exmrvfc

Members
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    125

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by exmrvfc

  2. Posted

    Regardless of who, why or when this or isn't happening.

    The law does not allow for a paid chief without that district going to New York State and getting state legislation passed allowing this to happen in a volunteer fire dept., unless there is already not an allowance for this in that department.

    Chief, I am not sure that is correct per NYS Town Law unless you are talking about an Independent Fire Company that contracts with the District.

    11-c. (Such Board of Commissioners) May adopt a resolution to employ paid firefighters and paid fire officers including but not limited to a paid chief of the fire district department, provide for their powers and duties, determine the chain of command in the fire department as between volunteer and paid firefighters, determine that paid chief and/or any other paid officers shall have charge of apparatus and other equipment, and determine that the volunteer firefighters and volunteer officers of the fire department shall act under the orders and control of such paid fire officers.   - See more at: http://codes.findlaw.com/ny/town-law/twn-sect-176.html#sthash.8zh2YIQO.dpuf

  7. Posted

    Three? That's essential? I'd say it's pathetic.

    OSHA / NFPA = 2 in 2 out

    ISO = 12 + an IC (career), 36 + an IC (volunteer)

    and THREE is their initial response. How is that being allowed to happen?

    Barry is better at the ISO info but I am pretty sure ISO does not require 36 volunteers at the scene. They require 36 on the roster assuming 1/3 will be available to respond getting you the 12 on scene.

  9. Posted

    As Far as FDNY FLIps, the attendess come out with the following NYS certifications:

    A first line officer completing this program receives certification in Educational Methodology, Fire Behavior and Arson Awareness, Fire Cause and Origin Determination, Haz Mat First Responder Operations, Fire Instructor Level 1, and Fire Officer Level 1.

    At minimum, My opinion is that a volunteer officer should have the Fire behavior, Haz Mat Ops and Fire Officer I out of the FLIP classes to be eligible to be "elected" as an officer. I would leave the instructor level classes to the MTO. This is in addition to the Firefighter level courses of FF1, FF2, AVET, Truck Co Ops, Pump Ops, SAfety & Survival. You need those classes to fight fires and any potential officer should already have them. I also think HazMat ops should be Firefighter level and HazMat Incident Command should be the officer level class. If people want to be officers, they should set the example and have the classes. If people are resistant to taking classes and making themselves better firefighters, maybe they shouldn't be leading the department. The above list is not meant to be all inclusive as I didn;t even get to the NIMS classes. Just going off of FLIPs list per the FDNY site.

  10. Posted

    Take a closer look at the stern, you'll see it. It's pretty much the same one as the Lawrence, although it has a bucket on the end.

    The ladder looks like a Telesquirt design. Although I have never seen one with a bucket.

  14. Posted

    Izzy,

    You are correct about Patriarch Partners being the owner. They are a Private Equity firm that specializes in buying distressed companies and turning them around. They did blame the computer system that managed their manufacturing for the mess they got into when they tried to unwind their relationship with Daimler. They also had to move production from the Freightliner Plan in SC into a new plant. Here is an article from last year that talked about it.

    http://www.firerescue1.com/apparatus/articles/348681

  15. Posted

    If I am reading town law correctly the petition merely is to force the Town Board (or both Towns in this case) to hold a meeting on the issue. Then according to Article 11 section 185 of Town law:

    "After the hearing upon notice as provided hereinbefore and upon the evidence given thereat, the town board or

    boards shall determine whether it is in the public interest to dissolve the district."

    It would seem to me that lacking any other plan to provide Fire Protection, it is clearly not in the best public interest to dissolve the district. That would be the angle I would play behind the scenes with the Town Boards. Has the District tried to "join forces" with this coalition to petition the State Legislators together over the tax inequities and get the State Law passed (on taxing the non profits)? Or as another poster suggested, pursuing PILOTS with the Non Profits?? It might help to work together on those issues and that would take you out of the role as their adversary. It may be possible to negotiate a PILOT if the Non Profits think the revised State Legislation has any chance of passing.

  17. Posted

    This is one reason why Career and Volunteers don't get along.Because of these kinds comments.Also comes to mind two career killed in texas while fighting a church fire as Volunteers in there hometown.Was denied lodd benefits from their career muncipality which was greater then their volunteer comunnity so WHO in the end suffers.

    What I posted is not anti-career nor an indictment of the 207 system. My question is who has the burden of proof? If a municipality wanted to deny line of duty benefits, such as disability, do they bear the burden of proof to prove the cause of the disability happened outside of work? Or does the FF bear the burden to prove it happened at work??

  18. Posted

    OK let me throw this at you! I am a career firefighter and lets say I volunteer somewhere else. Over the years I develop respatory problems, and my department I career in won't pay for or question my medical needs because they say that I may have developed my medical condition at my volunteer department. How can I go to my union for support and how can they go to bat for me when there is that doubt. It is just not worth the risk to screw my family or my career. Now look at it from that point of view. I came from the volunteer ranks and I am not forgetting where I came from!

    I have seen this argument before but has there ever been a case where FF was denied benefits due to this? We all know of guys (PD and FD) who have been injured on the ballfield or the "b" job and make it back to work where the injury suddenly occurs. There are enough of those cases that are covered. Wouldn't the municipality employing the FF have to prove it didn't happen on the job or does 207 require the FF to prove it did happen on the job?

  19. Posted

    I find that hard to believe. I think they will dig there heals in and scream "we've been seperate for over 100 years and everyone in town will die if you combine us".

    In many cases the manning even after combining may just meet standards (or still be substandard) so dropping by attrition may not be an option.

    I.e. PFD & PMFD have 6-7 onduty manning 3-4 engines & 2 ladders with 1 (average) ff per rig. If they were to merge they would need to run 2 engines & 1 ladder (at a minimum) with 2 ff's per rig. Would this improve service? Would it save $$? I believe the answer is Yes to both.

    I agree with your comments on the PMFD and PFD manning as I doubt there is an "overstaffed" department in the County. I was thinking more along the lines of multiple paid chiefs (PD or FD) multiple executive officers (PD) multiple DPW heads. Mainly where there is duplication of services, especially on the adminstrative (Clerks, Treasurers, Administrators, etc) side that are duplicated among towns & villages.

  20. Posted

    You may start to see more of these topics come up due to the economy. Municipalities are alredy looking at layoffs to trim the budgets. At what point due taxpayers look to "layoff" the Villages? Pelham and Pelham Manor do not need to be 2 seperate entities. Larchmont, Village of Mamaroneck and Town of Mamaroneck could be one entitiy. Rye Brook and Port Chester could get back together. All of these entities have their own police Chiefs and commanding officers, they each have their own DPW, Some have Paid Fire Chiefs and all have municipal Administrators and staff. Eastchester has a town wide FD but they still have seperate Villages. Harrison has Town wide PD and DPW but 3 fire districts.

    The Volunteer FD's are probably the most willing to combine out of all of these groups. It is far more likely that a Volunteer Chief would "give up his car" than the various municipal Unions would give up jobs. That is understandable as no one wants to lose their job. It really comes down to the public who is paying the tax bill. At what point do they say taxes are too high and I am willing to vote to consolidate services. They might even get better protection/service from the combined entities. The way to achieve the balance would be no lay offs at the mergers and lower the headcounts by attrition each year after that to get to "proper staffing" whatever that means to each entitiy.

  21. Posted

    According to the Yonkers website there are 686 police and 443 FD employees out of 1917 total employees. While they are the two biggest agencies, I can't see how no one in City hall has been cut. Every so often the Jorurnal News will print how some connected crony got hired from a Board of Ed Trustee position to become the Special Assistant to the Liason of the Mayor for Constituent services making 100K+ a year. Not to mention the foomer Council person who had to give up her "appointed" job because she couldn't pass a civil service exam. Would it be helpful for the Unions to point out these hypocrocies? Yonkers, the city of hills...........