is the undeniable cost savings a volunteer FD offers it, as well as opportunities for members of the community to serve in an organization founded in and composed of that...of their...community itself.

There is one view with which I agree with my many detractors more than any other and that is that the volunteer fire service has got to progress into the 21st century. Part of that progress is accepting that how and why we recruited and retained members in the past has changed and so too must the means of attracting and keeping them. "Paying" volunteers may be inevitable in the future as has happened in the UK, but for us here and now it is another option that may help in meeting the challenges we face.

Cogs

**All of the Dept.s thus far contacted have minimum requirements to recieve stipends including a combination of point or call reponse totals, certifcation (FF II/EMT universal thus far) and training standards in terms of time and content.

I would tend to agree with you; the volunteer fire service is evolving, albeit slowly and its quite possible that in time many towns and cities will adopt this mindset,which initially could show some promise of a new revitalized fire service. It wouldn't surprise me if the title of "volunteer" disappears from many departments and instead of volunteer or career you could see a generic title of "firefighter" regardless of employment status. Plus you might actually seen training standards more in line with what many feel firefighters should attain since their would be some form of compensation paid and prospective firefighters would embrace that concept.

Either way it'll be interesting to see how this all flushes out over the next 10-20 years.

ok "kind sir" I said this "I for one despise and loathe unions, so my opinion is biased and I'll stop with that. Theyre a bunch of mafia thugs who only push to sell their "product" which is a membership. They only care about themselves, gaining more members and how they can control and increase power. Employees should be given a choice whether or not to join a union when incoming to a company."

This reflects my negative opinion on unions and how I feel about them regardless of the reason it's my outlook on a workforce responding to another company that many people love to call a "union". The second & third sentence comes from articles and videos I researched into. Regardless if you want to agree or disagree with them I have put some validity to said articles and videos. The fourth sentence again states my opinion why a worker shouldn't be forced to join a union upon being hired by a unionized agency ie being hired by empress, fdny , a hospital etc. which I will hold onto till the day I die... if this is the land of the so- called free (which I'm finding out isn't the case day by day... we might as well use the constitution for toilet paper) why do I have to submit my paycheck to union deductions if I sign up to work for a unionized agency whether anyone argues if its beneficial or harmful necessary or not I don't care it shouldn't be forced on any incoming new employees, that to me is foul; and no one can provide a rational for this yet the only thing I'll probably here is that's the way it is too bad.

Now...

you said this:

"I've always worked union my entire life, so I can testify to the benefits of being union.....Just my two cents from a veteran union member. " in a previous post

.......I can see now why you took this personal

I'll PM you because i'm not going to dignify your post in public.

I just want to point out that as soon as I made my first comment contra to most if not all the opinion on here I was attacked and molested by a banter of negative rhetoric. I suppose peoples opinions are not respected anymore. I wonder how many ron paul fanatics are on this site. Calling everyone stupid crazy idiot for not agreeing with them. I weep for this country

Well if you had presented your opinion in a respectful way, then perhaps you might have gotten responses that were more respectful.

lets start with this jerk and we'll see how everyone digests it

Since when does NEA speak for all of organized labor?? Do you know what the term "Stereotyping" means?

I guess you aren't aware that in the "right to work (for less)" states, membership in a union is typically not mandatory.

Federal law prohibits mandatory membership in labor unions, however if you opt not to join the union (except in right-to-work states, where no membership/dues/fees are required), you are still required to pay a fee equal to what the dues and customary fees would be, unless you are an agency fee payer objector (see Beck vs. CWA), then you are only required to pay a fee based on contract maintenance/negotiations, etc which in most cases results in 15% reduction in the fees. New York is an Agency Fee Payer State.

empress has a union yet their starting medic rate is 15.75

Are you possibly aware that perhaps the rank and file who voted on the contract felt that it was a wage offer theyf could accept? You could work for a company paying you $25 per hour and if you have no job security, the $25 per hour really has no meaning. Its not all about money, but of course I wouldn't expect you to comprehend that based on your followup postings.

I for one despise and loathe unions, so my opinion is biased and I'll stop with that. Theyre a bunch of mafia thugs who only push to sell their "product" which is a membership. They only care about themselves, gaining more members and how they can control and increase power. Employees should be given a choice whether or not to join a union when incoming to a company. I for one would cross the picket into work and punch in because the union isn't going to pay my bills.

Typical attitude of someone young and ignorant. Where's your so-called "proof" or "evidence" that union's are nothing but a "bunch of mafia thugs" Do you know anything about union's or have you been listening to the typical company mantra or maybe your a manager who's deathly afraid of unions? Crossing a picket line? It just shows low character and poor moral fiber on your part. So you go on line and trash those who want to have better working conditions in the workplace? Well Merry Christmas to you too.

I do agree with you on one part of your post; yes, your opinion is biased and you should have stopped right then and there as opposed to sharing your biased screed with us.

Gotta play tax payers advocate. SAFER grants are great when faced with a short term financial shortages. Thats a substantial gamble saying that in two years we will be able to pay the bills on the staffing provided by SAFER and if not, pay back the last two years. The union did its job in providing alternatives to the cuts. The city is responsible for long term fiscal responsibility. If they cannot afford a certain level of staffing that is their problem. It is then the responsibility of the ff to do the best they can with the staffing they have. Can't do more with less. Hopefully the taxpayers are ready for that.

I think the mindset of many taxpayers is that they could care less about staffing, until their home catches fire and then suddenly fire staffing becomes a priority.

The one down side of a union is it makes it harder for the company to fire the "problem" employee. On the flip side it creates a disciplinary process that has to be followed to protect all employees.

I see no down side to the union, my opinion of course.

Keep in mind that its the company who hires the "problem" employee, not the union; the union has an obligation to represent the employee. Any employee can be fired for just cause, only the company has the burden of proof; no easy firings because the manager is having a bad day or has a personal grudge against the employee.

Ok, let me start off by saying that, this topic is not being started to anger the owners/managers of the private ambulance services. I have given a lot of thought to some posts made in a different topic about employees of the private services working together and helping each other out in different ways.

So, with that being said, an idea that I had to help each other out and to help employees throughout the private ambulance services operating the Hudson Valley Area (Orange, Sullivan, Ulster, Rockland, Dutchess, Putnam & Westchester) is to try to get the employees to unionize themselves. Unions can benefit employees in several ways, from better pay to better working conditions(work hours, better/newer equipment, shift bids, seniority, station conditions, sick days, personal days, vacation days etc.) to better medical/dental/vision benefits, to giving the employees of the industry a unified voice. Even though everyone works for different companies, if everyone belonged to the same union, meetings between all of the employees could be held on neutral grounds & everyone could speak about the issues they have in their respective companies. Some people may be surprised that the problems/issues they have are common among all of the services. A large strong unified organization has a better voice than a bunch of non-unified smaller organizations. Look at the IAFF & IUPA. Even though the individual agencies have their "local" unions or PBAs, the majority of them belong to the larger "parent" unions.

These "parent" unions are very strong & when they speak, their voices are heard.

I know that I am going to have some critics for what I have posted. I know that the owners/managers of some or all of the ambulance services will say "they cannot afford higher wages/better benefits" or "if we have to pay higher wages, we will have to lay employees off" or "this will bankrupt the company & we will have to lay everyone off and shut down"

These things will be said to scare employees from even considering the thought of unionizing. It has been said, that in the past, some services (who are more anti-union than others) have "unofficially" fired/terminated employees for even mentioning the word "union" around the work place. Obviously, the employers cannot just fire employees for discussing/considering unionization, but there are other ways for them to get rid of employees. Those who have been on the receiving end of this know what I am talking about.

Some employees are treated very well by their companies, so they may not think a union will be beneficial. However, how many employees think they are worth more than what they are getting from their companies? We all work very hard at our jobs and deserve to be compensated properly & fairly. How many employees have been treated unfairly and wish they had someone with a loud strong voice to defend them against owners/managers who are not treating them fairly?

If you have answered "yes" to any of the above questions, then you should, at least and for your own benefit take some time to consider unionizing.

Working union is really the only way to have any say over the terms and conditions of your employment. Non-union employees live and work at the behest of the company; New York State is an "employment-at-will state, so there are no guarantees aside from the federal, state and city discrimination laws, which are designed not to work in favor of the employee. With a labor contract, you'll what what the rules are at your job, you'll know what your base wages will be over the term of your contract,s o you'll be able to plan financially, you'll know what your benefits package will be and you'll have a mechanism in place to deal with issues that arise between the employer and the employee. Most of your colleagues in the public sector are union because they recognize the importance of collective bargaining and the job security which it brings.

To this day, it amazes me that people are so afraid of unionizing; of course the companies don't make it easier by routinely violating labor law, even though they know its illegal; those seeking to organize must remember that they are protected by labor law and the NLRB/PERB will actively pursue all valid charges filed. Now the companies will tell you that unions are responsible for everything from economic destruction to bad weather, but the fact of the matter is that they don't want you to have a say over your career since it means less control they have over your professional and personal lives.

I've always worked union my entire life, so I can testify to the benefits of being union; my son works for a non- union commercial ambulance company and I am fully aware of the low pay and horrible working conditions that those professionals have to endure. Unfortunately many of the employees are very young and naive and honestly think that the company will look after their best interests; they are sadly mistaken; the company will look after its own interests whether or not it benefits the employee.

Many of you who work commercial ambulance will no doubt give the company the best years of your life, health wise and energy wise, and while its not the complete panacea for all the issues, unionizing is a very good start. After all, you are owed something aside from low pay and horrible working conditions.

Just my two cents from a veteran union member.

F'n Politicians! :angry: I'd like to eliminate them!

While I agree with you; it looks like they are doing a great job of eliminating career Fire & Police. What's really bothersome is that I feel more of this is coming down the pike; particularly in states like Arizona where the politicians are trying to eliminate collective bargaining altogether in both private and public sector.

Ford reliability and quality has also made huge strides- they have been turning out some great stuff the past few years.........

.....now if only their tie rods wouldn't fail...hmmmmm......................

And, the unions spend too much time protecting bad members and antiquated work rules.

Union's have a legal obligation to represent their members; the member pay dues and for the union to fail to do so could result in a charge filed with the NLRB or PERB as the case may be and additionally they could be sued for failure to represent, so they have to represent them whether or not they are "good" employees.

Keep in mind that while in any job there might be sub-par employees, the union doesn't hire them, rather administrators and/or management hire them and if they are not "good" employees, its an indication that whoever hired them didn't do their job properly. So the blame should not rest upon the union, although the public in ignorance tends to blame everything from economic destruction to bad weather on unions. If management did their job right in the first place, in most cases you wouldn't have poor performing employees.

Work rules were put into place for a reason; in many cases due to safety concerns. Most unions recognize that in some cases they do become antiquated and need to be adjusted. Many companies, in response to either the market conditions or in the case of public employees, need to balance the budget and its not uncommon for the administration to make a claim of work rules that are too restrictive, but what it really comes down to is that they want the employees to do more with less and in many cases, it could place lives in jeopardy.