Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
ex-commish

FF1 revisions

139 posts in this topic

While I think that physical requirements are important, has NYS begun to require that all (yes, all) Firefighters receive training and certification that is compliant with NFPA 1001?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



This is probably in the long run a good thing.

I agree that doing a series of tasks in short order on a single bottle of air is unrealistic, unless we are going to drop that pesky rehab standard that was implemented a few years ago. You know the one that limits the time you can work without a rest period. Which probably would prevent you from doing a rapid series of tasks on a single bottle on a fire ground.

I'm not sure I'm following your line of thinking on this. Doing a series of tasks in short order on a single bottle of air is in fact very realistic. For one, have you not seen the FF Combat Challenge? I've done something similar for a firefighter research study on one cylinder. Heck, in my department, doing a series of tasks on a single cylinder is the norm.

The only rehab necessary would be after completion of the tasks.

Are you saying that the rehab standard requires a rest period before the first cylinder is expended?

As for the ability of the instructors to do this, I would be willing to bet that most can, however we all know guys who while mostly good at what they do have made teaching their main career and have not been in a fire in years. I have a feeling that this is who will be questioned, not the younger gung ho guys who nobody doubts can do the job.

As for a single standard, that is good in theory but has some problems in practice. The ability of someone in a career department to spend more time training is a reality that we have to face. The ability of a department to order someone to attend an academy on a full time basis is simply not there in a volunteer department or even some smaller career departments. a 14 week academy is over 500 hours, when I took FF1 is was about 120, the same for FF2 which together equal about half of that time. So how long would it take to run that full time standard on a part time basis?

It isn't necessarily the issue that you think it is, depending on what is defined as the single standard. If the standard is a 500 hour fire academy with a standard curriculum, then yes, most volunteers would have trouble attending on a full-time basis and there would be issues with getting someone quickly thru it on a part-time basis.

However, if the standard is testing for certification to a specific set of skills and knowledge, then it would not be quite as challenging to accomplish. For example, in my area, there are two paramedic training programs. One is run by the Community College and the other is run by a sub-organization of one of the local hospital systems. The Community College's program is less intensive, fewer hours and less expensive by comparison and more than adequate to train a paramedic. The other one in my opinion is a really good program for those whose ultimate goal is med school or nursing because of the depth to which they teach. In the end, all of the students from both programs have to take the same examination (NREMTP) in order to become a certified paramedic.

In that same vein, if there is a standard 3rd party testing process that validates the ability to perform a common set of skills and possess a certain level of fire service knowledge, then the process is less about the path traveled and more about one's ability to perform.

Bnechis likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"It is time we stop the nonsense and make one standard for firefighter. Enough of this "interior", "exterior"

Are you referring to new members or those allready in?

One standard for all firefighters. Period.

So yes, referring to new and existing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

it is an addition if it was not required and now is. AAgain not fighting the need I am simply saying that 1 cylindar to do all that in succession itome seems a bit much. And to the memberwho said we need 1 standard for all firefighters in lieu of interior and exterior thats nuts. Every FD and PD has people on full time desk duty. There is a job for everyone in this service.

You're incorrect. Every police officer in the state of NY and every career firefighter has been trained to one standard. If they are on desk or light duty later in their career, it's irrelevant. They were still trained to the same single NYS standard.

EMT, paramedic, police officer and career firefighter all have one training standard. Only in the volunteer sector did we eliminate a training standard.

Not everyone can or should be a firefighter. They have to be able to perform the job. If you want to welcome everyone with open arms into your department, fine, just don't call them all firefighters.

vwwh1, Newburgher and Bnechis like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As for a single standard, that is good in theory but has some problems in practice. The ability of someone in a career department to spend more time training is a reality that we have to face. The ability of a department to order someone to attend an academy on a full time basis is simply not there in a volunteer department or even some smaller career departments. a 14 week academy is over 500 hours, when I took FF1 is was about 120, the same for FF2 which together equal about half of that time. So how long would it take to run that full time standard on a part time basis? I don't think we need to get rid of support positions or exterior positions, although they probably need to be standardized as everyone seems to define them slightly differently. No matter the kind of department the guy who only files paperwork does not need to pass an interior standard any more than a paramedic does, as neither one is going into a burning building any time soon.

There are other states with the same, single standard for firefighter. It doesn't matter if you're paid or a volunteer, if you want to be a firefighter you take all the required training. This doesn't mean you have to attend full-time during the day but it does mean you have to make a commitment to your training. How many people are out there with outdated or inadequate training? Too many, and we ignore it and allow it to persist. How many are joining now and only taking the barest minimum of training before donning a pack and going into an IDLH environment?

Departments can order you to complete the training if you want to be given the title firefighter.

Support or exterior positions need to be called something other than firefighter. They're not and they're misleading themselves and the public. Some departments claim to have 100 members. To the public that means 100 interior firefighters (because the public won't make the distinction). In reality they have 25 life members (no longer doing anything), 25 junior members, and 25 exterior or support members, so in reality they only have 25 interior firefighters. How many will actually show up at the call? 1/3? 1/2? So 8-12 guys that can actually go inside to fight the fire or rescue grandma or whatever.

It's time we stop misleading ourselves and our public. One standard for the title of firefighter.

vwwh1, Newburgher, BFD1054 and 1 other like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One standard for all firefighters. Period.

So yes, referring to new and existing

I agree with incoming members but not those allready in who have put thier time in, perhaps can no longer wear a mask but can drive and run a pump or aerial ladder and do other stuff on the fireground that does not require wearing the mask. What happens to career firefighters who have some time on and fall into the same category?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with incoming members but not those allready in who have put thier time in, perhaps can no longer wear a mask but can drive and run a pump or aerial ladder and do other stuff on the fireground that does not require wearing the mask. What happens to career firefighters who have some time on and fall into the same category?

If you can no longer wear a mask you get to retire

FireMedic049 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you can no longer wear a mask you get to retire

You get to or you have to. Aren't there duties that can be preformed such as fire inspections, fire prevention, driving,etc?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You get to or you have to. Aren't there duties that can be preformed such as fire inspections, fire prevention, driving,etc?

All field positions including driving must be 100% interior qualified since our 4th due engine is FAST (including the driver) so any engine can be FAST. Also drivers not pumping are expected to operate inside, particularly at high-rise jobs.

Fire Prevention is done by field personnel assigned to FP on days off.

Fire Inspections are done by engine and ladder companies.

We have 2 inspectors (1 fire fighter, 1 captain) out of 156 active duty members that in theory could not be required to wear SCBA, but both are required to pass annual physicals and fit testing , because they can be transferred back to field units as needed (and their replacements in staff need to be certified as code enforcement officers).

We do have a few firefighters who can't wear SCBA's because of medical conditions, they are classified under GML 207A and are awaiting NYS Disability Pension Retirement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are other states with the same, single standard for firefighter. It doesn't matter if you're paid or a volunteer, if you want to be a firefighter you take all the required training. This doesn't mean you have to attend full-time during the day but it does mean you have to make a commitment to your training. How many people are out there with outdated or inadequate training? Too many, and we ignore it and allow it to persist. How many are joining now and only taking the barest minimum of training before donning a pack and going into an IDLH environment?

Departments can order you to complete the training if you want to be given the title firefighter.

Support or exterior positions need to be called something other than firefighter. They're not and they're misleading themselves and the public. Some departments claim to have 100 members. To the public that means 100 interior firefighters (because the public won't make the distinction). In reality they have 25 life members (no longer doing anything), 25 junior members, and 25 exterior or support members, so in reality they only have 25 interior firefighters. How many will actually show up at the call? 1/3? 1/2? So 8-12 guys that can actually go inside to fight the fire or rescue grandma or whatever.

I hear ya but inadequate or outdated training needs to be dealt with by the individual FD (AHJ). I dont see why Big Brother needs to dictate to everyone. There is a bigger agenda here and we keep beating around the bush. Solution; Let the local FD handle their own members, train the new members to the proposed FF1 and FF2 standards. Allow the existing Exterior and support staff continue because there are plenty of jobs that dont require a mask. Lets remember why career FD's retire those who cannot wear a mask--They dont want to pay them a full salary if they cant do the full job. In the volunteer sector that should not apply bc there is a job for anyone who wants to help.

It's time we stop misleading ourselves and our public. One standard for the title of firefighter.

Bottom of Da Hill likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're incorrect. Every police officer in the state of NY and every career firefighter has been trained to one standard. If they are on desk or light duty later in their career, it's irrelevant. They were still trained to the same single NYS standard.

EMT, paramedic, police officer and career firefighter all have one training standard. Only in the volunteer sector did we eliminate a training standard.

Not everyone can or should be a firefighter. They have to be able to perform the job. If you want to welcome everyone with open arms into your department, fine, just don't call them all firefighters.

Listen you can spin it how you want to spin it but not every FF and PO trained in say 1998 received the same training as a FF or PO trained today. The job is always evolving and so are training standards. This has turned into Career FF vs. Volunteer FF 9.0 as is usually the case on this site. Are there some Volunteers that act the part of 'the jolly volly"? Sure. But not every career FF is professional and the notion that they are is ludicrous. Enough already.

AFS1970 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Listen you can spin it how you want to spin it but not every FF and PO trained in say 1998 received the same training as a FF or PO trained today. The job is always evolving and so are training standards. This has turned into Career FF vs. Volunteer FF 9.0 as is usually the case on this site. Are there some Volunteers that act the part of 'the jolly volly"? Sure. But not every career FF is professional and the notion that they are is ludicrous. Enough already.

You are correct. Lets go back even further. in 1987 the career standard in Westchester was 480 hours plus EMT (120-140 hours). Since then they have added TIC training, FAST, Survival, collapse, confined space, hazmat tech, WMD, etc. And those of us who did not have it as part of our initial training got it as part of ongoing and in-service training.

Yes its evolving and the training standards evolve with it.

Funny it only is a career/volley issue in places that have 2 (or 3 if you consider exterior only) standards for the same title "Firefighter".

Dinosaur likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So all this back and forth is about a title ? Really ? Come on guys is this what it has come to ? What should we call those who do not go interior so we can move on from this lunacy ?

Bottom of Da Hill likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My only gripes with this are Station #3 (saw carry) & #4 (ladder raise). Besides the Yard Breathers, who wears an SCBA for this stuff?



And - if I have a 30 minute bottle and you have a 60 minute bottle - does that mean the same test for both of us?



The change is long overdue, and everyone will complain about it until it's been around for a while, just like everything else, when it becomes accepted. Any volunteer fire department that thinks doing this is a bad idea are probably the same ones that let their Chiefs handle everything while the rank and file members hold their dicks back at the rigs.


Bnechis, BFD1054, AFS1970 and 2 others like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My only gripes with this are Station #3 (saw carry) & #4 (ladder raise). Besides the Yard Breathers, who wears an SCBA for this stuff?

And - if I have a 30 minute bottle and you have a 60 minute bottle - does that mean the same test for both of us?

The change is long overdue, and everyone will complain about it until it's been around for a while, just like everything else, when it becomes accepted. Any volunteer fire department that thinks doing this is a bad idea are probably the same ones that let their Chiefs handle everything while the rank and file members hold their dicks back at the rigs.

Thst was my big issue from the get go. A 30 minute bottle which we all know doesnt mean 30 minutes is not fair for a guy to carry hose, drag a dummy, open a ceiling, force a door, set up a 2 section ladder, and carry a saw. Period.

Bottom of Da Hill likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thst was my big issue from the get go. A 30 minute bottle which we all know doesnt mean 30 minutes is not fair for a guy to carry hose, drag a dummy, open a ceiling, force a door, set up a 2 section ladder, and carry a saw. Period.

this is why we have engine co .ladder co. and rescue co.s who each have a job to do at a fire scene.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with incoming members but not those allready in who have put thier time in, perhaps can no longer wear a mask but can drive and run a pump or aerial ladder and do other stuff on the fireground that does not require wearing the mask. What happens to career firefighters who have some time on and fall into the same category?

I'm pretty sure career firefighters have to remain qualified (barring an injury) for the duration of their career. You make a valid point about allowing existing firefighters to retire with a sunset clause but there should be no more starting today that never become interior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You get to or you have to. Aren't there duties that can be preformed such as fire inspections, fire prevention, driving,etc?

Yes and No. In large departments, there may be positions dedicated to doing things like fire inspections, fire prevention and fire investigations. However, there likely aren't that many of those positions out there and there has to be a vacancy. In smaller departments, like mine for instance, inspections and prevention are something that everybody participates in and investigations are handled by the County Fire Marshals.

In some departments, the position of driver rotates among the company members. In others, it is an assigned position and the permanently assigned person drives when they work, but they are expected to be able to do the rest of the job if they are not performing driver related tasks on scene like pumping or operating the aerial. In small departments like mine, off-duty personnel are called in when we have working fires. When that happens, the driver jobs are already covered and we need people to fight the fire.

So, typically when you can no longer do the whole job, retirement is the only option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Listen you can spin it how you want to spin it but not every FF and PO trained in say 1998 received the same training as a FF or PO trained today. The job is always evolving and so are training standards. This has turned into Career FF vs. Volunteer FF 9.0 as is usually the case on this site. Are there some Volunteers that act the part of 'the jolly volly"? Sure. But not every career FF is professional and the notion that they are is ludicrous. Enough already.

It's not spin at all. Every police officer receives annual in-service training so they remain as current and qualified as a new recruit today. Likewise, career firefighters have to complete at least 100 (I think, it's been a long time since I did this paperwork) hours of annual in-service training also.

This is NOT a career vs. volunteer issue. This is an issue of standards. There is a minimum training standard for the career fire service and it has been vigorously opposed by the volunteer community. This disparity perpetuates the issues you're talking about.

I'm not saying every career FF behaves professionally or that volunteers don't. I'm saying that every career FF in the state of NY was trained to the same standard. You can't say that in the vollie community.

Bnechis, BFD1054 and FireMedic049 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So all this back and forth is about a title ? Really ? Come on guys is this what it has come to ? What should we call those who do not go interior so we can move on from this lunacy ?

It's more of an issue than you think. We have people who join the FD and never attend training except to be a driver and call themselves FF.

My point is that if you want to be a firefighter you shouldn't get to choose not to do the job of a firefighter by staying outside.

This isn't lunacy, this is the advocacy of FASNY and other groups that oppose vehemently any training standards or requirements to be called a FF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So all this back and forth is about a title ? Really ? Come on guys is this what it has come to ? What should we call those who do not go interior so we can move on from this lunacy ?

It's not exactly the trivial thing that you seem to be inferring. I don't have a specific term to throw out there, but here's an example to help you understand the argument.

Let's say that everyone who belongs to a fire department is titled "firefighter" regardless of what role they perform or don't perform. Using that same logic, everybody who works for a hospital can be titled "doctor" regardless of what role they perform or don't perform. We don't do this because titles do matter. The titles doctor, nurse, ER tech, janitor, aide, etc. help the patients and staff distinguish between the different roles and what they each contribute to the overall operation. So, if you are sick and in need of a doctor, you wouldn't want a "doctor" (aka janitor) to treat you.

If you polled the average citizen on what a "firefighter" is and what their expectations for them are, it won't be that they just drive or just help outside if that person's house was on fire and a loved one was trapped inside. Therefore, using the title "firefighter" for all members is misleading in the same fashion that "doctor" doesn't mean the person who pushes the broom down the hallways of the hospital.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not exactly the trivial thing that you seem to be inferring. I don't have a specific term to throw out there, but here's an example to help you understand the argument.

Let's say that everyone who belongs to a fire department is titled "firefighter" regardless of what role they perform or don't perform. Using that same logic, everybody who works for a hospital can be titled "doctor" regardless of what role they perform or don't perform. We don't do this because titles do matter. The titles doctor, nurse, ER tech, janitor, aide, etc. help the patients and staff distinguish between the different roles and what they each contribute to the overall operation. So, if you are sick and in need of a doctor, you wouldn't want a "doctor" (aka janitor) to treat you.

If you polled the average citizen on what a "firefighter" is and what their expectations for them are, it won't be that they just drive or just help outside if that person's house was on fire and a loved one was trapped inside. Therefore, using the title "firefighter" for all members is misleading in the same fashion that "doctor" doesn't mean the person who pushes the broom down the hallways of the hospital.

here is something to help you understand my point. The average citizen doesnt know or care who is called what as long as their local FD is doing their job. Departments should not be sending exterior guys to do an interior job. To me it should be less about what we call them and more about clearly defining what those classifications are.

Bottom of Da Hill likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So all this back and forth is about a title ? Really ? Come on guys is this what it has come to ? What should we call those who do not go interior so we can move on from this lunacy ?

On another thread "Rye City Manager - Staffed for Failure". At one point a Rye City Council women asks Why is adding firefighters so important "We have like 200 volunteers"

The chief answered, well not exactly...they are members but we only have 40 that are active and of those only 17-20 are interior, which means the others are helpers. And of those interior like 19 are not available daytime because of work or school.

So does it matter? The City thinks they have 200 and daytime they have 1.

TBarnum, BFD1054 and SageVigiles like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

here is something to help you understand my point. The average citizen doesnt know or care who is called what as long as their local FD is doing their job. Departments should not be sending exterior guys to do an interior job. To me it should be less about what we call them and more about clearly defining what those classifications are.

You are correct they don't know or care, because they believe that the FD has the trained personnel that can do the job. But their are a lot of depts. that are having major issues doing that.

And the law did that many years ago (some of the material has been law since 1990) to bad that OFPC just ignored clearly defined classifications

BFD1054 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

here is something to help you understand my point. The average citizen doesnt know or care who is called what as long as their local FD is doing their job. Departments should not be sending exterior guys to do an interior job. To me it should be less about what we call them and more about clearly defining what those classifications are.

Right, but there in lies the problem. Departments should not be doing it, but they are. Not only that, they are willfully allowing members who are underprepared to operate on the interior to do so. Some just aren't up for the job. It's somewhat rampant in my area and other parts of the country.

My department runs very few calls outside of our city (not by our choice, most of the volunteers just don't call us, even though we're closer than some of the departments they use). A few years ago we sent an engine to a reported dwelling fire (basement) early in the morning in a small neighboring borough. As far as I know, dispatch added us to the call due to a slow response from the volunteers. Our engine was the third unit to arrive. It would've been first if on the initial dispatch, but that's a different conversation. They arrived to find 2 engines on scene, a supply line established, attack lines off and several people dressed up as firefighters around the house, but NOBODY had entered the building yet! Our crew entered and quickly determined that there was NO active fire. Just a good smoke condition from a lint fire. Is this what a local FD doing its job looks like? I don't think so.

This type of stuff leads to low expectations from the public because they don't necessarily know what a good FD looks like. The fire trucks show up, people in firefighter gear show up, they squirt some water until the fire goes out, the building is destroyed, everybody pats themselves on the back on how good of a job they did. This repeats itself enough times that the public now praises them for their effort and just accepts that fires = destroyed buildings not knowing that a competent FD would've saved a good number of those buildings and/or their contents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My only gripes with this are Station #3 (saw carry) & #4 (ladder raise). Besides the Yard Breathers, who wears an SCBA for this stuff?

Uhhh....if you're going to the roof, you get off the rig with a pack on, get the ladder up and bring your saw up.

SageVigiles likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uhhh....if you're going to the roof, you get off the rig with a pack on, get the ladder up and bring your saw up.

You wear the pack on your back but if you're on air for this again you're a yard breather and are less of a ff then the exterior driver who has got tools out ready and ladders thrown to windows. But I forget there's no such thing as a need for support personnel everyone should be able to go interior so when guys get injured or they can't go interior they should be thrown out with the rest of the rejected that cannot be interior. Even though when properly cleared many of these categories can play a vital role in the outcome of a fire. We don't need anyone who can't be interior so we'll also have to start limiting age due to the number of 40 plus year old interior guy's dying from heart attacks. So with the age cut off those guy's on the job well oh well you can't be a driver because you don't belong interior so thanks for being here 20yrs have a nice day don't have to go home but can't stay here.

Yes the requirements for some one becoming and staying interior needed updating. Just remember there are probably more exterior/support personnel are and were regular firefighters before they had to hang up there scba the way some make it sound they are not firefighters. It was added about hospitals you're right not everyone is called a Dr but they are all health care workers. Just like not everyone in the fire service is an interior or wildland or whatever but we are all firefighters! So get off you're high horse find real solutions for all of the fire service and the community's better requirements for every position in the fire service don't just write off the exterior like I said before a lot of them can't be interior anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the new changes, if you cant pass the breathe down, you will not continue the training. That's what we were told by our County Coordinator.

Part of this is true, the candidate gets a second try a couple of weeks later. This new standard is for both career and volunteer ff's. What was explained to the chiefs was "this is not to get rid of potential firefighters, it is to have them in-house trained to expect this when they get to class. We (the fire service) do a disservice to volunteer recruits when we hand them all their gear and tell them to show at class night one, and they haven't even worn it yet. Several depts. in Westchester are way ahead of the curve by doing months of in-house training before sending anyone to class. AND IT SHOWS.

I read one comment that stated each dept should be responsible for their own training. I agree. Who gets to over see this? With this new OFPC standard the instructor who trained the recruits is not the same evaluator for final skills.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.