Ging599

Members
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    72

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Ging599

  1. Posted

    Believe me, I have made all of the points you gents just made. Some members have an attitude towards things that I do not understand. I am still pushing forward with the intention of forming the FAST and hope it pans out. I am further hoping that some of the negative members who see us progressing and training with FAST like what they see and become interested and come onboard.

  2. Posted

    The FAST situation in Putnam is less than ideal. If not calling Putnam Valley, ICs are just calling neighboring departments for an Engine or Ladder and assigning them as FAST. This doesnt necessarily give you a crew that has taken any FAST training. This, among other reasons, is why I am trying to form a FAST team in Carmel. It seems to have sparked some interest as I have a number of members signed up for next weeks FAST class. If nothing else comes out of this, at least I have a half a dozen guys who have taken the class who hadn't previously. Ideally, we end up with enough guys trained and educated that we can create a formal FAST team. Unfortunately I have met some resistance. If I hear one more time from someone that they don't want to create a FAST team because all you do is sit outside a building, I might strangle them. Instead I try to educate them on the positives of expanding training and ideas but sometimes this just doesn't get through.

  7. Posted · Edited by Ging599

    All members respond to the station unless they have to pass the scene to get there. We are strict about this and it is almost always complied with by members.

    Basically, as sometimes is in fire service, its about risk vs. reward. How much time are we really saving driving L/S to alarms? Unless there is a major traffic jam in town, probably not much, so even if an AFA turns out to be the real deal we aren't going to lose much on our response time.

  9. Posted

    I have addressed this with drivers and officers. You would be amazed at some of the justifications I hear as to why they went "Code 3". I won't go into specifics.

    It is hard to remove driving privileges or take disciplinary action when there is no set policy.

    I tried to lead by example. It is well known in my department that I very rarely use lights/siren on my Chief vehicle. Yes I have been driving down the road with no lights or siren on and in my rear view mirror I see the engine in the distance lights a blazing.

    helicopper and Bnechis like this

  10. Posted

    It's a shame that drivers/officers can't just use common sense based on dispatch information.

    Some calls that I don't see automatically requiring a Code 3 response: Mulch fire in a parking lot, PD on scene of a PDAA requesting a washdown, 2nd and subsequent apparatus responses to small fires reported to be out, mmm... those are just a few that readily come to mind.

    Believe me, I don't want to write more policies that further police the department but I stalled on this for a year and watched how responses went. I heard more absurd reasoning as to why they used the sirens for obvious non-emergency calls and got more complaints from people about the Q being wound up at 3am for no reason than I care to admit. I feel I have no other choice.

    Bnechis likes this

  12. Posted · Edited by Ging599

    Our FD is one of the few exceptions that Grumpy mentioned in Putnam County that does not provide EMS. At the request of our local VAC, (and false assurances that there very few CPR calls that they actually go on), we signed on with the Echo level policy that Grumpy described above and now respond with EMS on CPR calls. Our department was one of the first to be activated with EMS once the policy took effect and have gone on at least 7 such calls since it was implemented. We require that members that go on these calls are a minimum of CPR/AED certified. So far there seems to be positive feedback from the VAC as they appreciate the extra hands on scene.

    Bnechis, JetPhoto and grumpyff like this

  15. Posted

    The scenario I had in my mind when I posted this was a cardiac arrest call with family present. Members performing CPR would benefit from having respiratory protection due to the increased likelihood of aspiration. A simple, does he/she have any infectious diseases question during initial interview with the family. Of course first responders should have respiratory protection on but you honestly don't see that being worn so much.

    x129K likes this

  16. Posted

    I have been out of the EMS business for a little bit now and I apologize if this has been addressed elsewhere but....

    Is questioning if a patient has an infectious disease being done as part of gathering a patient's medical history?

    Very often we learn of a patient's infectious history after transport is complete and everyone is perturbed that they didn't know on scene but, is anyone asking if the patient is infectious during assessment?

    I understand that we are all supposed to use PPE and treat everyone as if they are infectious, but having the knowledge on scene would probably cause us to work with a little more diligence.

    Thanks

  24. Posted

    At least six people were injured Tuesday after an unidentified teenager stole a Uniondale fire chief's SUV on the Hofstra University campus and sped away with emergency lights flashing before slamming into several vehicles, police said Tuesday.

    A fire chief had rushed to Hofstra to answer an alarm and left his keys in the vehicle, which was also left running, while he investigated, when the suspect jumped in and drove off, said Nassau Police Det. Sgt. Richard Laursen.

    http://www.newsday.com/news/local/ny-webcr...,0,740328.story