Dumont NJ Captain Suspended For Using 10 Code

[AS702 0]

Firehouse Fued

[Jason762 2]

Without knowing the entire story and being a spectator from the outside it appears that they are targeting this fire company. Suspending a capt. for using a 10 code...seems a little extreme, right? Having meetings about disbanding a company without any of the company in question members present?!?!?! But then again the article seems to only show one side of the story. Whatever the case may be it seems the public's safety is taking a back seat to personal agendas. Hopefully someone with a little more knowledge can shed some light on this.

[Guest WolfEMT]

If he said something like "10-4" as a quick way to acknowledge what someone has said, then there should not be an issue since virtually everyone regardless of whether or not they are in the emergency service knows what "10-4" means. If he said something more specific like "10-28" which may differ in meaning from jurisdiction to jurisdiction (hence, why NJ has been teaching the use clear text in FF1 and EMT classes), then he should be coached on the disuse of 10-codes. Either way, it seems as if there is more to the story than was reported here; and there is no reason for the Captain to be suspended as a result. Sounds like more of a politcal battle between the municipality and the volunteer emergency services within it, but then again, what else is new in New Jersey?

[junior215 0]

I agree with Jason762. A newspaper article rarely gives the whole story. If there was a deaprtment order or SOG that was issued on radio procedures and this particular member continued to use the "10" codes, then a suspension may have been waranted. Also, were there verbal and written reprimands before he suspension???? Volunteers need discipline too, but it should not stem from personal battles.

As for disbanding a company.....this is never good, career or volunteer. Again, I cannot comment on this situation because the whole story isn't known. But if this is wat HAS to be done and services are provided to compensate for the disbanded company, then the decision may be supported. As long as this isn't truly a personal matter.

[JBE 328]

There has to be more to this than is being reported. I got my stones broken for saying K up in Lake Carmel when I first got on the job, but for the DFD to suspend this guy over saying 10-4 seems to be a bit much.

[AS702 0]

The chief has a grudge against the capt.. Firehouse Fued Video

[Guest]

AS702...thanks for the link that works...we have a dish, so if you don't have cable, you can't watch these stories on the net.

Not the kind of publicity anybody wants...and whether the whole story of the 'feud' will out is doubtful, IMHO. What they all need to do is go down to Hackensack and wolf down many White Manna burgers and call it a day....

[210 91]

Inmaturity on both sides I expect.

[IzzyEng4 427]

Well a few things could happen after watching the video. The statement of the chief saying the news had to leave because its "fire department property" then having the PD say the news can stay seems odd huh? I guess the it is safe to assume that the fire houses are owned by the borough?

The information is very inconsistant and to suspend someone for using a 10 code, COME ON!

If this is retaliation for the suspension of the other members for drug use, then in my opinion the chief should be suspended.

Though it still seems we are not getting the whole story.

[AS702 0]

From my understanding, it has been an on-going problem between companies.. The rescue thinks they should have the extrication equipment and the squad thinks they should..

[firecapt32 282]

You cant make this sh** up

you dont think this could happen in Westchester do you???

Hmmmmm

[goon16 155]

in my opinon its stupid the chief just has a grudge aganist him because of what he did to the two member in the present chief company and i think that the chief was just waiting for him to screw up even in the smallest nature even if it was just using a 10- code he could of just warned him and now since he has the power of being chief he can shove it as hard as he wants. The capt is just getting F*cked by some one who definitley has it out for him. As for the equipment let them both have it, who cares as long as the job gets done is all that matters

Edited July 26, 2006 by goon16

[X615 0]

suspending a captain for something like using the 10 code is such a ridiculous over reaction, petty & transparent that it makes the chief look inept & shows he obviously has a personal agenda to get this captain no matter how far of a reach he has to go to pin something on this guy. suspending this guy is nothing more than a "gotcha". sounds like a real happy place to be. crap like this is divisive and does nothing but ruin morale. nice going!

[calhobs 110]

You cant make this sh**  up

you dont think this could happen in Westchester do you???

Hmmmmm

←

In Westchester nooooooooooo never happens

[Jared1979 19]

To suspend someone for using a 10-code is the stupiest thing I have ever heard. The chief of that dept needs to grow up and get a life. I personally think there is no need to use plain text on the radio and I hear it all the time at home on my scanner. We have the 10 codes for a reason I suggest we use them, not plain text.

[Guest tfd193]

Its good thing it says Dumont on their gear and rigs, because they couldn't have looked much similar to FDNY with their rigs

[IzzyEng4 427]

You know, as I was looking at thier web site, since the rescue / truck comapny is on one side of the train tracks and the squad is on the other, don't you think that there should be 2 sets of tools?????? If this was the argument case so to speak.

Hmmmmm. But then again I'm an outsider looking in.

[goon16 155]

anyone find out the outcome? is he suspended or kicked off ???

[AS702 0]

Note: Tonight's hearing on the conduct of suspended Dumont Fire Department Capt. Brad Levitzki has been postponed because not all the members of the Fire Department Executive Board could attend, said Mayor Matthew McHale. No later date has been set.

[msm232 69]

Dumont suspends fire captain over spending

Friday, July 28, 2006

By EUNNIE PARK

STAFF WRITER

DUMONT -- An embattled fire captain was suspended by borough officials Thursday for allegedly mismanaging the Fire Department's budget last year while he was chief.

Capt. Brad Levitzki, who leads the 18-member Squad Company 1, was suspended for the second time this year, this time for allegedly spending about $26,000 beyond the department's budget. He was suspended earlier for allegedly failing to follow departmental procedure, fire company officials have said.

Levitzki, a 16-year veteran of the department, did not return calls Thursday seeking comment.

Borough Administrator John Perkins said Levitzki spent the extra cash on various gear and tools after he had been told not to spend any more money.

The purchases were discovered by Fire Chief Antonio Spina when he took office this year, and borough officials say they have been investigating the matter for several months.

"Our lawyers said there was significant evidence that what Brad did warranted suspension," said Councilman Robert McQuade, the acting fire commissioner.

Spina did not return calls seeking comment.

Levitzki was suspended in March for using a "10-code" against Spina's orders. The codes were traditionally used in radio transmissions to represent common phrases. But recently, many departments nationwide have stopped using the code in favor of plain language.

Last weekend Levitzki's firehouse hung banners in his support, and the Fire Department executive board voted to disband Squad Company 1.

The mayor and council, which have the final say on shutting down the company, issued a statement Thursday: "This recommendation will be considered in a professional, methodical and impartial manner with the safety of our residents as the most important factor."

Spina rescinded Levitzki's 10-code suspension Wednesday, just before the mayor and council suspended him for allegedly mismanaging funds.

Levitzki can request a hearing before the mayor and council. The allegations could result in his termination as captain, Perkins said.

Officials said the latest charges have nothing to do with Levitzki's March suspension.

"It's two different things," said McQuade. "It's a shame that it involves the same person and the same firehouse."

6967333

[IzzyEng4 427]

Whoa boy!

Also does this mean that Dumont Squad 1 and Engine 1 ehich are run by the same comapny is being disbanded or does this mean that Squad 1 would be eliminated and Engine 1 would just run?

Also this sheds the light on the engine returning the block to the chief.

Not good at all.

[firecapt32 282]

lets loook at it another way-- mabey they needed dicipline. we cannot run a fire service with out it. mabey they had enough of what was going on. mabey someone said- " what are you going to do to me supend me?"

some pepole just have to push the enevelop to a point where something has to be done.

I;m sure there is more to this. but there are 2 sides

Officers have to control the firefighters--firefighter have to listen to the officers. otherwise who knows what can happen.

just my thoughts

[JetPhoto 626]

To suspend someone for using a 10-code is the stupiest thing I have ever heard. The chief of that dept needs to grow up and get a life.  I personally think there is no need to use plain text on the radio and I hear it all the time at home on my scanner.  We have the 10 codes for a reason I suggest we use them, not plain text.

←

10 codes are slowly going away. There are many reasons for this, one of the biggest reasons is because there is no set standard of 10 codes anymore. This leads to major cluster "F" when a dept. responds m/a to another that they usually don't go too.

Another reson is part of NIMS requires the use of plain text for resons mentioned above.

[IzzyEng4 427]

10 codes are slowly going away. There are many reasons for this, one of the biggest reasons is because there is no set standard of 10 codes anymore. This leads to major cluster "F" when a dept. responds m/a to another that they usually don't go too.

Another reson is part of NIMS requires the use of plain text for resons mentioned above.

←

But Jet, I really think that the 10-codes suspension was a "foot in the door" to the biger suspension too. I don't really think that a person should be suspended just for one incident of using this instead of the NIMS standard if it was out of habit. However if it was a vendictive and habitual thing then that suppension was warented.

I still don't think we area getting the whole story.

[JetPhoto 626]

But Jet, I really think that the 10-codes suspension was a "foot in the door" to the biger suspension too.

←

Izzy I was refering to Jared1979 statement about only using 10-codes. I agree to suspend someone for using "10-4" is ludicris! I also agree that we don't have all the information. My own opinion is there is a personal fued between the two of them.

[22 Truck 6]

But Jet, I really think that the 10-codes suspension was a "foot in the door" to the biger suspension too.  I don't really think that a person should be suspended just for one incident of using this instead of the NIMS standard if it was out of habit.  However if it was a vendictive and habitual thing then that suppension was warented. 

I still don't think we area getting the whole story.

←

Couldn't agree more Izzy....First of all let me say that counties can either have or not have 10-codes based on who's in charge (Dumont dispatch, if I'm not mistaken is run by their own PD). In my county, fire does not use 10-codes but EMS does on a regular basis (just how we run). But in NO WAY would someone be suspended for use of a 10-code, regardless of a slip-up (we've done it). This was as you say Izzy, a "foot in the door".

Second, am I to understand that the entire Dumont Company 1 is dispanded for the actions of one? Capt. Levitzki may have acted inappropriately by use of 10-codes (which I think is BS), and he may have misappropriated funds, but now they want to disband the 18 member company??? Are you kidding me? These guys are volunteers who train hard, and they are going to say thanks for the work, but cya?

Third, I came across the Dumont FD even before this incident occured. I must say in following them that the rest of the dept. (Co.'s 2, 3 and Indep.) had something to lose as Co. 1 was hard at work. They remodeled their station, bought a used (1990) Pierce Engine from a LI FD to serve as Engine 1, spec'ed a brand new 2004 Seagrave Squad Engine as Squad 1....and trained seriously hard to actually be a Squad Company. Maybe they did model themselves after a FDNY Squad, but are we (or their chiefs) to fault them for giving that effort and trying to provide thier community with that top notch quality and skills? We should all be so lucky to have that dedication. Check out Dumont FD Website and review the archives to see. You'll see that the once Engine Co. 1 now "Squad Co. 1" trained very hard to get their status to serve their citizens better.

Fourth, since they went ahead and did all of this, it's no wonder why the rest of the dept. had a hard-on for them if they had all of the sudden become the strongest. They were very proactive as their website shows; maybe they gained so much power off of this that their chief(s) didn't like it? I commend Squad/Engine 1 for their years of hard work/planning to serve their community better!

Fifth, to have the chief of dept. allow the disband of the co. is a clear sign that there is a grudge w/in the dept. (since he is from another company). Maybe Squad/Engine 1 gained a lot of power b/c they trained so hard and became the best in the dept. off of their years of hard work? Is anyone to fault that? You simply don't tell an entire company, when it's 1/4th of your dept., to forget about their company w/out a serious threatening (of power?). Very shady to me.

Irregardless, I've come to care little about who is in charge of my fire dept., so long as they are as proactive in training and fighting fires as this Co. 1 has shown.

[AFS1970 504]

Sounds to me like this was all political.

However the 10-code vs. plain language debate has recently come to the forefront nationally. I know at work we all got a memo with an attached article stating that FEMA wanted police departments to stop using codes. Stamford PD adopted this as policy, although there are many slips from people that still use codes (both our older 10 codes and our newer NIBRS codes). What was interesting is that there was an article I saw on a firefighting news site a short while later where FEMA told a group of Police Chiefs that it was ok to use codes because the security concerns outweighed the interoperability issues. Oddly enough we didn't all get that article in our mailboxes.

Now Police and Fire are different agencies all together but lets remember that codes were introduced to free up the air, and keep secrets. In this day and age of higher call volume and homeland security, both of these are still valis reasons to use codes. Either way, a simple mistake was probably not grounds for suspension of any kind, let alone one so long in duration.