AFS1970

I know of one nearby department that payed a per-diem wage to attend training. I do not know if it was hourly or not, but I know that I met guys in classes that were encouraged to take more training because of the money. In one class I was taking on recruitment and retention the instructor saw one of these students and had him stand up and tell us briefly about it. I kind of like this idea but I have some reservations of any plan that pays volunteers and still calls them volunteers. I also think that if you are going to pay it is backwards to pay me to sit in a classroom but expect me to go into a fire and die for free.
I can think of a few departments that pay by response, but to me these systems are always one step away from fraud complaints. First would be a volunteer system that pays per call, but allows members to call in to say they were responding if they get canceled en route. It seems to me that on certain calls nobody has any way of knowing if you really got off the couch or not. I have seen similar systems in a couple of career departments where overtime was open book for certain types of calls. One friend told me he rarely did any work but often just had to drive by the scene and the chief waved him on. I was in a class once in a department that had a system of calling certain groups back on OT for full boxes ( I do not remember if there had to be reported smoke or fire) but a call came in and half the class left to take extra OT rigs to the scene. Some of the guys even said they were only going because they were in the building and might as well make some quick money during class.
I don't know much about LOSAPS, however I know that Stamford promised to start one way back in the late 1990's. It never happened. I think that if managed correctly this could be a big retention aid as it would reduce some turnover. I have seen departments that use the tax incentives CT allows as a sort of LOSAP and they seem happy with the results. One department gives $100 off per year of service so it takes you 10 years to reach the $1,000 max. Another gives $250 per year for each of the last 4 years that you have made your quota. This way someone with a bad year may still get something, but a bad year will take 4 years to recover from. I know of one town that has worked out a deal with a neighboring city to extend tax relief to out of town members, although I am not sure of what kind of legal wrangling that took.

Boston was a strange situation to say the least. I am not all that happy with ordering people to stay inside during that man hunt, but I do understand the safety sentiments behind it. Given the type of incident and the number of casualties and the fact that the killers had proven they were not only willing to attack the random public but to attack police and other responders in secondary incidents, I can see why the decisions that were made were made, even when I do not entirely agree with them.
However I reject the idea that either the police or the equipment they were using turned the streets of Ferguson into any such thing. If in fact Ferguson resembled a war zone it was because of the criminals who refused to take part in civil discourse and instead felt that lynching a good cop was in order. They terrorized a community, committed multiple acts of larceny, burglary, vandalism and arson as well as intimidation, assault and possibly attempted murder. The police in Ferguson did not start the war.

We're talking about the marathon bombing? That's completely different than Ferguson. Boston was an act of terrorism. Ferguson is rioting and looting by criminals. There's no comparison.

When journalists are in between the police and the rioters they're bound to be exposed to some tear gas. With my own interest in the subject and family in law enforcement, I watched a lot of the video from Ferguson and can only offer the following...
We have to protect our employees - and the police are our employees. This means when they're being shot at we have to give them armored vehicles and vests/helmets and support their use of them.
I guess we have to debate at what point a demonstrator becomes a rioter because if someone was walking toward me swinging a Do Not Enter sign like an axe I would point a rifle at him too. If this were a peaceful candlelight vigil I would agree that pointing a rifle at them was extreme but there was no way of knowing who in those violent crowds was armed and we will never know if the presence of those rifles actually prevented more violence or shootings.
Not sure what you mean about Boston either. Was there an incident up there too?

Good thing this isn't a military surplus truck or they'd be getting beat up in the press for having it.

Other than the weapons a lot of focus has been on the uniforms. Now I personally think some of the newer uniforms are bordering on the ridiculous, but that aside, they are often saving money for the taxpayers. CT State Police still uses custom made uniforms.\, I think a pair of pants is priced out somewhere in the $50 to $60 range. A pair of BDU's at any surplus store is in the$20 to $30 range. Should it matter that there are more pockets or drawstrings at the cuffs? If any agency could cut even half of their budget that way, we should be applauding them.
I have read about people complaining about the so called "tactical vests" which have pockets and straps but are also carriers for the body armor. These are generally worn on the outside of the uniform because the pockets would be useless otherwise. However the complaints always about how it looks. Most of the public would never suggest that the police stop wearing body armor, just that they don't want to see it. Seeing armour makes the public lift their heads from the sand and realize that various liberal policies have armed the bad guys more that then good guys.
I noticed something interesting when I was in Canada a couple fo months ago. Considering it is a country that claims to have gotten rid of all those nasty hand guns. Almost every private security officer I saw in my travels was not only wearing body armor, but wearing it on the outside of their uniform. Some in contrasting colors, and some blending in with the uniform. In this country there are security companies that do not allow body armor because they have decided they do not face that kind of threat. However if private security were to do that here, there would be calls to stop the militarization of security.
Just because the military does something does not make it bad. Almost everything on our uniforms has some historical military connection, no matter if the modern use if police, fire or EMS, yet nobody complains about that. This is just a new fad among the pro-crime lobby to try and make it easier to victimize the public.

I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you sir. While I can respect the idea that taxpayers (voters) should have a say in their municipal services, police procedure should not be one of those areas.
Let's face it, the majority of people have little to know clue about the services they receive. So you want the civilian layperson to judge what amount of protection their police officers need?
Most people probably have no clue how many police officers even protect their communities.
Same goes for Fire and EMS (as has been beaten to death here). The majority of people have no idea what level (or lack of) fire and Ems services they are getting.
They may know there's a local firehouse or ambulance corps. Other than that, they don't know if there is paid personnel or all volunteers.
I work for a Village DPW. Do you know what the majority of residents are constantly concerned about? Garbage collection.
I have family and friends who are LEOs and I want them to come home after every shift. Therefore I want them to have any and all equipment that may give them an advantage.
Ask the residents of Newtown or Aurora if they want their Police to be as prepared as possible.
20 years ago we didn't have to think like we do today. Unfortunately we live in a different, ever changing world with an unpredictable society. It sucks, but it is reality.
I carry a firearm on an almost daily basis. I know that carrying a firearm is not my only line of defense and may not save my or my loved ones lives. However, I carry because it just may be my only line of defense. I love my life and want to stick around as long as possible.

Actually yes I do think that it would work, because that's exactly what did work for the 200 years of American firefighting before the 2 in 2 out rule became the the rule. The idea of having members outside ready to assist is a good one, but it's not a new one, we just didn't give it a name years ago. Maybe if more emphasis was put on training guys to put the fire out instead of trying to regulate them to do everything but so they don't get a boo boo, we wouldn't be having this conversation. I've said it before I'll say it again, the surest way to make the fireground safe is to know how to do your job and the only way you learn how to do you job is by doing it. I will take safely aggressive over aggressively safe any day and I believe that those we serve are better served by that attitude, as is the fire service itself.

I have a question, how many firefighters have died in the initial phases of an incident due to disregarding 2 in- 2 out?
I know roughly 100 of us die annually, but about 1/2 of those LODDs are vehicle accidents, heart attacks ect leaving the other 1/2 as actual fireground deaths due to the fire. Now I've been around awhile and I do my best to keep up on LODD reports and I can't really think of any incidents where disregarding the 2 in 2 out rule was a contributing factor. To the best of my knowledge (and I'll be the first to admit that my knowledge may be limited) the vast majority of fireground deaths have happened when a good number of FFs are on scene, operations are well under way and in most if not all cases a FAST was assembled and ready to go.
Personally I find the 2 in - 2 out rule to be overkill and another attempt to make things safer that ultimately makes them less safe.

The problem is it is generally enforced retroactively - after something bad happens. You can get away with it until someone gets hurt, or worse, and then they will be under the microscope.
At issue isn't the interpretation but rather the underlying purpose of the regulation, which as I recall was to insure someone was there to rescue the crew if something happens in an IDLH environment. Saying that two exterior FF is enough for the two out is a trap. If something happens to the crew in the IDLH, the exterior crew either has to rescue them in violation of the regulation or not rescue them and leave them to their fate.
I believe there are OSHA interpretations (really the only ones that count) that say the IC or pump operator can count toward the two out (if they're qualified) but think about that practically. A mayday is transmitted and the IC abandons command to become part of the rescue crew. Who will know what's going on or where the mayday is coming from? Who will know how many people are operating and where? There are so many problems with that strategy it isn't funny. Likewise the pump operator. He abandons his post and goes to rescue the crew only to find that more water is needed or another line needs to be charged by another crew. Bad plan!
The underlying problem is no standard for FF (outside of the career service) - at least in NYS - and no compliance with NFPA 1710 or 1720 to make sure enough qualified FF are on the scene.

Probably right around the time Al Sharpton became a Constitutional scholar. I'm a small government conservative myself, but lets be honest; neither stop and frisk (which used to just be called the Terry Stop) nor the DoD's surplus acquisition programs, are harming anyone's liberty.
Its the same argument that I make regarding the Second Amendment. Having a gun doesn't make you a bad guy or a tyrant, that comes from the way in which it is used.

Let the local police determine the level of protection they need...not the feds or the media.

Yes but do they have the trained personnel available to operate all of that equipment that was purchased with our grant (read tax) money?
If it sits there with no one to operate it, its useless
If it responds, but with only a small % of the personnel needed to perform the mission, its useless
and if it responds to incidents without being called, and ignores policies, procedures and ICS in general, because "nobody can stop us", its more than useless it is a danger to themselves, other responders and the community.

I live in the southern Adirondacks. The nearest Level 1 Trauma Center is Albany Med which is about an hour and 15 minutes from my home. From the far north end of our ambulance district, it's another 20 minutes at least; and even more if it's up one of the back country roads and into the woods. So we use the birds a lot, and have many saves because of the time saved over ground transport.
I used to live in Ontario County and worked full time as a Dispatcher II for Rochester-Monroe County 911. Inside Monroe County, we rarely used the helicopters. Primary reason was short ground time and choice of two trauma centers, even from the edges of the county. The only exceptions were MVA's with long extrication times and other rare situations with long time frames prior to getting the patient into the ambulance. Ontario County on the other hand used the birds a lot. Mercy Flight Central is based in north central Ontario County and has very short response times to anywhere in that county so they are a very valuable resource.
It's all about the time. In the situation that prompted this thread, I tend to agree with the original question of why call the bird with a 21 minute ground time. But not being on the team that treated the patient, it's not fair to judge either.
I would offer that if you can have the bird on the scene when the patient is packaged and ready for transport, there can be benefits, even with relatively short flight times, over ground transport. If there is any appreciable wait for the bird when the patient is ready to go, the value drops off rapidly. But it's the more distant situations that really prove the value of air transport.
Side comment here... Living and working in the Rochester area was good when it came to burn patients. Strong Memorial is one of the best burn centers in the US and being close meant that we got our burn patients there fast and had lots of good outcomes. Up here, the nearest burn centers, I believe, are Westchester or Syracuse. Both are several hours by ground from here at a minimum. Couple that with the fact that helos don't fly under certain weather conditions, and it you have a very scary situation for EMS dealing with burns.

I've spent 20+ years in EMS working in areas remote from trauma facilities to just down the street from them. I've spent the last 15 or so in a metro county that is somewhat fly happy despite having 4 trauma centers within reasonable drive times for most of it. IMO, in the vast majority of cases, the use of medevacs in areas that are within this middle area, has more to do with ALS providers who are not confident providing advanced care to trauma patients for the duration of the ground transport time rather than with the patient actually needing care beyond the normal scope of practice for a street medic. Now there are certainly cases in which timely provision of critical care level care in the field is warranted, even if it delays arrival at the hospital by a few minutes.
As for the "time saving" aspect of medevacs, in this middle zone, it's often a toss up as to whether or not it truly saves time. I know of numerous incidents in my area in which units have spent a majority (or more) of the time it would have taken them to get to the hospital by ground, sitting at an LZ waiting for the helicopter to arrive. I know of a number of incidents in which patients from the same incident have been transported to the same hospital by ground and by air and excluding extrication delays, the ground units almost always get their patients into a treatment room faster than the air units can when you factor in waiting for them to arrive on scene, the transfer of care and then time to move from the helipad to the ER.

Interesting article.
When VoIP first came out there were big problems in getting correct addresses and even to this day many of them when correct are formatted wrong and cause problems for our automatic dumps from one system to another. When Optimum first started their cable phone service in CT all calls went to Norwalk because that was the PSAP for Cablevision. When this was pointed out to them you would have thought we were speaking some unknown alien language. It took a while for them to decide this was a problem that needed fixing.
Some of the problems with 9-1-1 in general could be fixed by public education. Other could be solved with some more regulation (shudder) This article speaks of a nationwide 9-1-1 system, which is not true at all. Each phone company that provides the local service has their own system although they work along similar processes. Even the steps in the article happen quickly, with the data attached and the routing done before the caller hears the first ring.
When we get a cellular 9-1-1 call, we get phone number and location, often just the tower location. Some providers will fine tune location, but even when we get an off tower location it is usually around a 300 meter radius from where we see it on the map. The phone company's map is so out of sate, it has streets that have not existed since right after WW2 and schools that were torn down or moved many decades ago. So sometimes even a valid coordinate puts it in the middle of a non-existant address. The worst part is we do not get a name. It seems to me that since all cell companies have this on file, so they know who to bill, they could easily provide us with a subscriber name, just like the land line companies do.
As for public education we need to stop telling people about the national 9-1-1 system. More and more people think there is one big dispatch center that sends out all calls nationwide. I took a call the other night from someone who got a call from home and called Stamford for an ambulance for an address in the Bronx. We have no way to transfer calls to NYC and are limited to finding public numbers only if the dispatcher happens to have a personal lap top set up at their desk. I usually have my lap top with me but it is not always turned on. That caller was told to have the person who called him call 9-1-1 from the Bronx, so he hung up and called right back and got me again.
The hacking / Swatting issue is important but is even a problem locally. A few years ago we were getting a series of false fire calls on a cell phone all over town. This was before we got anything other than tower location. We were able to flag the number as a probably false alarm, but still had to respond to the address given to investigate. Even on legitimate calls it is not always the closest tower that relays the call. Tracking these phones is quite a chore. Each phone company has their own protocol for releasing data and not all phone companies are 24/7. With the spoofed phones this will require the phone company to actually look at the routing information and I am not even sure if that is available in real time.
The other night there was a swatting incident in Norwalk and they called looking for information of someone that might have encountered Stamford PD but we had no matching information to help them out.

Interesting article.
When VoIP first came out there were big problems in getting correct addresses and even to this day many of them when correct are formatted wrong and cause problems for our automatic dumps from one system to another. When Optimum first started their cable phone service in CT all calls went to Norwalk because that was the PSAP for Cablevision. When this was pointed out to them you would have thought we were speaking some unknown alien language. It took a while for them to decide this was a problem that needed fixing.
Some of the problems with 9-1-1 in general could be fixed by public education. Other could be solved with some more regulation (shudder) This article speaks of a nationwide 9-1-1 system, which is not true at all. Each phone company that provides the local service has their own system although they work along similar processes. Even the steps in the article happen quickly, with the data attached and the routing done before the caller hears the first ring.
When we get a cellular 9-1-1 call, we get phone number and location, often just the tower location. Some providers will fine tune location, but even when we get an off tower location it is usually around a 300 meter radius from where we see it on the map. The phone company's map is so out of sate, it has streets that have not existed since right after WW2 and schools that were torn down or moved many decades ago. So sometimes even a valid coordinate puts it in the middle of a non-existant address. The worst part is we do not get a name. It seems to me that since all cell companies have this on file, so they know who to bill, they could easily provide us with a subscriber name, just like the land line companies do.
As for public education we need to stop telling people about the national 9-1-1 system. More and more people think there is one big dispatch center that sends out all calls nationwide. I took a call the other night from someone who got a call from home and called Stamford for an ambulance for an address in the Bronx. We have no way to transfer calls to NYC and are limited to finding public numbers only if the dispatcher happens to have a personal lap top set up at their desk. I usually have my lap top with me but it is not always turned on. That caller was told to have the person who called him call 9-1-1 from the Bronx, so he hung up and called right back and got me again.
The hacking / Swatting issue is important but is even a problem locally. A few years ago we were getting a series of false fire calls on a cell phone all over town. This was before we got anything other than tower location. We were able to flag the number as a probably false alarm, but still had to respond to the address given to investigate. Even on legitimate calls it is not always the closest tower that relays the call. Tracking these phones is quite a chore. Each phone company has their own protocol for releasing data and not all phone companies are 24/7. With the spoofed phones this will require the phone company to actually look at the routing information and I am not even sure if that is available in real time.
The other night there was a swatting incident in Norwalk and they called looking for information of someone that might have encountered Stamford PD but we had no matching information to help them out.

So we always hear about this thing called a risk benefit analysis. Apparently most people don't know what it is or don't do them. You should be doing it in your head quickly all the time.
So is this risk worth the benefit?

This tactic does seem risky and I really cannot think of any practical use for it. That said, if I had to think outside the box and rig this contraption together in an effort to save my own life or rescue a fallen firefighter, then I'd climb across it. It can be done...it shouldn't be done...but it can be done...
Now comes the double-edged sword...If it can be done, do you practice the tactic so that firefighters know this is feasible even though it is not recommended? Or is it too dangerous to even train on this tactic? I probably would have thrown a safety line on the guy at the bare minimum if it were me running the training! God forbid one of these guys gets hurt while practicing it though...lawsuit waiting to happen!

If they Keep Adam 12 and Emergency! where they are this will give us a 3 hour block each afternoon of "Educational TV".

We have one small area of town where we were getting Two EMS agencies and Two Fire Departments on all medical calls. This was because it was in Stamford, but in the far Northwest corner along the Greenwich and NY state borders. The roads to get there from Stamford are narrow and contain many turns making response times slow. So as a result all fire calls in that area got Long Ridge Fire and Banksville, NY Fire. All medical calls got Stamford EMS, Greenwich EMS and Long Ridge Fire and Banksville Fire. Such responses while likely overkill in most cases are driven by the nature of the area being served. The first arriving unit does a size up and cancels what they do not need.

This looks like a cool project. Any pictures of the original floating around? It seems like a unique rig.

"There are still more than twice as many volunteers as career firefighters. But the number of volunteers has dropped by around 11 percent since the mid-1980s, while the number of career firefighters has grown more than 50 percent, according to the National Fire Protection Association. The allure has diminished because fund-raising now takes up roughly half the time most volunteers spend on duty. It’s also harder to fit in volunteer work. The rise in two-income households often means that there is no stay-at-home parent to run things so the other can dash off for an an emergency. Urbanization and the aging of the rural population are taking their toll as fewer young people are available to replace firefighters who retire."
This is the paragraph that sums up most of the truth behind the decline of volunteer firefighters in America (in my own humble opinion, that is). So much has changed in the last 30 years in our society, in our faimly lives and values, and what we select as our hobbies. The American psyche has always been to work hard and earn that cold hard cash, and it has really taken shape into what we see today, not just in society in general, but even with the volunteers that still make the sacrafice to make the first due rig.
The first portion of this paragraph states that the number of volunteer firefighters has dropped 11% since the mid-1980's. It's a sound number, though I can't seem to verify this because I cannot find it with in the source given (NFPA). Regardless, it is true that the number of volunteers has dropped quite significantly over the years. I remember as a kid, growing up in the late 80's, that there was always, and I mean always, a dozen guys hanging around the fire house every day. When I finally became the almighty probie at age 18, I noticed not as many were around, and there was always a struggle to get the first due out the door with an appropriate crew. I remember one of my first residential alarms where I was still a probie riding officer with just the driver, and my father was the sole man on the second due engine. There's not much you can do with three firefighters. Thankfully my hometown fire department turned around and the firs due was always full, even during the day time. But as Sage mentioned,
this was an exception to the general trend. Anyway, time always has a way of playing its little game, and the downslope comes way too quickly. After I moved away 6 1/2 years ago the downward spiral began again. It seems that we, as the volunteer fire service, get little bursts of hope, and then we fall right back into the same original problems that we thought we erased, and now we're back to square one.
fund-raising now takes up roughly half the time most volunteers spend on duty.
I'll dispute this a little, as I've never noticed this at the district/department level here in Westchester, or the Tri-State area in general. Yes, many fire companies are out there every weekend doing boot drops, or car shows, or selling Christmas trees, but none of these fundraising efforts go to the operational needs of the department. It's company level funding. On the other hand, I do know of departments upstate and across the nation that solely operate on fundraiser money. For example, a good friend of mine's father is the chief of a small rural district in Iowa (forgive me, I can't remember the name of the town). They have no fire tax. The town pays nothing to the fire department, and neither does the village. They operate with a $110,000 budget every year, which comes only from fundraising. This goes for new apparatus, too. Their new $600,000 engine/tanker was purchased with money earned from the blood, sweat and tears of the volunteers. Do you know how long it takes to raise $600,000 while also raising money for your operational funds? My friend's father told me it took about 8 years. Now, you have to remember, these volunteers went out and worked their butts off, in their free time, to raise the money for a place that barely afford to give them a free t-shirt. They make it work, but it takes a lot of work to make it happen.
The rise in two-income households often means that there is no stay-at-home parent
This is all too true. It's almost impossible to have a single-income household while you're trying to support a family. Taxes keep going up, inflation is exponentially growing, and there is no such thing as a break anymore. Myself, living in my tiny one bedroom closet, I spend $1000/month in rent alone, and then there's student loans, car payments, insurance, and so many other bills to attend to. And that's just for myself. Imagine if I was trying to support a family on my income alone. It's impossible these days. And never mind the two-income household thing, because some parents, and sometimes both, have to work second jobs to help pay the bills! Do you really think that you can retain a volunteer that works two jobs AND has a family, or let alone any social life? It takes true dedication to work, tend to the family, have a social life, be a good neighbor, and volunteer at the same time. And people wonder why the divorce rate amongst emergency service workers is so damn high! We drive ourselves crazy enough that our spouses/significant other go crazy and snap! I can attest that after working a double shift that I don't want to go to that ridiculous EMS call at 0130 for the drunk passed out. And I can attest that our dedication to the service has ended plenty of marriages (including my own parents). Being a volunteer has become a circus act of juggling a few too many items in our lives, and it's killing us.
Urbanization and the aging of the rural population are taking their toll as fewer young people are available to replace firefighters who retire.
Well, ain't this the scary truth. Let's look at the first word of that sentence. Urbanization. It's quite obvious that no where on this planet is becoming more rural. As our populations increase, the cities spill into the suburbs, and the suburbs spill into the rural communities. Everything is becoming more urbanized, which leads to more accidents, more fires, and more people needing emergency help. Unfortunately, there comes a point where a small group of volunteers can no longer handle the onslaught of calls, so municipalities hire paid firefighters and EMT's. Slowly you see a small town volunteer department evolve into a combination department, and eventually into a fully staffed carreer department. It takes time, but it happens. Us volunteers hit the tipping point, and the municipalty takes over. And the most unfortunate catalyst in this issue is that our youth, the fresh college grads and young adults, move closer to the cities, and feed into the urbanization of America. So now our rural departments, even those in the suburbs, are left with an aging population that is tired, moving slower, and growing less capable of doing the job they once did so meritoriously. I'll admit I've seen a crew of firefighters all 50+ in age do a heck of a job at a house fire. But how will they perform in their 60's? And who is replacing them? Oh, yeah, no one. All of the kids moved to the city, and they want to be paid to do the job. Understandably, who wouldn't want to be paid to fight fires all day? It's an exciting job. But, as more and more of our youth move to become paid firefighters in the cities, we struggle to find replacements for our aging volunteers. The sad truth is that people don't last forever, and unfortunately our tradition won't either if this trend continues down this path.
The recent trend has been the downward spiral of fewer volunteers, lesser funding, and more work for the few of us that still have the spark to keep our departments alive. It's tough. Life gets in the way, and we make sacrafices every day to prioritize what's truly important. We may pass on that EMS call, but we'll say good bye to the family when that structure fire gets toned out. Our wives will continue to yell at us, and the people we help will still continue to be grateful for us. It's a fine balancing act that comes with a little bit of dedication, a little motivation, and a whole lot of perseverence. The volunteer fire service, even with all of it's short comings, has always been a vital vertabrae in American society since the begining, and we need to preserve this virtue. Will the volunteer firefighter disappear for good? Yeah, in a few hundred years, long after we're gone. But, for now at least, let's keep getting out there a doing the job we love. Recruit retain, train and retrain, and be the best damn firefighters we can be. It's a fine balancing act that comes with a little bit of dedication, a little motivation, and a whole lot of perseverence.

I agree, the article definitely has some flaws, and it also fails to acknowledge that so many fire departments are failing because they can't get with the times. If your idea of a recruitment plan consists of a signboard in front of the firehouse, you might want to consider getting some fresh blood into your recruitment committee.
There ARE some volunteer departments out there who are growing AND managing to consistently put well-trained Firefighters and EMTs on the street. Unfortunately they seem to be the minority.