Skip to content

Archives for my-size-up

See all posts in the network tagged with my-size-up

Nation’s Medevac Under Attack

1 comment

Some months ago, I blogged about the safety of the medevac industry. I wrote the blog shortly after we had a medevac helicopter go down here in Illinois, killing everyone aboard. Here is the blog: http://www.firefighternation.com/profiles/blogs/the-safety-of-air-ambulances.

USA Today ran a story on Thursday, August 19, 2010 that we should take notice of: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-08-19-1Amedivac19_ST_N.htm.

The headline for the article written by Alan Levin “Medevac Industry Opposing Upgrades Wanted by NTSB” is an attention grabber, because you have to wonder upon reading it, why anyone would oppose more safety in an industry that has had a recent, poor safety record.

So as not to violate copyright laws, I will encourage to use the link and read the article.

Since year 2000 to year-to-date, there have been 122 fatalities attributed to air ambulance crashes.

I understand that, in the larger scheme, the fatalities are a small percentage when compared to the thousands of flights, but when you call your service a “life flight”, the last thing you assume is that you are going to die taking one.

“Medevac” is an abbreviated term for “medical evacuation”. That is to say that a person(s) has a medical condition and they are being evacuated to a facility that can treat the patient’s medical condition. The whole premise is to get them safely to that facility, so it makes sense that every effort is made to do just that. That would include improved technology and equipment. It may very well include removing older air ambulances from service. It might also include night vision technology and warning systems designed to alert the pilot to an impending collision/crash.

So, why would the industry be opposed to it?

After 2007/2008, the industry DID take many voluntary steps to improve safety, but they were voluntary. Mandated change is what appears to be the hang up, but with 13 fatalities already this year, voluntary efforts don’t appear to be going far enough.

Without question, changes are going to add to the cost of running the service, but let’s face it; Life is priceless. It is heart-wrenching every time an air ambulance goes down and families are left to ask their questions.

So, is it a question of money or perceived government intrusion into an industry that wants the latitude to correct deficiencies on a voluntary basis or is it both? Is there more to it?

Where can sense and sensibility meet to reduce the number of air ambulance accidents and yet allow air ambulance operators to manage their business efficiently?

In rural America, where pre-hospital response times are often measured in miles, it is a question that will hopefully be answered very soon.

TCSS.

The article is protected by federal copyright law under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella. It is written and submitted by Art Goodrich a.k.a. ChiefReason. This article or any other article submitted under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella cannot be reproduced in ANY form without the expressed, written permission of the author. Violations are punishable by applicable laws.

Please visit: www.fireemsblogs.com and my blog www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on August 21, 2010 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , , , ,

Self Dispatch or Insurance Co. Saving Scratch?

1 comment

On April 16, 2005, Andover, IA volunteer firefighter Justin Faur attempted to rescue a co-worker who had fallen into a manure pit at his place of employment. Both men later died.

At issue with the fire department’s workers compensation insurance carrier was whether Faur was acting as a firefighter or as an employee as a result of his efforts to save his co-worker. The insurance company (Travelers) contended that Faur was not acting as a firefighter at the time.

This was just handed down recently by the Iowa Supreme Court. (http://qctimes.com/news/local/article_801f5f46-a755-11df-903b-001cc4c002e0.html?oCampaign=hottopics)

Read about the workers’ compensation hearing here: http://decisions.iowaworkforce.org/workerscomp/2008/February/FAUR,%20JUSTIN%20-%205016580A.doc

For volunteer firefighters, the argument often comes up that, since most don’t have assigned shifts, that line between on duty and off duty becomes very blurred. In this case, it appears that the question may be: when is a volunteer firefighter acting as a firefighter or as a private citizen with firefighter training?

In my opinion, our government and our judicial system can’t seem to reconcile legislation and its interpretation that affect some of the distinct, cultural differences between career and volunteer fire departments.

Career firefighters have clearly defined on-duty and off-duty hours. A shift for them is usually 24 hours and is spent at the fire station. They don’t punch a time clock, but time sheets are kept for payroll purposes. They can be “re-called”, if a large incident requires additional manpower. They are dispatched through a central dispatching agency.

A volunteer firefighter is theoretically available 24 hours a day, if they are within their response area, can leave their full time job to respond or the other activities that fill their lives.

It is not unusual for volunteer firefighters to witness an emergency in their fire district and to call it in to a dispatching center, expecting the appropriate agency to be dispatched. When possible, the firefighter will initiate assistance, if it is within their scope of training and it is safe to do so.

It was clear that Iowa Workers Compensation Commissioner Christopher Godfrey understood the volunteer firefighter culture in his initial ruling in favor of Justin Faur’s survivors.

So, when is a volunteer “on the clock”?

In my opinion, the clock begins as soon as the firefighter recognizes the existence of an emergency that requires the assistance of his fire department, makes the call to the dispatching agency or has someone else call 911 and they can begin to render aid, however limited.

For a judge to say that a volunteer firefighter is not “on the clock” at that point is to remove a very key component that is critical to life safety issues in the rural setting. It also flies against the ideal of “neighbors helping neighbors”.

Again; Commissioner Godfrey “gets it”, as he recognized the importance of minutes and even seconds where lives were at risk.

For this model to work in the eyes of the Iowa Supreme Court in the case of Justin Faur, he would have been required to leave his co-worker face down in the manure pit, wait for the dispatching agency to properly tone out the Andover, IA Fire Department and wait until they arrived in order for benefits to be paid.

Faur’s mistake may very well have been to not wait for his fire department so that properly protected responders could enter the hazardous environment of methane gas, but the strong emotion of having an unresponsive co-worker in a pit and a desire to help someone needing it was too strong to keep Justin Faur from risking his life to save another.

I don’t know what was going through Justin Faur’s mind at the time of the incident, but I know that anyone familiar with hog or cattle confinements understand that methane gas is a by-product and a dangerous one at that and I’m sure that Justin Faur knew it, too. He entered the pit, knowing the danger. Very few “private citizens” would have done it and some firefighters might not have, but Justin Faur did.

And had Faur not been a member in good standing with the Andover, IA Fire Department, I might be inclined to side with the Iowa Supreme Court.

However; this is not the case.

Two factors leap out when reading available information on this incident: (1) As an employee, Faur recognized the emergency and had 911 called and (2) His firefighter instincts took over and he attempted to affect a rescue.

So, his surviving family members should be entitled to all benefits accorded to a firefighter; be it insurance death benefits, PSOBs or workers compensation benefits from his fire department.

If the Iowa Supreme Court doesn’t see it that way, then in my opinion, the case should be appealed at the federal level, up to and including the U.S. Supreme Court.

When you tell someone to call 911, the presumption is that they will call and the appropriate emergency agencies will respond.

Firefighter Justin Faur did NOT self-dispatch.

He placed “self” above all else and paid the ultimate sacrifice with his life.

And that is not Emotion speaking; that is Logic and Fact speaking.

I oppose the practices of self-dispatching and jumping calls and that isn’t the issue here.

In my past, I witnessed many incidents, called them in and went to work in my capacity as a volunteer firefighter. Period.

Faur might very well have initiated his rescue, anticipating that the additional help of his fire department would be there very soon. Who would know that any better than someone who had been on that department for the past two and a half years?

Under “normal” circumstances, this would be a subrogation issue between two insurance companies, but in this case, the Iowa Supreme Court chose to trash a very logical and articulate decision by Commissioner Godfrey and narrow the language/definition of “summoned to duty only through official channels”. And the Court is basing THAT on the assumption that Faur did not receive the pager tones.

If the Iowa Supreme Court’s decision in this matter is allowed to stand, then the entire volunteer response system may come under their review.

As an example: imagine if they would rule that you are not covered as a firefighter while in your personal vehicle on your way to the station or to a call.

Tell me that wouldn’t significantly change the landscape of what volunteer fire departments do!

THIS case needs further review AND further discussion.

Let me know your thoughts.

TCSS.

The article submitted is protected by federal copyright laws under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella. It cannot be re-produced in any form without the expressed written permission of the author Art Goodrich, also known as ChiefReason. Please visit www.fireemsblogs.com and my blog www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on August 16, 2010 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , , , ,

Look For The Hook

1 comment

Look For the Hook

Many of us took similar paths into the fire service.

For some, it was for the opportunity to help someone in a time of need.

For others, it presented an opportunity to give back to their communities.

Privately, the excitement that a call could generate fueled an adrenaline spike that would explode into the ultimate struggle of Good vs. Evil.

There is no question that most firefighters want to be seen in the best light, held in the highest regard and looked upon as someone who can be trusted with the lives and properties in their communities.

We have trained to keep skills sharpened and up-to-date, while paying our respects to the fire service’s rich history and tradition.

Some of us have been drawn into reading volumes on fire history to an almost obsessive level. Though reading about Benjamin Franklin and his formation of the nation’s first volunteer fire department does little to enhance our skill sets, we recognize its importance to rounding out our personas as firefighters.

And that brings me to the purpose of this blog or rather, this question:

Are the motivating factors that shaped us 30 years ago still fueling the candidates entering the fire service today?

Are kids still “running to the curb”-as Tiger would say-to see the fire truck go by on its way to a call?

Are kids who have not grown up in a house where there have been generations of firefighters finding their own way into the fire service?

What is kick-starting that desire in the next generation of firefighters?

Will firefighter jobs be plentiful with the retirements of the 50/60-somethings or will they fall prey to budget constraints and destroy the dreams of those who wish to serve?

When you examine the cultural differences of today vs. 1980, you can see how societal changes have affected the perceptual inclinations of our newest firefighters.

What people my age perceived upon entering the fire service was an almost paramilitary, clandestine brotherhood.

Nothing left the confines of the fire station. Discussions and disputes started and ended at the fire station. Each man “covered” for the other, regardless of the circumstances. At the very least, they “didn’t know anything”.

The perception was that the fire department had to be seen as a group of honorable and rational men, capable of making split-second decisions in life and death situations.

Investigations into firefighter deaths would hardly ever go far enough as to reveal any damaging or damning facts that could impugn the dignity of the deceased and otherwise could bring shame or embarrassment to the grieving family. Some called it “extending a professional courtesy”.

And besides; even if something “unseemly” did make it to the news, it was local; where it stayed.

But today?

Everything and everyone is on the fast track.

Short bursts and short bites followed by copious amounts of diverse and sometimes perverse information can quickly lull us into overload mode.

We are not attracted to any, one subject; we do not want to “specialize”.

We are de facto game show contestants, vying to show our deep reservoir of general knowledge.

We want to do something today, but do something entirely different tomorrow.

And we don’t want to do anything that is going to chew up large chunks of our time. That feels too much like a job!

So; how do we get a hook into the newbies and reel them in?

How can a fire department match their training programs to candidates who are not fond of repetition or being told incessantly what to do, for that matter?

I have always been a traditionalist where it comes to the fire department. But, I am also a realist. I honestly believe that it is important to cite fire department history and some of the nation’s, major fire service milestones into perpetuity. Knowing why a ceremony is a time-honored tradition brings honor and dignity to the act and we must carry that forward.

Where we can jack it up for the next generation is in the training and how it is presented. Challenge them to improve the process. Let them drill with the music on. Turn it off if it’s a distraction or they are not drilling correctly. Find out what trips their trigger and then trip it.

What I learned from my days of fishing is that the biggest hook didn’t necessarily catch the biggest fish, but it made it harder for the fish to get off of the hook.

So, look for the right hook…

And don’t forget the bait!

TCSS.

This article is protected by federal copyright laws under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella. It cannot be reproduced in any form without the expressed, written permission of the author, Art Goodrich aka ChiefReason.

Please visit www.fireemsblogs.com and my blog at www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on August 10, 2010 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , , ,

Belt It Out: WEAR IT!

2 comments

Mourn the death of yet another young volunteer firefighter.

Extend your condolences to his family, friends and fire department.

Read the story about his last few minutes on this Earth (http://www.firefighternation.com/forum/topics/pennsylvania-department-mourns).

Then read the rather spirited discussion surrounding the details of his death (http://www.firefighternation.com/forum/topics/yeah-suredont-bother-wearing).

And when you are through with all of that, I want you to get upset and downright angry because; FIVE years after the nation’s fire departments were asked to take the seatbelt pledge by then Acting United States Fire Administrator Charlie Dickinson, firefighters are still dying from not wearing them.

From apparatus crashes to accidents in personally-owned vehicles (POVs) while enroot, the message is getting missed and it’s another missed opportunity to educate our firefighters on one of the most basic firefighter safety principles-the wearing of seat belts.

The National Seat Belt Pledge is very straight forward and states: “I pledge to wear my seat belt whenever I am riding in fire department vehicles or any moving vehicle. I further pledge to ensure that all firefighters riding with me wear their seat belts”.

How many times have we responded to a motor vehicle accident (MVA) and found life-less victims lying outside of the vehicle and on the ground, knowing full well that seat belts may have made a difference?

I responded to a call some years ago and found all FIVE family members ejected from their sport utility vehicle (SUV). Three of the five didn’t survive.

How can we stand in front of our citizens as public safety champions if we aren’t willing to practice what we preach?

We love going to school assemblies and “scaring” young adults into following safe practices; yet, we don’t do as we say? Hypocrisy comes to mind.

It’s not heroic to die imitating a human cannonball. It is senseless, because it is easily preventable.

There is no excuse-none, zip, nada; for not wearing your seat belt.

Don’t give me that crap about it won’t go around you with your gear on. They make seat belts to fit those of you who are “big boned”.

Dr. Burton Clark wrote a very good article after Firefighter Joe Torkos died from being ejected during an apparatus accident. He said: “…we cannot point a finger at anyone; we cannot put the blame on someone else or something else; so there are no headlines. Not using seat belts is our own fault; we have no excuses; we are the flaw”.

However; a quick Internet search on this subject will find a couple of interesting trends: (1) Families are suing fire departments for not enforcing their seat belt policy and (2) Officers are being criminally charged for not ensuring that their crew was seat belted at the time of their accident. Neither will bring back the deceased firefighter(s), but I think that it points to a growing frustration over not following a very basic safety principle.

So, what is your excuse?

Do you need to see a seat belt policy?

Here is one suggested by the International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC), the United States Fire Administration (USFA) and the National Volunteer Fire Council (NVFC). It reads: “All personnel must be seated and belted whenever the vehicle (either department or personal) is in motion for department business. The driver and/or officer shall ensure by voice and personnel reply that seat belts are properly fastened. The driver will only proceed when it can be confirmed that all members are seated and belted. The only exception to the use of seat belts while a vehicle is in motion is a situation where a person is providing direct patient care (EMS) and there is no reasonable restraint system available. Utilize a progressive disciplinary system holding the violator and the supervisor responsible to ensure compliance with the seat belt policy, reflecting the serious and potential life-threatening consequences of failure to comply”.

Now that you have a policy…

ENFORCE IT!

TCSS.

The article is protected by federal copyright law under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella. It is written and submitted by Art Goodrich a.k.a. ChiefReason. This article or any other article submitted under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella cannot be reproduced in ANY form without the expressed, written permission of the author. Violations are punishable by applicable laws.

Please visit: www.fireemsblogs.com and my blog www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on July 19, 2010 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , , , , , , ,

Should I Stay or Should I Go?

No comments

Why would any member of a fire department want to leave the department as other than a member in good standing?

Why would you want to leave all of your good work for a group that you once held so close to your heart to a letter from the department severing the relationship?

Do we stay on until we get upset enough and mad enough to quit?

Do we continue to believe that we are a teenager in the body of a 50-Something as we chalk up yet another injury?

Have we reached a juncture where we talk a litany of accomplishments over the years, but haven’t attended a training session in over a year?

Are we “turning it over to the young guys”, but not to the extent that they can tell you anything?

Are you less helpful, but more critical?

Do you find yourself talking about all the calls that you used to go on as you make fewer and fewer calls; the ones that you now cherry pick?

Do you think that you have earned special treatment, purchased with your years of service and are upset because you must follow the guidelines like everyone else?

Do you believe that your officer’s rank is a life-long appointment and that leadership is what the chief does?

Why does reality only set in after you have let your passion, skills, attendance and fire department relationships erode and then overshadows your time served?

What prevents us from planning our time with the department to the eventuality that we allow for participation through another avenue that is every bit as pivotal to the successes of the fire department?

Instead; we “force the hand” of our once-called/so-called “brothers” to push us over and then OUT. Where it could have been a happy and memorable moment, populated by platitudes, testimonials and well-deserved recognition, it has developed into a sour source of bitterness and bad feelings.

Could there be this confusion over the notion that to remain on a fire department, we must be a “member in good standing” and it has nothing to do with getting off of the department? In other words; the priority of membership and being in good standing does not apply to “non-members” or “former members” apparently.

Is it important that we cut the chord as a firefighter WITH firefighters to eliminate any lingering effects; sort of an “all or nothing” assault on our sensibilities?

Cut it clean/cut it quick; right?

We think that we don’t want to “just hang around” the fire station, even though that is exactly what we have been doing for the last ten years, along with missing meetings, training, fundraisers, open houses, equipment checks and parades.

When you belong to a fire department, you are part of a group that is driven by teamwork.

It is an organization that is structured.

It is a culture that breathes rarified air.

Unfortunately; you can only stay as long as you contribute. That doesn’t only mean the physical stuff. There is plenty of other work to do besides riding the truck.

You do it within a framework and under the terms of your by-laws and SOGs.

But, you can leave on your own terms and with your head held high.

It doesn’t have to be with middle finger extended!

TCSS.

This article is protected by federal copyright laws under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella. It cannot be re-produced in any form without the expressed and written permission of the author, Art Goodrich a.k.a. ChiefReason.

Please visit www.fireemsblogs.com and my blog at www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on July 15, 2010 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , ,

From My Observation Point

No comments

He is the trusted partner in the enterprise.

He must gather the intel that will allow for the successful execution of the plan.

He is consulted in the selection, purchase and use of the right equipment.

He must develop; then refine the information that is inserted into the tactics used to dispatch the obstacles that lie before them.

He must diplomatically guide his enterprise to attain the goals that are set each year.

He must make sure that schedules are kept and milestones are achieved.

Every piece of equipment must be properly maintained, repaired or replaced. Each piece has a purpose and must work to plan every time that the plan is executed. Or you could simply be the “water boy” or “towel boy”. It doesn’t matter!

He must never violate the confidence and trust that has been put upon him.

He must work hard, but be transparent when the situation calls for it.

He must make certain that everyone gets to Point A; then Point B and so on.

And if he is asked for his honest opinion, he will give it, even if it isn’t what wants to be heard.

As a part of the team, he may have to do his share of “heavy lifting”.

He does it, knowing that his role is most important, but is the least recognized; at least to those outside of the team.

He lives for the moments when his advice is asked, is taken and the outcome is successful.

A “high five” is all he needs to continue on.

He feels the same pain when there is failure. The low is at the exact same, emotional level, but at the opposite end of the spectrum.

He watches from the side and out of the way.

He stands in awe as the crowd recognizes an extraordinary effort.

He must balance his consolation and adulation, so as not to confuse it with accepting failure and apply tough love on a case-by-case basis.

And though he runs in a circle populated by gifted people, he doesn’t think that of himself.

Yeah; as I watched the John Deere Golf Classic at Deere Run over the weekend, I thought a lot about the caddies and how similar they are to fire district trustees!

TCSS.

The article is protected by federal copyright law under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella. It is written and submitted by Art Goodrich a.k.a. ChiefReason. This article or any other article submitted under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella cannot be reproduced in ANY form without the expressed, written permission of the author. Violations are punishable by applicable laws.

Please visit: www.fireemsblogs.com and my blog www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on July 11, 2010 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , ,

Taken Down By Traditional Media

No comments

Use of social media is at its saturation point.

From the tech-savvy teenager to the blue-haired baby boomers; texting, tweeting, Facebook, MySpace, LinkedIn, Digg, Google, Ask, Mozilla, etc. have come to deliver our information with the velocity and power of a lightning bolt.

In the recent past, we have seen the so-called, social media experts expounding upon their hypotheses for communications of the future.

They are preparing the arrangements for the death of the print media-the “traditional” media, in my opinion.

No more newspaper or news magazines. If you want it in print, you will have to go to a website and print it off, but really; will it be the same? Hardly!

It used to be that, if there was important, breaking news, TV programming was interrupted with a news bulletin or a special edition of the newspaper would be printed and delivered.

And if you were reading it in print, it was already HOURS old.

But today; you can get it as it is happening-streaming, live video shot from helicopters and drones. Media people are imbedded with police, fire, EMS, military, politicians, religious cults, drug cartels, despot governments, porno industry, human traffickers-you name it!

All that you need is a camera phone and presto; you just went “viral” on YouTube. Hollywood, here I come!

There are endless websites with a full menu for whatever titillates you.

I grew up on Rolling Stone, National Lampoon and Mad magazines.

They were as far from “mainstream” as you could get. They were both counter-culture and pop culture.

In its early years, Rolling Stone was heavy on music and music personalities, mixed with some political activism that wasn’t so much anti-war as it was pro-peace.

National Lampoon magazine was a favorite of mine for its political satire which was simply outstanding.

Mad magazine was pure escapism and hilarious; pure nonsense, yet relevant.

From Hunter S. Thompson to Dotson Rader, Rolling Stone pioneered a more liberal interpretation of freedom of speech for us. They pushed the bounds, used expletives unabashedly but not obscenely and widened the scope through which many of us view our own activism to this day.

Rolling Stone was everything that Look, Life and the Saturday Evening Post magazines weren’t. It was like James Dean vs. Beaver Cleaver!

You could not view Rolling Stone in the same way as any other magazine. It was, in a word, “cool”…and relevant. If you weren’t reading it, you weren’t keeping up with what was happening, cool and hip. From shaping your musical tastes to the clothes that you wore to your political views, Rolling Stone was immensely influential.

When they changed their focus sometime in the 1990s to broaden their appeal to younger readers, I stopped reading it. I felt that they had deserted our cause. It was like losing an old friend. They just weren’t relevant to me anymore and the death of Hunter S. Thompson took part of its soul and killed any desire by me to return.

Then BAM! They brought down a four star general (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236).

I mean; maybe they didn’t blow the lid off of Watergate or the Iran Contra affair, but their brutally honest and candid article on our top general in Afghanistan cost him his job!

But, when I say that the article that appeared in the Rolling Stone (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236) cost General McChrystal his job; that is not to blame the magazine…for the most part.

I want to believe that it wasn’t Jann Wenner’s (THE man at Rolling Stone) or Michael Hastings’ (the writer of the article) intent to take General McChrystal down, but when you have been around as long as Wenner and his Rolling Stone (1967), I have to think that Wenner had a smirk on his face as the July 8-22, 2010 issue went to press.

The July 8-22, 2010 edition wasn’t suppose to hit newsstands until Friday, June 25th, but the McChrystal article was already viral by Tuesday, June 22nd and by Wednesday, June 23rd, McChrystal was called to the White House, called on the carpet and stripped of his true calling for calling his boss, the President of the United States-and I am paraphrasing; uncomfortable, intimidated, uninformed, disengaged and a disappointment. Again, I am paraphrasing from a lengthy article that must be read in its entirety to get a real sense of it.

So, when I say that traditional media took down General McChrystal, you have to consider this:

In my opinion, the traditional relationship between the subject of the news story and news reporter builds from a synergy of comfort and confidence-of speaking freely; confident that the common sense of the interviewee will guide dialogue and the common sense of the interviewer will determine what goes or doesn’t go into the published article.

An added common sense safety valve is the editor-in-chief, whose very name and reputation rides on articles such as “The Runaway General”.

I have no doubt that McChrystal’s firing and subsequent retirement was yet another unintended consequence of our social media (See: http://www.firefighternation.com/profiles/blogs/social-medias-unintended), triggered by a traditional media interview.

Think about this: McChrystal was fired two days BEFORE the interview hit the newsstands!

Rolling Stone had already posted the story on the home page of their website by 10:00 am on Tuesday, June 22nd (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236).

I believe that when we are in the public’s eye, we must assume that NOTHING is “off the record”.

The tape is always rolling-be it audio or video. What we say or do will be sliced and diced, re-configured and publicized as a re-invented and re-incarnated skeleton of the factual body.

The McChrystal firing should serve as that reminder once again.

The story has re-ignited the debate over whether access by the press should be limited.

Naturally, the Media is opposed to ANY access limitations, but where they haven’t exercised good judgment in what appears in the finished product; why should they be rewarded with a front row seat to our news events?

Do you realize that, by today’s standards, very little live audio and video exists from World War II and even the Vietnam War and yet; VOLUMES have been written on both wars?

Our society has become so impetuous and impatient that we must have immediate gratification from our day’s events.

Is restricting free access restricting free speech? That’s open to debate.

Think for a minute of how damning and damaging a perceived inappropriate comment by a firefighter could be to your fire department if it were to be made public.

Do you think that there would be the added footnote that this is how some in our profession “process” bad stuff? Probably not.

Do you think that YOUR boss will react in a similar manner to General McChrystal’s boss? Probably so.

We want to watch “Rescue Me” with a wink-wink, but we want a public view of what we are to be akin to walking among the lepers, cursing those who sully our reputations with their bad behavior.

We want to project traditional values through non-traditional means. If we cannot pick and choose our media moments, then we at least have to stay true to our mission and if we must engage in the “off color or off handed”, then do so when no one else is around, take an oath to silence and a pinky swear, because if we don’t, we will be misinterpreted, misrepresented and misunderstood by a public who wants to believe that we are better than that.

And let’s face it; we exist in a culture populated by the weak and the strong, the passionate and the dispassionate and the sinners and the saints.

So, at the end of the day, you have to ask yourself if you want to be remembered for one blog, one Facebook comment, one YouTube video or one news article, because in today’s world, it won’t matter if you have four stars or four bugles…

It may be just enough to bring a career crashing down in the traditional sense!

TCSS.

The article is protected by federal copyright law under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella. It is written and submitted by Art Goodrich a.k.a. ChiefReason. This article or any other article submitted under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella cannot be reproduced in ANY form without the expressed, written permission of the author. Violations are punishable by applicable laws.

Please visit: www.fireemsblogs.com and my blog www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on July 5, 2010 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , , , , ,

Need Not Be Present To…Re-Certify!

No comments

“Over 200 Massachusetts EMTs Suspended in Certification Scheme” is a headline that will get your attention!

Many of you will recall that FirefighterNation posted a news story back on May 27, 2010 about this: http://firefighternation.com/forum/topics/boston-firefighters-among.

In a recent news article (http://firefighternation.com/forum/topics/over-200-massachusetts-emts) that was posted on June 18, 2010, you will find more current information, including punishments that have already been delivered.

It has also been handed over to the states’ attorney general for further action, if warranted.

What struck me was the very last comment in the http://firefighternation.com/forum/topics/over-200-massachusetts-emts article. It stated:

Auerbach said some of the EMTs caught up in the probe expressed remorse for their actions, but others ‘did not quite understand the severity of their actions!

That statement simply blows me away.

Is it stealing?

Is it cheating?

Is it fraud?

Is it a criminal act?

Now; I am not sitting on my pedestal, high atop of moral ground, but; when you commit a dishonest act, you can either continue down that path and end up in REAL trouble or you can see the errors of your ways and correct it.

We are not talking about sneaking a peek at someone’s poker hand when they leave the table to go to the restroom.

We are not talking about taking a couple of tomatoes from your neighbor’s garden.

We are not talking about a kid writing the answers on their arm to test questions on a high school exam.

We are not talking about someone who drives 5 mph over the posted speed limit.

We are not talking about someone’s indiscretion only hurting them.

No; we are talking about someone who took money to go to classes, did not attend those classes and received credit anyway and was re-certified as a giver of advanced medical care.

We are talking about actions taken that will hurt a fire department ambulance service and a community for months and even years to come.

Others on the fire department who did the required work to re-certify as an EMT will be resentful and distrustful of those who “bought” their re-certification.

The face of the fire department will no longer be the face of one of the most trusted occupations on Earth.

The public will feel that their trust has been violated. They won’t know who to trust. They won’t know which ones cheated and which ones didn’t, so they will distrust ALL of them! It doesn’t matter to the public if this is the first or the tenth time. The time is NOW.

So; though the public might not be interested in learning the pathology of this scandal, I have to wonder if this type of behavior has been reinforced by years of not getting caught for other dishonest acts.

I have to wonder if these thieves cheated on exams during their high school days, then college and then, they fabricated a job resume that got them hired to their jobs. I wonder if they are getting “free” cable TV from their neighbors.

In their world, dishonesty has become their reality, so they would not view their dishonest actions as wrong or at the very least “no big deal”.

They got caught this time, so they’ll just pay the money again and take the test. No problem, right?

Ask yourself if you would rather have someone who cheated at card games, but studied hard, did their practicals, kept up on their in-service training so that they could re-certify their EMT license OR someone who paid off an instructor to get a free pass on their re-certification. Hmmm…

Get out the deck of cards!

How screwed up does your moral compass have to be to NOT comprehend that lying, cheating and stealing to gain re-certification of life-saving skills is wrong?

Here’s a paradoxical question for you and you don’t have to raise your hand: how many of you would cheat if you KNEW that you could get away with it?

Some of you will answer “no” and will be completely honest.

Some of you will answer “no” and be lying about it.

Some of you will answer “yes” because, in your mind, the reward is worth the risk.

Some of you will answer “yes” but will try to rationalize it with the old “I didn’t have time to study” argument.

Still, some of you will answer “yes” because the few times that you got caught, you simply had to re-take the test, get lectured by your parents and promise never to do it again. Oh; the AGONY!

So; would an EMT who got their certification COD be qualified? Would YOU want to take that chance?

How would you feel if you found out that the guy who did your surgery was actually the night shift janitor at the hospital?

Or that the marriage counselor that you are seeing has been divorced FIVE times?

How about the drivers’ education teacher who has not had a valid drivers’ license for three years (DUI) and is teaching your sweet child?

I know how I would feel!

Why then, would instructors want to risk their teaching certificates and their students be willing to violate the public’s trust?

For the money?

Because they are lazy?

Because they didn’t think that they would get caught?

Because they thought that they knew everything anyway?

Because they thought that they were “different and special”?

Because they didn’t care?

Because they weren’t smart enough to pass it on their own?

No matter; rational people won’t be willing or able to justify it under any circumstances.

It may not feel good to be beaten by a team that cheats, but it would feel worse to “out-cheat” them in order to win. Remember: cheaters never win and winners never cheat!

We have to continue to believe that hard work has its rewards. Honesty, integrity, moral fiber and ethics have to drive those of us who are in public safety.

If we don’t conduct ourselves in that manner, then we will be facing moral dilemmas each and every day.

And little by little, our public’s trust will continue to erode.

TCSS.

The article is protected by federal copyright law under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella. It is written and submitted by Art Goodrich a.k.a. ChiefReason. This article or any other article submitted under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella cannot be reproduced in ANY form without the expressed, written permission of the author. Violations are punishable by applicable laws.

Please visit: www.fireemsblogs.com and my blog www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on June 24, 2010 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , , , , ,

First Due Blog Carnival-Wanted: National Fire Chief

5 comments

A voice of reason will be needed to speak the message to our nation of firefighters.

The voice must be strong to be heard loud and clear.

It is a voice that will have to be heard over the deafening roar of hurricanes, tornadoes, raging floodwaters, bomb blasts, wildfires, structural fires, earthquakes, mudslides and any other man-made or natural disasters.

But, most importantly, this “voice” must be heard and understood by our country’s political leaders.

The mission of our national fire chief must have a broad and diverse base of support, but have a single purpose, which is to provide leadership, coordination and support for our fire prevention/control, fire training/education and EMS programs in this great nation; from the smallest village to the largest cities.

They must, on the one hand, know what is needed; but on the other hand, possess enough strength of character to resist typical, government intrusive behavior.

We have to remember that the USFA was established in 1974 in response to the now infamous “America Burning” report. At the time of the report, 12,000 civilians and 250 firefighters were dying in fires every year.

So, it made perfect sense to create an agency that would focus on fire prevention and control, using training, public education and research through data collection and analysis (Hello, NFIRS).

Granted; USFA had met its goal of reducing civilian and firefighter deaths by 50% by 1998, but we still have one of the worst fire safety records in the industrialized world. Fire is still costing us 100 firefighters and 3,700 civilian deaths each year and over $10 billion in economic losses.

My agenda in my first year would be to combine USFA and NIST under FEMA and pull FEMA from the Department of Homeland Security. This will streamline the bureaucracy and place more focus on this country’s continuing fire problem. Funding should be a straight line item and never “attached” to another bill. A blank check for funding will do, thank you!

My three priorities would be: (1) Reduce cardiac-related events through improved, medical surveillance and equipment technology; (2) Enact NFPA 1001 and NFPA 1582 as LAW; and (3) Implement stricter building codes, including fire sprinkler systems-both commercial and residential.

To further expound; USFA and more specifically, FEMA got lost in the shuffle of re-organization when it was rolled into the Department of Homeland Security.

Though it may have been well-intended as a solution to better communication between agencies, the different agencies had their own priorities. It may not have rendered USFA useless, but it did contribute to its ineffectiveness.

I believe that the blood, sweat and tears of our firefighters, both past and present, should be elevated to a higher priority, instead of “just another fire agency”. USFA has, over the years, established milestones and gained a reputation of advocacy for the nation’s fire service. It must be preserved and even allowed to flourish.

69% of today’s LODDs are the result of vehicle accidents going to and returning from a call (24%) and cardiac-related deaths caused by the call or proximate to the call (45%).

Then, why all of the talk about: “buildings are killing us”; or “we are getting too timid”; or “we are putting ourselves ahead of our citizens”; or “we need more/better equipment to do our jobs” if only 19% of all LODDs in a year comes from actual fire suppression activities?

Hold that thought!

And why aren’t we seeing a more unified effort for presumptive illness legislation for the brothers and sisters who contract a debilitating disease while in the service of their communities?

And why is there this notion that non-paid firefighters are somehow different with regards to firefighter job requirements or the hazards that are faced?

Fire, cancer, heart attacks, heat stress, building collapses, etc. affect ALL firefighters in the SAME ways and ALL firefighters should be treated the same in these regards.

That said; I also believe that all firefighters should be held to the same, minimum training and physical condition standards. That is the trade-off for career and volunteer being treated the same to collect some of the benefits.

You cannot expect to call yourself “firefighter” if all you do is lean on the pike pole during training, while your paid counterparts are pulling ceilings and going to the training center every other shift. You should remain in a “ready” state by furthering your training and by staying in good physical shape that includes a yearly physical by a certified occupational medical specialist.

Your desire to volunteer is commendable, but you want to be a community asset and not a liability, so you want to pass your physical and to train like your life depended on it, because it DOES!

Having enforceable, national standards administered and monitored through the National Fire Academy (NFA) will leave no doubt about requirements and by linking the standards to the benefits off of the back end, then all benefits are measured by the same set of criteria. While we’re at it, we can strengthen the leadership programs offered by the NFA.

Then, we make sprinklers mandatory in buildings built with wood chips, glue and spit. And as long as a property owner owns the building, regardless of its condition, the sprinkler must remain on and in working condition. The only time a sprinkler system can be “out of service” is while it is being tested or repaired.

So, there you have it.

I realize that it is an ambitious slate, but time is our enemy. There is a call every 15 seconds in this country.

We have to make sure that Everyone Goes Home®.

Can you think of a better reason?

The article is protected by federal copyright law under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella. It is written and submitted by Art Goodrich a.k.a. ChiefReason. This article or any other article submitted under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella cannot be reproduced in ANY form without the expressed, written permission of the author. Violations are punishable by applicable laws.

Please visit: www.fireemsblogs.com and my blog www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on June 21, 2010 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , ,

Not Too Sharp Doesn’t Cut It

1 comment

In less than three weeks, we had two confined space incidents (http://www.firefighternation.com/forum/topics/ohio-firefighters-overcome and http://www.firefighternation.com/forum/topics/indiana-firefighters-injured-1 ) where firefighters were injured. Reports indicate that confined space protocols were not followed in both cases.

All departments should be trained to recognize a confined space and to also recognize whether they are trained and equipped to conduct confined space rescue. If not, defer to someone who is.

All firefighters should have enough common sense to know that when you look into a hole, see two people who are unresponsive, that you don’t jump in with them.

I am conflicted about how I should feel about this.

On the one hand, I am outraged that in this day and age, we still have firefighters taking stupid pills because they certainly aren’t taking the training.

On the other hand, there isn’t a national standard that MUST be met in order to legitimately call ourselves “firefighters”. Yes; we have NFPA standards, but they are not the law of the land and though they may be used in a court of law as the basis for arguments on firefighter qualifications, fire departments are not bound to follow them.

You also have OSHA regulations that ARE the law of the land, but depending on whether you are an OSHA state or if you have a third party like your state department of labor administering the regulations through their agency, volunteer fire departments can fly under the radar for quite awhile and it usually takes a complaint to get the attention of OSHA. Even then; unless the violation is “egregious” or “willful” or “IDLH”, OSHA will typically allow the offenders time to correct their deficiencies and to pay a small fine for their troubles.

I don’t believe that this will be the case in the Ohio and Indiana incidents. Ohio does not have a state plan, so they will most likely be contacted by federal OSHA compliance officers. Indiana has a state plan, so their state OSHA compliance officers would be conducting their investigation into the incident.

From reading some of the comments being posted in the discussion forums, you would think that the “good ole boy” fire department culture is alive and well.

Even if it were to apply to the Ohio and Indiana near-miss incidents (and I am not saying that it does), I will tell you that it is not a prudent or a wise position to take, because there is no logical reasoning to support it.

No department, regardless of size or type can justify such reckless behavior in any of their firefighters and if they do, then it’s time for new officers and fire commissioners on those departments.

If a command structure is so lax that the first arriving will forego BASIC personal safety and to risk imminent danger to their life or their health, then their command structure is non-existent. And that lends to the issue of whether SOPs exist in these departments. I would seriously question their existence.

Then, we often wonder why federal agencies are crawling all over volunteer fire departments who want to plead “poor us” on the one hand and claim “we are all firefighters doing the same job” on the other hand. Don’t make me vomit!

Clearly, with these two, recent confined space incidents, we are NOT the same and if they are the litmus test for our preparedness, then we are in some deep doo-doo.

However; I don’t believe that we are.

I believe that volunteer fire departments, for the majority, have come a long way from those days when fire departments were just another social club in the community. I know for a fact that we fixed it in our community some time ago and we are not far from the norm.

We are not flush with money. We still do fundraisers and we borrow money if necessary. We have to consider whether to repair or replace our equipment. We don’t have people beating our door down to join. We are competing with other organizations and obligations for a candidates’ free time. We are like many departments in that regard.

But, two things that we insist on are: providing necessary personal protective equipment and training for the services that we offer our community. We will NOT do anything that we are not equipped or trained to do. Yes; we are equipped and trained to do confined space rescue. We split the cost between taxpayers and business owners in order to provide the service and under Illinois law, we can charge for extraordinary expenditures as a result of the rescue, if necessary.

Again; I believe that there are many departments who are more like us than those who are not.

In my mind, these recent events aren’t even wake up calls. Maybe it is for the affected departments, but for the many departments who have SOPs, it only serves to remind us that some should seriously consider getting out of the business, because; if they can’t afford to get into it, then their communities’ cannot afford the risk.

 When I think about the Indiana incident and the fact that aid was delayed to the victims because they had to remove two stricken firefighters first, it makes my blood boil because firefighters are constantly complaining about the few seconds that they are delayed by Dispatch or because the motoring public didn’t pull over when they saw the blue light or because a proper size up delayed the error chain or because incident command wasn’t established fast enough and on and on.

So, this begs the question: how long was aid delayed to the victims because two firefighters had to be pulled out first?

And is it appropriate to insert the old adage: how much good can we do for the victims if WE become the victims?

I thank God that no one else died in these incidents, but it wasn’t because it was planned that way.

It was because of luck and divine intervention.

We have to continue to keep the pressure on organizations that masquerade as fire departments.

We have to sharpen the knife and excise those who create tremendous liability to their fellow firefighters, their departments and their communities. If there isn’t a plan in place to train and provide the equipment for technical rescues, then the plan should state that your department will not attempt such rescues. If you don’t tell your communities what you can and cannot do, then they will expect you to do EVERYTHING.

We have to be sharp enough to recognize the realities, educate our communities and then meet expectations.

We simply aren’t cutting it if we don’t.

TCSS.

This article is protected by federal copyright laws under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella. It cannot be re-produced in any form without the expressed and written permission of Art Goodrich, also known as ChiefReason.

Please visit: www.fireemsblogs.com and my blog www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on June 1, 2010 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , , , ,

Could We Have ‘Dunmore’?

1 comment

Voters in Dunmore, Pennsylvania have spoken (http://www.firefighternation.com/forum/topics/referendum-vote-causes).

With a ‘no’ vote on a referendum to increase taxes to fund the fire department; you would wonder what factors determined the vote outcome and what lies ahead for the future of fire service to the town of Dunmore.

Does it appear that there is a public backlash occurring with the fire department?

What has been the relationship between the town and its firefighters?

Are there concerns by the voters that money earmarked for fire department purchases have not been spent wisely?

Were the voters expecting to see current services maintained with the failure of the referendum?

Was it clearly communicated that, without passage of the referendum, cuts would have to be made?

Did a misconception exist that services would come from other communities in order to maintain current levels of service?

Did the public understand exactly what a mutual aid agreement covers?

When fire departments get involved with referendums for whatever reasons, they are immediately invested at an emotional level.  In my opinion the reason is simple; firefighters are passionate about what they do for their community and want their community to be just as passionate as they are.

The reality is that many in the community have no sense for what motivates their firefighters, because those issues are transparent to them.

On a typical day, firefighters won’t show outward or public emotion, believing that it is a sign of weakness and unprofessional. It is for this reason that I feel that the public will reject this uncommon display of emotion as ‘gamesmanship’ by the fire department to instill fear in their citizens and that will detract from any need-real or perceived.

The relationship, if one has been established between a fire department and their community, is very important.

People might see their firefighters in their fire department roles, but they must also see that firefighters share many of the same social and economic morays as they do.

Voters want to see firefighters as productive citizens in their communities, whether it is at sporting events, church or other civic/community events. They don’t want to see their firefighters in trouble with the law or with their mortgage lender.

Some may expect a higher moral code for their firefighters, but not a higher level of entitlement.

In other words; citizens expect firefighters to BE better, but will not treat them as ‘better’. And if firefighters have been given preferential treatment-real or perceived-then backlash will also occur.

Open houses at the fire station are a key to establishing need for equipment and justification for its purchase. Having recently, purchased equipment on display with firefighters ready to answer questions is the best response to questions of spending practices.

The public needs to know that their tax money is going for needed equipment and that fundraiser and donations will be used to raise money for additional equipment and items from a ‘wish list’.

However; holding fundraisers and then showing up in new fire department logo clothing such as polo shirts, coats and hats can send the wrong message, even if members personally paid for the clothing. This is an example of bad timing that gives the appearance of impropriety that could lead to public apathy towards the fire department. In this case, much will be made about it and the department will find itself defending themselves from misguided public perception because of a lack of communication.

Many small departments see very few structural fires and have more than likely expanded services to include vehicle extrication and first response to medical calls, even though taxes have only been collected for fire protection. Unless the fire department is charging non-residents, then more than likely, revenue has not kept pace with expenditures.

Residents will often miss the more subtle calls and will only notice that there aren’t many fires, which in their minds, means that there isn’t as much of a need to fund fire protection beyond current levels or quite possibly, reducing it.

Do we establish a sense of betrayal with our public when they discover the costs that allow firefighters to pursue their dream for the best job in the world?

If firefighters project an uncommon passion for their occupation, does it somehow create an expectation by the public that we would do it for nothing or very little?

Do they take us at our word that we will continue to serve no matter how tough things get?

Getting assistance from neighboring communities in the form of mutual aid has always been the answer in towns where the event grew to larger than local resources could manage. Mutual aid was never intended as a ‘stop gap’ measure for budget constraints.

‘Mutual’ means that there is an expectation that reciprocity of effort is shared by communities and that mutually benefits the area.

In my opinion, you are going to see fire departments offer services on a contract basis to communities who are making cuts in programs.

At the very least, you may see departments voiding MA agreements and in turn, billing for services.

Regardless; neighboring communities will not allow the expense of their services to increase as their neighbors decrease and relying on mutual aid to fill that gap.

It might very well create feelings of protectionism and isolationism that is reminiscent of the 1950s.

A few months ago, Mike Ward asked if the fire service was the next ‘tea party’.

I will ask, “Could we have ‘Dunmore’?”

TCSS.

The article is protected by federal copyright law under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella. It is written and submitted by Art Goodrich a.k.a. ChiefReason. This article or any other article submitted under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella cannot be reproduced in ANY form without the expressed, written permission of the author. Violations are punishable by applicable laws.

Please visit: www.fireemsblogs.com and my blog www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on May 25, 2010 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , , , , ,

Tough Guy Don’t Cry…Yeah, Right!

No comments

I made it through a pretty rambunctious childhood, 13 knee surgeries, a major bacterial infection, had my heart broken a time or two and saw plenty of fire, death and destruction in the 22 years that I served as a firefighter and EMT.

I didn’t want to simply “put the fire out”; I wanted to kick its butt-to give some back for the times it kicked mine.

I wanted every medical call to be a “save”. Unfortunately, that wasn’t the case.

But, I was sure that I had developed a mental and physical toughness. I could be compassionate without showing emotion. I was trained to project a calm, outward demeanor by some of the best leaders in the fire service.

I can tell my stories, provide details as deep as you would want to go and do so with boyish enthusiasm. I don’t get emotional, but I am passionate when I talk about it.

There was one accident call that rocked my world!

It was in the summer of 1995. By then, I had led the effort at hundreds of MVAs. Many of them had fatalities-multiple fatalities. I was unfazed. I never suffered nightmares. Maybe I was “programmed” differently. Maybe my “processor” was bigger; I don’t know.

But, that 2-vehicle, head-on collision on Saw Mill Hill in the summer of 1995 put me into a momentary spin after we had cleared the call and I had gone home.

It was a Saturday. I remember that it was mid-afternoon and temperatures were in the 90s.

My pager tones dropped and we were being dispatched for mutual aid to a vehicle accident on a state route west and south of us.

The host fire department was there directing traffic and had removed the passenger from the large, luxury car and two passengers from the compact car.

Drivers-both deceased-were pinned in their vehicles, which is why we were called. We had the equipment to get them out.

First, I looked into the small car. The driver had the car’s engine pressing against him, making for a very tough extrication.

I went to the big car. The elderly male driver was pinned against the steering wheel and his left foot was under the brake pedal. No air bags.

I decided that we would take the big car first.

We cut the seat retractor and the seat could be moved. Without thinking, I told a new guy to grab the left foot and “untangle” it from the brake pedal. As soon as he bent down and saw the protruding ankle bones, he completely freaked out. I put a hand on his shoulder, gave him my clipboard and asked him to collect vehicle information and to assist the police officer with insurance cards and such. I had a veteran take care of the entanglement issue.

Then, we went to the compact car to extricate the young male driver.

His lower body was pinned by dashboard and motor. His legs were bent so far under him that his knee joints snapped, exposing bones and interior views of the joints. Imagine getting hit from behind in the lower legs by someone big and then getting hit in the chest from the front by someone big at the same time. These were the physical forces at play here. Inertia, gravity and mechanical stress points all met at once.

To continue; his upper body was between the front, bucket seats and laying in the back, right floorboard, where his wounds had bled profusely. There was a standing pool of blood in the floorboard that was attracting flies. The smell was one that you never forget and that is all that I will say about that. Needless to say, the smell and the flies were taking their toll on my guys.

We worked for about 40 minutes; pushing, pulling, prying, cutting and cussing. At the peak of the operation, I looked up and an adult male with a young child was trying to get close to take a look. I went towards him like I had been shot from a cannon, but kept my cool.

I said, “Sir; you do NOT want to see this. Go back to your house.”

We wound up taking the victim out the passenger side after removing the passenger seat. To spare the gawkers, we used blankets to shield our activities from public view.

After we loaded the body into the coroner’s van, I got my guys together and told them of the great job that they had done and how very proud I was of them.

After we got back to the station, completed our inventory and equipment checks, I went home.

Instead of going into the house, I walked around to our patio and sat down.

And then I cried…hard.

Why?

Because I had a son, who, at the time was the same age as the three in the small car. They had JUST graduated from high school JUST like my son, were enjoying the summer JUST like my son and the driver and one of his friends were dead. I kept thinking about the devastation that this accident would cause to parents, families and friends and how, on any given day, it could be my son and my family struggling with this horrific heartache and it made my heart ache and I cried and cried.

I felt like I had this one shot to drain my being of all of the emotional liability that could cause these moments and I had to get it all out of my system for fear of it returning at a most inopportune time.

I kept thinking about how we had in one car an elderly couple, perhaps pillars in their communities who had the opportunity to build their lives, their families and their communities and to lay a foundation and a legacy for future generations. And then; in the other car, you had three kids, who, at eighteen were just starting a new chapter in their lives, only to have it shattered by a distraction enroot to a terrible vehicle crash. Their potential contributions to human kind were destroyed in a matter of seconds. And I cried.

My wife must have seen my vehicle from the kitchen window, found me on the patio, came out and sat down without saying a word, because she knew that it was better to let me say something first. She knew instinctively of those times and this was one of them.

We talked and we cried together until it got dark.

And that was the last time that I was affected like that.

But, it was also the last time that I wore “tough guy” on my sleeve!

Tell your stories, boys and girls. It’s liberating for you and educational for those who read it.

TCSS.

The article is protected by federal copyright law under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella. It is written and submitted by Art Goodrich a.k.a. ChiefReason. This article or any other article submitted under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella cannot be reproduced in ANY form without the expressed, written permission of the author. Violations are punishable by applicable laws.

Please visit: www.fireemsblogs.com and my blog www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on May 16, 2010 • Filed under: My Size Up

Person of Convictions or Convicted Person?

1 comment

Allowing convicted felons to serve on a fire department is not a moral/ethical question, but is one of legal liability. Beyond that, it raises serious issues with public trust.

Do we have no more regard for the public that we are sworn to protect that we would knowingly unleash a criminal with a key to the city?

Have we no more respect for the law-abiding members of the fire department that we would force them to act in concert with someone with known criminal tendencies?

Is it worth the potential legal problems from a failed, sociological experiment?

As a trustee for a fire district, I can tell you that the answer to all of the above is a resounding “NO”!

Every fire department should have a “Code of Ethics” that every prospective member should know before they join and would agree to follow if hired.

It goes without saying that current or active members would be guided by the same code of ethics.

If a prospective member has a criminal past, the code has already been violated. There are no second chances. A criminal past cannot be “undone”. Criminals cannot “take it back”, call a “do-over” or pretend that they were young and foolish and made a “mistake”. Breaking the law is not a mistake; it is a crime!

Most reasonable people are driven by the values that were instilled in them by a parent(s), their schools, churches and communities and are re-inforced by the laws of the land.

Though it is not intrusive to a civilized society; for those willing to break laws for personal gain, the laws are designed to discourage any thought of committing a crime by outlining the punishments if you do.

For those who perpetrate a criminal act, it is understood that they need to become gainfully employed once released from prison, but NOT in a public safety position in the public sector.

The private sector is better suited for a criminal assimilating back to Society.

It should be noted that, in my opinion, convicted felons are NOT starting a “new” life. They are resuming their lives with one strike against them.

I realize that you pay for your crime once, but you suffer the cost for the rest of your life-as it should be.

It is the fire department’s “Code of Ethics” that reminds a community that they will be served by the most ethical public servants that can be found and will be uncompromising with this mission.

Codes will not be ignored and rules will not be bent or broken.

Violations of the “Code of Ethics” will result in dismissal with cause.

Following are examples of verbiage often included in a “Code of Ethics” document:

  •  We will respect ourselves and the public that we represent and serve.
  • We recognize that our position as a public servant is a privilege.
  • The Public Interest will always be placed before individual, group or special interests.
  • We will not discriminate and will work to prevent and to eliminate discrimination where it exists.
  • We will accept “thank yous” and gestures of gratitude ONLY and will accept charitable donations in the spirit in which they are given.
  • We will not display negative or rude behavior towards the public.
  • We will not use our position of trust for personal gain.
  • We will always protect the confidentiality of our public’s information.
  • No drugs (legal) or alcohol will be consumed while on duty. When off-duty, at least eight (8) hours must pass after drugs (legal) or alcohol has been consumed before a member can respond to a call or callback.
  • Statements concerning the fire department will be issued through the Public Information Officer. Personal opinions shall be identified as such.

Keep in mind that it is a “Code of Ethics” and it does not take the place of pre-employment questionnaires, employment applications, criminal background checks or employment contracts. Having members recite a code of ethics may deepen and strengthen their commitment to them.

“Employment” is to be construed as career OR volunteer.

A volunteer fire department can be charged with negligent hiring in the same way a municipality with a full time fire department can.

And I have been advised that “Tort Immunity” will not cover it nor is there insurance for it. You pay cash if negligent hiring can be proven.

If that isn’t enough to discourage you from hiring people who have already proven that they cannot conduct themselves within the confines of the rule of law, then I don’t know what will.

Maybe, some of you weren’t cut out to be trustees.

Wait…

You probably thought that allowing the fire department to “elect” their members gets you off the hook?

Wrong again!

Under the law, you cannot abdicate any of your legally, sworn duties. Allowing the fire department to choose their members is, in fact, “hiring” them. And trustees “approve”, even if they are not directly involved with the decision.

Here, the fire department personnel committee makes the recommendation for a new member and the trustees approve it. Then, the probationary period starts. Once they make it through probation, they are “retained” and approved by the trustees.

But, be sure to use that argument in court: Well, your Honor; the fire department put him on the department. We had nothing to do with it.

Judge: And that’s exactly why you’re here! Get your checkbook out.

So; you might want to re-think that whole second chance mentality; at least where you claim to have the best interests of the public in mind.

TCSS.

The article written by Art Goodrich a.k.a. ChiefReason under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella is protected by federal copyright law. It cannot be re-produced in any form with the expressed and written permission of the author.

Please visit me at: www.fireemsblogs.com and go to www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on May 10, 2010 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , , , ,

Putting the Trust in Trustee

1 comment

As some of you know, I became a trustee for our fire district after having a fulfilling, active career as a volunteer firefighter.

I haven’t written many blogs from a trustee’s perspective, because I doubt that there are many trustees in my audience.

Over the years, I have been contacted by many firefighters who were having problems with their governing bodies. I have offered a diverse range of opinions, due to having been on both sides of the fence. I cannot recall a single instance where I was contacted by a trustee for advice.

I am self-effacing as a trustee, because I still have a firefighter’s passion. I still get jacked up when the guys are talking about a recent call.

I go to their training sessions to stay current with the skill sets.

I go to meetings in case they have questions. The “old” trustees didn’t like coming to our meetings and hated answering questions even more than going to meetings.

Though I might look like I am out front; in reality, I don’t get involved unless I am asked or unless there is slow progress towards a resolution.

In other words; I take what they give me.

I had MY time. Now; it’s THEIR time.

I am not, nor will I ever be your typical trustee.

You know the type. The typical trustee has never served on a fire department, but is “good with a check book”.

The typical trustee knows the color of a fire truck, but they know the color of money even better. But, you don’t spend it; you save it.

With the typical trustee, the most often, uttered reply will be, “We don’t have the money for that”. Second on the list will be, “Do you REALLY need that?”

Believe me; I was well-schooled on the “resistance fighters” known as our trustees. The fire department and I, as their leader, was the enemy, because we were always trying to take “their” money.

Though we were constantly denied money for much needed equipment, our trustees wouldn’t apply for grants, they wouldn’t increase the taxing rate, didn’t seek a referendum to increase taxes or look at viable alternative revenue streams, such as charging out-of-district users.

I literally had to take them on in order for our department to respond to calls on the interstate highway that runs through our district. They “got it” once they were told by our attorney that we could be sued and they ALWAYS followed the attorney’s advice-right or wrong.

That was in 1989. In 1990, they finally agreed to out-of-district charges; a flat rate of one hundred dollars.

The acrimony continued until we changed the process appointing them to having them elected.

A new era of hope and change arrived for our department.

Though we still have a dust up from time to time, anyone familiar with the “old days” can tell you how much better it is today.

Dealing with fire district issues as a chief in the “old days” made me better. I became more resourceful, more diplomatic and more determined to improve all aspects of our business; from communication to funding levels.

I did not want the department’s attention diverted from their mission to provide fire protection.

I made them a promise when I became a trustee. It was not an empty promise and I have kept my promise to them and our fire district residents.

When we take a vote, we have enough discussion to have a clear understanding of what we are voting on, so most of the time, the vote is unanimous.

My advice to fire department officers who interact with their fire boards is to remain respectful, diligent, patient and knowledgeable of the laws that govern the fire service.

Yelling only increases the temperature of the room.

You can keep your fire board engaged without them feeling threatened and you can do so without compromising your principles.

Communication is the key and any impediment to good communication must be removed.

There are many legal pitfalls for governing bodies. Fire districts should temper everything that they do with a proper legal review.

Too often, trustees are afraid of legal liabilities and choose to do nothing.

It is just as important for a trustee to continue their education as it is for firefighters.

Trustees who are unwilling to improve their trustee skills are just like firefighters who don’t want to train; NEITHER has any business being a member of their fire department or fire district board of trustees.

In a nutshell; trustees should be leaders too!

TCSS.

The article written by Art Goodrich a.k.a. ChiefReason under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella is protected by federal copyright law. It cannot be re-produced in any form with the expressed and written permission of the author.

Please visit me at: www.fireemsblogs.com and go to www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on May 4, 2010 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , ,

Ever-Changing is Always Confusing!

No comments

It started with that very first, “If you don’t like the rules, then don’t play”!

But then, someone came along who decided, “Well, I don’t like the rules, but I want to play, so we’ll change the rules”.

And so it began.

When more and more got to play and it was starting to get crowded, then the rules were tightened, so that fewer got to play.

But, that appeared to be discriminatory, so the rules were changed again in the name of diversity.

But, when diversity proved to be discrimination in reverse, the rules were changed once again.

And on and on.

How does it happen that these changes are made?

How is it that rules, requirements, legislation or laws are so ill-conceived that they face these barrages of changes?

In my opinion, it is because the INTENT is often misinterpreted.

What seemed like a good idea at the time, turned out to be a sieve for challenges by anyone smart enough to ask the question. And rather than stay with the original intent; the intent became the victim of more liberal interpretations, because our society has moved more towards inclusion, so as not to appear exclusionary and done so without consideration for cost or the problems created by constantly changing the rules.

I offer as examples federal grant programs, PSOBs and my favorite; NIMS.

The “don’t haves” complain that the rules are too stringent that they can’t comply, whether it be a training standard or a grant for training.

The “haves” complain that what they get isn’t enough or doesn’t go far enough.

Both are appeased when rules are “loosened” for the “don’t haves” and the “haves” get to apply for money in more than one category. On the surface, it looks like “win-win”, but it isn’t, because, unless you walk up and hand someone a bundle of cash, there will always be the “don’t haves”.

I have seen a couple of recent articles that address public pensions (http://www.iacoj.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=12453&highlight=) and LODDs (http://backstepfirefighter.com/2010/04/15/case-for-the-asterisk/).

With public pensions and with firefighters pensions to be more precise, it appears that the public-i.e. taxpayers-aren’t as supportive of the notion that firefighters are worth their pensions.

Yeah; all of a sudden and in these tough economic times, the citizenry has the same contempt for ALL public sector employees, regardless of job description. It would appear that our once-adoring public HAS put a price on public safety and it’s less than they are currently paying.

It seems that governments everywhere have no desire to eliminate wasteful spending in order to continue to deliver needed services, if it means eliminating their relatives and their pet pork projects. They want to max out credit and borrow more and if they can’t, they will cut where it hurts the most.

But, taxpayers all across the nation are saying “enough is enough”.

And I’m saying that, once again, our societal tendencies have shown that, when we are angry, we will indeed cut off the nose to spite the face!

Turning to LODDs, the language in this document continues to be a “work in progress”, though I’m not sure how much progress is being made. I believe that we have gone past reasonableness if we award LODD status to firefighters who die in a car wreck while returning from training; a car wreck that may have been caused by street racing. Note that I use “IF” and “MAY” and I will also throw in that, until the alleged charges are proven, judgment should be withheld on guilt AND the awarding-or not-of LODD status.

My opinion will be very clear on this; without using the news article from North Carolina as an example, I will simply say that firefighters who are returning from a sanctioned event and are involved in an incident where they have violated rules of conduct or laws and die as a result, then LODD status should not be awarded. Death benefits and type of funeral service will to be determined as well.

My opinion in general on LODD is this: maybe it’s time that we return to the days when you were actually engaged at an incident in an activity and died at the time you were engaged in said activities. Illness due to the many pulmonary, cardiac and cancers that cause death have their place under LODD, if for no other reasons, the illness occurred from their occupation.

I mean; it has gotten to the point where, if you die of complications from an abscessed tooth and was seen eating candy bars at the fire station, you get LODD status.

We have lost sight of the INTENT, which are noble and political correctness has weighed heavily on the LODD process and created an “LODD Lite” category. I feel that, if you have to split hairs, then it shouldn’t qualify. If you don’t look at the total package and only the information that meets the criteria, then we will see a day when a firefighter arsonist who set the fire and died while putting it out, will be on the memorial.

My point is that, if there are “questions” surrounding the death, then maybe we should hold off on the “honors” until we are certain that it will not bring major embarrassment to the department.

Unless we don’t care; you know; just like our elected officials.

No thanks.

Let’s talk about it at FDIC in Indy.

TCSS.

The article is protected by federal copyright law under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella. It is written and submitted by Art Goodrich a.k.a. ChiefReason. This article or any other article submitted under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella cannot be reproduced in ANY form without the expressed, written permission of the author. Violations are punishable by applicable laws.

Please visit: www.fireemsblogs.com and my blog www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on April 18, 2010 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , ,

Time to Get Out

6 comments

Yes; it could mean the amount of time needed to evacuate a structure when conditions inside become untenable, but for the purposes of this blog, it simply ponders that issue that faces every firefighter or EMT when we ask ourselves “Is it time to get out of the service?”

I get frustrated when the discussion boards lack discussion; meaningful discussion, that is. Oh; there is the same old chatter from the squirrels, but the good information that is coming out in a host of blogs…if they are getting read, they certainly aren’t being discussed to any great degree.

Are we THAT busy in our lives that we can’t take a moment and check in to see what’s shakin’ in our little world of the fire service? Then, if we have a few minutes but don’t take the time, are we disconnected or disinterested?

In case you didn’t know, the winds of discontent are blowing…or sucking, depending on your perspective.

As I learned from listening to a recent podcast on www.firefighternetcast.com, our people in fire/EMS are not all that happy and in some cases are getting burnt out and burn out leads to GETTING out.

We cannot afford to let that happen, so what do we do?

Bear with me as I share my thoughts with you. Maybe you should go and get that beverage now.

Where is it written that WE must shoulder the weight of the world just because we want to help our communities in their times of need?

Who says that we have to internalize and otherwise hide/mask all of the ugly junk that we see that defies any plausible explanation or description?

Why do we continue to believe that, if we don’t do it, no one else will? Can’t you feel the sheer desperation of having no alternatives that effectively forces someone to commit?

And finally; why do we watch our brothers and sisters succumb to the pressures of giving our best efforts, failing to change the outcome and believing that it’s failure nonetheless?

Well, I am here to tell you that you lost touch with reality on the day that you thought your fire certifications and EMT licenses was going to fix everything!

We continue to set the bar high which, in and of itself is a good thing, but when we don’t have a net to catch the ones who barely miss reaching the bar, we set ourselves up to fail. We must keep everyone engaged, improve our leadership, training and expand the knowledge base in everyone who chooses to be a firefighter/EMT.

Besides; what are we really measuring our success against anyway?

From cheating death?

From cheating all of those external forces that we cannot control, but manage to survive in while it kills others and taking our guilt from it with us?

And along with that guilt, a sense of failure that washes over us with such pervasive force that we forget our love for what we do?

We become so emotionally invested with every, single incident-we become so singular of purpose-that we let the outcome define us going forward. Each time a building falls or a patient dies, a little bit more of our desire to do the job leaves us until we have no more desire to do it.

We should not measure ourselves and what we do by the outcome of one incident. Instead, we should look at incidents-one by one-as lessons learned, pay compliments to those involved, share a light moment and get ready for the next one, because, in the end; it is the volume of work and we are adding the chapters; some bad, but many that are good or even great.

We hear a lot about pain thresholds. How much pain can we take before it becomes too much?

And though it largely refers to physical pain, I have to believe that the same holds true for mental pain.

I know someone who used a staple gun to pierce their ear and laughed about it as they did it, but when they saw the blood, they immediately passed out!

On the other side, I have friends who will go to the emergency room if they get a bug in their eye, but can deal with the most complex, multi-agency response incidents that I have seen. So, one type of pain threshold isn’t necessarily indicative of the other.

As we know, firefighters need both mental and physical toughness to weather the beatings that we will take from an incident. We have to take something positive from EVERY incident. There ARE positives even if there is a negative outcome and we have to talk it to that point where we all agree that, had we not been there, the situation would have been worse, regardless of the outcome.

Veteran firefighters hold the secrets to their longevity of service. They could be invaluable to the ones who are struggling with the emotional aspects of a call. Veterans could take the broken pieces of someone’s spirit and help to put it back together, if only they were asked.

See; veterans know the protocol. Veterans won’t invite themselves to the party. Veterans don’t take shots at those who have just seen grotesquely mutilated metal and flesh. They remember their first few times and they know all too well that you have to process it. It’s something that you don’t joke about…until you have had time to get better, that is.

Veterans play a pivotal role in helping others process what they do, see and hear at an incident and especially if it is having a negative impact. Were it not for the veterans, our turnover rate in the fire service would be 100 percent plus. They remind us that each of us are uniquely different, but with similar stories and it’s the telling of those stories to each other that gets us back to our love for what we do!

I got by because I treated calls as if they fell somewhere between “I haven’t seen the worst one yet” to “I have seen worse”.

Roll that one around for a bit, but it makes perfect sense to me. They are on opposite ends of the spectrum, so every call will fit somewhere between them. That is how I managed to truly love every minute of my 22 active years of running calls. I have a couple of scrapbooks that I visit from time to time and I know that many of you have your scrapbooks in the memories of your minds.

Today, I have plenty to be concerned with. I am still active in making sure that our fire department is ready for emergencies.

Though I am dismayed by some of what I am reading about scumbags in the fire service, I take something positive away EVERY day; whether it is a story of a good save, a baby born on the way to the hospital, a near miss with a happy ending, a story on a friend’s promotion, an article from a friend’s keynote address, or a book written by an old friend from his Illinois days. That’s right; Illinois claims Chief Rick Lasky.

People in the service like Rick, Tiger, Dave, Gonzo, Rhett, John, Mick, Ted, Jason, Chris, Mike, Steve, CJ and many others help to keep my compass needle pointing in the right direction.

I will offer you this piece of advice: you will miss opportunities if the only times that you dream is when you sleep.

Take something positive from the job and end the day with good thoughts.

TCSS.

The article is protected by federal copyright law under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella. It is written and submitted by Art Goodrich a.k.a. ChiefReason. This article or any other article submitted under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella cannot be reproduced in ANY form without the expressed, written permission of the author. Violations are punishable by applicable laws.

Please visit: www.fireemsblogs.com and my blog www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on March 27, 2010 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , , ,

Can You Answer My Question?

2 comments

Do you hear that?

That is the sound of despair, hopelessness and fear. It is your victim.

They can’t get out without your help. The few minutes that have passed has emptied them of any hope that they will get out alive.

Blinding smoke, searing heat…what they are drowning in is what we flourish in; it ignites us and excites us, not because we want it to, but because Fire forces so many conditioned responses and extraordinary actions and tests our most primal instincts. We must rescue our fellow humans AND survive while doing it.

There is no “fight or flight”. It is more like “stay and pray”.

Your victim doesn’t want to die alone, but they don’t want anyone else to die like that, either. They are hoping that, if they are not rescued in time, then at least, in their final moments, they will hear the soothing voice of their God whispering forgiveness into their ear and then open the gate to their eternal peace.

You will move swiftly, stopping for a split second to gauge your own mortality and then push forward, because you have seen the face of your victim. You have looked into their eyes; the windows into their soul and the pain and anguish that you see is the fuel that you use to give you strength.

Their face could be your face or the face of someone that you know. It matters not, because they are a victim. You HAVE to get to them in time. Otherwise; you can only hope that they slip into an unconsciousness that will numb their senses to the horrific effects that only Fire can produce.

You cannot bear that thought. You have made your decision. You have committed your team. You have not only trained for this moment, but you have lived for this moment; a moment in which you could die!

You may hear the roar of the fire over the pounding of your heart. You will hear the water shooting from the nozzle and splashing against the walls and ceiling with terrific force. If you close your eyes, it almost sounds like you’re taking your car through the automatic spray carwash.

You will hear every step, every breath, the sound of the vent saw, a ladder hitting the side of the house, the sound of glass breaking and the radio chatter over the PA speaker on the engine.

There could be several endings to this, but one thing is certain; risk a lot to save a life is in our mission.

This is a scenario that has played out in our heads and in our communities for decades.

No nobler profession than that of firefighter!

The desperation, contemplation, exhilaration, extrication, celebration; it’s a roller coaster ride of emotion for victim and rescuer.

So, my question to you is this: why would you risk it all on an abandoned, unoccupied, vacant, dilapidated, dangerous piece of property that has no soul, no heart, no gratitude and only hate and contempt for those who dare to enter? See: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/fire/reports/face200837.html.

Or would you?

TCSS.

The article is protected by federal copyright law under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella. It is written and submitted by Art Goodrich a.k.a. ChiefReason. This article or any other article submitted under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella cannot be reproduced in ANY form without the expressed, written permission of the author. Violations are punishable by applicable laws.

Please visit: www.fireemsblogs.com and my blog www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on March 18, 2010 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , , ,

Is Code of Ethics Code Blue?

No comments

Or so the Fire Service Reputation Management White Paper Report (https://myfirecompanies.com/download.php?f=4383_orig.pdf&fc=whitepaper2010highres-Final%20for%20publication%203-8-2010.pdf) would lead us to believe.

But, it comes off as if sounding an alarm to a recent fire service revelation.

And the truth is that many of us have been discussing many of the areas of concern for some time. I can tell you that the hot topic of firefighter arson has been on the discussion boards since at least 2001 and USFA released a report on it here: http://www.usfa.dhs.gov/downloads/pdf/publications/tr-141.pdf

Am I to believe that people who apply for firefighter positions have to be reminded that, as firefighters, they will be held to higher moral and ethical standards?

Unless they recently crawled out of a cave, I would think that, if nothing else in the job description is known, “held in the public’s trust” would be a tacit thought at the very least.

What fire departments have to do is to screen out the candidates who might have an ulterior motive for joining a fire department, which is to use the position of trust to commit crimes. (See http://www.rapidcityjournal.com/news/article_b988d898-0962-11df-879a-001cc4c03286.html).

When departments are making poor decisions to recruit and retain members, why would we expect that same department to make GOOD decisions when a firefighter has been caught committing a serious criminal act?

Fire departments keep their dirty little secrets “internal” for one of two reasons: either they honestly believe that they have the wherewithal to appropriately deal with it or they are hiding and hoping; that is, hiding it from the public and hoping that it will go away on its own.

The Fire Service Reputation Management White Paper Report was delivered with an almost wide-eyed astonishment. No disrespect is intended, but, in my mind, it was never a question of whether our lofty moral and ethical characters were taking a hit with each new firefighter arrest, but when, as a nation of firefighters, we were going to collectively do something about it.

I resent that, once again, “lack of leadership” is being credited with this growing blight in the fire service, because in today’s society of Google search, scientific calculators, Garmin GPS, computerized cash registers and instant gratification from pass/fail and “ nobody gets cut and everyone gets a trophy for participating”, we have essentially lowered the bar, because the process where we are taught how to learn is no longer practiced. Leaders are being expected to lead people who will not take personal responsibility and if they are the future leaders, then isn’t it likely that they will invoke excuses that has become a part of their modus operandi ?

Honest, hard work to succeed has been displaced by “whatever it takes” and unfortunately, that includes cheating and breaking the law.

A few years ago, here in Illinois, a department was caught cheating on an EMT test, so instead of disciplining the individuals involved and changing the order and wording on the test questions, the entire state exam was scrapped and a new one written. It took over two years and God knows how much money and in the meantime, Illinois was without a state EMT test. Anyone who was in class at the time had to pay for and take the National Registry test. New EMT classes weren’t started because of the test issues. Look at all the trouble a few selfish cheaters caused, but what was done to them? We never heard. I would have terminated them had they been on my department.

Maybe, instead of investing money in “competitive” grants, some of that money should go to every department in the country for conducting thorough background checks, psychological testing and education programs to recognize criminal behavior in their members. We might see some positive results.

We also know that self policing, whether it be with regards to drinking/drugs, computer use, harassment claims or department assets, simply doesn’t work. Once again, we find ourselves legislating common sense and this should not be the case if we have hired reasonable people with above average intelligence.

If departments still believe that they want to police themselves, then good for them, but if that were the case and I made decisions on federal funding, then any department found guilty of any of the crimes cited in the white paper would NOT receive any federal money for the duration of length of the individual’s sentence. Sentences of probation would cost a department one year of eligibility for federal grants.

A code of ethics has always been there. Unfortunately, it took a back seat to money and manpower discussions. And it’s ironic, but ethics has everything to do with money and manpower.

Sometimes we can’t see the forest through the trees.

TCSS.

This article is protected by federal copyright laws. It cannot be reproduced in any form without the expressed written permission of the author, Art Goodrich aka ChiefReason.

Please visit: www.fireemsblogs.com and my blog at: www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on March 12, 2010 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , , , ,

Florida City Manager Battles Volunteers

No comments

The subject of this blog was a news story that was posted here: http://www.firefighternation.com/forum/topics/florida-volunteers-upset-over.

The focus of this story has always been on the volunteer fire department’s reaction to the ordinance, when in fact; it should have been on the city manager and her appetite for control.

A quick history lesson of Davenport, Florida city politics finds a community with money that sits just 10 miles from Walt Disney World. Now; I say “with money”, because they have a Commissioner-Manager form of government, 6 paid firefighters and 2 part-time firefighters that is headed by a “part time regular” Fire Administrator. Then, you have the City Manager running things. This is a position that, when it was created, took at least 17 months to fill by the city council. One can only speculate as to why it took so long. Yes; there is a mayor, but apparently, he just runs the meetings and cuts ribbons. Amy Arrington, the city manager rules the city.

Amy Arrington had not held a city manager’s position until Davenport, Florida. She had previously served as assistant city manager for Haines City, Florida. She was hired in Davenport as assistant city manager. When the city manager resigned, Arrington was named interim city manager at a salary of $65,000 a year. The previous city manager, Ryan Taylor, was making $66,950 when he left.

According to my notes, the city and Arrington entered into negotiations for her to take over as city manager, but could not agree on salary and benefits. Arrington showed her team spirit by demanding $76,000 a year in salary, 15 paid leave days and two weeks vacation. Demonstrating the art of compromise, she “settled” for $75,000 a year in salary, no paid leave days, but THREE weeks vacation. I would think that there would also be the standard insurance benefits, retirement, per diems, continuing education and car or car allowance benefits as well.

And, apparently, though she was officially hired on 12/3/07 to the city manager’s position, her start date was adjusted to 8/6/07. My guess is that this is the date when she took over as interim city manager, so there was almost four months of retro pay. Let’s call it a “signing bonus” of sorts.

What does this have to do with the volunteer fire department? PLENTY.

In Florida, county fire departments are common. Davenport, Florida was being serviced by a volunteer fire department and had for about 86 years. Then, after the hurricane season in 2004, the city hired six full time firefighters and supplemented them with the volunteers. I could find no acrimonious articles on any rifts between the full time and volunteer firefighters.

Then, Arrington was tasked with hiring a fire administrator for the purpose of bringing the full time and volunteer firefighters under one leader and resisting the advances of Polk County Fire Service, who had proposed in early 2009 to take over fire service for Davenport. Residents had made it clear that they wanted a local fire department

Arrington’s first hire lasted TWO, whole days. Hmmm; that’s a red flag.

On October 16, 2009, Arrington announced that she had hired Stuart McCutcheon as her “part time regular” fire administrator. His part time salary was set at $25,500 a year. McCutcheon finished work on an AAS degree in fire science on April 12, 2006 from Daytona Beach Community College. I did an exhaustive search and that is all I could find on him (However; I did find a press release from March 3, 2010 by the State of Florida Commission on Ethics that dismissed a charge against Stuart McCutcheon for “no legal sufficiency”).

So, with someone in place that Arrington could control, the wheels were in motion to gain control of the volunteers.

Many of the fire service websites have been discussing this fire department from the perspective that it is because of the ordinance requiring the volunteers to apply for the “auxiliary” positions under the new “regime” (http://theledger.com/article/20100121/NEWS/1215083).

But, in my opinion, it started months before when the volunteer chief, Don Pelt, was suspended on November 16, 2009 by Stuart McCutcheon, the newly minted fire administrator for responding to a medical call in Davenport. Note that the date is exactly one month after the fire administrator was hired. And consider too, that, the city council, by not voting a show of support for their chief, was showing support for the city manager and the fire administrator (http://www.theledger.com/article/20091123/NEWS/911235073).

Then, city manager extraordinaire Amy Arrington was instructed by the council to get the matter with the fire department resolved, but the council was leaving it to Arrington to solve.

At the next city council meeting and over objections by the crowd that filled the chambers, the council passed on first reading the new ordinance. (http://www.theledger.com/article/20100126/NEWS/1265034). With the distinct possibility that the volunteer department was out of service, the mayor asked the city manager to meet with them, but Arrington made it very clear that she would, but that she supported the ordinance.

This led to the question by the mayor if Davenport could afford full time fire services. (http://www.theledger.com/article/20100209/news/2095917). If you look at savings in salaries alone, it amounted to approximately $190,000. I’d be curious to know what Polk County Fire Services quoted them for protection. Plus, because the salaries of the full time firefighters were much lower than surrounding departments, they could be easily lured away by higher pay. Without a volunteer department to supplement, you would be increasing the possibilities of overtime, hiring more full time or part time, longer response times, injuries and relying on mutual aid for coverage.

As I said from the beginning, this was never about fire service delivery, but rather, control; a controlling city manager who controls the city council, who controls the fire administrator, who now controls the much smaller fire department. (http://www.theledger.com/article/20100223/NEWS/2235073).

Don’t believe me? Here is a quote from the news article: “The purpose of the ordinance, they (Arrington/McCutcheon) have said, is to give the city full control of the department and a single chain of command with Arrington and McCutcheon at the top.

And THAT is where I have my biggest problem with the whole mess.

Can someone please explain to me how a city manager becomes the top of the ladder in a fire department, in broad daylight and in full view of a city council?

TCSS.

This article is protected by federal copyright laws and published under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella. It cannot be reproduced in any form without the expressed written permission of the author.

Posted by chiefreason on March 8, 2010 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , , , , ,

The Errors of Arrogance

No comments

I have received several messages from readers who have found themselves re-reading “The Futility of Our Humility” (http://www.firefighternation.com/profiles/blogs/the-futility-of-our-humility).

Normally, I would be ecstatic that people found my stuff so compelling that they would read it again-a dream come true!

Unfortunately, I think that I have confused the point of my point.

Where I believe that the central issue lies is with the use of “arrogant/arrogance”. Some are reading into the blog that I am pointing the fickle finger directly at THEM.

When I describe a thought or an act that I believe lends itself to what I believe is arrogance, then the only thing that remains is for the reader to decide if it could fit their situation and if so, what has been done about it or what WILL be done about it.

What I did in my previous blog was to describe what I believed were feelings of acts of arrogance. As I have stated on numerous occasions is, “If it applies, then apply it. If not, then disregard”. There is no need to take offense if it is not your situation.

When I write, I want it to entertain, to challenge your thinking and hopefully, to allow you to learn and to offer your perspective.

Often times, I will offer straight-forward opinions that can be agreed or disagreed with or used as a trigger for a discussion point.

In my opinion and in some ways, some in the fire service have been arrogant and in the process, have lost some humility.

If that were not the case, then why are we so incensed or surprised that cities are making firefighter staffing cuts?

I never said that I agreed with it and completely understand the many downsides to such kamikaze budgeting, but there is a sense of arrogance in our response back to the city’s, brainless trust and at the expense of other city employees.

Now; this may sound “arrogant”, but I think that we all realize that our self worth and our value as public servants have higher skill sets than, as an example, one who runs the landfill and I am NOT saying that the landfill isn’t important. I am simply saying that, in my jaded opinion, it takes more skill to read smoke and to run HazMat operations.

However; I think that it is wrong to believe that deeper cuts will be made elsewhere to preserve every public safety position.

How can a fire department argue about staffing issues that cannot be seen with the naked eye of the public?

We all know as sports fans what happens to a football team, if they are one man short on defense. The other team will have the advantage, at least for that one play. It could result in a touchdown for one team and spell defeat for the other team.

So; with that example, you have a properly staffed team winning and one that isn’t properly staffed losing.

Another good sports analogy is the hockey power play. The team with more players has the definite advantage.

Now; I am in no way minimizing or trivializing the loss of firefighter staffing with these sports comparisons; I am saying that it is not easy for citizens to know the effects, unless they have been educated on the clear relationship between lower staffing and the safety of fewer firefighters responding.

I am saying that, with these comparisons, the same holds true with fire departments. Unfortunately, the public can’t see it when we are under-staffed. It is not as obvious as the hockey power play.

And simply telling them is no longer effective, but city governments are telling their citizens that they won’t notice a difference and THAT is gaining support, because the public may not know any better.

But, how can this be? If the public thinks that we can get by with less NOW, then they must think that we were over-staffed to begin with.

Well, maybe not according to the NFPA standards, but citizens can’t relate at that level and since it won’t cost anything unless something goes wrong, city managers are willing to roll those dice for the cost savings. This is what I call “uber arrogance” on the part of city governments!

In my opinion, if a fire department allows that very first firefighter to be cut due to budget issues, then another and another will follow. Any chief smart enough to understand manpower requirements would NEVER allow it to happen, because once you lose them; how easy is it going to be to get them back?

A chief worth his weight would not cut firefighter positions to balance a budget. They might instead sweep their various budget funds to the bone, including over-time and maybe re-arrange schedules for staff and administrative positions. HIS humility for where HE came from should weigh heavily on his mind.

But, mayors, city managers and city councils trade their humility for arrogance faster than they can recite their oath of office.

My point is that, either city governments are arrogant to believe that public safety cuts will have little or no effect on service, have little or no effect on the safety of those employees OR are aware of it, but are arrogant enough to believe that the risks are worth the cuts.

My other point is that fire departments may be arrogant to believe that the citizens will side with firefighters based upon our proffered emotional statements rather than accurate examples of increases in accidents, injuries or even death as a result of staffing cuts. Providing information from LODD reports where it was specifically stated that low staffing contributed to the death would be appropriate to use.

It’s hard to be humble when the errors of arrogance are not properly and accurately addressed and it might very well be a failure of our leadership to properly assess the community’s needs and their firefighters’ needs.

TCSS.

The article is protected by federal copyright law under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella. It is written and submitted by Art Goodrich a.k.a. ChiefReason. This article or any other article submitted under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella cannot be reproduced in ANY form without the expressed, written permission of the author. Violations are punishable by applicable laws.

Please visit: www.fireemsblogs.com and my blog www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on February 28, 2010 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , , , ,

The Futility of Our Humility

No comments

I have found myself thinking about the term “arrogant” a lot lately. It is what comes to mind as I read some of the stories coming out of our fire service these days. And trust me; what you will read here won’t be a speech that you will hear this year at FDIC.

Yes; I am of the opinion that our humility has been uprooted and replaced with an air of arrogance.

What right do I have to say this?

Well, I was an active firefighter for 22 years. I suffered through under-funding, a lack of leadership, no plan, no mission, little hope, but a desire to help my community. Back then, we would be standing there with a booster line, shooting water into the hole that was once a house and everyone was telling us what a great job we did.

We did everything that we could, we would say. Arrogance!

We appreciate everything that you do, was a typical sentiment that was voiced by one and all. Ah; humility!

You are swept up by this unconditional worship of the fire department when you are new to it (humility with a splash of cynicism), but, after you have been on for awhile, you come to expect to hear it and to feel it each and every time there is a reason to drop the tones (arrogance with a touch of entitlement).

Is it a natural part of the maturation process to lose one’s humility or have we been confusing “humble” with “grateful” for, oh, so many years?

Recently, there have been several, negative stories in the news about firefighters or ex-firefighters.  Are we humbled by the fact that we are still regarded very highly by the public, even though recent news has firefighters committing arson, murder, sexploitation, drug sales and embezzlement? Or are we grateful that it isn’t happening where we live? More importantly, are these national headlines chipping away at our “unconditional worshippers”?

I keep hearing complaints from many corners in the fire service about how the pro-firefighter sentiment has eroded since 9/11. Do we want to believe that it took a catastrophe of major proportion to elevate our stature? Or did we think too highly of ourselves to begin with? It’s easy to fall into the trap of believing what we read about us.

I am disturbed by the fact that we use 9/11 as a reference point on the gauge of public opinion as if it were some “side benefit” for firefighters who weren’t even there, who didn’t lose family or aren’t struggling with health issues that may or may not be recognized as linked to the WTC site and covered under insurance or PSOBs. We should not be arrogant enough to believe that we can understand the immense loss that a city and their firefighters felt and continue to feel and instead be humbled by the professionalism exhibited by them.

When I think of some of the incidents that we have undertaken over the years, I take a critical view of the end result and am not humbled by it. If we are approached by a citizen and told we did a good job, I am grateful for their kindness, but no longer feel humbled by it. Why? I believe that it comes from knowing that we could have or should have done things differently for a better outcome.

Part of the reason that I think the public was so quick to heap praise upon their fire departments some years ago was because it was somewhat guilt driven. They didn’t have the time or wouldn’t take the time to join their fire department; yet fully understood the importance of praise as positive reinforcement. This is how they raised their kids and it worked with them and let’s face it; a firefighter is a big kid who, as a young kid, wanted to be a firefighter.

So, it was necessary for leaders in the community to praise their public servants so that they wouldn’t have to do it and then they could sleep better at night. When I think about my early days on the department, I remember that many of the property owners were too involved emotionally in their fully involved house to be thankful that a fire truck or two was there to keep it cool as it collapsed into the basement. As you were getting ready to return to the station, the last image at the fire scene that you saw was a family huddled in the front lawn arm-in-arms and holding on to what was left from the fire-each other.

Somehow; humility isn’t the feeling that comes to mind. But, I must admit; there is a feeling of arrogance from the expectation that there should have been a “thank you” for our efforts.

I think back to how many times we told ourselves that just a “thank you; just a pat on the back” was good enough. But, that was back when we didn’t have a lot of emotion, time and effort invested in ourselves as a member of the fire department. As we increased our skill sets, did our expectations of how we should be perceived grow as well? Once we were neck deep and fully vested; was a simple thank you or pat on the back ever going to be enough again? Was that arrogance settling in?

Then, we must have thought that the community was going to be right there alongside of us every step of the way as we went to school after school, conference after conference and collecting certificate after certificate. We were arrogant enough to believe that taxpayers would buy anything for their fire department; the best training and the best equipment and for awhile they did.

But, the economy turned. We started seeing job losses, eroding tax base, less new development, no new jobs, no new revenue sources, schools eating up most of the taxes and TIF districts got the rest. Our equipment was getting older and so were the firefighters. Even in tough times, we felt that the community would support the purchase of new fire trucks. The older guys didn’t want to attend training and the new ones didn’t have the time, but we were arrogant enough to believe that we could survive on our laurels. We could stir public support with tales of the old days.

And if that didn’t gain us their support, then we were arrogant enough to believe that we could use the old “if we don’t get it, more people will die” Big Lie. It had worked very successfully for years. “Can’t miss; two thumbs up”, you say.

Still; the community didn’t want the debt of a new truck in these uncertain times. They were resigned to the reality that the old trucks might break down when we were in the heat of battle, but that was a chance that they were willing to take. It sounded like a much cheaper alternative than the $300,000 for a new truck.

Our last gasp of arrogance comes with the “we will have to shut down the department and let someone else handle the calls”. We are thinking, “No way will they want to wait for the next town over”, but your citizens are thinking, “What’s the difference? They are going to pour water into the burnt out basement anyway”.

Yes; communities will support their fire departments through the tough times, but it will not be at previously high levels. Our public is more educated and therefore, less inclined to be swayed by emotional arguments. They remember the demonstrations of low pressure/high water volume tactics and its reliance on limited manpower. Let’s not forget the great Quint debates either. A truck designed for understaffing? I’ll take ten.

When you are no longer able to fulfill your mission statement because of a lack of resources, then you must either contract to your current level of resources or risk catastrophic failure in some form. It would be arrogant to think otherwise.

And a community telling their fire department that they cannot support them at their current levels can be very humbling, indeed.

TCSS.

The article is protected by federal copyright law under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella. It is written and submitted by Art Goodrich a.k.a. ChiefReason. This article or any other article submitted under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella cannot be reproduced in ANY form without the expressed, written permission of the author. Violations are punishable by applicable laws.

Please visit: www.fireemsblogs.com and my blog www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on February 24, 2010 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , , ,

Personal Accountability with Morality

1 comment

Many times, we find ourselves complaining about our lack of control over our jobs or with our futures at our jobs.

We are in middle level management and historically, that has been the “crème in the Oreo cookie” of corporate America. That is; we get squeezed from both sides-the employers’ and the employees’.

But, something that we DO have control over is our moral compass. THAT sets the direction down the road to righteous decisions for a bounty of personal, moral and ethical situations.

I receive many on-line versions of magazines. Honestly, I don’t know why companies even bother sending out paper versions anymore. Often times, they go straight to the re-cycle bin unopened.

One of my faves is Fire Chief and articles by author/editor Janet Wilmoth. Janet has had her fingers on the pulse of the fire service for many years and her editorial this month was no exception.

Her topic for this month was “Chiefs Behaving Badly”.

I immediately bristled at the notion and I know that I could provide irrefutable examples that would prove that chiefs had not cornered the market on bad behavior within our fire service.

Why, just in the last few days, Caleb Lacey was found guilty of arson and homicide for a fire that he set in Long Island.

However; Wilmoth did provide some examples of some pretty egregious behavior by chiefs.

First up is Gary Scott, former chief of Campbell County, Wyoming’s fire department.

Apparently, the chief liked to molest his fire cadets; so much so that he pleaded no contest to FOURTEEN counts of sex abuse.

And we wonder why junior/explorer programs are going away!

The kicker is that Scott is already serving a 24-year sentence on TEN felony convictions of taking children across state lines for sexual abuse. (Source: www.rapidcityjournal.com)  He is either very stupid or very sick (twisted) or both.

Stay tuned to this one. Some of the young boys who were molested have filed a $150 million lawsuit against the fire department. Somehow, I don’t think that Tort Immunity is going to be enough. They might want to start NOW looking for new revenue streams to pay their legal bills.

Next, we have Eric Adam Grueninger, former chief of Locust Creek Volunteer Fire Department in Louisa County, Virginia.

This sick mutt was sentenced to 323 years in prison with 235 years suspended (?) for TWENTY felony sex counts, including rape, forcible sodomy, aggravated sexual battery of a minor, object sexual penetration, taking indecent liberties with a child and possession of child pornography. (Source: www2.timesdispatch.com)

Sorry, folks; no snappy retort for this one. This one leaves me shaking my head and leaves me wondering how a “pillar” in a community can be so depraved and yet; shows no noticeable, outward signs. I can say that deep scars will exist forever with the victims and for a very long time in their respective communities.

Then, there is the curious case of Chief David Peterson of the Plainfield Township, Michigan Fire Department.

According to the article that I read, Chief Peterson and Township Supervisor Robert Homan knew that volunteer firefighter and township assistant clerk Jeffrey Hawkins was a convicted sex offender and they allowed him to continue working for the fire department. Hawkins was first convicted in the mid-90s for a crime involving a boy younger than 13 years of age.

Hawkins was again arrested in September of 2009 for soliciting sex from two, young boys on Facebook. (Source: www.woodtv.com)

Public opinion has been brutal since Hawkins’ arrest. The township fire department has been accused of putting other children at risk, for keeping a convicted pedophile on the fire department and for keeping it “secret”.

So, when we have our discussions about how a chief is promoted (elected or appointed), the cost of doing background checks (or not doing them) and as to how desperate volunteer fire departments are to recruit and retain members; please think about what you have just read, but with this one caveat: $150 million in potential liability to your department and taxpayers.

Anything else pales by comparison!

TCSS.

The article is protected by federal copyright law under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella. It is written and submitted by Art Goodrich a.k.a. ChiefReason. This article or any other article submitted under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella cannot be reproduced in ANY form without the expressed, written permission of the author. Violations are punishable by applicable laws.

Please visit: www.fireemsblogs.com and my blog www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on February 21, 2010 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , , , , ,

Arrogance and Ignorance Is a Dangerous Combo

1 comment

This is what came to mind when I read the story of the Long Pine, Nebraska Fire Department (http://www.firefighternation.com/forum/topics/nebraska-town-dismantles). Apparently, the mayor and city council decided to “dismantle” the fire department over some internal disputes between the mayor and the fire department. See a news piece here: http://journalstar.com/news/state-and-regional/nebraska/article_61573e48-1809-11df-9219-001cc4c03286.html.

I call it “arrogant”, because the action was taken by a small group elected to represent their residents.

Are we going to believe that the citizens WANT to be without a local fire department?

If they care about someone showing up at the time of their emergency, then they should NOT be happy at this turn of events in their community.

Citizens of Long Pine; throw out the elected officials who are behind this cavalier attitude towards your community’s safety. They are using YOU to prove a point and a very dangerous one at that.

In fact; have your police chief arrest them for aggravated stupidity!

I also call it “ignorant”, because once again, one city government wants their public safety problems solved at their neighboring community’s expense. Yeah; use their resources paid by their tax money for your emergencies. Call it “redistribution of wealth”.

It is also an ignorant notion because fire will grow for each minute that it takes Ainsworth to get there.

People should go to jail for putting the safety of their communities at risk.

When elected officials fail their oath of office by acts of their own neglect, then they should be arrested, charged, tried and convicted for it.

Go ahead and say it. Say, “But you won’t get anyone to run for public office if they can be arrested for making bad decisions”.

And I will say, “No; a bad decision would be to increase the sales tax because sales are down”.

Shutting down your fire department because a couple of city council members-including one that is ON the volunteer fire department and voted to dismantle it-has an axe to grind isn’t a bad decision; it’s a wrong decision and a very dangerous decision.

When government and its power are abused by the few who are elected, it no longer functions FOR the people.

And if you could go to jail for being arrogant and ignorant in matters of public safety, then new prisons would be popping up all over the nation.

This case in Long Pine is not an example of partisan politics, ladies and gentlemen. It’s elected officials abusing their privilege to serve their citizens. It’s elected officials serving their own self-interests at the expense of their citizens.

So, when they bring the process down to the personal level, replete with acts of revenge, then it is time for them to go.

You cannot justify a public body making private decisions on public safety without public comment and participation. It’s wrong AND illegal.

Is there more to the story?

There had better be.

TCSS.

The article is protected by federal copyright law under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella. It is written and submitted by Art Goodrich a.k.a. ChiefReason. This article or any other article submitted under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella cannot be reproduced in ANY form without the expressed, written permission of the author. Violations are punishable by applicable laws.

Please visit: www.fireemsblogs.com and my blog www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on February 14, 2010 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , ,

Volunteers; Who Is Listening?

5 comments

Most issues that exist with volunteer fire departments occur at the local level and in many states where you have a state-wide response program; at the state level.

So, where do you turn when assistance is needed?

Where I live, we have a regional organization that meets every other month and naturally, local issues will become a part of the meeting records.

If you are plugged in at the state level, several organizations, such as the state fire chiefs association, an association of fire protection districts and a state firefighters association are there to address state issues.

Beyond that, you may be fortunate enough to have a working relationship with your state representatives.

When you study this political structure, it is easy to feel that a solution to your particular problem is beyond your reach. But, it shouldn’t be.

Where do you go-who do you turn to-to get your issue resolved?

You know; there was a time some years ago when volunteer fire departments had the single, largest voting block in their respective communities. It may feel uncomfortable to some who are reading this, but “old school” also meant “old school politics”, where connections in a community wielded power and fire departments had it.

What happened?

Do you ever ask yourself “why does the smaller demographic in the fire service yield the most power? Career firefighters in this country make up less than 30% of the nation’s firefighters; yet, they pack a powerful voice. It is most likely because of their affiliation with the IAFF.

What do the volunteers have besides the National Volunteer Fire Council?

Will the NVFC come in and arbitrate a local disagreement?

Doubtful.

I mean; it took them TEN years to issue a white paper

(http://www.nvfc.org/files/documents/Volunteer_Training_White_Paper.pdf) on volunteer firefighter training. When I say that it took ten years, I mean that, many of us have been voicing concerns about training, recruitment and retention since at least the year 2000.

It is a very good paper and I don’t want to come off as overly critical. They are very blunt in the paper. They identify three critical areas: Time Constraints, Resource Constraints and Leadership as critical areas of impediment to training objectives. My favorite phrase from the paper is:

Unfortunately, a large number of volunteer fire departments are still operating with personnel who are not trained to a level consistent with national consensus standards for basic firefighting preparedness. This can lead to ineffective and unsafe responses that put lives and property at risk.

Have we not discussed this many times on the many fire website discussion pages? Are any of the organizations “browsing”? Or do they need an email shot right to their inbox?

So, NVFC is calling for volunteer firefighters to be trained to a national consensus standard that is known as NFPA 1001. I have a suggestion for them…

If they want departments trained to this standard-and many of us already are-then they should offer a free membership into NFPA if they are currently using NFIRS.

If the information from NFIRS is so critical to our fire service-and for the record, I believe that it is-then; it should be worth the price of admission into the NFPA.

My fire department is a member of the NFPA, but let’s face it; it’s pay as you go.

Anyone who is willing to meet NFPA standards should be incentified and I don’t mean by the threat of jail for not doing so.

Small, volunteer departments need help and it shouldn’t have to cost them money that they don’t have. They cannot afford consultants, membership fees and training programs at $1500 a pop.

Our national organizations want compliance from volunteer fire departments. Are they willing to fund their mandates?

What about equipment manufacturers? Maybe instead of wining and dining prospective customers, they can cut back there and instead, offer a ten year membership in NFPA if the fire department purchases equipment from them. Or they could offer IFSTA training programs as an alternative.

What about the scholarship programs where only one firefighter benefits from the money? Instead of offering a scholarship, sponsor a fire department for NFPA membership.

Most of us know what the problems are and I understand that, in many cases, simply throwing money at it won’t fix it.

But, like we found out in Illinois, if you take it to the fire departments, they will respond…and in record numbers. Illinois uses up every training program dollar allocated every year.

If you don’t want to take my word for it, then contact Dave Clark, Deputy Director of the Illinois Fire Service Institute (IFSI).

They have been listening to us for years.

Who is listening to you?

TCSS.

This article is protected by federal copyright laws. It cannot be reproduced in any form without the expressed, written permission of the author, Art Goodrich a.k.a. ChiefReason.

 Please go to www.fireemsblogs.com and visit my blog at www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on February 9, 2010 • Filed under: My Size Up

Didn’t You? Didn’t You? I Thought You Did. No? Me Neither!

1 comment

By my count, this fire department had FIVE chances to get this call right. They didn’t.

Why? Because, according to their internal report, they didn’t follow their own procedures, which led to an interesting discussion.

Last night, after Chris Kaiser, the featured guest of FirefighterNetCast had concluded his portion of the Old School vs. New School program, FireCritic Rhett and FireDaily John went to a discussion format and wanted to discuss the Dekalb County, GA Fire Department response to a fatal fire.

When the story first broke, a discussion thread popped up and naturally, I had some opinions based upon the limited information that was coming out at the time. My initial reaction was that I couldn’t believe what I was reading. I was stunned by it.

Before long though, there was a groundswell under this story fueled by the family of the deceased and from members in the news media wanting some answers. To date, five firefighters have been terminated and the chief has resigned as fallout from the incident at 1687 Houghton Court North, Dunwoody Georgia; home to Ann Bartlett, age 74.

I was in the chat room at the time and someone flashed me to call in, so I did. I weighed in heavy on the discussion of this incident along with Rhett, John and Chris Naum. I was going off of my recollections, but I was up to speed with the exception that I hadn’t read the internal report of the incident from Chief Foster.

While we were concluding the discussion, I got a message from the chat room from a buddy who felt that we were “piling on” this fire department. I pointed out that I didn’t bring the subject up, but was merely offering my opinions; something that I’ve been known to do.

He wanted to know if we were “perfect”. Of course we aren’t, but I also thought that you would have to be drunk or crazy to get an incident THIS WRONG. My buddy thought that we were offering strong opinions based upon speculative journalism and even if the story was barely correct, he was still upset that we were “kicking a department when they were down”.

Well, I initiated some soul searching right there in the chat room and upon reflection, he was right…to a degree. Perhaps on any other day, the good men and women of this department might very well have gotten it right, but one could make a strong argument, based upon the internal report, that it might not have been a different outcome, if complacency and disregard for written protocols were routinely ignored.

In the end, I told my buddy that I had over reacted, but the emotional value of this incident was very high for everyone involved and for those of us who read and analyze incidents for lessons learned. But, I also wanted to read the internal report, re-visit the discussion thread and follow up with local news to make sure that I wasn’t being a total wienie on this one.

Upon further review, I stand by my comments. Everyone involved with that run on that day bear some responsibility and not just the officers who have been terminated or have resigned. The guys riding backwards get some, too and I will be glad to explain.

First of all, the entire time that was spent on the first call was 7 minutes and 22 seconds. Do you think that a thorough search could have been initiated and terminated in this short time frame?

Engine 18 arrived at 1:15:10 in the AM with Truck 18 and Engine 12 arriving shortly thereafter. The scene was cleared at 1:22:32 in the AM with a report of no smoke or fire.

If you read the internal report, you will notice that: captain of Engine 18 arrives first and does not establish incident command and no one exits the vehicle. Truck 18 arrives, but fails to notify dispatch that they are on scene, does not establish command and the captain states for the report that they “looked at the house; no signs of smoke; house was dark”. In other words, no one checked the house. Engine 12 arrives and goes to the hydrant. The captain states for the report that he did not hear anyone establish incident command and watches as Engine 18 and Truck 18 leave the area. Engine 12 leaves without noticing smoke or fire, but no one checked the house. Battalion 1 did not hear command established and did not insure that command was initiated. Battalion 1 never made it to the scene. The shift commander was contacted by the dispatch supervisor who stated that she felt that it was a legitimate call. The shift commander was not monitoring the radio traffic from the call, so he was unaware of the breach in protocols.

Many think that establishing incident command is a royal pain. Some even think that it is over kill. When you examine the missteps in this incident, it appears to be very well suited for command and control, because apparently, establishing incident command would have been  the kick to the head that this incident needed to engage the officers into doing their jobs.

But, where were the “guys who ride backwards”. The working stiffs; the rank and file? Does it take a direct order by an officer to activate your common sense? Not one firefighter could say, “Hey, Cap; permission to walk to the house to talk to the owner”? You could even be a little more demanding without risk of discipline, I would think.

Yes; all officers have been terminated and based upon the internal report, it is justified; sadly.

I have a problem with the chief riding out of Dodge at a fast gallop, but the department will heal faster, too.

The family of Ann Bartlett wants an apology from the firefighters who were involved in this incident.

And if I was a resident of this county, I would want some assurances that asses will come out of the seats of the trucks and check my welfare, if needed. And that’s really my biggest beef. Even after not smelling smoke or seeing fire, someone could have, at the very least, checked on this lady’s welfare, just to re-assure her.

But, that would have required someone to get out of the truck.

You know; to make an effort.

I don’t think that this is what we had in mind when we talk about accountability.

Now might be a good time to go back and review policies and read that book on leadership again.

TCSS.

This article is protected by federal copyright laws. No reproduction of any kind is permitted without written permission from the author.

Please visit me at www.fireemsblogs.com on www.chiefreasonart.com.

Posted by chiefreason on February 5, 2010 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , , , ,