SRS131EMTFF

Brotherhood isn't gone. I see the same brotherhood that I had (and still have as a retiree) in my sons and the brothers in their FD. It's thhe same brotherhood I saw when my father was on the job. Sometimes you have to look a little harder than you would like, but the brothers are still here today.
It's not in drinkin' with the guys or playing softball, or the union or the vols association. Our brotherhood is an attitude, a code of conduct,if you will. It's helping a brother move to a new home; it's covering his shift because he is out of sick time; it's giving him a hand when you see him struggling with a task.
Brotherhood was in full speed on 9/11. The world saw them respond. What I saw also were guys reporting for work without being recalled to duty. In their hands were their own private colection of sawzalls, sledges, prybars, etc. They were going to look for their brothers.
How do you find one of these true brothers? You might have to wait until the circumstances are just right. For example, you might be advancing a line down a hallway. It starts getting hot, smoke is banking down lowering your visibility. You don't want to admit it, but you are getting a little scared, and now the heat and smoke have got you as low to the floor as you can get. Look over your shoulder. You should just be able to make out a dim flashlight, just about a foot behind you.
THAT is your brother. Take care of eachother.

I dunno, Joe. I don't think they could be charged with a hate crime. They haven't taken a violent turn with anyone. Just standing there with signs and protesting I don't think qualifies.
Phelps' daughter is an attorney, so she knows her way around the law. I applaud the Supreme Court for taking a controversial subject and making a tough decision. As reprehensible as Phelps(note I wouldn't consider this guy a Reverend) and his followers beliefs are, the SCOTUS made the right call on this one. A number of my gay and lesbian friends were screaming about this the other day. I wanted to say to them, "Look, it may not be the decision you wanted, but it was the right decision." I would also say the same thing to any of my military friends, current or retired. It sickens me as a veteran that these people have nothing better to do than protest at funerals of men and women who were just doing their jobs. They are protected by the Constitution and this is an example that it works.
I'd actually like to sit down and read the dissenting justices opinion.
Westboro, IMHO, is a cult, plain and simple, that hides behind religion and the First Amendment to make its views public. One could say the same about white supremacist groups, black power groups, and folks of their ilk. they use the First Amendment as a shield. You may not like what they say, but they have the right to say it.
I took an oath to protect the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic. Do groups such as this infuriate me?? Of course. Would I like to see them disappear?? Yup. Will I defend their right to say what they want?? You bet I will. I do feel, free speech should be tempered with common sense, but the letter of the law says otherwise.
I'm actually suprised nobody has tried to destroy the church, or throw these people a beating.

Boehner is a bonehead. This like the 9/11 bill is just an extension of the GOP continuing to tell America's Hero's that their sacrifice is not great enough.

With all respect Brother "Men Of Fire" I have to disagree with you. As far back as firefighting goes, there have been hairbags that come into the service either by volunteering, or somehow scoring well enough and bluffing their way onto a career job.
But we cannot take a broad stroke of the brush and paint all junior men/women into one complete group of people in the service who do not care about keeping the traditions, the nobility and the comrade-re of the Brotherhood alive. As an example, just look at how many of our members here on Bravo in the younger age group have become such active members here, and show so much interest in those traditions, and learning "the ways" of the fire service.
I remember hearing senior men, when I was a junior man, extolling their observations that the Brotherhood wasn't what it used to be; that the Brotherhood was doomed to extinction.
Those that do believe in the virtues of our Brotherhood need to be reassured by senior men such as yourself, that the traditions you speak of are indeed still alive, and need to develop the belief in themselves that they are part of something larger than just a job, and need to be taught that they will in the near future be the ones responsible for carrying on the Brotherhood, when they move into positions of seniority, promotion, and leadership.
If we truly care enough in our fraternity to want it to survive and thrive well into the future, then senior men today need to redouble their efforts in seeing to it that these junior men are properly taught about the sacrifices our fore bearers gave to this noblest of professions. All members in senior positions, and leadership today need to be asking themselves a very personal question; are my judgments about the future being clouded by my personal disappointments about things that have happened to me through the years of my career?
It becomes very difficult at times as the years pass, to maintain the motivation to want to pass on our finest traditions. To want to help our junior members succeed in gaining the true understanding of how the Brotherhood continues to evolve, through generations of sacrifice, members being killed in the performance of their duty, members fighting to gain workplace improvements through the collective bargaining process, and members becoming sick through a lack of workplace safety.
I always believed the best way to educate our younger members about these things was to show them examples of what conditions were like before improvements were made. To tell them the stories of what our members went through to gain the improvements we have in place today.
Some things obviously cannot be easily taught. Some things members are just going to have to learn for themselves; generosity and caring for each other, being able to forgive each other for mistakes and not hold grudges.
But I truly understand how you feel. Sometimes it feels like paddling upstream against an overwhelming current. Sometimes we just want to throw it all down, and simply walk away. But the past generations of Brothers who fought so hard for all of the improvements we enjoy today; the firefighers who never got the chance to enjoy some of those improvements, because they got sick or were killed from the very things they were fighting so hard to improve; for the memory of these Brothers passed, we owe it to their memory to continue the fight. To continue to impress upon on our newer generation of firefighters that some things are worth fighting for, some things are worth giving our all for; and the Brotherhood is the greatest of attributes we share in the fire service.
It may not feel like you are making much headway in passing these lessons on, but I guarantee you when the time comes and you have moved on from the job; if you have put in the effort to share with your newer members all of the greatest things about the Brotherhood, your efforts shall not have been in vain.

My question is was the building sprinkled, was it alarmed? When was the first call for aid, where and how did it start? Who ran the program and what is their staff to child ratio? I think the answer to these questions will give us greater insight into how something like this happened. Obviously it is not often that these happen but the common theme among these incidents is the failure to plan for emergencies by the staff of the program.

Definitely Kudos to them, however, I do have this to say, there are mechanisms that exist in this country to get people the fire protection equipment that they need. There are various local, state and federal methods to secure funding for equipment. The methods are totally absent from most developing nations. While yes it is important to support and help those at home I ask a simple question, ignoring location, which community needs a fire equipment more? A department that serves 1,000 people over 10 square miles with a 30 year old rig and some bunker gear, or a department that serves 100,000 over the same area without a rig or any bunker gear? It my just be may involvement with charities such as FDNY BC Sheridans Mutual Aid Americas but IMHO the community that is even more severely lacking in fire protection should receive the equipment, regardless of whether or not it is overseas.
I suppose that is the problem that much of the world has with us however, they think that we only we think of our selves before others.
I am not saying that all rigs retired should go overseas, I am saying however that the greatest good for the greatest number of people should be considered.

Rest In Peace, end of an era for American Military History. Cpl. Buckles and the rest of the American Military Forces boots on the ground did in less than 365 days what the french, british and other allied forces could not do in more than 3 years.

It really amazes me how down in Westchester we completely ignore the EMT-I training and protocols. Where I am in VT, almost everyone here is an EMT-I. The EMT-I course up here is nothing more time wise than another EMT class (i.e. you meet for about 4-6 hours a week for about 3-4 months). In this time you learn IVs, some interventional med. administration, ECGs, and other advanced techniques. I guess since we staff our volly and career rigs 24/7/365 with EMT-Is minimum paramedics are not very common. Almost every rescue squad in the state is volunteer but staffed 24/7/365 with EMT-Is, additionally we always have EMT-Bs and EMT-Is "jump" the calls, get on scene before us and start treatment. Often if an EMT-I has responded and an IV is required, the IV is started and flowing before we even get there.
I know WPs high angle team and YVAC have EMT-Is, anyone else in West. Co. use EMT-Is, I would imagine in areas where the VACs actually get out and paramedics are far away, having EMT-Is on the rig would be very beneficial.

1. While Watch Hill Road maybe in Mohegan, it is 5 minutes or 2.5 miles away from Montrose FD HQ, the nearest Mohegan Fire House is 8 minutes for 3.6 miles away
2. U-12 is a utility with the cascade system that is requested to all fires in the tri-village. It is not a front line piece of apparatus (I.e. ambulance, rescue, ladder or engine), it is more of a scene support vehicle therefore it is understandable that it would respond with no interior members. Sounds like a great job for one of life members who still wants to help out and can drive and operate the cascade system.
3. One would need to ask the chief on scene, but 14 minutes is too long to wait for a FAS Team
4. One would need to ask the chief on scene, however the VAFD has primary responsibility for their campus, it is possible they too were tied up
5. One would need to ask the chief on scene, however Peekskill is further away and I would be willing to bet the same guarantee for manpower.
I am sorry this was not that unusual/out of line/controversial for you.

1. While Watch Hill Road maybe in Mohegan, it is 5 minutes or 2.5 miles away from Montrose FD HQ, the nearest Mohegan Fire House is 8 minutes for 3.6 miles away
2. U-12 is a utility with the cascade system that is requested to all fires in the tri-village. It is not a front line piece of apparatus (I.e. ambulance, rescue, ladder or engine), it is more of a scene support vehicle therefore it is understandable that it would respond with no interior members. Sounds like a great job for one of life members who still wants to help out and can drive and operate the cascade system.
3. One would need to ask the chief on scene, but 14 minutes is too long to wait for a FAS Team
4. One would need to ask the chief on scene, however the VAFD has primary responsibility for their campus, it is possible they too were tied up
5. One would need to ask the chief on scene, however Peekskill is further away and I would be willing to bet the same guarantee for manpower.
I am sorry this was not that unusual/out of line/controversial for you.

1. While Watch Hill Road maybe in Mohegan, it is 5 minutes or 2.5 miles away from Montrose FD HQ, the nearest Mohegan Fire House is 8 minutes for 3.6 miles away
2. U-12 is a utility with the cascade system that is requested to all fires in the tri-village. It is not a front line piece of apparatus (I.e. ambulance, rescue, ladder or engine), it is more of a scene support vehicle therefore it is understandable that it would respond with no interior members. Sounds like a great job for one of life members who still wants to help out and can drive and operate the cascade system.
3. One would need to ask the chief on scene, but 14 minutes is too long to wait for a FAS Team
4. One would need to ask the chief on scene, however the VAFD has primary responsibility for their campus, it is possible they too were tied up
5. One would need to ask the chief on scene, however Peekskill is further away and I would be willing to bet the same guarantee for manpower.
I am sorry this was not that unusual/out of line/controversial for you.

1. While Watch Hill Road maybe in Mohegan, it is 5 minutes or 2.5 miles away from Montrose FD HQ, the nearest Mohegan Fire House is 8 minutes for 3.6 miles away
2. U-12 is a utility with the cascade system that is requested to all fires in the tri-village. It is not a front line piece of apparatus (I.e. ambulance, rescue, ladder or engine), it is more of a scene support vehicle therefore it is understandable that it would respond with no interior members. Sounds like a great job for one of life members who still wants to help out and can drive and operate the cascade system.
3. One would need to ask the chief on scene, but 14 minutes is too long to wait for a FAS Team
4. One would need to ask the chief on scene, however the VAFD has primary responsibility for their campus, it is possible they too were tied up
5. One would need to ask the chief on scene, however Peekskill is further away and I would be willing to bet the same guarantee for manpower.
I am sorry this was not that unusual/out of line/controversial for you.

They have been there for at least 6 months. never seen them move, never seen anyone go near them, in them or use them. I have asked this question to myself and the staff there many times and I have not received an answer at all.

I'm sorry but when a firefighter or firefighters act in good faith in perfoming their duty (or calling or "hobby" or whatever the hell else you want to call it) on behalf of and in service to a community that community should bear the burden of protecting those firefighters should the need arise be they paid or volunteer.
Cogs

Cogs, I agree with you; unfortunately some in here are wearing blinders. Sometimes I think its useless to attempt to rationalize with them as they are fixed in their positions for whatever reason and in their minds they are totally justified. So be it.
Reading this thread is like reading the funnies; you need a cup of coffee and the tv on. This is one of these cyclical things; I think the best thing to do is let them get it out of their systems and that will make them happy for the next couple of months or so and then let them start the whole cycle over again.

Thanks.
I guess the most unfortunate thing to me is that yet again it comes down to a career vs volunteer debate. I can't for the life of me figure out why anyone would think that ALL firefighters should not be afforded the same protections, regardless of their "qualifications". Yes, disparities do exist but in the end we ALL willingly put our lives at risk to help those in need do we not. And that above all else is what matters.
Cogs

I find it very hard to believe that you have any concept of what goes on in the real world. The only thing you've done on this forum is sound off for career firefighters and ridicule volunteers. What you don't seem to understand is a single thing about how the law really works. When people have told you within this thread, all you have done is continue with your anti-volunteer rhetoric.
The Board of Fire Commissioners holds the responsibility for setting the standard within their district. If they wanted background checks, psych evals (which are not required of any career FD that I know of), and a full length fire academy, they COULD set that as their standard. Most volunteer or combo departments have commissioners that understand the sense of fiscal responsibility and realize that they can provide a certain level of fire protection at the least burdensome cost to the taxpayer.
The Board of Fire Commissioners has the final say on all membership applications and all officers of the department. They have the final say on all training and continuing education requirements. The taxpayers sign on to the standards required by the Board of Fire Commissioners by electing them. As such, the taxpayers should bear the burden of indemnification of the firefighters and officers that are acting within the standards that are completely in control of the municipality. The commissioners are responsible for providing a level of fire protection that a reasonable district of the same size would offer and they hold the sole responsibility to make changes if that standard is not being met.
In the event of gross negligence, indemnification does not apply. All of the cases you mention are gross negligence and the firefighter(s) would be on their own.

I get the point. I don't disagree that standards should apply equally and that has been my tune in every post in every thread that deals with the issue. My hang up is that regardless of that inequity FFs still step up and perform their duty and freely put their lives on the line to protect their communities. In turn those communities should not turn their backs on them as a matter of course when issues arise. Negligence or incompetence is negligence or incompetence regardless of a paycheck and when this occurs those responsible should bear the consequences of their actions or lack of them. This Bill will not erase or eliminate anyone's ability to pursue their right to seek compensation or justice and get it when justified. But it will protect volunteers in cases where despite their best efforts tradgedies occur, just as indemnification does for our career counterparts.
Cogs

This thread has become a sound off for Career vs Volunteer. Many communities just cannot afford a career department and the amount of runs just cannot justify the cost. A department with under 200 runs a year just cannot justify 50 career members plus officers. The further north you go into the rural areas the poorer some of hte departments are and some barely keep up with keeping equipment running, and have no where near the latest and greatest. A lot is a mater of economics. Yes if it was a perfect world, everyone would have the same training, same equipment etc. We all have to make due and the faster some people accept that the better. I for one do not want to pay any more taxes and have thought many times to pack it in and leave NY. Look at what the average home owner pays in taxes. Not just property but sales tax but every other little tax. Home heating oil. 3% more that Putnam just in a tax, the list goes on. So where does it end...Economics.

Bnechis did you write let's try not to lump us all together? That's funny because that's what certain chiefs in here do every time he types. Minimum standards does not mean that's where the majority stops. There is not a rule that once you have completed the minimum you can no longer train.
Im pretty much done with this topic and site for anything other than IA's. There have been many posts in this topic alone that not only had nothing to do with the original topic but also bad mouth the non career side. Funny they weren't deleted but im sure this will be.

I'd say that's reasonably well-trained. I'm still fairly new to the fire service, and the day I stop learning they can put me in a box!
Thanks Chief, that's all I really wanted; some opinions on if it was reasonable to treat two firefighters performing the same task differently, just because one was career and one was volunteer.
It's certainly not going to happen at my department, and I respectfully suggest it's extremely unlikely to happen at any department; if an 18 year old is the only Chief they can scrape up, then they must be pretty much a one-man department, and they've got FAR bigger issues to confront than debating indemnification!
Again I can't relate to that; we don't do parades, except in our own district. If departments do do that, I suppose they must arrange for cover with their neighbours.
Chief, I've not attacked anything you've said, and I resent the accusation. I simply declined politely to take the debate in the direction you seemed to wish, and confined my interest to a particular question which, as it happens, related to my own department - it being a combo department. And it brings out the essence of the debate: should you treat career and volunteer firefighters in a combo department the same with respect to the issue at hand? If you argue that you should, that provides a basis for arguing the case in departments which are exclusively career, or exclusively volunteer. If you consider that 'unreasonable' or 'attacking' then I suggest... qtip :-)
Mike

Chief,
We appear to be still at cross-purposes; you're talking generalities, I'm talking specifics.
'What is an "ex-chief"?' - I can't see how that, for instance, is relevant to my question. As for the rest, I'm just a firefighter, I don't speak for my department on a public forum. Suffice it to say I have full confidence in my Chiefs & Officers, and none of them would ever order an unqualified member into an IDLH environment.
Let's make the question even more specific, shall we? I, and one of my career colleagues, both interior qualified and well-trained (career academy in his case, 250 hours+ at FTC in mine) are ordered to perform a primary search. We fail to locate a civilian. The civilian is subsequently found, deceased, on secondary. A relative finds a smartass lawyer and proceeds to sue my career colleague & I for negligence in failing to find their relative. Chief, should the department, and the municipality, handle our cases differently, and indemnify us to different degrees? Why? If you look back to the first post, that's the issue. That's the question.
Mike

I think that what he is trying to say is that it is very hard to compare these two locations. Ardsley was settled around 1682, Round Rock around 1851, seeing as Round Rock is a newer community it has had less time to see problems develop and mature. I am sure when Ardsley was founded almost 200 years before Round Rock they too thought they had a much better system then others (in this era read British). Now that you live in Round Rock you see westchester like those in 1682 saw their counter-parts, however, that does not mean that Round Rock will not develop its own, different problems then England or Ardsley once did.
And what he was saying about Gasoline Tax is all of the money the state of Texas gets from the Oil and Gas companies for use of public land and other taxes and fees that large oil corporations pay allow taxes to be so low, kind of like how Alaska actually gives money back to its residents based on income from gas companies.

Chief,
You misunderstand, hopefully not intentionally. When I said 'We're performing exactly the same duties under the same command' I was referring to operating at a specific incident, perhaps one leading to litigation... By 'same duties' I mean myself and one of my career colleagues 'performing the same fireground assignment, working as a team'. By 'under the same command', I mean 'following the same orders from a superior officer on the fireground'. I trust that clarifies my point, and my question, which remains unanswered: if the actions of the team on the fireground lead, for whatever reason, to litigation, why should the career FF be treated differently to the volunteer when it comes to issues such as indemnification?


It wasn't in any sense a general comment about hiring, training, or promotion, and I regret you mistakenly took it at such; your 'debunking' was unnecessary and doesn't contribute to this debate and I apologise if my meaning was unclear.


Mike

From the way the AOL article takes it seem, in my opinion, its not that he wouldn't respond, it is that he couldn't. While he may have physically been able to do his job, mentally it sounds like a different story. I would not be surprised if it was determined that this firefighter had some form of PTSD that reoccurred during this tragedy. As with all mental health issues, it is a very slippery slope and one never knows what little event can cause a devastating downward spiral leading to depression, anxiety, and much worse. I think there is A LOT more to this story than the few paragraphs in the article. This does highlight the need to CISM Teams for all persons involved incidents like this, not just only for those with blood on their hands.