gamewell45

Great news!  We should also take notice that the Port Chester firefighters were laid-off and not fired.  Fired would equate to a termination of employment (which has a negative impact on one's employment record) whereas lay-off would be for a reduction of work (and has no negative impact on one's employment record). The only reason I bring it up is that you never know who reads these postings; we want to make sure that the Brothers have every opportunity to obtain gainful employment and don't have to explain that they weren't fired to a prospective employer.

Great news!  We should also take notice that the Port Chester firefighters were laid-off and not fired.  Fired would equate to a termination of employment (which has a negative impact on one's employment record) whereas lay-off would be for a reduction of work (and has no negative impact on one's employment record). The only reason I bring it up is that you never know who reads these postings; we want to make sure that the Brothers have every opportunity to obtain gainful employment and don't have to explain that they weren't fired to a prospective employer.

Great news!  We should also take notice that the Port Chester firefighters were laid-off and not fired.  Fired would equate to a termination of employment (which has a negative impact on one's employment record) whereas lay-off would be for a reduction of work (and has no negative impact on one's employment record). The only reason I bring it up is that you never know who reads these postings; we want to make sure that the Brothers have every opportunity to obtain gainful employment and don't have to explain that they weren't fired to a prospective employer.

Great news!  We should also take notice that the Port Chester firefighters were laid-off and not fired.  Fired would equate to a termination of employment (which has a negative impact on one's employment record) whereas lay-off would be for a reduction of work (and has no negative impact on one's employment record). The only reason I bring it up is that you never know who reads these postings; we want to make sure that the Brothers have every opportunity to obtain gainful employment and don't have to explain that they weren't fired to a prospective employer.

the old saying, "Arrive Alive" comes to mind sometimes
 
 

when I first started out as volunteer,(yes, the apparatus was motorized) we were instructed in the "Essential of Firemanship," the ins and outs of the blue light laws of NY State. I still remember Jim Taxter, who I believe was a volunteer with the Tarrytown FD, stressing that the blue light was just a courtesy light. Gamewell hit the nail on the head why I never used a blue light. Standing at a red light made me feel like a jerk at times. For me, its common sense to safely move over whether the light is red, blue, green or amber. I was taught by my father, when operating a motor vehicle, I was responsible for the safety of everyone, including people sitting on the side of the roadway. Defensive driving seems to be a thing of the past.
 
I prefer that warning lights be visible 360 degrees. just safer, but that can be a point well debated.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

I stopped using blue lights since (they are courtesy lights and most drivers are not courteous anyhow) they confused more drivers than not; the last thing you wanted to do was to sit at a red traffic light with your blue light flashing and no one from the other three opposing lanes move because they don't know what to make of it.  The way I look at it, I'll get there when I get there.  Btw I do think you may be right on the comeback of revolving lights; it makes common sense.

I haven't used a blue light in probably 10 or more years now, however come January I'll dig out my old revolving blue light and place it on the roof upon arriving on scene, thus ideally drivers approaching the scene will take notice and slow down, etc.

The law is a long time in coming; it'll help to make the scene safer for volunteers and in particular for fire police who have to deal with traffic control.  I wish more laws that benefit the fire service like this would get pushed through as quick as this one was.

I stopped using blue lights since (they are courtesy lights and most drivers are not courteous anyhow) they confused more drivers than not; the last thing you wanted to do was to sit at a red traffic light with your blue light flashing and no one from the other three opposing lanes move because they don't know what to make of it.  The way I look at it, I'll get there when I get there.  Btw I do think you may be right on the comeback of revolving lights; it makes common sense.

Maybe the revolving blue lights will make a comeback for this purpose. You never know.

I haven't used a blue light in probably 10 or more years now, however come January I'll dig out my old revolving blue light and place it on the roof upon arriving on scene, thus ideally drivers approaching the scene will take notice and slow down, etc.

You are very correct; you are permitted to display one blue light (of which the candlepower escapes me at the current time) and that's it.  You are also required to have a "blue light" card signed by the Chief and be able to produce it upon demand.

The law is a long time in coming; it'll help to make the scene safer for volunteers and in particular for fire police who have to deal with traffic control.  I wish more laws that benefit the fire service like this would get pushed through as quick as this one was.

The law is a long time in coming; it'll help to make the scene safer for volunteers and in particular for fire police who have to deal with traffic control.  I wish more laws that benefit the fire service like this would get pushed through as quick as this one was.

The law is a long time in coming; it'll help to make the scene safer for volunteers and in particular for fire police who have to deal with traffic control.  I wish more laws that benefit the fire service like this would get pushed through as quick as this one was.

Because that is what it is going to take if you want the term removed.  While the NFPA may not define exterior firefighters, certain departments do and that's something that people in the fire service will just have to live with.

Then take the Village of Port Chester to task for misleading the public.  In the meantime I stand by my opinion that your term was divisive and was totally unnecessary.  It would be the same if I referred to interior firefighters as fire extinguishers since that is a major part of what they do; I doubt many firefighters would embrace that term; in fact I suspect many would take offense at it. 
 
If you find term firefighter objectionable when it's applied to Exterior personnel, fine but there is no need to be divisive; instead work for reform to legally change the titles if it offends you so much.  Being divisive accomplishes absolutely nothing positive.

Barry, I googled your term "Firefighter Helpers" and there is nothing listed under that.  Therefore I'm going to conclude that it is nothing more then a divisive term you threw into the mix.  The term "exterior" is more appropriate in this case and I'm sure you are well aware of what Exterior Firefighters roles are in the fire service.

Barry, I googled your term "Firefighter Helpers" and there is nothing listed under that.  Therefore I'm going to conclude that it is nothing more then a divisive term you threw into the mix.  The term "exterior" is more appropriate in this case and I'm sure you are well aware of what Exterior Firefighters roles are in the fire service.

I agree wholeheartedly. It is the culture within many VFDs that has to change and adapt to the modern realities. What worked years ago doesn't in most cases anymore. An all career dept is not the one size fits all solution either since many towns and cities simply can't afford the expense. That said there are a number of departments that have accepted the facts and made changes. Now to be fair some have done so and made dramatic improvements while other have only begun to move forward, but the point is moving forward they are. Sadly for every one that is moving forward there are 10 that are stagnant or worse still, moving backwards. 
 
Ultimately the most practical solution is a combination system where staffing is distributed effectively to provide the most coverage in a timely manner with a reasonable cost...on paper that is. We all know it isn't that simple. To the outsider looking in at the fire service, it must seem that we, as a group, are either completely insane or downright stupid or both. That there are so many things which get in the way of providing a decent level of service to those we are all here to protect is a travesty of monumental proportions..and quite frankly it defies reason.
 
Until ALL firefighters decide to live up to OUR core values and put those we serve first there is little hope for progress. The simple truth is that we have all let something other than those we serve become our primary concern. It doesn't matter if it's a fiefdom, a contract, a grudge or ambition, everything that stands in the way of us serving our communities in THEIR best interest is the problem. And it is OUR problem
 
You know it isn't always the other guy, in fact it almost never is. We might all do well to remember that "I'm a part of the problem" and work on fixing ourselves before we go lambasting "the other guy". That admission would do more to change the fire service for the better that any debate, battle or scheme in our collective history. We are all a product of the culture we are a part of, but we are also the only ones who, right now today, can begin to change that culture. 
 
As was told to me and as I pass along to every new FF that passes through the door..."NEVER forget that you are not here for you, you are here for those we SERVE"!! Somewhere along the line it seems many have forgotten that fact.
 
 
 

And it's unlikely to change anytime soon; you want a career department that's fine, but it comes with a cost attached to it and the taxpayers don't want to pay the costs; they'd rather roll the dice. 
 
The biggest problem with volunteer departments is getting the apparatus out in a timely fashion; most departments resist having bunk-in's at the fire stations which would cut response time dramatically instead relying on the volunteers to get out of bed and respond to the firehouse for apparatus. Until the mindset changes, nothing will change.

And it's unlikely to change anytime soon; you want a career department that's fine, but it comes with a cost attached to it and the taxpayers don't want to pay the costs; they'd rather roll the dice. 
 
The biggest problem with volunteer departments is getting the apparatus out in a timely fashion; most departments resist having bunk-in's at the fire stations which would cut response time dramatically instead relying on the volunteers to get out of bed and respond to the firehouse for apparatus. Until the mindset changes, nothing will change.

I think you misunderstood my comment.  I wasn't speaking about employer initiated discipline, I was referring more to comments from the online peanut gallery.  I've seen numerous comments that call for career firefighters to be fired for an inappropriate action or comment that oftentimes really isn't worthy of termination.
 
As for your comment, typically the employee has the ability to challenge the termination via the grievance process.  If the matter cannot be resolved via discussion/negotiation between the employer and the union on behalf of the employee, then the matter would go to arbitration.  If the employer can't show just cause for the termination, then more than likely the employee would be reinstated by the arbitrator.

 
If I read the above correctly, Five of the seven volunteer fire companies are willing to support those laid off career firefighters. If that is correct, "Hat's off to those Brother Firefighters who are willing to step up to the plate and do what is right". This could be a huge plus in their favor. Try to put yourself in those career firefighters shoes. They loose their jobs from what I am starting to realize over some political or power hungry individuals, who apparently have no concern for these firefighters or for the citizens who depend on them.
 
If I were one of those laid off firefighters, I would make sure I never forget who supported me and who didn't.
 
Of the Five departments whose members are supporting those laid off firefighters, is it possible for someone to post which departments they are. They deserve a "pat on the back and recognition" for what they are doing. Let the World know what True Brotherhood in the Fire Service is all about.