BIGRED1

As usual, the answer likely lies somewhere between the two extremes.

First off, stop it with the selfies.  Not just on the fireground, stop them altogether. Everywhere. Please, I'm begging you. You look ridiculous.
 
Our department has a pretty liberal social media program by fire department standards; we have a "blog" style website, Facebook page, Twitter, Instagram, and Youtube, all run by the Line Officers and the Chiefs. As part of our recruitment/retention grant we purchased several HD helmet cams and GoPro cameras to capture footage of fires, rescue locals, and yes, response to calls. Say what you want, but it has paid off. We advertise how busy we are, the experience you can get at our station, and the benefits to membership, and it works big time: our active membership roster grows every month, and we always have people coming to do a ride along to see if Morningside is the place for them. The days of recruiting with the signboard in front of the station are over, folks. We also invite some of the firefighter YouTube TV series to ride along and film us (The Battalion TV and Into The Smoke, Battalion has posted their video already, ITS is still working on their season).
 
Our Chiefs encourage the membership to post photos and videos of what we're doing, it helps get the message out about what we are doing and it keeps people coming in the doors. We police ourselves and people who stray outside of the accepted norms are quickly corrected. Youtube videos are produced by the membership (we have a couple former film students) and approved by the Chiefs before posting.
 
There's sort of a tradition around here of taking a "crew shot" on the bumper of the rig following a fire or a pin job. Other than shots of the rigs and training evolutions, those are probably the most common things you see down here.
 
https://www.facebook.com/morningsidevolunteers/?fref=ts
https://twitter.com/morningsidevfd
https://www.instagram.com/mv27fd/
https://www.youtube.com/user/MorningsideVFD27

Real firefighters involved in doing their job don't have time to take pictures of themselves. As the saying goes; "Don't brag about yourself, let others do it for you".

Is it just me, or does anyone else see firefighters taking selfies at car accidents, fires, and every other type of major incident?  I've noticed over the last few years the number of selfies popping up in social media FROM FIREFIGHTERS is increasing, including the number of general pictures of the scene and responding apparatus.  I'm not going to knock professional photographers (as this is their job), nor the general public for taking photographs or videos of these incidents, rather I want to know; why do firefighters have to stoop the unprofessional position of taking a selfie while on the job?  This just kind of irks me because firefighters are taking a side step to get the "awesome shot," or get a selfie to show that they were there.  Why aren't you paying attention to what's going on and focusing on your job?  Are the imaginary internet points and likes worth it?
 
Let me pose a few other questions while I'm here:  Does your department have a social media policy?  If so, what does it state?  What are the disciplinary measures for going against the policy?  And, why would a department tolerate its own personnel taking pictures at inappropriate times?
 
 

I would like to think that this thread has been an education without opening a book.
 
Add in two other threads in which a serious discussion has taken place. The threads of:
  "Paid Firefighter lay offs contested by residents, FDNY/Garden City News"
  "Village of Port Chester Disbands Career Fire Dept".
 
There should be no doubt in any firefighters mind just what side of the fence they need to be on. You have been presented with a well written group of statements, many backed up with facts. I commend those who took the time to speak here to explain the rights and wrongs of volunteer and career firefighter relationships.
 
 This story is not only played out in Port Chester or Garden City, NY, but many other places across the country as well. People are following these stories whether on this site or other fire dept sites. I know many members in Connecticut, both career and volunteer certainly are.
 
  Perhaps this was a "wake up call" to some who felt we could just write those career firefighters off. We now see that way of thinking kind of back fired for a group of chiefs who now may have to explain their position. They now may be required to give facts on why they felt the need to cut those eight career firefighters. When I would think, most chiefs would totally disagree with that decision. As someone mentioned, how would eliminating these firefighters make it safer for those citizens and the firefighters as well. I hope they have a good answer for that.
 
 As a retired firefighter and a citizen of a small city about 100 miles from Port Chester, I have been directly involved in trying to make small, but significant changes within that city involving career and volunteer firefighters. After meeting with the then city manager about some serious issues that I saw going on within the departments last year. These issues also greatly involved the publics and firefighter safety as well.
 
 One example was an occupied house fire in which a fire house with eight career firefighters were ONLY 1.8 miles away. They were NEVER called by the volunteer commanding officer. Instead two other volunteer fire depts. were requested, one from as far away as eight miles. Those career firefighters each spent 16 weeks at a firefighter recruit school to learn their trade. Yet they were NEVER called. In fact, those career firefighters are actually closer than the first due volunteer company. All part of the same city.
 
  There was another very serious haz mat incident in a warehouse and those career firefighters, including 4 Haz Mat Techs, were never requested until another Haz Mat Team responding some 15 miles away actually requested them to respond. There has been other incidents as well.
 
  With no positive results from the city manager, OR those Volunteer Chiefs, I decided to go to a local newspaper about these issues. I have provided to that reporter dates, times and facts. Within the last two months, one volunteer dept has called that career dept twice. Including one call to where that building fire was less than a year earlier. "I guess they know somebody is watching".
 
  As I understand it, that newspaper reporter is still in the process of conducting interviews. In 2008, a civilian died less than two miles from that career firehouse. All while the commanding officer felt the need only for volunteer firefighters much farther away.
 
  So as we see, its not only Port Chester or Garden City where some volunteer chiefs are very willing to put the citizens as well as his own volunteer firefighters at risk. I hope things DO change without getting into the newspaper. It just won't look good if that story comes out. So stay tuned as these events happen as well.

I like how some here will continue to try and sugar-coat what this story is about (very predictable).
 
It is also cute how one clown had such a "strong" defense of his fellow volunteers that he blurted out the "get a life, get a job" rebuttal (that kind of response could get you on the fast track for a Chief's position in Port Chester). 
 
Sorry folks...."it is what it is"..... and that is a poorly orchestrated plan to retaliate against Union firefighters for blowing the whistle about actual problems within someone's little kingdom. 
 
I know that many volunteers have traditionally cherished the "victim role" in the endless career vs. volunteer saga, but this piece of history should not be looked upon for anything more that exactly what it is = textbook anti-union animus . 
 
This story will not have a happy ending for those who had a hand in the release of these firefighters.
 
 

Alan, good points.
 
And, as my late father once told one of his ass-kissing subordinates; "Nobody likes a rat." I also don't like that it took so long for this incident to be brought to the forefront. However, it shows a true lack of professionalism and decency on the part of the chief. Unfortunately, times have changed (not always for the better) and standards of conduct are always open to (intense at times) scrutiny. 
 
As Warner Wolf used to say, "Lets go to the videotape." By today's standards, he's guilty of conduct unbecoming a (fill in the blanks). His credibility, questionable from the outset, is at an all time low. Not someone I'd want, or trust, having my back at an emergency, or in the company rooms. 

As a starting point.....Change the name of the thread to VOLUNTEER VS. CAREER. 
 
This entire issue was manufactured by a small group of completely incompetent volunteer fools wearing Fire Chief costumes from the Port Chester FD.
 
Sorry if the truth may hurt for some of the pro-volunteer carrot snappers on this board, but this story is going to sting for awhile (as it should).
 
Contrary to the claim of one "dinosaur" here......This has everything to do with career and volunteer relationships and the absolute jealousy that a few complete losers from PCFD attempted to enact upon 8 unionized firefighters who did not conform to their failing regime. 
 
Speaking out earned them being thrown out.
 
Except, the labor world is a bit harder to con than the archaic volunteer fiefdoms that these pieces of trash have matriculated through.
 
Open check book PCFD.
 
Elections have consequences. 
 
 

Now that we have all these side dramas= a Rye Brook suit, trustees not signing paperwork and now a seemingly damning tape , where do. we stand with getting the PC8 their jobs back????

http://westchester.news12.com/news/port-chester-volunteer-fire-chief-edward-quinn-accused-of-telling-men-to-damage-harrison-firefighte-1.11840390#autoplay=true
 
this isn't good.... 
 

http://www.wsj.com/articles/9-11-museum-a-tough-sell-for-new-yorkers-1463964385

 
Appears to be a foregone conclusion that MOST of the officers, along with the volunteer force, had no idea what the three cheeses, I mean chiefs, were orchestrating.

Well i thought the meeting went well. Mayor and the Board just kept getting blasted with truth and you could tell it hurt. The board knows they all committed political suicide and that they will not be in office after the next election. A lot of great points were made and the speakers were all well informed and cool calm and collected. The real highlights came from Chief Flynn, Barry Mcgoey, and A Officer from Greenburgh who's name escapes me. They all had there ducks in a row, they came with that cool heads, and most importantly, they let the board know that we as firemen are not going away. We will keep on them till this is resolved.
 
Another highlight was at the end when the Mayor tried to stop two board members from adding a item to the agenda. Tried to say that Trustee Luis Marino could not second Trustee Greg Adams vote to re-instate the Port Chester Eight because he had abstained from the now infamous first vote. After some back and forth the item was added to the next meetings agenda. 

That is correct. The Village is in the red because the 1 million dollars from Rye Brook would offset the cost for the career staff.  This was a nice little chunk of cash that was in the budged and was still included after the guys were cut. Real shifty book keeping.
 
Hope every resident from Port Chester goes to the next board meeting and let them know this is not good. Don't gamble with peoples lives cause your just gonna lose.

Just when you think things couldn't get weirder..........
 
http://www.lohud.com/story/news/local/westchester/rye-brook-port-chester/2016/05/20/port-chester-oath-office/84666408/

 
 Excellent point. Apparently those THREE Chiefs have not only put the citizens and their property at risk, but with their decision to eliminate those eight career firefighters, they have put their own members at risk as well. I am very glad to see that some of Port Chester's own volunteer firefighters realize that. It doesn't really matter which T-shirt or uniform you wear. Firefighters get hurt and even sometimes die while performing their duties.
 
  Those three chiefs should have NEVER recommended the removal of the "PC8". The chiefs have apparently proven to many the real lack of knowledge within the fire service they have. As well as the total lack of concern they have for those who must depend on them. For any fire chief to recommend the elimination of any firefighters under their command goes AGAINST everything taught or learned from past experience.
 
 The best thing those chiefs can do is to make amends and admit their foolish mistake by bringing back those eight career firefighters. The first step is to bring back those eight firefighters. The next thing for those chiefs is to readily admit how wrong they were. Fire Chiefs are human too. They make mistakes as well. But it is much easier to admit a mistake like this now, Rather than NOT admit a mistake today and attend a funeral later because they wouldn't.

I feel for the volunteers but the company had 61 runs last year. Im sure a dept. like Pittsburgh can pick that up no problem. This will sting for a while but I'm sure its in the towns best interest , they could use the extra cash for law enforcement 

 
http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2016/04/12/ingram-borough-council-votes-to-eliminate-volunteer-fire-company/

This is a rerun of the same discussion over the years.  Nothing is going to change so long as we have these little empires and emperors running things.
 

The first step is admitting one has a problem, and since agencies can't or won't do that even after the 3rd or 4th tone out.
 
the leadership in most agencies do not want change! 

I do a lot of highway driving in the tri-state area. People are just oblivious as to what is going on around them while driving.
I have noticed that there really is not much traffic enforcement on our local highways anymore.
Whatever happened  to the  NYS Police UNmarked blue tahoes,  I don't see them on the road any longer.

Does it irk anyone else that no one follows the move over laws? On top of that, when you are trying to move over, people won't let you in.
 
Do PD's ever sit there with their lights on, and peg people who don't move over? I always hope I will see that. 'Cause if they don't, I'd love to see something like that more often.
 
Just a tiny rant.

I'm seeing this being picked apart on other sites. First, let me give you some context.
 
Check out the video:
http://www.fox5dc.com/news/102497228-story
 
Next, Kentland Fire, in something the "Salty" people seem to have dubbed "beaching" that they displayed on their Facebook page. Now, maybe some more experience Aerialscope operator can enlighten me.
First off, is taking your truck across, what I can only assume is soft soil, and then set it up very close to the building, safe?  I get they had to have been rescuing occupants from the apartment across the hall.
 
But my question to y'all......and I'm on the fence here.......can you maintain stability in the jacks and outriggers in this type of surface?
 
I mean, it looks OK, like they got the truck where it needed to be. I can't decide, do I say good job on this one? I want my fellow members to make up my mind please.
 
Photos from Kentland FD's Facebook Page

 
 
 

Just wanted to pose a question to the EMS community.
 
Last night at a single car MVA,  had a single patient who was going to be transported. She was removed from the car to a backboard and placed on the ground and strapped in. when the ambulance arrived, she and the backboard were lifted and put on the stretcher. Then the Ambulance crew removed the backboard and transported her. there was no backboard on the stretcher and she was in a collar.
 
My question is, is this a new procedure? Was it done cause she was not thought of as a high risk? We asked the State trooper if he had seen this on the road and he said no. Just want to keep up to date with things and know how we should operate out there.

Many regional protocols are moving away from requiring backboards except for extreme indicators... research found that the backboard didn't cause as much benefit as previously thought and more often than not, a patient is already moving around and had compromised C-Spine if there were an issue. With that being said, a lot of the protocols still require collars to be used, just not full immobilization.

Yes. This is the new NYS protocol from last Autumn. Backboards can be used to move a patient but not to transport them to the hospital. There was a protocol update last Autumn.  All EMT's had to do it.