Skip to content

Archives for

See all posts in the network tagged with

Ordering From the Risk Menu

No comments

May I take your order?

 

Firefighter: What is your special today?

 

Today, we are offering all you can risk. The price is a serious injury. If anyone else in your group gets a serious injury, your names will go into a drawing for a chance at a firefighter funeral; compliments of the house…that was gone before you got there!

 

Firefighter: Cool. Then, I’d like to start off with not wearing my seatbelt while en route to the scene. Can I substitute anything for that?

 

Yes; you can substitute entering a lightweight structure with heavy fire showing or driving apparatus through intersections without slowing down.

 

Firefighter: Do you have any recommendations?

 

Well; entering lightweight structures with heavy fire showing is very popular.

 

Firefighter: Can I get a radio that doesn’t work to go with that?

 

Yes, you can; but might I also recommend drinking alcohol and then responding?

 

Firefighter: I don’t know; I want to leave some room for dessert. Can you warm it up for me?

 

Absolutely. We will heat it to flashover.

 

Firefighter: Excellent. Can I get tunnel vision?

 

It is our specialty. Your dessert?

 

Firefighter: Can I have a heart attack?

 

You’ll have it in no time.

 

Please note that this monologue is dripping with a heavy dose of sarcasm, but is used to drive the point of this blog.

 

It would seem that our fire services’ “risk menu” continues to grow.

 

But, now more than ever, the fire service has taken steps to address unsafe behavior that results in taking “unnecessary risks”. Unsafe behavior that is not corrected in other occupations can get you fired for not following policies and procedures. In our profession, unsafe behavior can get you worse than unemployed; it can get you killed!

 

Is risk-taking unsafe behavior? If engineering, administrative or personal protection controls haven’t been taken, then yes; it is unsafe behavior.

 

If it gets to the level of knowing that a safe job analysis is required, but hasn’t been done, then everyone from the firefighter to the chief have failed to identify risks.

 

I posted a blog about building a risk assessment plan together and had a scant four (4) replies with recommendations contained in them. http://www.firefighternation.com/profiles/blogs/building-a-risk-assessment

 

We tell ourselves THAT isn’t going to happen to us…and then IT DOES!

 

With each firefighter death comes our outrage.

 

Another death; MORE outrage!

 

It is as if we are apathetic to protecting our personal safety.

 

When we lose another firefighter, we take the time to offer our condolences; as we should.

 

But, we should also take the time to take the initiative to CHANGE.

 

If you don’t have a clearly written process for safely executing your duties as a firefighter, then you haven’t been doing your job. You have simply been LUCKY!

 

Do you want to leave your LIFE in the hands of Murphy? Because, Murphy and his law will be there every time the tones drop.

 

Stop believing that there is no need to change our culture because it hasn’t happened to you.

 

Recognize the positives and the negatives.

 

Reward the positives and share its success.

 

But, fix the negatives, because THAT is what will get you hurt or worse; DEAD!

 

Would you like something from the menu?

 

The article as submitted is published under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella and is the intellectual property of Art Goodrich a.k.a. xchief22 and ChiefReason. It is protected by federal copyright laws and cannot be re-printed in any form without expressed permission from the author. You may read other works by the author at www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on February 28, 2009 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , ,

Building a Risk Assessment Plan

No comments

Since there has been a lot of discussion lately on firefighter safety and risk assessment, I thought it presented a golden opportunity to take it a step further and use this medium in a constructive manner.

 

So, I would like to use your expertise for developing a living, breathing document that anyone could take back to their department and use.

 

I have the start of what I feel can be improved upon by those who reply. With each reply, we will either cut content or add content. I will edit the article to reflect the changes and in the end, we will have a risk assessment plan that we can all be proud of.

 

So, how about it? Do you have something to add?

 

Then, let’s go!

 

Your Fire Department’s Risk Assessment Plan

 

(Insert Number) – Structural Firefighting: Rules of Engagement

 

  • All structural fire fighting operations involve an inherent level of risk to firefighters.
  • The exposure of fire fighters to an elevated level of risk is acceptable only in situations where there is a realistic potential to save known endangered lives.
  • All feasible measures shall be taken to limit or avoid these risks through risk assessment and application of safety policies and procedures.
  • No property is worth the life of a fire fighter.
  • No risk to the safety of fire fighters is acceptable in situations where there is no possibility to save lives or property.
  • Fire fighters shall not be committed to interior, offensive firefighting operations in buildings that are known or reasonably believed to be vacant or unoccupied.
  • The following guidelines are to help determine what is an acceptable risk.

 

(Insert Number) – Acceptable Risk Defined

 

  • A basic level of risk is recognized as a measured and controlled effort that is employed to save lives and property.
  • These risks are not acceptable in situations where there is no potential to save lives or property.
  • A higher level of risk is acceptable only when there is a realistic potential to save lives.
  • This elevated risk must be limited to operations that are specifically directed toward rescue and when there is a realistic potential to save the person(s) that are in danger.

 

(Insert Number) – Risk Assessment Plan: Preface

 

Following the preface, there will be guidelines to determine how much risk is acceptable at a structure fire incident.

 

 A major component of the process is utilizing the Pre-Incident Plan information.  Anyone reasonably expected to respond, including mutual aid companies and the officer-in-charge should review the information as part of the risk assessment.

 

Mutual aid companies will be furnished with Pre-Incident Plans and if requested, upon arrival will report in, confer with the Incident Commander, conduct a risk assessment and  communicate the information to the Incident Commander before engaging in any assigned duties.

 

 

Offensive attacks will commence only when lives are at high risk or if the overall risk for protecting property is in our favor.

 

THERE ARE NO STRUCTURES WORTH THE LIFE OF A FIREFIGHTER!

 

Therefore; aggressive, interior firefighting will be deployed only after a sound size up and risk assessment has identified type of building construction and life safety threats.

 

As part of the initial size up and risk assessment, ventilation will be a tactical priority if the decision is made to initiate an aggressive, interior attack.

 

In addition, sound strategy and tactics with safety as the determining factor will lead our efforts.

 

Otherwise, a defensive attack will be made outside the structure with attention towards protecting exposures.

 

It is important to know that once the fire has extended to a level that it is no longer safe for interior firefighting, an evacuation command will be given. All crews will remain together and exit the structure immediately upon hearing the command.

 

Unnecessary risk will never be acceptable. Officers will not put saving property above the safety of their crews. Unacceptable risk is just that; unacceptable.

 

Where risk cannot be completely eliminated, the goal will be to minimize it as much as is practical.

 

Once the decision to go interior is made, the first in crew shall not advance beyond the safe zone of five (5) feet without conducting an interior size up and conveying the information back to the Incident Commander (IC).

 

Upon leaving the safe zone to advance the interior attack, the interior officer-in-charge must conduct ongoing interior size ups and report changes in conditions to the Incident Commander (IC), who may determine from that information to discontinue with interior tactics.

 

 

A combination of experience, training and education will be the foundation for making good decisions.

 

Everyone from the firefighter up to the chief MUST COMMIT to improving their training and education, with the end goal of going home after the shift without serious injury.

 

We owe that to our families, our fellow firefighters, our community and ourselves.

 

(Insert Number) – Risk Assessment Plan

 

  •  It is the responsibility of the Incident Commander (IC) to evaluate the level of risk in every situation. This risk evaluation shall include an assessment of the presence, survivability and potential to rescue occupants. When there is no potential to save lives, firefighters shall not commit to operations that present an elevated level of risk.
  • An incident command system (ICS) shall be established, beginning with the first, arriving crew at the scene of every incident. The Incident Commander must conduct the initial risk assessment to determine the risk to fire fighters. The initial risk assessment will determine the strategy and tactics to be deployed.
  • The responsibility for risk assessment is a continuous process for the duration of each incident. The Incident Commander shall continue to monitor conditions to determine if the level of risk has changed and a change in strategy or tactics is necessary.
  • The incident commander shall assign one or more safety officers to monitor and evaluate conditions to support the risk assessment plan.
  • If the Incident Commander does not assign a safety officer, then the IC shall be responsible for performing these duties.
  • At a minimum the risk analysis for a structure fire shall consider:

 

  Building Characteristics

  • Construction type and size.
  • Condition of structure.
  • Occupancy and contents.

 

Fire Factors

  •  Location and extent of the fire.
  • Estimated time of involvement.
  • What the smoke is telling us.

Risk to Building Occupants

  • Known or probable occupants.
  • Occupant survival assessment.

Fire fighting Capabilities

  • Available resources.
  • Operational capabilities and limitation.
Posted by chiefreason on February 20, 2009 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , , ,

Can We Put Risk Out of Business?

No comments

In the NIOSH Alert Preventing Deaths and Injuries of Firefighters When Fighting Fires in Unoccupied Structures (http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/review/public/141/pdfs/DraftAlertUnoccupiedStructures.pdf), there are several references made to risk assessment, developing and enforcing risk management plans and then training the firefighters, safety officers and incident commanders to the plan.

 

This is accomplished by creating SOPs/SOGs specific to risk management.

 

What I want to point out straight off the git go is that every incident is going to be different in some ways, but your process for assessing risk should be the same every time. It is not one of those “if you don’t see this, then skip steps 3 and 4”. No; you should measure risk the same way every time and THAT, along with a proper size up will determine your tactics.

 

In Paul Grimwood’s latest book, Euro Firefighter, he discusses risk management at length.

 

I believe that it is by design that it appears in the very beginning of the book to underscore its importance to a successful outcome.

 

A clear distinction is drawn between what is a size up and what is risk assessment, because they are NOT one and the same.

 

According to Grimwood: The purpose of size up is to efficiently deploy my forces to achieve life and property protection and to have sufficient resources on-scene.

 

The purpose of risk assessment is to establish the level and types of exposure to risk that personnel may encounter and to decide how these hazards might be managed, controlled, prevented or ‘balanced against the potential for gains’.

 

When you look at common factors associated with firefighter deaths, is it any wonder that more focus and a sense of urgency is placed upon properly assessing risk?

 

When you place your people inside a structure with radios that don’t work, radios that might be on the wrong channel or worse, no radio at all, then you haven’t properly assessed risk.

 

If you have anyone at the incident and PASS devices have not been activated, then your risk management plan has failed, because training your department in the proper use and maintenance of their personal protective equipment is also a part of that plan.

 

When you think about the goal of the incident commander, it is to get the job done and get it done safely. Conversely, the goal of the safety officer is to do it safely and to still get the job done. Firefighters should be empowered to communicate any condition that compromises their safety.

 

Recently, I read an excellent article on risk assessment in Professional Safety magazine, a monthly magazine published by the American Society of Safety Engineers. The article was written by Jerry D. Loghry and Chad B. Veach.

 

What caught my attention was a part of the article that discussed “probability of loss”. It stated that probability is measured as the number of times in which a particular event can result from a certain activity, divided by the number of all outcomes occurring from that activity.

 

I realize that it is a mathematical calculation, but think about it. If we are looking for empirical data that will ease our conscience and help to flush the bitter taste from our mouths because we would not take unnecessary risks with an unoccupied structure, then “probability of loss” is it!

 

If it sounds too “theoretical”, then think about this; Loghry and Veach also state a more basic concept, which is: The more ways an event can occur in given circumstances, the greater the probability that it will occur…The frequency of previous event occurrences can indicate a strong probability of future recurrences.

 

Does that make sense; the frequency of injuries at vacant/unoccupied structures can predict a strong probability that it will happen again?

 

Let’s look at a study that was done at Flint, MI in 2007. From Grimwood’s Euro Firefighter: Out of 767 total structure fires dispatched, 443 resulted in a report of actual structure fire. The 443 structure fires involved 264 occupied structures and 179 vacant structures. Vacant structure fires represented 40% of the department’s structure fire call volume.

 

The department’s injury rate at vacant structure fires is more than TRIPLE the national average reported by the NFPA.

 

62% of the department’s fire-ground injuries occurred at vacant structure fires.

 

79% of the cost from fire-ground injuries resulted from fires at vacant structures.

 

93% of the cost of injuries at fires in vacant structures occurred in buildings that were unsecured when firefighters arrived.

 

Fire-ground operations produced (21) injuries at vacant buildings.

 

(13) injuries occurred during fires at occupied buildings-whilst most injuries were minor by nature, the potential for serious injury or LODD clearly exists.

 

If THAT doesn’t get your attention, I don’t know what will.

 

My conclusion? The NIOSH Alert Preventing Deaths and Injuries of Firefighters When Fighting Fires in Unoccupied Structures (http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/review/public/141/pdfs/DraftAlertUnoccupiedStructures.pdf) must be taken seriously by every fire department in our country.

 

Drawing up a risk assessment plan with detailed SOPs/SOGs should start NOW!

 

If you would like to comment to NIOSH about the alert, please go to http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/review/public/141/comments.html.

 

TCSS.

 

The article as submitted is published under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella and is the intellectual property of Art Goodrich a.k.a. xchief22 and ChiefReason. It is protected by federal copyright laws and cannot be re-printed in any form without expressed permission from the author. You may read other works by the author at www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on February 16, 2009 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , ,

How Did We Get to This Point?

No comments

The following link is worth your time and is the subject of this blog.

 

http://www.iafc.org/displaycommon.cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr=306

 

Now; try to work through my sarcasm as you read this.

 

There is this novel idea being floated that WE, as firefighters, need to take some personal responsibility for our OWN safety. What a surprise!

 

What I am about to say has a target. Some of you might be offended by my remarks, because you have been one who has always been a champion for safety. So, enjoy this blog for its entertainment value then.

 

But for the rest of you; when did everything that happens to you become someone else’s fault?

 

When did it become someone else’s responsibility to watch over you?

 

When did you resolve that you weren’t accountable for your actions any longer?

 

Why are you a master at playing the “blame game”?

 

Why do you believe that the easy way out is the only way out?

 

And last; why aren’t you willing to grow up, step up, suck it up and get up off of your “C” sector and make the right decisions for YOU, instead of leaving your safety in the hands of someone uncaring, unqualified or indifferent to the whole idea that firefighting, despite inherent risks, can be done more safely?

 

I am not talking about sanitizing it to paralyzing proportions. I am talking about educating yourselves and integrating that seamlessly into your firefighting tasks. It really doesn’t take any longer to do a job safely as it does to take needless risks.

 

If you have learned about building construction and fire behavior, you are well ahead of the safety curve when dealing with a structural fire. Risk vs. benefit will be at the front of your thought process. You will be assisting your officers with making good decisions when deciding interior vs. exterior tactics and with that, you will be creating a culture that will insure to everyone that safety is the first priority. It isn’t safe if YOU say it isn’t safe. It will not be up for discussion or debate.

 

Getting to the scene isn’t half the battle; it is much more important than that. Not only should your personal safety be of the utmost importance, but also the safety of the other motorists; your customers. Operating the vehicle with due caution is the only option that you have if you are the apparatus driver. You cannot sit in the drivers’ seat and assume or predict what the other motorists are going to do. Therefore, you cannot drive with disregard for others who share the road and you have to remember the valuable “resources” that you are hauling to a scene.

 

If you are a passenger in said vehicle, then you’d better be belted in. There isn’t an excuse that is reasonable or acceptable for NOT wearing your seat belt. Aren’t we all getting tired and frustrated by reading “ejected from the vehicle”? How many more have to die before it sinks in that not wearing your seatbelt is a dangerous and unnecessary risk? Why should we have to rely on someone else to tell you to wear it? Why won’t you wear it, unless someone tells you to?

 

We talk about how foolish and stupid it was to ride the tailboard in days gone by, but yet; we don’t wear seatbelts, SCBAs or safety harnesses when we should. We have all kinds of reasons and lip service for not doing it, even though we know that it will save lives.

 

Chief BillyG was recently quoted in an article on the IAFC safety initiatives:

Deputy Chief Billy Goldfeder, chair of the IAFC’s Safety, Health and Survival (SHS) Section said, “While some firefighter injury and death cannot be avoided, so much of it can be, and it so often falls to each of us taking responsibility for ourselves and each other. A very critical factor in success is the role of fire officers and chiefs developing policy, providing training and enforcing the policy based on training to each and every member. The IAFC SHS Section proactively leads and supports any department, anywhere, in accomplishing these goals.”

I love Billy to death for his immeasurable contributions to the fire service, but when making that statement, he is thinking like a firefighter and not like a safety guy, because a safety guy will NOT accept less that ZERO for injuries or fatalities. You see; in my world of safety, accidents aren’t accidental; they are caused. When looking at the causes, you have to look at if they are preventable and if so, make the necessary changes to avoid repeating them.

I am also a realist. I have been a safety professional and a risk manager for 16 years. I was active in the fire service for 22 years. I know that we cannot be engaged in the types of activities that are required of us and NOT take a calculated risk which could end in some unintended results; injury being one of them. But then; that is why your basic risk vs. benefit is done in the first place. THAT will at least force you to consider the bad stuff before declaring your EAP.

So; though I am not a “Safety Sally”, I am an advocate for reducing unnecessary risks. We have to prevent the injuries that are preventable. Don’t wait for someone else to do that for you. Take ownership. Take responsibility. Take the time to do it as safely as possible under the circumstances or in spite of them.

Don’t find yourself lying in a hospital bed asking yourself, “How did I get to this point?”

TCSS.

Art

The article as submitted is protected by federal copyright under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella. It cannot be re-produced by any means without the expressed permission of Art Goodrich aka ChiefReason.

Posted by chiefreason on February 6, 2009 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , ,

Dancin’ Fool – Episode #26

No comments

Jake was doing some classroom instruction on Building Collapse for his crew and he noticed that Vinnie was being very quiet and seemed to be pre-occupied.

 

Jake had been doing videos and PowerPoint for about 90 minutes and decided that it was time for a break.

 

“Let’s take about 15 minutes; pee pee break and coffee refills. Vinnie; stick around for a minute”, said Jake.

 

Jake waited for the room to clear out, except for him and Vinnie.

 

“What’s goin’ on with you today?” asks Jake.

 

“Nothing. What do you mean?” asks Vinnie.

 

“You’re sittin’ there like some kind of a zombie. You catchin’ anything I’m sayin’, ‘cause this stuff could save your life. Now; what’s eatin’ you?” insisted Jake.

 

“Guys are still giving me a hard time for falling off the ladder. Christ; how long do I have to carry that crap around with me?” asks Vinnie.

 

“Till you RETIRE!” exclaims Jake.

 

“Is that all this is? Guys are bustin’ on you for a screw up and you takin’ it personal? Geez, Vinnie; what happened to you ain’t crap and truth be known? Jimmy knew he was going to throw your butt off as soon as he saw that you weren’t locked in and handed you the vent saw. You think that you’re the only one who has ever hit the ground?” asks Jake.

 

“From the way the others carry on about it, you’d think I was”, grunts Vinnie.

 

“You must think pretty highly of yourself”, says Jake. “I’m going to give you a couple of nuggets, but if you tell anyone I told you, I swear to God, I will turn the Merry Prankster loose on your sorry butt”, threatens Jake.

 

“I don’t know nothin’, Jake”, says Vinnie.

 

“Then listen and learn, my boy”, says Jake.

 

“You know how ‘old habits die hard’? Well, when Jimmy Mac first got on the department, he had been use to sleeping in the buff. First night call we had, Jimmy hit the pole and sort of stuck to it, because he was buck naked! He’d slide about a foot and stop. Slide and stop. Slide and stop. The others were getting impatient. Jimmy finally made it down the pole, but damned near tore his “family pride” off in the process. Then he had to run back upstairs to get dressed and missed the truck in the meantime. He had to catch a ride with the BC. Imagine THAT conversation! When we got back to the station, I asked Mac, ‘why didn’t you throw on something before you hit the pole’? You know what he told me and you might want to write this down. He told me, ‘cause I didn’t think of it’! You believe that crap? What the hell was he going to wear under his bunkers? He ate it for about a year. Newbie and naked with a nut bag injury! Man; the guys were brutal. When Jimmy was younger, it was a sore subject for him. Now; it’s just another firehouse war story. I’m sure it will come up in all of its splendor at his retirement party; no doubt with some kind of cheap picture for added embarrassment!” Jake explains.

 

“I’d laugh-well, actually, I was-but I know exactly how he must have felt”, says Vinnie.

 

“Oh yeah? Do you want to take on the whole crew?” asks Jake.

 

“Hell, no”, says Vinnie.

 

“Well, Mac did”, says Jake. “I had to get between him and anyone who mentioned it for the next couple of months. I’ll say this; Mac is one proud SOB!”

 

“What would happen if I said something about it now?” asks Vinnie.

 

“You’d probably get us both killed”, replies Jake.

 

“One more story, then we got to get this class done”, says Jake.

 

“Back when I was an LT, we got the report of a storage shed on fire. Full blown! We get there and it is like a 24’ x 32’ Morton building. Come to find out this nitwit had a paint shop in his back yard and it was cookin’! We threw a ladder to the roof and I went up there to cut a hole. It was a friggin’ METAL roof! Wrong saw! Mac run back for the other saw, while I stood there whistling the theme from “Rawhide”. The roof was getting pretty hot and the tar was getting slippery. I had a tough time keeping my footing, so Mac was up there and had his hand stuck up my butt to keep me from falling. We got the hole cut and Mac went to the ladder first. He was looking back at me as I started down. I lost my footing and Mac said that I looked like one of them tap dancers doing that ‘windmill grand finale’! I slid down the roof and as I got to the ladder, Mac grabbed the saw! I fell fifteen feet down to the ground and landed on a riding lawnmower. My nickname was ‘Lawn Boy’ for a while. Every time someone would ask Mac about Roof Ops, he’d go into this tap dance routine. I wanted to choke him”, says Jake.

 

“Why did he grab the saw, instead of grabbing you?” asks Vinnie.

 

“Ah; good question and I asked Jimmy that same question while I was recovering from two busted ribs. I said, ‘Jimmy; what the hell? Why’d you grab the saw’? He said, ‘Cause I didn’t want you to fall on the saw and get hurt’! Son of a bitch! I said, ‘Thanks, bro; I owe you one’. But I never told him ‘one what’!” says Jake.

 

Vinnie was laughing pretty hard, picturing Jake coming off of that roof.

 

“Go ahead and laugh, numb nuts. It’s funny when it happens to the other guy”, says Jake.

 

They were both laughing pretty good when the crew came back in.

 

“What’s so funny?” asks Jimmy.

 

“Roof Ops”, says Jake.

 

Jimmy started to tap dance. The room exploded into laughter…

 

 

The article submitted is a fictional account of events-real or imagined. Any similarities to the people, places or situations portrayed are purely coincidental. The article as submitted is published under The Adventure of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella and is the intellectual property of Art Goodrich a.k.a. xchief22 and ChiefReason. It cannot be re-printed in any form without expressed permission from the author.

Posted by chiefreason on February 5, 2009 • Filed under: The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie

When a Discussion Reaches Flashover

No comments

Throughout my years on the discussion boards, I have had the unique opportunity to engage in some of the most interesting conversations on an eclectic array of subject matter.

 

The whole idea of discussing issues is to learn more about the issue and the different perspectives. It has never been my intent to shove my opinion down anyone’s throat. It has never been done to get everyone to agree with me or to hear those three, magical words, “you are right”.

 

When the little guy in my head tells me that he has something to say, I grab a favorite cigar (tonight, it is an Alec Bradley Tempus Torpedo), my iPod, put on my Harley hat, get a legal pad and pen and go to my smoking office (laundry room adjacent to the garage). Yes; I write everything out in long hand (is that a lost art form?), make as many changes before I sit down at the computer and put it into a Word document that is to become a blog.

 

The title of this blog infers that any discussion can get hot and certainly, any discussion has that potential. But actually, I was referring to the discussion TOPIC; and I have found that there are really TWO topics that will explode into a fiery abyss that will melt common sense as emotion vents out in a rage that will find participants leaping en masse towards safety.

 

The TWO topics? Firefighter deaths (LODD) and politics!

 

I have written several articles on both topics. I have been fortunate in that I haven’t been threatened in any way for my expressed views. Some insults have been thrown, but for the most part, my articles have been well received because of their timing and their detailed information. Other participants have been less fortunate and that is the first part of this article.

 

On firefighter, Line-Of-Duty-Death (LODD):

 

I have written blogs that discuss the timing of disclosing our opinions on the reasons for a firefighter(s) death. The mere fact that the subject is brought is a sacrilege to some. It is viewed as disrespect, unwanted criticism and an affront to the brotherhood/sisterhood. Rarely is it seen as honoring the death through open discussion, so that we can learn from it to keep others from dying in a similar manner. Apparently, THAT is viewed as a weak argument.

 

Because the loss of one of our own is so highly emotional, a response may not be properly worded or it is taken completely out of context and misconstrued.

 

How many of you are like me, in that, when we receive word of a firefighter death, our very first thought is “how did it happen?”

 

Once we find out how it happened, we wonder “how COULD it happen?” When LODD reports take a year to release, we are left to try and piece it together, because for each day that we don’t figure that out, it is putting us closer to our own LODD. There is that sense of urgency that FORCES the discussion and to infringe upon the aggrieved’s private Hell.

 

Therein lays the issue.

 

What we do is a very public job. When something happens to us, that too, is very public and so are its causes. There are many occupations that won’t even make a blip on the public’s radar screen, but firefighting will light it up with a million lumens!

 

So, we scream for some decency and privacy as we honor the fallen in a very public display of brotherhood/sisterhood with our firefighter’s funeral.

 

As we make our way through the streets of our community with the flag draped coffin on the hose bed of the engine, we want “privacy”?

 

Do we want our public’s involvement with pre-conditions? I have a deep philosophical issue with this. We can’t take public money, seek community support with the talks of cutbacks, cite them for code violations, accept their condolences to us and then tell them that they don’t have a right to know how their firefighter died. Yes; that is problematic for me, because it allows “cynicism” to creep in.

 

All of the major firefighter websites have Line-Of-Duty-Death (LODD) sections where their intent is for us to go there and offer our condolences to the family, friends and fire departments of the fallen firefighter. It is NOT where questions or opinions should be left. That would be disrespectful. If you don’t know what to say, then don’t say it. “I’m sorry for your loss” is sufficient. KNOW the difference between a condolence forum and a discussion forum. Any question, you should rule on the side of caution and simply leave a condolence message only.

 

On the other hand, it should come as no surprise that a discussion is started to analyze the causes of the death to arrive at the lessons learned, but it might get hot, so dress for it!

 

Politics is the other hot topic.

 

I am not referring to the Republican vs. Democrat brand of politics, but politics in the broad, philosophical sense.

 

Many will declare that they don’t get involved in the politics and that is absolutely not true!

 

From the day that you spoke your first words and broke the lamp on the end table, you got involved in politics, because you were negotiating your way out of trouble for breaking that lamp. You reached the height of politics only after you mastered the art of playing Mom against Dad. Dad had pocket veto, but Mom was your powerful lobbyist and Mom usually got what she wanted.

 

Every day that you attended school, you were politicking for your place in its social structure or your place on the sports team.

 

As you grew older, you started your campaign with the “other” party-the opposite sex. Tell me THAT didn’t require superb, political skill to guide you to the victory of that first kiss!

 

With our skills sharpened, we took it to college or into the job market, where politics would be prevalent, but transparent.

 

Then, for the lucky ones; they got to the fire department test, the interview and eventually to the job. Can you honestly say that politics played no part? No; you can’t!

 

You joined the union? Politics.

 

You joined the volunteer fire department? Politics.

 

You decided that you wanted to become an officer in your department? More politics.

 

Things didn’t turn out like you wanted? I’ll bet the house that politics played a significant role in your situation.

 

What about your equipment and the money to purchase it? How can that NOT be a political issue?

 

Like it or not, politics is an integral ingredient and you may unwittingly be its casualty. Some would even argue that an LODD might be the result of politics gone awry. Think back to 9/11 and the discussions about radio communications. Reports surfaced that the purchasing system for radios was flawed, dead spots had been identified but not fixed and there was a shortage of radios as well. The fact that the 9/11 Commission was formed speaks volumes to the politicization that appeared post incident.

 

The most recent, multiple LODD incident to see politics at its worst was the Charleston fire. The city government and fire department were cited on numerous levels in most of the reports for creating or contributing to a culture that allowed politics to set a series of errors into motion that took the lives of nine firefighters.

 

And it created a firestorm beyond the fire itself.

 

So, if you’re a firefighter in this country, don’t think for a minute that you can separate what you do or what you will do from politics.

 

You won’t take a class on it or a written test, but its influences will definitely be there and you need to figure out how you’re going to deal with it…

 

Because, it’s not going to go away.

 

And don’t forget; we are already dealing with Murphy!

 

The article as submitted is published under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella and is the intellectual property of Art Goodrich a.k.a. xchief22 and ChiefReason. It is protected by federal copyright laws and cannot be re-printed in any form without expressed permission from the author. You may read other works by the author at www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on February 1, 2009 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , ,