FireMedic049

"We have 31 fully qualified, completely trained and certified firefighters, 22 of which are also interior qualified,” said past assistant chief and 53-year member Bob Harford. "
 
I know there's differences from state to state regarding training and certification, but how can a department claim a member to be a "fully qualified, completely trained and certified" firefighter when that person is not "interior qualified"?
 
When did being "interior qualified" as a firefighter become a bonus skill set rather than the standard? 

"We have 31 fully qualified, completely trained and certified firefighters, 22 of which are also interior qualified,” said past assistant chief and 53-year member Bob Harford. "
 
I know there's differences from state to state regarding training and certification, but how can a department claim a member to be a "fully qualified, completely trained and certified" firefighter when that person is not "interior qualified"?
 
When did being "interior qualified" as a firefighter become a bonus skill set rather than the standard? 

Actually, the majority of the population is served by career or mostly career departments.   The majority of the country (land wise) is served by volunteer or mostly volunteer departments.  Volunteerism is declining and many all volunteer departments are now combination and many more probably should be.  
 
Love for the community is not exclusive to the volunteers, which for some reason is something people like you are unable to grasp.
 
What's your stance on volunteer grandstanding? 

"We have 31 fully qualified, completely trained and certified firefighters, 22 of which are also interior qualified,” said past assistant chief and 53-year member Bob Harford. "
 
I know there's differences from state to state regarding training and certification, but how can a department claim a member to be a "fully qualified, completely trained and certified" firefighter when that person is not "interior qualified"?
 
When did being "interior qualified" as a firefighter become a bonus skill set rather than the standard? 

"We have 31 fully qualified, completely trained and certified firefighters, 22 of which are also interior qualified,” said past assistant chief and 53-year member Bob Harford. "
 
I know there's differences from state to state regarding training and certification, but how can a department claim a member to be a "fully qualified, completely trained and certified" firefighter when that person is not "interior qualified"?
 
When did being "interior qualified" as a firefighter become a bonus skill set rather than the standard? 

I don't think the headline necessarily needs to be changed.  Whether or not this is actually a career vs volunteer issue, the term "professional" was used correctly in the headline.  A professional firefighter is a person who is paid to be a firefighter just like a professional athlete is a person that is paid to play a sport.  
 
Acting in a professional manner and displaying professionalism is a different animal.

I don't know what the exact charge would be, but it would be something along the lines of impersonating a public safety official since they are no longer recognized as such.

I don't know what the exact charge would be, but it would be something along the lines of impersonating a public safety official since they are no longer recognized as such.

I don't know what the exact charge would be, but it would be something along the lines of impersonating a public safety official since they are no longer recognized as such.

Yeah, but our municipal leaders and in some cases, fire chiefs, are not very good at heeding those lessons learned.
 
This type of stuff keeps happening over and over and for the most part, nobody pays a price for it expect the employee and the taxpayer.

I disagree that the best analogy would be volunteer compared to career EMT.  In fact, I don't think it's even a correct one for the point I think he was trying to make.  All EMTs receive the same minimum training, have the same scope of practice and hold the same certification regardless of being paid or volunteer.  A better comparison for the point would have been EMT vs Paramedic.  Both may work side by side on an ambulance and save lives, but one has a larger volume of training and larger skill set prior to stepping into that ambulance.  Both are important and contribute to the success of the team, but there is a distinct difference between the two and what they are able to contribute.
 
By comparison, the person who attends a full-time fire academy for initial training is going to possess a larger volume of training than the person who just attends a basic FF1 class.  Typically a career recruit academy includes more than just basic FF training and usually more hands on training.
 
Recruits for the large metro department in my area obtain certifications for FF1, FF2, BVR, Hazmat, Rope Rescue, EMT and a number of others before graduating and responding to their first call.  By contrast, a new member in many of the VFDs in the area can get on the truck without any formal training or certification.  Many require their members to attend the entry level training course (about 166 hours), which prepares one for the FF1 test, but doesn't not include testing for the certification.  They may not be required to achieve additional certification other than the federally mandated, minimal Hazmat training.
 
Both are considered "firefighters" and both are valuable to their departments.  Both may even work side by side routinely or on occasion.  Over time, the "gap" in training, certification, experience, ability, etc. between the two may disappear, but there is clearly a difference between the two at the start and I think that was at the heart of the point being made.
 
 

Yeah, but our municipal leaders and in some cases, fire chiefs, are not very good at heeding those lessons learned.
 
This type of stuff keeps happening over and over and for the most part, nobody pays a price for it expect the employee and the taxpayer.

I disagree that the best analogy would be volunteer compared to career EMT.  In fact, I don't think it's even a correct one for the point I think he was trying to make.  All EMTs receive the same minimum training, have the same scope of practice and hold the same certification regardless of being paid or volunteer.  A better comparison for the point would have been EMT vs Paramedic.  Both may work side by side on an ambulance and save lives, but one has a larger volume of training and larger skill set prior to stepping into that ambulance.  Both are important and contribute to the success of the team, but there is a distinct difference between the two and what they are able to contribute.
 
By comparison, the person who attends a full-time fire academy for initial training is going to possess a larger volume of training than the person who just attends a basic FF1 class.  Typically a career recruit academy includes more than just basic FF training and usually more hands on training.
 
Recruits for the large metro department in my area obtain certifications for FF1, FF2, BVR, Hazmat, Rope Rescue, EMT and a number of others before graduating and responding to their first call.  By contrast, a new member in many of the VFDs in the area can get on the truck without any formal training or certification.  Many require their members to attend the entry level training course (about 166 hours), which prepares one for the FF1 test, but doesn't not include testing for the certification.  They may not be required to achieve additional certification other than the federally mandated, minimal Hazmat training.
 
Both are considered "firefighters" and both are valuable to their departments.  Both may even work side by side routinely or on occasion.  Over time, the "gap" in training, certification, experience, ability, etc. between the two may disappear, but there is clearly a difference between the two at the start and I think that was at the heart of the point being made.
 
 

This afternoon ,members of the Port Chester Firefighters Local paid a visit to village hall. Along with the members were signatures of approximately 4000  citizens. This forces the village of PC to have a referendum to bring back the union firefighters. Only 3000 were needed, went beyond and got 4000. Their brothers and sisters from locals across the tristate hit the pavement and helped reach their goal. All I could say is job well done..

Please forgive me for being "off base".  I didn't realize that you were only referring to small communities when you stated the "country as a whole".

Actually, the majority of the population is served by career or mostly career departments.   The majority of the country (land wise) is served by volunteer or mostly volunteer departments.  Volunteerism is declining and many all volunteer departments are now combination and many more probably should be.  
 
Love for the community is not exclusive to the volunteers, which for some reason is something people like you are unable to grasp.
 
What's your stance on volunteer grandstanding? 

I don't think the headline necessarily needs to be changed.  Whether or not this is actually a career vs volunteer issue, the term "professional" was used correctly in the headline.  A professional firefighter is a person who is paid to be a firefighter just like a professional athlete is a person that is paid to play a sport.  
 
Acting in a professional manner and displaying professionalism is a different animal.

You know who else has rights too?  Employees, even non-union ones.
 
I agree that the whole story needs to be told.  I read an article that stated the department had 150 interior and 150 non-interior members, but it failed to mention what the average volunteer turnout is for calls.  That number is more important than the first two.
 
You don't have to like the "union rhetoric", but the reality is the public does have a higher risk now.  When you eliminate on-duty, in-station staffing, the dispatch to arrival on scene time increases by at least a few minutes on average.  Minutes matter when your house is on fire. 

Actually, the majority of the population is served by career or mostly career departments.   The majority of the country (land wise) is served by volunteer or mostly volunteer departments.  Volunteerism is declining and many all volunteer departments are now combination and many more probably should be.  
 
Love for the community is not exclusive to the volunteers, which for some reason is something people like you are unable to grasp.
 
What's your stance on volunteer grandstanding? 

You know who else has rights too?  Employees, even non-union ones.
 
I agree that the whole story needs to be told.  I read an article that stated the department had 150 interior and 150 non-interior members, but it failed to mention what the average volunteer turnout is for calls.  That number is more important than the first two.
 
You don't have to like the "union rhetoric", but the reality is the public does have a higher risk now.  When you eliminate on-duty, in-station staffing, the dispatch to arrival on scene time increases by at least a few minutes on average.  Minutes matter when your house is on fire. 

You know who else has rights too?  Employees, even non-union ones.
 
I agree that the whole story needs to be told.  I read an article that stated the department had 150 interior and 150 non-interior members, but it failed to mention what the average volunteer turnout is for calls.  That number is more important than the first two.
 
You don't have to like the "union rhetoric", but the reality is the public does have a higher risk now.  When you eliminate on-duty, in-station staffing, the dispatch to arrival on scene time increases by at least a few minutes on average.  Minutes matter when your house is on fire. 

You know who else has rights too?  Employees, even non-union ones.
 
I agree that the whole story needs to be told.  I read an article that stated the department had 150 interior and 150 non-interior members, but it failed to mention what the average volunteer turnout is for calls.  That number is more important than the first two.
 
You don't have to like the "union rhetoric", but the reality is the public does have a higher risk now.  When you eliminate on-duty, in-station staffing, the dispatch to arrival on scene time increases by at least a few minutes on average.  Minutes matter when your house is on fire. 

I would like to think that this thread has been an education without opening a book.
 
Add in two other threads in which a serious discussion has taken place. The threads of:
  "Paid Firefighter lay offs contested by residents, FDNY/Garden City News"
  "Village of Port Chester Disbands Career Fire Dept".
 
There should be no doubt in any firefighters mind just what side of the fence they need to be on. You have been presented with a well written group of statements, many backed up with facts. I commend those who took the time to speak here to explain the rights and wrongs of volunteer and career firefighter relationships.
 
 This story is not only played out in Port Chester or Garden City, NY, but many other places across the country as well. People are following these stories whether on this site or other fire dept sites. I know many members in Connecticut, both career and volunteer certainly are.
 
  Perhaps this was a "wake up call" to some who felt we could just write those career firefighters off. We now see that way of thinking kind of back fired for a group of chiefs who now may have to explain their position. They now may be required to give facts on why they felt the need to cut those eight career firefighters. When I would think, most chiefs would totally disagree with that decision. As someone mentioned, how would eliminating these firefighters make it safer for those citizens and the firefighters as well. I hope they have a good answer for that.
 
 As a retired firefighter and a citizen of a small city about 100 miles from Port Chester, I have been directly involved in trying to make small, but significant changes within that city involving career and volunteer firefighters. After meeting with the then city manager about some serious issues that I saw going on within the departments last year. These issues also greatly involved the publics and firefighter safety as well.
 
 One example was an occupied house fire in which a fire house with eight career firefighters were ONLY 1.8 miles away. They were NEVER called by the volunteer commanding officer. Instead two other volunteer fire depts. were requested, one from as far away as eight miles. Those career firefighters each spent 16 weeks at a firefighter recruit school to learn their trade. Yet they were NEVER called. In fact, those career firefighters are actually closer than the first due volunteer company. All part of the same city.
 
  There was another very serious haz mat incident in a warehouse and those career firefighters, including 4 Haz Mat Techs, were never requested until another Haz Mat Team responding some 15 miles away actually requested them to respond. There has been other incidents as well.
 
  With no positive results from the city manager, OR those Volunteer Chiefs, I decided to go to a local newspaper about these issues. I have provided to that reporter dates, times and facts. Within the last two months, one volunteer dept has called that career dept twice. Including one call to where that building fire was less than a year earlier. "I guess they know somebody is watching".
 
  As I understand it, that newspaper reporter is still in the process of conducting interviews. In 2008, a civilian died less than two miles from that career firehouse. All while the commanding officer felt the need only for volunteer firefighters much farther away.
 
  So as we see, its not only Port Chester or Garden City where some volunteer chiefs are very willing to put the citizens as well as his own volunteer firefighters at risk. I hope things DO change without getting into the newspaper. It just won't look good if that story comes out. So stay tuned as these events happen as well.

Actually, the presence of the volunteers is a significant factor in situations like this.  Their presence "on paper" can lead to the perception that a small staff of career personnel are expendable and not really needed.  Particularly in tough financial times.
 
The volunteers themselves may not be directly responsible for the decision, but they essentially become accomplices by allowing themselves to be used as pawns in the process by not speaking out against the cuts.
 
For the most part, the career staff in a primarily volunteer department are there for a reason.  They serve to suppliment an inherent deficiency in the volunteer staffing model, inconsisent availability to respond in a timely fashion 24/7.
 
If you eliminate the career staff without resolving the reason they existed, then there will be negative consequences on the response end of things.  That's not a scare tactic, that's reality.

Actually, the presence of the volunteers is a significant factor in situations like this.  Their presence "on paper" can lead to the perception that a small staff of career personnel are expendable and not really needed.  Particularly in tough financial times.
 
The volunteers themselves may not be directly responsible for the decision, but they essentially become accomplices by allowing themselves to be used as pawns in the process by not speaking out against the cuts.
 
For the most part, the career staff in a primarily volunteer department are there for a reason.  They serve to suppliment an inherent deficiency in the volunteer staffing model, inconsisent availability to respond in a timely fashion 24/7.
 
If you eliminate the career staff without resolving the reason they existed, then there will be negative consequences on the response end of things.  That's not a scare tactic, that's reality.