CTFF

Members
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    305

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by CTFF

  8. Posted · Edited by CTFF

    http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/article/Stamford-Fire-Rescue-chief-departs-with-1450695.php#page-1

    Stamford Fire & Rescue chief departs with concerns over city fire service's future

    Jeff Morganteen, Staff Writer

    STAMFORD -- Tuesday marks the end of a 41-year career for Robert McGrath, the departing chief of Stamford Fire & Rescue and a Stamford native who worked his way through the ranks from a firefighter to captain before taking the helm of the city fire department 11 years ago...

    skylark likes this

  9. Posted

    Well I had heard and suspected it existed, in fact a former BFD member supposedly has a copy of the letter from the IAFF to Stamford's local supporting the rival designation, but I had not seen it. Now we have a person that actually has seen a document that specifically cites Stamford's VFDs (sans Glenbrook what a shock) as rivals. An interesting turn of events to say the least with potentially far reaching implications.

    Cogs

    Yeah because a Random guy on the internet claims to have seen a document it must all be true!

    JohnnyOV likes this

  12. Posted · Edited by CTFF

    As the example cited shows I really don't need a specific statement from L-786. Your Union General President on numerous published occasions has explained the Union's official and his personal stance vis a vis volunteers. So unless L-786 is going to go against your duly elected General President and the decisions of the Conventions the proof is quite clear to anyone with eyes to see.

    Let's look at this another way. Are you saying unequivocally and in an official capacity that L-786 does not now and never has viewed Stamford's VFDs as rivals? And are you also saying the L-786 does NOT prohibit it's members from volunteering in Stamford and that prohibition is due solely to FSLA?

    Cogs

    My comments here are never in an official capacity.

    I have never heard the term "rival organization" used to describe any volunteer organization by members of local 786, Vollies are the only people I've seen use the term.

    No.

  13. Posted

    As far as your questions in point one, well since I am not a member of 786 I cannot answer them. I can say in regards to L-786 citing of the VFDs as rivals that this is a commonly held belief. Although to be fair it seems that while most believe a document exists stating such apparently no one has actually seen it. But we do have the fact the CT saw the need to pass a law in regards to career fFFs volunteering as stated earlier and statements from the IAFFs General President to that effect such as:

    "Let me be as clear as possible. We as a union, by Convention actions, do not represent or condone volunteer, part-time or paid on-call fire fighters. This is also my personal position, as it has been from the time that I first joined the IAFF. It remains my position today as your General President, and I have reiterated this position to affiliate leaders on a number of occasions."

    Definition of CONDONE

    transitive verb: to regard or treat as acceptable

    So if your General President and by Convention your union does not condone volunteers, by definition it regards and will treat them as unacceptable..or in other words, rivals.

    On to the questions posed in the remainder of your post.

    Since I cannot definitively answer them and to speculate would most likely only inflame the situation i will only say that quite franky your concerns are those many of us share as well.

    And finally FSLA:

    My understanding is that under FSLA laws one cannot volunteer for their employer, which in the case of SFRD personnel is the City of Stamford, not the VFDs. I would also take that to mean that any future SVFD employees hired as firefighters would be prohibited from volunteering as such for the SVFD.

    Cogs

    So much like your stance on L786 barring SFRD firefighter from volunteering in stamford (when in fact FLSA prevetns it), You have no documentation showing where L786 declared anyone a rival orginaztion?

    Thats what your response feels like to me.

  14. Posted

    So a question to my fellow union brothers and those familar with the ongoings in Stamford. There has been a lot of talk how L-786 declared the VFD's rival organizations. My question is this, does the union body have to vote on something like that? Does the E-Board have the authority to just declare something like that? If so, does something have to be put into writing? I have spoken to several past E-Board members that state that nothing of the kind was ever done. So, where is it coming from? Proof?

    And just out of curiosity, if the SVFD plan is enacted, will the officers be equally trained, tested, and interviewed the same as the downtown ones or will they just continue to be elected? If one of the paid drivers(or volunteer) is injured on duty, who pays for that? Worker's comp, the overtime to fill his/her shift? The new volunteer department? The city? The tax payers? What about the cost of apparatus maintenance and replacement? Who pays for that? Will there be 1 for 1 overtime just like it was in the past? Will there be a minimun staffing?

    And what if the paid drivers unionize? Who do they bargain with? The new SVFD? Would it be like the paid drivers of Long Ridge negotiating with themselves being that they are volunteers there? No conflict of interest there......

    As far as I understand it, FLSA allows you to volunteer, just not in the same system that you work. IAFF does not allow volunteering where there is an IAFF local. We all new this when we signed on. (It was NOT mandatory that we joined the union. We DID have the choice)

    I think the SVFD deal is only 85% done, I'm not sure they've agreed to any minor details yet.

  15. Posted

    True. I do believe that here in CT a law was passed a couple of years ago prohibiting municipalities i.e. the employer from prohibiting their career firefighters from volunteering so long as that activity does not conflict with Garcia (FSLA).

    Excerpt from Fire Chief magazine:

    Jun 13, 2008 11:13 AM

    Connecticut enacted legislation that codifies the right of career firefighters to volunteer during off-duty hours. The bill, An Act Concerning Volunteer Service by Paid Emergency Personnel or Paid Firefighters (H.B. 5646), received final legislative approval on May 7, became a public act on May 19, and was formally signed during a ceremony June 9, the National Volunteer Fire Council reports.

    The new law bars municipalities from entering into a collective bargaining contract that prohibits paid emergency personnel, including firefighters, from serving as active members of a volunteer fire department during off-duty hours. It also directs the state fire administrator to develop model guidelines for municipalities with paid emergency personnel and municipalities with volunteer emergency personnel to develop agreements authorizing career personnel to volunteer.

    “Both our career and volunteer firefighters are among Connecticut’s bravest public servants and an integral part of our communities,” State Rep. Sandra Nafis, the sponsor of H.B. 5646, told NVFC. “We’re pleased to have received the overwhelming support of the legislature to insure that our career firefighters have the choice to continue to serve as volunteer firefighters and support their communities.”

    Of course Union By-laws can still prohibit volunteering as long as that language does not appear in the CBA.

    Cogs

    Yes changing the laws and or rules would also work.

  16. Posted · Edited by CTFF

    While I do understand the rationale behind this aspect of the stance, to me the individual should still retain the right to make his/her own decisions in regards to what they do with their life in their off time. What you see as justifiably "{protecting people from themselves" others see as an infringement on their personal freedom of choice. But here again this is a non sequiter since, as was pointed out earlier, the law (FSLA) restricts that choice as well.

    Cogs

    Speed Limits, Helmet laws, seatbelt laws, the amount of booze we can drink then drive limit personal freedoms as well but they are simply the laws we live with. Now of course you can say but you may hurt someone else but not following the above and you'd be right, of course you may end up hurting your family by not following laws and rules laid down. You don't like the no volunteer rule, stop taking test, you're on the job and don't like it? Get off the job.

  17. Posted

    Well you might have a case at that, but in the end it is irrellevant. As I stated earlier your union Local forbids it's mermbers from volunteering (in Stamford at least) and enforces that ban, that alone is reason enough that double dipping will not be an issue.

    Cogs.

    I'm not sure as I don't speak for anyone but myself, I have to wonder if by double dipping the poster was asking about SVFD paid personel and if they would be allowed to volunteer and collect any abatements?

  18. Posted

    The direct answer to your question is No, it's not illegal (as in criminal law) to volunteer in another community. However, the career firefighter may be subject to other rules & regulations that may prohibit or restrict that activity. For example, the employer may have rules restricting secondary employment as a firefighter and this often includes volunteering as a firefighter. Additionally, if the FF is an IAFF member, then by the IAFF By-Laws, that member is prohibited from volunteering in a department in which an IAFF Local exists. Enforcement of this is left to the local level and the By-Law does not specifically prohibit volunteering in a fully volunteer department.

    The no volunteer stance is also to protect the firefighter. Firefighters are going to run into problems in the future when making claims for job related illness and dieseas. A career firefighter is going to put in a claim and the city he works for is going to provide proof that he volunteered while he was a career guy. His employeer will then point the finger at his volunteer dept and tell him to go after them, guess where the volunteer dept/town/city is going to point the finger? guess who is stuck in the middle? Sometimes we have to protect people from themselves.

  19. Posted

    You are absolutely correct CT, thank you for pointing that out. My apologies for being remiss in stating such. Although to be fair some believe that technically SFRD employees could volunteer for any of the City's VFDs since as independent entities the VFDs are not their employer. It is my understanding that FSLA is meant to prevent abuses by employers in forcing employees to work for no pay. Not sure about that but that is why I did not mention FSLA and cited only the union's stance.

    Cogs

    I think you could also argue that Stamford is the community where we work and therefore can't volunteer as firefighter/emt's in Stamford.

    Then I would make a case the city should not grant tax abatements to people who volunteer for independent entities.

  20. Posted · Edited by CTFF

    Since your union forbids active volunteering I don't forsee this as a major problem in Stamford. SFRD members that also hold non-active membership in any of the City's VFDs cannot and do not respond, to do so means they face sanctions from your union as we have seen in the past. So no I don't think any of your union brothers will jeaporidize their employment for any nominal perks offered by the VFDs.

    I know it is easy to pick on the union stance but I figured I'd bring up the FLSA here "When Congress amended the FLSA in 1985, it made clear that people are allowed to volunteer their services to public agencies and their community with but one exception - public sector employers may not allow their employees to volunteer, without compensation, additional time to do the same work for which they are employed."

    We are not allowed by law to volunteer in Stamford.

  21. Posted · Edited by CTFF

    I can answer the question.

    There are several approaches to how to do something like this.

    One involves an abatement of property tax, whether it be real estate property tax, or personal property tax such as the tax paid on your vehicle. I believe, but am not certain, that there is a mechanism set up by the state by which a municipality can offer such an abatement to a resident.

    I do know for a fact that the former Belltown chief approached the former Stamford mayor on more than one occasion looking to make such an abatement a reality in Stamford, and was stonewalled. This type of abatement represents a true and real incentive to many more people than offering points on a civil service exam. I honestly feel that if the former administration had been more supportive of, and realized the value of, a strong volunteer cadre of firefighters in Stamford, you would see a very different set of circumstances than we have today.

    There are other perks one can offer, such as subsidizing the expense of a gym membership, rewarding a member with a nice piece of equipment for high levels of participation, etc., but all these things do cost money. After being in deficit spending for several years because Mayor Malloy viciously cut the operating budget, it is nice to actually have a budget again, but it doesnt seem any money is earmarked for member perks.

    I've seen mention about the tax abatement laws but am not familair with them.

    I seem to recall the stamford volunteers stonewalling the past administration when

    information was requested from them. I guess this is like the age old question which came first, the chicken or the egg. We all know it was the chicken.

    Wouldn't it be better to build a gym at the firehouse? One time cost, serves multiple people and might draw firefighters to the firehouse?

  22. Posted · Edited by CTFF

    Why hasnt this been done in Stamford, why can't it be done in Stamford, why does it seem that in the current SVFD plan it is an afterthought?

    I'm not sure why a recruitment and rentention program hasn't been done in Stamford. I would hope aa member of a volunteer dept in Stamford you could answer that question. What efforts has the volunteer made to make a R&R plan work?

    I think it can be done in Stamford. I know the possibility of points on the entrance exam for volunteers has been discussed. I know this may only benefit a small portion of the volunteers but it is a step in the right direction, right?

    I would think any recruitment and rentention plans for the SVFD would have to come from the SVFD Budget. I'm not sure how the city could offer something to members of a private organization.

  24. Posted

    As with your interpretation of Pat's post and how he used the word "IF" in regards to volunters at their stations, so to is it in my post that the key word is IF. IF it becomes apparent that the resources of the SVFD are incapable of handling the responses, not when or they will be. There has been much made by contributors here, many from SFRD, of the notion that the SVFD will be incapable of providing adequate manpower for incidents. I was simply pointing out that any additional resources necessary already exist and would be a simple radio call or AMA agreement away. I was also pointing out that any resistance to such an arrangement by L-786, should it beome a necessity, would not bode well for that organization in the public eye. As far as SFRD itself goes yes I do expect any mutual aid will "simply come from" them as they don't really have a choice in the matter. And just to clarify I do not at present see the need for SFRD to assist up North once the SVFD is in place, but as a pragmatic fire officer I do realize that unforseen circumstances could arise and we must be prepared for them.

    As to part two of your query,

    Yes I am worried about the lack of availibility of units and service that the residents downtown will face if the SFRD plan were to become reality. But my concern is not limited to just downtown. The proposed redistribution of the available resources I believe puts many areas of the City at risk since SFRD will be stretched thin within the confines of Stamford's geography and certain areas i.e. Belltown will be without fire protection at all. By the way my concern in that particular post did not address the situation of SFRD units being pulled North from their current stations. That is a whole other can of worms.

    Cogs

    If we look at any of the recent fires up north there has been a large number of SFRD units working these calls. This gives us a insight into the response we can expect from the SVFD, I can't look it at the situation any other way. As for mutual aide it would have to be agreed upon by SFRD (The Chief), I would hope the Chif would take into consideration The people he is paid to protect and their wishes. Maybe the downtown residents won't feel like sending their fire dept to protect people who just caused the downtown tax to go up while up north gets a tax break.

    It's seems anytime the mention of SFRD covering the city you assume the volunteers go away, I've yet to see this spelled out. Belltown will never be without fire protection, if Belltown FD stopped responding SFRD will continue to respond.