fdalumnus

This article is apparently from 2011. Has anything changed since then (sure I know the answer)....

A friend of mine (RIP) did a comparison study of a career county fire department in Maryland that is a twin to Nassau County and found the career county department operated with a budget half the size of the amount it costs to operate all of the Nassau County's VFD's. The FDNY operates FIVE rescue companies in a city of 8000000 people, Suffolk County with 1,200,000 people has OVER ONE HUNDRED rescue trucks and no career fire departments. FDNY has an average of 10,000 rescue responses annually. I don't believe that Nassau and Suffolk County have anywhere near that amount. 

Wow !!!
 
But it's all done for FREE right. On a smaller scale kind of reminds me of a place I am very familiar with in Eastern, Ct.

 
Article: http://m.timesunion.com/local/article/One-town-35-chiefs-1370649.php

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.

It has nothing to do with the quality or capabilities of the latest FD officials, it's the political oversight that is unwilling to allow the FD to manage itself 

Read that update and it still smells fishy to me. Mount Vernon is always going to be in ruins unless they just change the whole system up. The politics need to change and they need to bring in people to that fire department who know what they are doing and are willing to take the time to rebuild and fight for the necessities. The politicians can't be using emergency services as a political toy to bait with. Lives are at stake and those shenanigans need to stop. I don't know how many chiefs are retiring out of FDNY but maybe somebody with that level of experience should be running the department. That's just my two cents. If they don't take themselves seriously and try to make things better for themselves, nothing will change and they'll still be looked down upon. And that's not right to the firefighters who take the job seriously and to the people of Mount Vernon who rely on their services.

 
Of course that is GREAT NEWS and THANK YOU for keeping us updated. Now, Seven more to go.
 
So what does this indirectly mean for other guys. In particular those that want to become career firefighters as well. By laying off these eight Port Chester career firefighters, the competition just got harder for those younger volunteer firefighters within the border of Port Chester. Actually, by cutting these career firefighters, their own volunteer membership actually may have, indirectly, have hurt their own membership. Just maybe one less opening for a Port Chester volunteer firefighter to be hired in nearby Rye and begin a very satisfying and rewarding career. And soon there could be seven other positions somewhere nearby in which more career opportunities could be lost for those volunteer members.
 
 Besides the fact of those Port Chester citizens lives and personnel valuables are being put at much more risk. Besides the fact that a fire leadership is willing to put their own members lives at more risk.  We now see another smaller price that a few younger volunteer members may end up paying. LESS opportunity for them to become a career firefighter. All because of a leadership within their own ranks that are more than willing to let them down.
 
  By the way, "how's Chief Quinn doing" ?

Rye Brook has hired one of the fired Port Chester firefighters . Its a start !

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

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.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

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

Another red light, green light 1, 2, 3 discussion....
 
If you use a blue light, don't drive like an a$$hole, period. If people want to pull over as a curtesy, terrific. If not, do not tailgate, do not flash your high beams, just deal with it. Regardless, you are to still obey all traffic laws. You are better off not using a light.
 
As for this new change in the law, I think it's great. Anything that's meant to further protect emergency services is ok in my book.
 
 

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.

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.

 
If you have lights "all over your personal vehicle"  you have already broken the law.

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.

time to eradicate these scoundrels from the face of the earth !
 
Also time we start holding the "host" countries responsible. Some of these countries get money and other aid from the USA. Cut them off pronto.
 
My condolences to the victims.

wishful thinking for some FASNY people
 

wishful thinking for some FASNY people
 

After being involved and knowing the system for a very long time, it is my opinion (only opinion), that there was a conscious effort by those involved in the leadership of the Five Volunteer Companies to make the case that "they can prove" to this city, that they are perfectly capable of providing fire service WITHOUT ANY USE of those Career Firefighters.
 
I also believe it was also in the plan to eliminate twelve of those firefighter positions by closing an engine company and reducing the manning on another. They apparently were also working with one or two city council members, as well as one or two outside CAREER Firefighters who went against their own brothers so they could continue to be the heros within their volunteer organizations. In fact during one budget hearing earlier in June, one council member used many facts that seem to point in the direction of one particular OUTSIDE CAREER Firefighter. However, just as expected the Norwich Fire Chief had all of his facts well prepared to present countering those comments. That's how sure the members of that Norwich FD were that this Outside Brother Firefighter would be used against them.
 
 Then after that first recorded incident involving a nursing home, apparently most of my opponents thought this "old retired dinosaur" really has NO IDEA what he's talking about and we (Volunteer Chiefs) could just "write him off".  When the second serious incident occurred with no response from that closer, fully staffed fire dept., another email was sent out. This time word is, "I am going to the newspaper no matter who tells me not to". Between the time of my scheduled appointment with this newspaper reporter and this second incident - TWO more serious incidents get added to the story.
 
 When I do finally meet with that reporter we talk for about two hours. I remind her that she is certainly entitled to hear from the other side and she advises me of such. She tells me that she will be heading to the dispatch center to get some facts related to these incidents so she can start with the story. The next week she contacts me and shows me an email she received. It is apparently from someone who works there and that email basically states: "When you showed up to get the facts, (named individual) was in a PANIC MODE after you left". She was apparently referring to one individual that wears TWO Commanders hats and was directly involved in one of the incidents reported. To this day, I still have no idea who that person reporting this was. However I did see the email claiming to be J. Citizen who apparently was fully aware of what was going on.
 
 The reporter was instructed to come back in about a week to get those detailed reports. Once she did get that, those facts conflicted with facts I had given her. Through further investigation those documented facts conflicted with other witnesses and fire dept reports.
 
 That story was never mentioned. If that were true, that could very well be a MAJOR story in itself.
 
 I will add this as well. I have offered this story to readers of this site in light of what has been going on as posted with some other fire depts. Hopefully stories like these can be avoided BEFORE getting to this point. This is a perfect example how being a fire chief trying to maintain some type of ego has turned around putting them as the main cause of a serious problem. These were the Chiefs that were "Voted in" by their own membership. A leader they chose who is willing to put their own lives at risk rather than call that career fire dept. And now, not only are their moves being watched by some old retired guy who once was a part of this outdated system, but after that newspaper story, maybe those moves are now being watched by many more individuals OUTSIDE of the local fire service.

It maybe very difficult to get what your requesting due to the on going lawsuit pending .