Skip to content

Archives for firefighter

See all posts in the network tagged with firefighter

The First Due Blog Carnival

3 comments

The Fire Critic is sponsoring The First Due Blog Carnival (http://firecritic.com/blog-carnival/) and it is the first-ever blog carnival for firefighting. All bloggers are welcomed to submit a blog by no later than March 22, 2010 and the topic for the first installment is:

 I AM A Firefighter Because…

I grew up believing that firefighters were the bravest, most honorable and unselfish people that walked the Earth.

I took this belief that I held of firefighters and put it into practice by becoming one.

It was necessary that I did this for ME. That may appear to be selfish, but please allow me to explain.

Quite simply; I would have most likely died a rebellious, young man had I not embraced the ideals of a firefighter.

I realize that this swims against the tide of the usual “to help someone in need” crowd, but at the time, I was the one in need of help and in some respects, it DID involve a fire; but it was the fire that was burning inside of me and about to flash over.

I also credit my participation in team sports while growing up for helping me to return to the right path. I believe that firefighting is the ultimate team for the extreme.

You see; because of my radical, rebellious behavior as a young adult, I destroyed my relationship with my parents.

A simple “I’m sorry” wasn’t going to fix the damage that I inflicted upon them

No; this was going to have to be a visible, spiritual change in me-one that they could see and feel and to know that it was genuine.

So, I joined the local fire department and the rest, as they say, is history.

I carried my mother’s compassion, because she was always the one who cooked and cleaned for us, got us safely to wherever we needed to go and took care of us when we were sick. They were perfect attributes for my time with the ambulance service.

Dad was a veteran of the Great Depression and World War II. He educated himself by reading whatever he could get his hands on, had a keen aptitude for taking things apart to discover what made them work, wasn’t afraid to work hard and get dirty, used colorful language if the situation called for it and was the most honest person that I have ever known. He would have been a GREAT firefighter.

To apologize to them and to honor them, I took the values that they had instilled in me as a youngster, misplaced as a young adult and re-discovered some years later and became a firefighter; someone who was more like them/someone that they could be proud of.

And though they never told me, they never had to tell me that they were proud of me. Others that they had told were telling me!

Mom always told me that when our tones dropped, Dad would not leave the scanner until we had completed our call. What she didn’t tell me was that SHE was sitting right next to Dad. How cool is that?

They are both gone now, but are still with me every day, reminding me of why I became a firefighter and why I still love the fire service.

Because, even though I became a firefighter for them and for me, I also learned from them that helping in a time of need is an innately, uniquely, precious commodity that is more valuable than the rarest diamond. You could NEVER buy the kind of hope and support that we provide to our neighbors in need or the pride that it brings to us as ones who are able to affect the outcome!

Yeah; I’m still telling Mom and Dad that I’m sorry, but I’m not sorry for the sacrifices that my family and I have made so that I could be a better person-a better firefighter.

And those ideals that I found in firefighters?

They were right there in front of me; in my parents all along and passed on to me.

It’s funny how Life can take your journey full circle!

TCSS.

Art

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

Posted by chiefreason on March 11, 2010 • Filed under: Miscellaneous • Tagged: , , , , , , ,

Your Cheatin’ Heart…

No comments

When did we become a society where cheating has become so acceptable and almost fashionable?

Everywhere we turn; we are hearing or reading about another incident of cheating. Pages and pages of examples of yet someone caught or accused of cheating.

Another headline; another cheater exposed.

Students caught cheating on their SATs. (They are “pressured” by parents to get into the best colleges)

Teachers caught cheating on their standardized testing of students. (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/28/national/main580355.shtml The teachers “care too much, sometimes)

College professor caught cheating on their resume. (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/10/20/BA186979.DTL Professor provided “inaccurate information”)

Wife caught cheating on husband. Husband caught cheating on wife. Each blames the other.

Politicians accused of stealing elections. ACORN accused of faking voter registrations. Sports teams accused of stealing opponents’ playbook. Coach accused of allowing the use of steroids among players. Players accused of using corked bats. Pitchers accused of using Vaseline on baseballs. Another college coach accused of cheating with recruit program. Alumni accused of funneling money to college players. EMTs accused of getting copy of state test to “study”. Firefighters accused of defrauding disability benefits. Mayor accused diverting tax money to campaign fund. City treasurer accused of taking over $100,000 dollars in tax money.

And on and on. Examples of cheating with no end in sight. Call it what you want-fraud, misappropriations, caring too much, inaccurate information, juicing, doping, adultery, bad decision, embellishing, plagiarism,  winning at all costs, spying, bribery, intimidation, looking the other way-but, it’s still cheating and most of it goes on without an appropriate, severe response to it.

I can remember when being called a “cheater” was grounds for a fistfight. It was a term that was so reviled that you didn’t say it, unless you could back it up with fists. But anymore, it would seem that you aren’t a cheater, unless you are caught! Where our conscience used to be the driving force behind our moral decisions, in today’s world, it is evident that you aren’t gaining if you aren’t cheating somehow to secure the desired end result. And when other people can see the benefits, they will risk the downside against getting caught.

But, where did it all start? When did we see the “warning signs” that would get us to where we are today?

Could it be traced back to Biblical times? Perhaps, we can go back to David and Goliath. Goliath came to the fight, believing that his size was going to beat his opponent. David showed up with a sling and some rocks. You know the saying: never bring a sword to a rock fight! David slue Goliath that day because he cheated? Or did he “out-smart” his opponent? Well; the Philistines would say that David cheated, but the Israelites would disagree. That would lend itself to my previous assertion that we “package” the cheating with candy for the brain; that is, we use less offensive terms to rationalize the act.

Could it have come from the days of the Old West when a gunslinger would carry two guns instead of one? Let’s face it; the days of the honorable “duel” between two combatants had been gone for some time (see Burr vs. Hamilton). It seems silly to me that two guys would face each other with the end result of one fatally shooting the other without one of them serpentining or dropping to the ground to take his shot at the other, but I digress.

I realize that the last two examples may be stretching it, but, to be honest, I am at a loss for where our society took that moral turn towards such dishonesty. You could cite several political figures during the past century alone where corruption/dishonesty/cheating were discovered after the fact.

And in today’s world, you can see more current examples each and every time you pick up a newspaper or turn on the television news.

Obviously, I am interested in how we behave as a national fire service and it bothers me to see cheating among our minions. A few years ago, Illinois was without a state EMT test, because some firefighters were caught cheating. It took just over two years to restore the test and its integrity.

More recently, a firefighter was caught on video at a bodybuilding competition, even though he was on disability from his fire department. (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,386570,00.html) What does that say about him, his department and our national fire service if a swift response is not delivered? I understand that we live in a society where we are innocent until proven guilty, so an alleged case of fraud is pending. But, you have to admit (1) The firefighter was granted disability, (2) He was video-taped competing at a bodybuilding competition, (3) He didn’t get into that condition from being “disabled” and (4) You can’t blame his parents, fire department or doctor for such a brazen display of cheating.

We also have reports of cheating on firefighter exams. Although it is one of the keys to the door to the greatest job in the world, I don’t think that one should come by those “keys” by stacking the deck and slipping cards up their sleeves for the advantage. See related link: http://www.firefighternation.com/forum/topics/cheating-discovered-in

There is no gene that exists in us that causes us to cheat. Cheating has to be taught and it has to be learned and that is where the effort to stomp it out has to start. The response to it has to be so strong as to discourage it from happening again. It has to be so powerful of a message that it tells others that are tempted to do so not to even THINK about it.

As long as we are willing to put a cute little tag on it and make it more palatable to swallow, it will continue to grow into a much bigger monster than it is today.

As long as we accept cheating in the most innocuous forms such as cheating the speed limit, cheating the stoplight, cheating on our training, cheating our bodies of physical conditioning and good diet, cheating our SOGs and cheating our taxpayers, we will continue to see a rising problem with few remedies.

Winners never cheat and cheaters never win?

I’m not convinced at this point.

Are you?

TCSS.

Art

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

Posted by chiefreason on October 25, 2009 • Filed under: Miscellaneous • Tagged: , , , , , ,

Patriotism or Sensationalism?

No comments

I have been following the saga involving Firefighter James Krapf of the Chester, PA Fire Department in what has been alternately described as an attack on his patriotism, the symbol of our country-the American Flag and “rules are rules” that must be followed.

Here is a re-cap of how we have gotten to the top of a slippery slope:

1)       An African-American firefighter had a cartoon on his locker that others felt was in poor taste. He then wrote a comment on the cartoon.

2)       Fire Commissioner James Johnson issued a directive that stated that everything was to be removed from the outside of lockers.

3)       11 firefighters were warned that they were in violation of department policy.

4)       Krapf removes everything from the outside of his locker, but tells his chief that he won’t remove the American Flag sticker. The chief tells him to go home.

5)       Krapf is suspended until he removes the flag.

6)       The “flag flap” is now all over the national TV news, printed news, websites and discussion boards.

7)       Another firefighter, Robert Butler joined the protest by wearing a hat with an up-side down flag sewn on it.

8)       The union has a rally of support for Krapf planned for Monday, October 19th.

So; what is really at issue?

In my opinion, it’s about poor policy, flag-waving, a lack of common sense, a lack of reasonable thinking and under-pinned to racial disharmony.

I say that because it was an African-American firefighter who displayed the “offensive” cartoon, depicting two, African-American men and a racial slur. Fire Commissioner James Johnson is African-American and Firefighter James Krapf is Caucasian. So, in my opinion, there is a racial component.

To add to an already, tense situation is the fact that Chester firefighters have been working without a contract since 2007, there are accusations of “gamesmanship by the union; a charge that the union denies.

The sticker at the center of the controversy could be a smiley face and most would agree that the directive should be followed.

However; it’s not. It is the sacred symbol of our country that evokes strong emotions in us, so we are less inclined to say to remove it.

Is Firefighter Krapf feeding on those emotions or is he that strong in his beliefs? I don’t know the man, so I can’t say.

Is refusing to follow a directive the same as refusing to follow an order on the fire ground?

Many would argue that it is, but it’s because it points towards a breakdown in the command structure; one that leads to the very heart of getting the job done.

As a former chief, I might look at this as an affront to my authority and as an act of disrespect.

However; respect in this case should have come early on when the issue should have been resolved internally with better discretion used when decorating the outside of lockers. That would include respect for each other and respect for those who makes decisions.

Regardless; now that the whole nation is watching, more decisions will have to be made that will leave all sides on the losing end.

And in the end, personal choices and personal liberties will shrink even further; all because common sense was missing from the equation.

Here are links to related reading:

http://www.firefighternation.com/forum/topics/pennsylvania-firefighter

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/local/20091016_Chester_City_firefighter_suspended_over_decal.html

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/pennsylvania/20091018_Unrest_over_flag_decal_deepens_in_Chester.html

http://www.iaff1400.org/

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,568221,00.html

http://www.myfoxphilly.com/dpp/news/local_news/101609_Firefighter_Suspended_Over_American_Flag_Sticker_On_Locker

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/local/pa/20091018_Unrest_over_flag_decal_deepens_in_Chester.html 

TCSS.

Art

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

Posted by chiefreason on October 18, 2009 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , , , , , ,

West Virginia-Hotbed for Arson

No comments

I’ve got to tell you; this revelation coming out of West Virginia (http://www.dailymail.com/News/200910130853) has definitely caught my attention.

I have been watching firefighter arsonist cases for several years and never have I seen such a glaring, isolated trend.

When THIRTY firefighters have been arrested and charged with arson just in the last year in of all places, West Virginia; you have to wonder if the cops in that state are very good at their investigations or is the rest of the country derelict, under-reporting cases or just plain ignoring what looks like a growing problem?

Firefighters who set fires are a very disturbing crime indeed. There is no reason that is rational and no excuse that is reasonable for a firefighter to violate their sacred oath to protect their communities in their times of need.

I liken a firefighter who sets fires to putting a vampire in charge of the blood bank.

Is there a desire that lies deep within a firefighters’ subconscious that needs fires?

If the potential to cross the line and set fires exists, then what keeps the majority of firefighters from crossing that line?

If “boredom”-often cited as a reason for a firefighter to set fires-is a symptom, then is heavy call volume the cure?

Were a firefighter not a firefighter, would he be an arsonist, nonetheless?

What tools exist TODAY that would screen out potential arsonists? The obvious one is criminal background checks, but it won’t unlock the juvenile file, where early fire-setting might be indicated.

Is there a psychological exam designed specifically to address potential arsonist tendencies in a candidate?

Ladies and gentlemen; my questions are not rhetorical. I am looking for answers.

You can search out many discussion boards on the various firefighter websites and you will find discussions on the topic of firefighter arsonists.

Firefighter arson creates a public relations nightmare for the fire department, but the real damage is to the public’s trust for the ones that they trust the most-firefighters.

The fear factor is off the charts as the fires are set-one; then another. An entire community will not sleep until the arsonist(s) is caught.

But, that is only the beginning of the fear, if it is a firefighter(s) who is caught. The fear will continue and often morph into mistrust in an entire fire department. Will it ever go away or will it continue forever?

It will continue, because somewhere; another firefighter will be arrested for arson and those communities who have suffered similarly will re-live it again and again…wondering if it will happen to their community again.

That is why we must stop it before it starts.

We can’t allow it to happen. But how?

If a cop is convicted of a crime, such as domestic violence, they can no longer possess a firearm; essentially ending their law enforcement career.

Likewise, if a firefighter is convicted of a crime such as arson, they should never be allowed to be a firefighter again.

However; if the horse is already out of the barn, then the damage is already done. We have many punishments and programs once a criminal is convicted of a crime. Where are the programs designed to keep them from committing the crime in the first place? You know; there is only so much Mom and Dad can do with regards to shaping their children’s’ personalities.

Will a firefighter be given the opportunity to set another fire because due diligence wasn’t done, because a department wouldn’t conduct a thorough background check, question “nomadic” tendencies or connect the dots between a spotty work record and a meaningful, oral interview?

Will a “gut feeling” be sufficient?

If the problem in West Virginia is any indication, then our national fire service is in for some very rough times.

We need to fix it now…for the sake of the good men and women who serve and the communities that they have sworn to protect.

Here is some related reading:  

http://www.firefighternation.com/profiles/blogs/the-abcs-of-arson

http://www.firefighternation.com/profiles/blogs/889755:BlogPost:440973

http://www.firefighternation.com/profiles/blogs/889755:BlogPost:318771

http://thewatchdesk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=42772

TCSS.

Art

This article is protected by federal copyright laws. It cannot be reproduced in any form without the expressed permission of the author

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

LODD? Not So Fast!

1 comment

I have found it increasingly confusing when looking for the hard/fast LODD number. I don’t have this macabre fascination with firefighter deaths, but I look at the reports to find trends that indicate that we are moving in the right direction in reducing the number of LODDs.

 

If you look at Firefighter Fatalities in the United States-2008 that was released in July of this year by the NFPA, there were 103 LODDs in 2008. Their definition of on-duty deaths is as follows:

 

Each year, NFPA collects data on all firefighter fatalities in the U.S. that resulted from injuries or

illnesses that occurred while the victims were on-duty. The term on-duty refers to being at the scene of

an alarm, whether a fire or non-fire incident; while responding to or returning from an alarm; while

participating in other fire department duties such as training, maintenance, public education, inspection,

investigation, court testimony or fund raising; and being on call or stand-by for assignment at a location

Firefighter Fatalities in the U.S., 7/09 2 NFPA Fire Analysis and Research, Quincy, MA.

other than at the firefighter’s home or place of business.

On-duty fatalities include any injury sustained in the line of duty that proves fatal, any illness

that was incurred as a result of actions while on duty that proves fatal, and fatal mishaps involving nonemergency

occupational hazards that occur while on duty. The types of injuries included in the first

category are mainly those that occur at a fire or other emergency incident scene, in training, or in crashes

while responding to or returning from alarms. Illnesses (including heart attacks) are included when the

exposure or onset of symptoms occurred during a specific incident or on-duty activity.

The victims include members of local career and volunteer fire departments; seasonal, full-time

and contract employees of state and federal agencies who have fire suppression responsibilities as part

of their job description; prison inmates serving on firefighting crews; military personnel performing

assigned fire suppression activities; civilian firefighters working at military installations; and members

of industrial fire brigades.

Fatal injuries and illnesses are included even in cases where death is considerably delayed.

 

If you look at Firefighter Fatalities in the United States in 2008 that was released in September of this year by the USFA, there were 107 LODDs in 2008. However; an additional 11 fatalities qualified under the Hometown Heroes Survivor’s Benefit Act, bringing the 2008 total to 118. Their definition of on-duty deaths is as follows:

 

On-duty fatalities include any injury or illness sustained while on duty that proves fatal. The term “on-duty” refers to being involved in operations at the scene of an emergency, whether it is a fire or non-fire incident; responding to or returning from an incident; performing other officially assigned duties such as training, maintenance, public education, inspection, investigations, court testimony, and fundraising; and being on-call, under orders, or on standby duty except at the individual’s home or place of business. An individual who experiences a heart attack or other fatal injury at home while he or she prepares to respond to an emergency is considered on-duty when the response begins. A firefighter that becomes ill while performing fire department duties and suffers a heart attack shortly after arriving home or at another location may be considered on-duty since the inception of the heart attack occurred while the firefighter was on duty.

On December 15, 2003, the President of the United States signed into law the Hometown Heroes Survivors Benefit Act of 2003. After being signed by the President, the Act became Public Law 108-182. The law presumes that a heart attack or stroke are in the line of duty if the firefighter was engaged in non-routine stressful or strenuous physical activity while on duty and the firefighter becomes ill while on duty or within 24 hours after engaging in such activity.

The inclusion criteria for this study have been impacted by this change in the law. Previous to December 15, 2003, firefighters who became ill as the result of a heart attack or stroke after going off duty needed to register some complaint of not feeling well while still on duty in order to be included in this study. For firefighter fatalities after December 15, 2003, firefighters will be included in this study if they become ill as the result of a heart attack or stroke within 24 hours of a training activity or emergency response. Firefighters who become ill after going off duty where the activities while on duty were limited to tasks that did not involve physical or mental stress will not be included in this study.

A fatality may be caused directly by an accidental or intentional injury in either emergency or nonemergency circumstances, or it may be attributed to an occupationally related fatal illness. A common example of a fatal illness incurred on duty is a heart attack. Fatalities attributed to occupational illnesses would also include a communicable disease contracted while on duty that proved fatal when the disease could be attributed to a documented occupational exposure.

Firefighter fatalities are included in this report even when death is considerably delayed after the original incident. When the incident and the death occur in different years, the analysis counts the fatality as having occurred in the year in which the incident took place. One firefighter died in 2008 from injuries sustained in a 1999 incident, bringing that year’s total to 114. Information about this death in Massachusetts is included in Appendix A of this report.

There is no established mechanism for identifying fatalities that result from illnesses such as cancer that develop over long periods of time and which may be related to occupational exposure to hazardous materials or toxic products of combustion. It has proved to be very difficult over the years to provide a complete evaluation of an occupational illness as a causal factor in firefighter deaths due to the following limitations: the exposure of firefighters to toxic hazards is not sufficiently tracked; the often delayed long-term effects of such toxic hazard exposures; and the exposures firefighters may receive while off duty.

 

So, as you can see, since December of 2003, the number of fatalities and what constitutes an LODD has changed. What does it mean? It means that, if you quote NFPA, there were 103 LODDs in 2008. If you quote USFA, there were 107 LODDs in 2008 and if you include criteria for HHSBA, there were 118 LODDs in 2008.

 

For me, the failure to draw statistical data from ONE source and especially where just one fatality can skew the results is disconcerting. And when discussing LODD, if you are looking at whether programs are helping to bring the number down, you might cite the lower number, but where you are arguing that more needs to be done, you may cite the higher number. If everyone is quoting the same source of information, then there can be no confusion.

 

In closing, I would like to invite everyone to re-visit Bill Carey’s article that was written earlier this year: http://www.firefighternation.com/profiles/blogs/2009-lodd-6month-summary-1

 

And I would like to point to a couple of interesting stats in the NFPA report for 2008 fatalities:

 

First, heart attacks in 2008 accounted for 41% of all career FF LODDs. Heart attacks in 2008 accounted for 52% of all volunteer FF LODDs.

 

Age groups – Career (21-25) 1 LODD; (61-65) 1 LODD; (66-70) 0 LODD; (over 70) 0 LODD.

Volunteer (21-25) 8 LODD; (61-65) 6 LODD; (66-70) 4 LODD; (over 70) 8 LODD.

 

Years of service – Career (5 or less) 4 LODD; (over 30) 2 LODD.

Volunteer (5 or less) 19 LODD; (over 30) 13 LODD.

 

If you read the reports, you may find information that will change the way that you recruit, retain and train your firefighters. We might very well find ourselves facing tough questions and tough decisions down the road if we want to continue our services.

 

If we truly believe that we learn from our mistakes, then the empirical data that we review and choose to ignore isn’t a “mistake”; it’s a crime.

 

We need to get it right.

 

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

Posted by chiefreason on September 28, 2009 • Filed under: Miscellaneous • Tagged: , , , ,

Dare To Be Different!

No comments

 What gives any of us the right to feel or believe that we are entitled to be called a firefighter?

 

For some of us, we have held a steady job, been married, are raising children, are helping with community projects in our small, rather rural communities and all the while, we have been thinking about joining the local fire department to help out…so we do!

 

We are interviewed, accepted and are issued gear, along with a pager. Does this entitle us to call ourselves “firefighter” or to be regarded by others as a firefighter?

 

For others, getting on a paid fire department has been in the family for four generations and has been your childhood dream. It’s never been an option; it has been your destiny. Your goal is to serve in a large city where history has been witness to some monumental fires and extraordinary firefighters.

 

We get our name on the hiring list, go through the testing including CPAT, complete our interview and get confirmation that we have been hired. Does this entitle us to call ourselves “firefighter” or to be regarded by others as a firefighter?

 

It occurs to me after joining this website that there is a “Who’s Who” of current and former firefighters who are offering up a plethora of information on a wide range of subject matter. The training articles are second to none and the authors are likewise. The author’s style and tone of their articles do not discriminate nor differentiate between career, paid on call or volunteer firefighters. It is information that anyone who wants to improve their skills as a firefighter can do so. Do you think the authors of the blogs, news articles or training articles even care about what TYPE of firefighter you are? Oh sure; there will be articles on rural water supply that may only apply to a rural, volunteer department, but on the flip side, you will see articles on aerial truck operations that are interesting to guys like me, but are targeting metro firefighters. We can’t leave out our friends in wildland firefighting. They engage in some highly specialized tactics that warrant their own niche as well.

 

Did I say “type of firefighter”? I certainly did.

 

All MEN/WOMEN are created equal. Firefighters are NOT!

 

This may be contrary to what you believe or have been told, but it is an educated opinion that is supported by years of personal observation. We have seen nicely choreographed illustrations from authors who have been on both sides of the spectrum. They have been career firefighters who have gone on to volunteer. We have also seen the other swing where volunteer firefighters have become career. In both cases, the firefighter is taking SOMETHING from where they came to where they’re going. It might just be oodles of experience and the respect that experience will earn you with your peers.

 

Why does it matter so much to want respect or acknowledgement or acceptance from people that you don’t even know? Why would you presume to even EXPECT respect from someone that you don’t know, because isn’t one of the pillars of respect built on knowing the person? In my mind, you are being disrespectful by immediately wanting respect simply because you are on a fire department. When these people have not seen us perform our tasks, then how can we expect them to measure us all the way to a level of respect? We can’t and we shouldn’t, because it is wrong and very frustrating for those who don’t understand.

 

And on the other side of the coin, how can we say that we are the SAME as they are if we haven’t seen them perform their tasks, which are only in our realm of basic skills until they go to academy and start riding the trucks. It changes right then and there. We are no longer the same. Numbers of calls and time spent in classes and training cans DOES change all of that.

 

For me, it has never been about puffing my chest out around the paid guys. When I got my FF II certification, I knew that I was better for taking the training, but didn’t bother to gauge it against a career firefighter. It didn’t occur to me and frankly, it didn’t matter. I was trying to raise the bar for our fire department. As we progressed, so did respect between us, because we realized that our training would help hone our skills and keep us sharp. Respect could be measured in the amount of training that you did or didn’t do.

 

And with regards to training outside of the department with other departments? It was done with the intentions of LEARNING and not whether career guys were busting on us. It was about doing it right or doing it wrong and having to do it again. And if you had to do it again, then you shouldn’t complain that you were being picked on, but rather, shut up and do it right. What; because you are in turnout gear, you are entitled to get a free pass? You think that’s respect?

 

I want to see an end to the career/vollie debate. We all know what we are capable of doing. We know if we have the right to call ourselves “firefighters” and to have the privilege to wear the gear and to serve our communities. We cannot take anything for granted; least of all training and our interactions with other departments on a mass incident.

 

As far as respect?

 

Worry about getting it from your kids, your fire department and your community first. That should be all that matters anyway.

 

Then, you can look at how you measure up with others who are in the fire service. Use it to weigh your strengths and weaknesses, then share your strengths and strengthen your weaknesses. If you set out like you have nothing to prove and conduct yourself with a reserved and quiet humility, respect will sneak up on you before you know it. You may not hear it, but you WILL feel it.

 

Ask yourself if you want to be the same as all of the other firefighters or do you want to be different?

 

Dare to be different!

 

Tell yourself that you’re entitled to pursue the possibilities that exist in becoming the best firefighter that you can be for your family and your community.

 

Respect the honor, tradition, history and the dangers associated with firefighting.

 

Work on your life-saving skills and forget about saving the world.

 

Study hard and train hard. Word will spread. Respect will grow.

 

There you go; all because you dared to be different!

 

TCSS.

Art

 

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 permission of Art Goodrich aka ChiefReason. Visit me at www.chiefreasonart.com.

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

What Is Learned That Is Not Taught?

No comments

I have read several, recent articles that ponders whether firefighters and their fire departments function better with leaders/managers or strategists/tacticians.

 

There is an axiom out there that says “leaders can manage, but managers can’t lead”.

 

I guess that could happen if you were foolish enough to hire a fire chief with loads of management skills and no firefighting experience. But, in my management training over the years, I found it to be very beneficial to “know the product”.

 

But again, when city governments are scurrying to save money and fill funding gaps, while giving themselves raises, they will “combine” their public safety under one head and here’s a surprise…usually, it WON”T be the fire chief who is the public safety director. Of course, the city manager will tell you that they are the top dog anyway(Note: insert heavy sarcasm here).

 

I happen to be of the opinion that leaders in the fire service cannot rise to that lofty status without first mastering strategy and tactics.

 

After all, you don’t want to sit there like some wide-eyed kid and listen to the discussions on the pros and cons of a good knockdown; you want to LEAD those discussions. When a phenomenon occurs that raises questions in your most experienced people, you want to give them the answer or at least an explanation that leaves them nodding in agreement.

 

But, if you aspire to be a leader, where do you go to acquire the skill set? Which book do you read? Whose class or seminar will you take to emerge as a leader? When will you know that you have become a leader?

 

I have asked some pretty tough questions, eh?

 

I submit to you for your consideration that you CANNOT learn leadership.

 

Now; I have thought about this a lot and I suspect that there are many intangibles that goes into the development of a leader and there it is; leadership is developed; not learned!

 

We all have our personalities. Did we learn that which makes up our personality? Did we learn compassion, charity or our spirit of volunteerism?

 

If we learn to be leaders, then let me ask you this; was the smartest student in your high school class-your valedictorian-the leader of your high school class or was it someone who gave an unforgettable speech at graduation that you soon forgot?

 

Because a leader leaves an impact; an indelible and undeniable, emotional reference point from where you can gather an identifiable link to your character and LEADERS HAVE CHARACTER!

 

And if you were/are uncomfortable with leadership, then you aren’t there yet.

 

I can almost map my development, starting in the 6th grade. I wanted to be in the Safety Patrol. Today, they call them crossing guards and adults volunteer their time. Back then (1963), kids did it. We got to wear a bright orange belt that went over the shoulder, then around the waist and snapped together. We didn’t have a stop sign, but we had to stand in the middle of the roadway, stop traffic and make it safe for the kids to cross the road. We “led” them to safety.

 

Then, it was on to jr. high school, where our coaches would lead us and look for athletes who were their captains on and off the playing field.

 

I played baseball as a catcher and the catcher was the leader on the field. I had to know the “book” on the opposing team, read scouting reports, know their weaknesses and call the game from behind the plate. I told the pitchers what pitches to throw and set our defense, all the while keeping the heads of teammates “in the game”.

 

Granted; there were many things that I had to learn, but they would have been worthless had I not developed it into a plan to defeat the other team.

 

I fervently believe that my early years-years spent with the opportunity to work with leaders-served me well when I entered the fire service.

 

And let there be no mistake; I have read volumes on management skills and stacks of books on strategies, tactics and yes; leadership.

 

Those books gave me perspective. They established a base of knowledge that I had to develop into workable plans to allow our fire department to execute and to complete our mission.

 

It created a belief in them to believe in me and for me to believe in them. That is what leaders do. They don’t lead the cheers; they lead their people.

 

With that accomplished, you are comfortable with your leadership and it doesn’t matter that your name isn’t spoken alongside the names of other leaders.

 

What matters is that you are respected by your men and women as their leader and that is a trust that is stronger than any binding on a book.

 

That is why I say that you cannot learn what isn’t taught.

 

And the payoff comes when YOUR leadership develops new leaders!

 

TCSS.

Art

 

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

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

Forward Progress on ‘Reverse’ Discrimination

No comments

First of all, I detest the use of the term ‘reverse discrimination’.

 

Why is it that, when a non-white, gay or female believes that they were treated unfairly, it is discrimination?

 

But, when a Caucasian male believes the same, it is reverse discrimination?

 

If we are all created equal and I believe that we are, then how can discrimination be ‘different’ for whites?

 

Where professional, performance-based standards are involved, then shouldn’t the playing field be level for everyone? That is to say that, in the fire service, the multiple tasks required to safely perform the job and their resulting consequences, good and bad are no different for ANYONE. You must force doors, carry hose, rescue people twice your size, scale ladders, wear 40 pounds of gear and an encyclopedia of other tasks; not to mention getting each other out of harm’s way.

 

I sit here befuddled that there hasn’t been more discussion and especially since it has been said the “historically, it has been the common practice of the fire service to discriminate”!

 

Ricci v Destefano was not going to derail Sotomayor’s confirmation for U.S. Supreme Court justice, but it should serve as a reminder to cities who still believe that hiring and promoting to achieve diversity goals by denying the rights of others is neither safe nor smart.

 

There should only be ONE pool of candidates, regardless of race, color, gender or religion. Hiring and promotions should go to the most qualified…period.

 

Before Firefighter Frank Ricci testified at Sotomayor’s confirmation hearing, efforts were made to discredit and lionize him, because this wasn’t Ricci’s first rodeo.

 

In 1995, Ricci sued the City of New Haven, CT for not hiring him, claiming that he wasn’t hired because he told them that he had dyslexia. The suit was settled in 1997 when he was hired by New Haven.

 

In 1998, Ricci filed an appeal to his firing from Middletown’s South Fire District, claiming that it was in retaliation for his investigation of a very controversial fire.

 

In some circles, Ricci was being accused of ‘faking’ his dyslexia to gain advantage.

 

So, why was Ricci being singled out and attacked when Michael Blatchley, Greg Boivin, Gary Carbone, Michael Christoforo, Ryan Divito, Steven Durand, William Gambardella, Brian Jooss, James Kottage, Matthew Marcarelli, Thomas J. Michaels, Sean Patton, Christopher Parker, Edward Riordan, Kevin Roxbee, Timothy Scanlon, Benjamin Vargas, John Vendetto and Mark Vendetto were all parties to the Destefano and City of New Haven lawsuit?

 

Because, if one didn’t take the time to read the record, you could erroneously conclude that he was an opportunist.

 

I think that his personal battles embody the temperament needed to be a firefighter.

 

In fact, I would go so far as to say that Frank Ricci is the “Everyman” of the fire service.

 

He didn’t use his disability (dyslexia) to create an advantage; he succeeded in spite of it.

 

And though much was made of it by those on the left (according to Ricci), I believe that Ricci was raised just like you and I were. I was taught to always fight for what I believed in and if I believed that I was right let nothing change my mind. That’s not to say that it didn’t get me into some trouble from time to time, but I still hold true to that belief to this day.

 

Frank Ricci prevailed each time someone challenged his rights and that is exactly how the justice system is supposed to work.

 

What is troublesome is that we have a U.S. Supreme Court nominee who holds that only minorities can be discriminated against and that somehow, it should provide for certain advantages.

 

I might be wrong, but I thought that the Civil Rights Act and especially Title VII was enacted to eliminate advantages and to allow the disadvantaged equal protection under the law.

 

Sotomayor’s stories of growing up in the Bronx are noteworthy, but far from extraordinary. It should be the center of her humility, but in no way should it serve as her perspective in matters that come before the court, because if she doesn’t know it by now, there are a lot of “Frank Riccis” out there!

 

I am not interested in her making history.

 

I am only interested in her making good decisions with regards to the law.

 

The fire service must continue to test to performance and resist grading “on the curve”.

 

Where lives depend upon having the most qualified firefighters, there is no room for social experiments.

 

And to those of you who are reading this and fail to see how Sotomayor may impact our fire service in the future?

 

Two things, in my opinion: 1) She didn’t appreciate the smack down from the Supreme Court on her decision to deny a rehearing in Ricci v Destefano and 2) She will rise up against the fire service that has “historically engaged in discrimination”.

 

Remember; you read it here first!

 

Here are some relevant links: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/71660.html

 

http://www.slate.com/id/2222087/

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090629/ap_on_go_su_co/us_supreme_court_firefighters_lawsuit

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/16/AR2009071603090.html?wprss=rss_politics

 

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/08pdf/07-1428.pdf

 

TCSS.

 

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

Posted by chiefreason on July 18, 2009 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , ,

FIRE Act; Time to Cut and Run?

No comments

After reading Mike Ward’s latest blog and an article that he highlighted (http://www.heritage.org/Research/Economy/upload/wm_2499.pdf), the little guy in my head got busy.

 

First of all, I am one of those who have felt strongly that fire departments should be a local issue. I have never held that local fire departments should be subsidized by the federal government because as we have seen with the “stimulus” money, the money comes with strings attached.

 

But, like so many others, I feel that, if my tax dollars are going to pay for someone else’s fire department, then I might as well be one of those other fire departments.

 

When FIRE Act first hit the scene in 2001, I honestly thought that our most destitute departments would be getting money.

 

Then, when I read down the names of successful fire departments, it read like a “who’s who”. Many names did not strike me as “destitute”.

 

I inquired and was told that it was a “competitive” grant. Oh, so if I can find the winning combination of data and blah-blah, I could ‘win’ a grant?

 

So far, we have only been successful in 2007. The funny thing is that we were awarded a grant for (12) SCBAs. Last year, we applied for the air compressor to fill them and were rejected. It doesn’t make any sense, but I digress.

 

Again, though I feel that funding should be a local issue, I have to take exception to Muhlhausen’s reasoning for discontinuing the program.

 

It is his contention that the program be ended because it has not reduced civilian and firefighter injuries or deaths. That isn’t exactly true and it would depend on whose data you use.

 

I found a study at the FEMA website that captures this information. NFPA and NIOSH are slightly different with their totals.

 

Muhlhausen might have a valid point were it not for the fact that heart attacks have been and continues to be the #1 killer of firefighters. From 2001 – 2007, heart attacks accounted for 48% of all firefighter fatalities.

 

Let’s compare 2001-the first year of the Act-to 2007.

 

In 2001, there were 1,734,500 fires; 3,745 civilian deaths; 20,300 civilian injuries; $10.5 billion in property losses; 105 firefighter deaths and 41,395 firefighter injuries. Note that 2001 doesn’t reflect the events of the 9/11 attacks.

 

In 2007, there were 1,557,500 fires; 3,430 civilian deaths; 17,675 civilian injuries; $14.6 billion in property losses; 118 firefighter deaths and 38,340 firefighter injuries.

 

If you average the years (2001 – 2006), you would see that: prior to 2007, we averaged 1,633,583 fires; 3,645 civilian deaths; 18,175 civilian injuries; $10.8 billion in property losses; 110 firefighter deaths and 40,057 firefighter injuries.

 

In 2007, by category, there was a 5% decrease in the number of fires; 6% decrease in civilian deaths; 3% decrease in civilian injuries; 26% increase in property losses; 7% increase in firefighter deaths and 4% decrease in firefighter injuries.

 

So, Muhlhausen’s conclusion that the FIRE Act program has not reduced fire casualties is not accurate and is not consistent with the program’s original, stated purpose.

 

In addition, Muhlhausen’s conclusion that the FIRE Act program is ineffective is flawed, because, clearly, he hasn’t spoken to the departments who have gotten the grant.

 

Though I don’t believe that the program is ineffective, it is certainly somewhat frustrating because you are not provided with an explanation as to why your grant application was denied. Were we to know that, it would enhance our chances of writing a more compelling grant and improve our chances of being successful.

 

What is clear after you read Muhlhausen’s article is that you cannot rest a decision to discontinue the program upon numbers alone.

 

How is it that you can look at FIRE Act and see the difference that it has made to local fire departments and believe that the money given to banks, insurance companies and car companies will make them more “effective”?

 

Don’t be ridiculous!

 

TCSS.

Art

 

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

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

The ABCs of Arson

No comments

There have been several, excellent blogs posted recently on timely topics, but I just can’t seem to get past the whole “firefighter as arsonist” issue. It simply blows my mind as to how anyone in such a strong position of public trust could intentionally set a fire.

 

There have been a couple of recent arson cases that provoked me into delving further into the reasons firefighters set fires.

 

So, I went on an Internet search for some fresh information and I found a very compelling white paper written by the Forensic Psychology Practice LTD of the Willows Clinic in Great Britain.

 

However; the report was written in 1999! But, I was taken by its timeless relevance and its precision in breaking down the behavior of fire-setting.

 

After reading the report, my concern is this: do firefighters start setting fires AFTER they become firefighters OR had they set fires while growing up and continued their propensity, using the cover of firefighter to quell suspicions?

 

After all, less than 5% of the arsonists are ever caught and convicted, which might explain why the study of arson is a growing science.

 

Here’s a famous example of one who was never caught: David Berkowitz. The “Son of Sam” serial killer who was caught in 1977 and charged with the murder of Stacy Moskowitz claimed to have set over 2,000 fires in New York City. He told investigators that, as a kid, he wanted to be a FIREFIGHTER! Doesn’t that just about knock your socks off?

 

Here’s my dilemma…I always thought that firefighters who set fires were “different” than your typical arsonist. But, after I read this report, I have changed my mind.

 

More often than not, a firefighter arsonist will say that they set fires “out of boredom”. In other words, they wanted more excitement. A few will say that they wanted to be “heroes”, fewer still will say they did it for money and a very few will say that they did it for self-gratification.

 

Interestingly, arsonists who are not firefighters will tell you the same thing!

 

And in ALL cases, arson was used to solve a problem-real or perceived.

 

A lot has been made of the lack of intelligence of arsonists. Their average IQ is below 70.

 

Really?

 

Then why can’t people with college degrees and years of investigative experience catch them or better yet, screen them out of fire departments?

 

Remember the guy who terrorized the Pacific Northwest, armed with nothing more than a BIC lighter? His name was Paul Keller and it wasn’t the cops who caught him; his dad turned him in! Paul might still be setting fires were it not for dear old Dad.

 

I am of the opinion that many arsonists are smarter than their IQ score would indicate, but were “under-achievers”. Let’s be honest; the more you do a task, the better you should get at it; right?

 

The report recognizes three components, easily remembered by “ABC”-Antecedent (trigger), Behavior and Consequence. When analyzing a firefighter arsonist for instance, “boredom” would be the antecedent (trigger); setting the fire would be the behavior and responding to and fighting the fire would be the consequence. Be careful not to confuse it with “end result”. We all know what the end result can be, but you have to remember that the arsonist doesn’t care about the consequences that are outside of his locus of control.

 

Again; in ALL arson cases, arson is the resolution to a problem; also called “the only viable option theory”. With this approach, arson is a “highly effective means of changing hard-to-tolerate circumstances or conditions”. Is boredom hard to tolerate? In the mind of the arsonist, not going to fires is hard to take. He believes that there is only one way to fix it. So, yes; boredom may trigger fire-setting in firefighters where fires are not an every day occurrence.

 

So, when an arsonist sets a fire, they are only concerned with resolving THEIR problem without regard for the ensuing problems that it may cause their victims.

 

Though they may say that they are remorseful, science says that they are not. With this in mind, no empathy or sympathy should be shown to the arsonist. They will only be remorseful for getting caught!

 

In closing, I would submit to readers that you must use an assessment tool for selecting prospective members or for members that may be suspected of setting fires. Simply conducting a criminal background check might reveal an arson charge, if it was committed as an adult, but remember; juvenile records are sealed. Even then, the charge might not be arson, but is cleverly disguised as criminal mischief, property damage or vandalism. The fact that fire was involved will be buried somewhere deep into the report.

 

Fire-setting has its highest frequency in the 10-25 year-old age group. For many of you, that would encompass your explorer’s group. So, even your candidates for explorer should be screened.

 

You should no apologies for your due diligence, but think about your department’s image should one of your own sets fires.

 

Apologies won’t be nearly enough to the people that you have sworn to protect from the ravages of fire.

 

Make sure that you have conducted a full background history on your people. Watch and listen to them. Are they displaying behavior that indicates pleasure that there is a fire? Do they display anti-social behavior? You need to be vigilant and be prepared to contact professionals if you sense a problem.

 

At least think about it.

 

TCSS.

 

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

Posted by chiefreason on June 2, 2009 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , ,

Ricci Don’t Lose That Number!

No comments

That number would be the number assigned to Frank Ricci’s reverse discrimination lawsuit recently heard by the U.S. Supreme Court (07-1428 & 08-328).

 

Why should this matter, you say?

 

Well for TWO very important reasons: 1) Frank Ricci is a New Haven, CT firefighter and 2) One of the justices (Sonia Sotomayer) who denied his appeal has just been nominated by President Obama to replace the retiring David Souter.

 

We have had many discussions on promotions criteria, leadership, qualities of officers and recognizing who’s best for the job. Many feel that it should be based solely on the most qualified as determined by testing. Many have dismissed diversity initiatives as unnecessary in today’s liberal society. Still, others believe that we are not quite there yet and hiring based on ethnic quotas to achieve equality is still necessary.

 

Please note that while this lawsuit has been going on, the officer positions have been left open and are currently being filled by “acting” officers; some who FAILED the promotions exam!

 

I find it easy to say that everyone should be treated the same and that’s because I am not prejudice or bigoted in my thoughts. In my mind, race/color/religion should never factor into the equation. But, because of our country’s history, fail safes had to be put into place, even at the expense of other race/color/religions. And to me, THAT is discrimination. If we have to discriminate against one group to eliminate discrimination in another group, then we haven’t stopped it; we have perpetuated it. And that is wrong on many levels.

 

In the case of Frank Ricci and 20 other New Haven firefighters; they took a promotional exam in 2003 for (7) Captain positions and (8) Lieutenant positions. Based on the results of the testing, no African-Americans would have been promoted, so the Civil Service Board threw out the tests, because they feared a lawsuit by the African-Americans and Hispanics.

 

It’s interesting to note that the top (15) scores for the Captain’s exam were achieved by (13) whites and (2) Hispanics and the top (15) scores for the Lieutenant’s exam were achieved by (13) whites and (2) African-Americans.

 

So, Frank Ricci filed a lawsuit, based on the idea that he was not promoted because of his race.

The decision by the Supreme Court should come by the end of June.

 

The decision should have a precedent-setting impact on the use of racial quotas for filling positions; then using it for promotions.

 

And as I said; testing should determine the best candidates; period.

 

TCSS.

Art

Posted by chiefreason on May 26, 2009 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , ,

Cultivating a Civilized Approach to Safety

No comments

In Tim Sendelbach’s most recent editorial in the June edition of FireRescue found here http://www.firerescuemagazine.com/fromtheeditor/sendelbach_JUNE2009.html, he speaks to the very essence of effectively “selling” safety to the fire community.

 

With this editorial, I feel that FireRescue’s editor-in-chief clearly establishes the mission of the magazine. His very last statement-“It’s our responsibility to stand strong, unite and make OUR safety PRIORITY No. 1”-emboldens every one of us to take our safety personally!

 

Safety isn’t accomplished by reading the owner’s manual on a piece of equipment. It isn’t accomplished by appointing someone as your “safety” officer. It isn’t accomplished by reading from a list of “dos” and “don’ts”. It isn’t accomplished by putting on a bright yellow vest. It isn’t accomplished by bitching about wearing said vest. It isn’t accomplished by simply saying “be safe” at the end of every meeting. It isn’t accomplished by chance.

 

It can only be accomplished if a specific set of safety guidelines are written, implemented, then enforced EVERY DAY! It will NOT happen any other way.

 

Many are drawn to the fire service because of its “romanticism”; a “good vs. evil” scenario.

 

Bull McCaffery walking from the inferno through the doorway with a young child wrapped by Bull’s right arm in the movie “Backdraft” lends itself to the melo-dramatic side of what we do. And the funeral at the end caps an untimely end to Bull’s career, but the fire never got him! We get it!

 

But, when you watch that movie, you can also see a lot of risk-taking. Was it for “dramatic effect” or was it an accurate depiction? Only the film’s technical advisor knows for sure!

 

Many of us operate under a risk assessment policy that says “risk a lot to save a lot”, but we also understand that it is a very carefully calculated one as well.

 

Firefighters are NOT an asset or a commodity where their personal safety is at risk. Therefore; it is unacceptable should they be seriously injured or die in the line of duty.

 

We don’t risk death because the public “expects” it. That, I’m afraid, is where we are caught up in the romanticism of what we do.

 

No one that I have ever spoken to on the subject have said that they “expect” us to die to save their property. At least; they wouldn’t admit it.

 

But, WE-the fire service-have promoted this notion for decades. We have gone into structures for years without regard to their structural integrity, because “that is what we do”. Getting inside and fighting the fire on its turf is easier but not necessarily “better”.

 

In fact, just recently, it was stated that we have put ourselves first and the citizens that we have sworn to serve second. Another said that we should risk “everything” for our citizens.

 

Why? Because it’s “expected”?

 

So as not to create another controversy, suffice it to say that I believe that we can serve our citizens, reduce the number of LODDs and integrate safety into everything that we do.

 

Why can’t we simply treat safety with the same respect and urgency that we do for confined space, technical rescue or hazmat and apply that attitude to the firefighting component? Look at all of the safety requirements of the components that I mention and I have to ask why we can’t do the same for driving apparatus, wearing seatbelts, sizing up a building and fire conditions and yes; even our wellness/fitness.

 

While we argue for better presumptive illness legislation, we continue to clog our arteries with fatty foods and fill our lungs with the smoke from menthol Marlboros.

 

We are not “fighting the beast” or “slaying the dragon”, but it IS a little more complicated than simply “putting the wet stuff on the red stuff”. We need to inject the safety components into mitigating the chemical chain reaction caused by heat, fuel and oxygen.

 

We can do so while fulfilling our mission to our citizens and doing it as safely as possible.

 

And Tim nailed it in his editorial.

 

Following the 16 Life Safety Initiatives is an excellent place to start!

Posted by chiefreason on May 22, 2009 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , ,

Brother/Sisterhood: Illusion or Elusive?

No comments

First of all, I am not going to the dictionary to define “brother/sisterhood.

 

For one thing, it would not adequately capture the essence of the deep feelings for what is the core of brother/sisterhood as it applies to the fire service and I believe that, as a nation of firefighters, we are still defining it.

 

For over a quarter of a century, I have been studying what exactly it means to be in the  brother/sisterhood.

 

Dylan Thomas, the renowned Welsh poet, wrote an amusing piece about brotherhood. He stated that he built a snowman, his brother knocked it down, he knocked his brother down and then they had tea! A simple but workable description of brotherhood, but I believe that it goes deeper.

 

Does brother/sisterhood only exist in the fire service? If not, then why don’t we hear doctors, nurses, teachers, business executives, politicians or electricians talk about their professions in such terms?

 

Wait; there IS the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW), but is our brother/sisterhood on the same plane as the electricians?

 

One only has to look at the funerals to know that they are NOT the same.

 

Yes; the funerals! When we see the videos and photos of the apparatus, the flags, honor guards, the sea of dress uniforms and the bagpipers, it is this congress of comrades that is the epitome of what is the brother/sisterhood. As we struggle to bury one of our own, we are one and the same.

 

And it would seem that we gather our strength from this very emotional moment in our lives and take it to heart and make it a part of our every day lives.

 

People who are unfamiliar with this phenomenon will often ask why so many of us come from all over the country to say good-bye to a fallen brother/sister that we didn’t even know.

 

Our answer? Because THAT’S the brother/sisterhood!

 

How is it, then, that we don’t hear the same pronouncement when a brother/sister “knocks down the snowman”, so to speak? Are we picking and choosing when we invoke it?

 

Granted; a firefighter funeral and a malicious act committed by a firefighter are on completely opposite ends of the spectrum-that is quite obvious. In fact; some would argue that the two examples don’t even belong in the same sentence, but when we talk of brother/sisterhood, is it humanly possible to feel our compassion for someone who has committed a malicious and selfish act and not a selfless act?

 

In our country, everyone is considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, but in the case of a public servant; once the headline is plastered all over the news outlets, we are guilty until proven innocent in the court of public opinion.

 

Our outpouring from the brother/sisterhood will be split between those who believe that we should remain silent until we know all of the facts and those who feel compelled to state their opinion based upon what we know at the moment.

 

Often, “brother/sisterhood” will be invoked like the hard swing of a hammer in an effort to suppress discussion. It is said with an air of indignant exclamation. Is it because the brother/sisterhood only wants to recognize and acknowledge whatever produces a positive image? Some might think so.

 

I have heard, How can you judge a brother/sister when you don’t know all the facts? Some brother/sisterhood!

 

When the discussions fire up, it is often triggered by a news report. Firefighters weigh in and many will preface their remarks with “if”, “alleged” or “in giving them the benefit of the doubt”. I do it in that manner, because we ARE innocent until proven guilty, I am giving the brother/sister the benefit of the doubt and in the end, I am showing respect for the brother/sisterhood.

 

But others will reply in a tone and manner that has the brother/sister as already guilty. However; they are also entitled to their opinion, however misguided or premature, because they are of the brother/sisterhood.

 

The brother/sisterhood of the nation’s fire service is not a nation of lemmings. We do not have one leader leading us all in the same direction with the same principles and goals. Many cultures diverge into one, common cause that calls for us to act, but we don’t all take the same path and we don’t all get the same results.

 

There are departments that are better than others; no question about it, but does “better” define who is and who isn’t in the brother/sisterhood? If the under-manned and under-funded departments are moving forward in the face of adversity to provide their services, guided by the principles in our call to duty, are they any less worthy?

 

Is the brother/sister who gets straight A’s in school kept in the family and the one who struggles to barely pass kicked out or as a family-as a brother/sisterhood-do we work with and help the ones who struggle so that they can become stronger, which will build a stronger brother/sisterhood? I would like to think so.

 

So; what defines our brother/sisterhood?

 

Edwin Markham wrote: There is a destiny that makes us brothers: None goes his way alone: All that we send into the lives of others Comes back onto our own.

 

Is it our willingness to help our friends, neighbors and total strangers?

 

Is it the way that we think?

 

Is it the way that we dress?

 

Is it strengthening our bodies and battle plans or letting complacency weaken our purpose and preparedness?

 

Is it what we agree on or is it that we can bridge the differences?

 

Is it the good and the bad, but accepting neither as the best that we can do?

 

Is it trusting your life to someone else or trusting your judgment that you can?

 

Is it treating everyone with some respect until it becomes clear that they deserve more or less or NONE?

 

Is it basing our conclusions on the here and now without regard for our history and traditions?

 

Is it searching for a redeeming quality or a reason to give up?

 

Is it an excuse or a mandate to fix a problem?

 

Is it overcoming the black eyes caused by lapses in judgment or living with the scars, both physical and emotional, in a society that fixates on perfection?

 

When we make our decisions, both personal and professional, it must be done with our family of brothers and sisters in mind. When it is not, then we have turned our backs on the brother/sisterhood and have consciously or unconsciously “left” the brother/sisterhood. That separation is necessary to preserve the integrity of the brother/sisterhood and to respect our predecessors’ founding principles.

 

Regardless, the brother/sisterhood moves forward with the strength of the battle-tested veterans and the promise of a bright future from the new ones.

 

And the brother/sisterhood will not only survive, but will evolve even further.

 

Michael Joseph Barry wrote: But whether on the scaffold high or in the battle’s van, the fittest place where Man can die is where he dies for Man.

 

Defining the brother/sisterhood in a sentence, sound byte or even a single act will remain elusive, but we know that it’s real and that it isn’t an illusion.

 

I want to thank everyone who reads my meanderings and I hope that I have given you something to think about.

 

TCSS.

 

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

Posted by chiefreason on April 10, 2009 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , ,

Your Back Up May Be Your Attorney

No comments

“Firefighter Injured In 2006 Blaze Sues Department, Other Firefighters”.

 

You want a headline that grabs your attention, but lets go at some point after reading the story.

 

Since reading this story, I can’t let it go; it won’t let me go.

 

Suing your fellow firefighter has existed in the state of Illinois for several years. An attorney who specializes in fire district law told us that we could be sued if we hurt another firefighter.

 

Prior to the law, we enjoyed a certain “tort immunity”, but also, a lawsuit crazy culture didn’t exist back then. Firefighters suing firefighters; firefighters suing fire departments JUST DIDN”T HAPPEN! I struggle with the logic and motivation behind such a lawsuit.

 

My first thought after reading the article was: “wow; this person should be a chief”. I thought this because the claims in the case are so articulate. That is; she is so detailed on the causes for her injuries. Maybe she is receiving some good coaching. As an example, Schuenke stated: “…that Corbin was mismanaging the fire scene, had lost control of the fire scene, and was exposing firefighters…to a heightened and unreasonable risk of danger. The two (University City Assistant Chief and the Battalion Chief) should have removed Corbin as incident commander”, the suit says.

 

So, I am sitting here wondering how Schuenke knew incident command was “mismanaged” when she was engaged in the activities resulting from those “mismanaged” decisions.

 

Or, are she and her team of attorneys “assuming” that, because she was injured, it HAD to be the result of a bad decision by someone else?

 

Or, (I feel like Sherlock Holmes) is there a “forensic expert” or clairvoyant who could accurately “re-construct” down to the most miniscule detail of the events of that day?

 

It is unfortunate that something went terribly wrong and she was injured. Her crew was ordered to enter the house. It would be her team’s decision making from that point forward. They have interior command in my book. If it is not safe, THEY would decide to exit.

 

Also, you would sound the floor and move cautiously and deliberately and look for signs of trouble. Schuenke claims that her gloves didn’t fit properly, which is why her glove pulled off when Yahnke tried to pull her up through the hole in the floor. She removed her other glove to free her trapped foot. Both hands and a foot were severely burnt as a result.

 

I don’t know if it’s accurate or reasonable for her attorney to claim that: “This young lady is never going to be made whole. All the money in the world isn’t going to restore her to what she was before. She lost a career, and her life will be forever changed”.

 

While Schuenke was still in the hospital, she did an interview where she stated that no one helped her and left her for dead. Some close to the case believed that she was hinting at a possible lawsuit then.

 

But, I believe that the decision to sue came after Community Fire Protection District ended her employment.

 

In my mind, the lawsuit is filled with emotion, bitterness, retaliation and is void of any personal accountability on her part.

 

Why do I say that?

 

Because in her lawsuit, she names three (3) fire departments and five (5) firefighters specifically for not keeping her from being injured.

 

She is also suing the maker of her PASS device, because it didn’t alert rescuers to her predicament and location, even though firefighters DID know her predicament and location as soon as she fell through the floor.

 

There is no doubt that this is a sad case. I wasn’t there. I can only base my opinions on what I have read.

 

When you think about it, consider this: Schuenke is suing because she wanted to return to the Community Fire Protection District as a firefighter/paramedic and they terminated her. If, as she says, it’s her life and she wants to get back to it, then why is her lawsuit and her attorney saying that her career and her life as she knows it is over?

 

How else could they rationalize the lawsuit that isn’t about money?

 

I submit that, whenever lawyers and money are involved, then it’s about the money. Without knowing the amount being requested in the lawsuit, the worst case scenario is that it could bankrupt three (3) fire departments and five (5) individuals, even though her injuries were unintentional. That is; they were not inflicted with intent by any one person specifically through their actions or inactions, in my opinion.

 

I don’t know what kind of scene size up was done, what the conditions were when firefighters entered the structure or what SOGs and MA agreements dictated.

 

I only know that a lawsuit of this type could set off a chain of events that will bankrupt fire departments and paralyze even more fire departments, if firefighters are suing each other and their mutual aid partners.

 

I believe that this lawsuit was filed out of bitterness and retaliation. The money is a given (attorneys, you know?).

 

Unfortunately, the department that fired her wasn’t named in the lawsuit! How weird is that?

 

This case will bear close scrutiny. I am not taking any bets on its outcome.

 

I wish everyone involved the best of luck.

 

TCSS.

 

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

Posted by chiefreason on April 5, 2009 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , ,

The Body Won’t Do What the Mind Tells It To!

No comments

As we get older, we find ourselves saying that we can’t do some of the things we could do when we were younger because the body won’t let us.

 

Younger firefighters who haven’t yet challenged themselves aren’t sure if they can get their bodies to do what this job sometimes requires it to do.

 

Others simply choose not to for their own, personal reasons. These are usually the ones who had no idea of the mental and physical toll that fire/rescue can have on you. They will get out early.

 

But my article is about something else. It is about those who unexpectedly find themselves stricken with a medical condition that robs them of a normal existence in our very chaotic world.

 

A good friend of mine has a firefighter who is battling cancer with the help of an entire nation’s fire community. Davey and his department are making certain that this battle will be fought with the support of his brothers and sisters.

 

A little over a year ago, Bob Juarez of the Davenport, IA FD fell twenty feet from a ladder at the scene of a working fire and is now paralyzed from the waist down. The outpouring of support has been phenomenal. Bob is now working in Administration for the fire department.

 

I have a story about one of our members.

 

Matt was diagnosed with Primary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis (PPMS) towards the end of 2004. With this type of MS, there are no periods of remission. It is also characterized by gradual progression. There may be periods of leveling off of disease activity and there will be good/bad days. This type also attacks the spinal cord but will migrate to the brain. Primary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis affects 10 to 15 percent of all MS patients.

 

I was chief of department when Matt got on in 1995. He came to us from another department, so I asked that chief about Matt. He told me that Matt was a real “cowboy” and to keep an eye on him.

 

Well, I kept an eye on Matt and what I saw was someone totally committed to our cause, someone who would hump hose, overhaul and clean up when we got back into quarters. He helped out at every fundraiser that we held. He made all of the meetings and was in the top ten for training hours every year. We took a couple of road trips together and if you didn’t know how to take him, you might think that he was opinionated. He was one of our work horses.

 

That’s why it is so emotional for me to see how this disease is taking that away from him. His motor skills have rapidly disappeared. It was very subtle in the beginning; almost undetectable. He would get up from sitting and would have to steady himself before walking. He would often walk near a wall or objects to steady himself as he walked. The tremors that now shake his body were small ones in the beginning. They resembled muscle “spasms”, so there was little concern in the beginning. He takes many medications, when the state authorizes the prescriptions and we all know how frustrating that can be.

 

From there, Matt had to use a cane and then a walker.

 

Now; Matt has an electric wheelchair. He is pretty much homebound in bad weather, but will get out in good weather and travel about town in his wheelchair.

Last year, some of the guys from the fire department went to his house and built him a wheelchair ramp.

 

Matt is not married and lives with his two little dogs, Billy and Darla.

 

To insure that Matt gets at least one, nutritional meal a day, several members of the department are on a monthly calendar to take him a meal. This also allows Matt to receive visitors to keep in touch on a social level. I am proud to say that the younger firefighters are participating as well as the ones who have been with Matt since he got on the department.

 

We participate in a firefighter golf outing every year and Matt is taken as a member of the chief’s team. Matt might get to hit a ball or two, but he will mostly just ride along and enjoy the day and the camaraderie of the many firefighters.

I know that it is killing him that he can’t be more active, but he is going to remain with us, because the support is what he needs.

 

In February, 2006, we staged a benefit for Matt; not so much to raise money, though he needed it, but more to let him know that we love him, support him and will be with him always. He loves being a firefighter and in my mind, he always will be.

 

I sent out a request via the Internet to the fire community and asked for patches and notes of encouragement. The response was overwhelming. I had my sister make a quilt for him from the 200 plus patches that we received. A picture of the quilt is on my home page at FFN.

 

On the day of the benefit, I had firefighters come from as far away as Canada, Ohio, Iowa, Indiana and all over Illinois. It was amazing. THAT is brotherhood!

 

I know that we have held discussions about unproductive members. I know that many of us have definite opinions about some who will not rise to their potential and meet expectations, though they do not suffer from a debilitating disease and only suffer from laziness, a lack of motivation or indifference.

 

But, what would you do if you had to live as Matt does, knowing the mind won’t let your body do what you want it to do anymore? To never know when the tremors will come, the muscles will let go and to wake up and not know if it will be a “good” day or a bad one?

 

And all the while wanting to turn the clock back to a day when you could ride the truck, grab a hose, cut a top off of a car,  play a round of golf with the guys and just be “normal” again.

 

When you have been given God’s gift of good health and an opportunity to serve your community, why would you want to waste it on things that leave you empty in the end? Why would you want to miss your calling?

 

Matt is still on our department and when he is feeling good, he will attend a meeting and participate in discussion. His gear still hangs on the wall.

 

He is a member for life.

 

TCSS.

Art

 

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

Posted by chiefreason on March 29, 2009 • Filed under: Miscellaneous • Tagged: , , , ,

Ordering From the Risk Menu

No comments

May I take your order?

 

Firefighter: What is your special today?

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Firefighter: Do you have any recommendations?

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Absolutely. We will heat it to flashover.

 

Firefighter: Excellent. Can I get tunnel vision?

 

It is our specialty. Your dessert?

 

Firefighter: Can I have a heart attack?

 

You’ll have it in no time.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

With each firefighter death comes our outrage.

 

Another death; MORE outrage!

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Recognize the positives and the negatives.

 

Reward the positives and share its success.

 

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

 

Would you like something from the menu?

 

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

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

How Did We Get to This Point?

No comments

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

TCSS.

Art

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

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

When a Discussion Reaches Flashover

No comments

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Therein lays the issue.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Politics is the other hot topic.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

You joined the union? Politics.

 

You joined the volunteer fire department? Politics.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

And it created a firestorm beyond the fire itself.

 

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

 

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

 

Because, it’s not going to go away.

 

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

 

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

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

Just Me and the Ball

No comments

I love golf, but at the same time, I hate it!

 

I love to play the game, because there’s something about making the right club selection, hitting the ball cleanly, propelling the ball to the intended target with its proper distance, landing the ball to within a putter’s length of the cup and then putting it in.

 

Just me and the ball!

 

What I described may sound simple to the unknowing.

 

Do you realize how many things can go wrong from the time you select your club, approach your ball, set up with your stance, start your back swing to your follow through and then leave your ball in the hands of the golfing gods?

 

That’s why I hate it. I know of no other activity that requires so much to think about and then you have to put all of it out of your head to “enjoy the game”.

 

I took up the game when I was 48 years old. I tried to hold out until I was 50, but I had too many friends eager to take my money (25 cents a hole-winner take all), so I bought my FIRST set of clubs. I am now on my FOURTH set, and I have owned no less than SIX putters!

 

You see; I am one of those guys who must rely on technology to strengthen the weakness of my game. So, yes; I believe that you can BUY your way to a better game!

 

I will start this season with an 18-hole handicap of 17. Not bad for taking it up 8 years ago.

 

I enjoy the sheer beauty of a well manicured golf course. I belong to a local country club that is very well maintained. We take great pride in our course, but I have also played on some of the best courses that Illinois and Iowa have to offer.

 

Wherever I go, I will replace my divots, fix my ball marks on the greens and pick up trash that I find on the course. Yes; I’m a better groundskeeper than golfer!

 

I believe that I have the right attitude for golf. I am a student of the game. I learn something every time I go out and play. I have taken lessons. I play in a league. I play in tournaments and I am no longer nervous around other golfers. I have found that I actually play better when I am playing against better golfers and I have beaten some good ones; mostly in handicapped matches.

 

No; I am not a sandbagger; I have honestly earned my 17 handicap. I don’t…nope; I won’t go there!

 

I have also seen the ugly side of golf. I am talking about the expletive-filled, club-throwing, ball-throwing, walk-off-in-the-middle-of-a-match ugliness; not by me, but by others. You have to wonder why they play!

 

Call me a romanticist, but I can relate to people like Player, Palmer and Nicklaus and their reverence for the game. It is almost spiritualistic their connection to the game.

 

I play for the challenge. I strive to get better. I play for the fun and the enjoyment of hitting that one, good drive; that one, good sand shot and making a 20 footer for a birdie. It makes my whole day and screw what’s on my scorecard. I’ll pay my money when I lose, but relish in the eagle that I made on #13!

 

Then, we will sit around in the clubhouse, have our beverages and bust each others’ balls.

 

Sound familiar? It almost sounds like the firehouse, doesn’t it?

 

I play in firefighter tournaments when I get the chance. Last year, I sponsored a two-person, super ball tournament for my firefighters. I’m proud to say that Lance and I took second place. My chief and his partner won the thing. They want to do it again and I will gladly take a re-match.

 

To me; it’s the best of both worlds. The camaraderie is second to none. And the charities that they support are well worth your time and your entry fee.

 

Love golf? You bet (25 cents a hole).

 

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

Posted by chiefreason on January 27, 2009 • Filed under: Miscellaneous • Tagged: ,

Union Banning Members From Volunteering?

1 comment

Specifically, volunteer firefighting!

 

Oh; I assume that you can still volunteer at the animal shelter, homeless shelter or the youth football league, but the days of you providing a vital volunteer service to your community as a volunteer firefighter are over, according to The Albany Times Union, N.Y. newspaper. See article: http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=761517

 

It is highly suspicious that the union would single out members who also volunteer as firefighters where they reside. So, Albany, NY firefighters who belong to the IAFF and who live outside of Albany will no longer be allowed to volunteer without facing sanctions* by the union.

 

Apparently, the union feels that members cannot be injured while working their “side” jobs on their days off. I guess that you cannot get injured standing in traffic while filling the boot for Jerry’s kids. And perish the thought that members could be hurt playing softball, hockey, rugby, bicycling, motorcycling or rock climbing.

 

Does anyone else find it rather odd that the union would single out volunteering on a fire department as the only activity that could hurt firefighters; thus, costing taxpayers money?

 

So, it’s fine and dandy if their effort at a secondary activity is monetarily rewarded?

 

Without seeing the “decree”, does it specifically state “volunteering as a firefighter”?

 

What about POC (Paid On Call)? Can you volunteer for an AMBULANCE service? What about a “private” fire company or industrial fire brigade? Are any of these activities approved under the union rule?

 

If so, then the intent of the ban is more than obvious to me!

 

So, I find it reprehensible. Telling anyone what they can and can’t do during their OWN time is wrong and bordering on unconstitutional.

 

I can only say to the union: try as you might and wish all you want, but volunteer fire departments are here to stay. In fact; in these tough economic times, I wouldn’t be surprised to see an increase in volunteer fire companies.

 

Don’t get me wrong; I am not anti-union. I am grateful to the IAFF for their work on behalf of firefighter safety, but on this issue of forcing members to stop volunteering, I am deeply saddened and disappointed that they would attack the very fiber and foundation on which this great nation’s fire service was built.

 

Call me crazy, but I think that the union is missing a golden opportunity with the volunteers. I would be seeking their support, offering them services for a volunteer member’s rate and paving their way to full membership some day.

 

Sam Fresina, the local union representative said, “This is nothing against volunteers. This is simply us enforcing an international bylaw for the purpose of taking care of our residents. People in the city of Albany pay our salaries, and it’s incumbent upon us to give them the best possible service that we can”.

 

Sorry, Sam, but it has EVERYTHING to do with volunteers or more importantly, the union inserting themselves in the private/public lives of their members. Regardless of the motive, it is driving a wedge between career and volunteer.

 

And that’s too bad, because BOTH serve vital roles in the communities where they live and serve.

 

*Resolution 2 directs the IAFF to delete Article XV, Section 3 and insert a new subsection to the list of defined misconduct as “working a secondary job part-time, paid on call, volunteer or otherwise as a firefighter, emergency medical services worker, public safety or law enforcement officer, or as a worker in a related service, whether in the public or private sector,where such job is within the work jurisdiction of any affiliate or which adversely impacts the interests of any affiliate or the IAFF.

Upon a finding of guilt…it is recommended that the penalty include disqualification from holding office in any affiliate and/or expulsion from membership for the period that the misconduct persists. Charges filed for the misconduct described…shall be preferred by a member of the charged party’s local and/or member of an adversely affected affiliate.

 

This article is protected by federal copyright and cannot be re-printed in any form without the expressed permission of the author.

Posted by chiefreason on January 22, 2009 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , , , , ,

Perpetual Motion: The Career/Volunteer Debate

No comments

 First Published 1/25/04

 

That’s right! Right here/right now. Once and for all; the final word on this age-old argument is…..

 

A question!

 

Aren’t both types of firefighters critical to our fire service efforts?

 

Of course they are!

 

Grab a snack before we tiptoe through this minefield together, because quite frankly; I am going to literally try to rationalize out loud why we have to argue one against the other in a “who’s better” debate for what; bragging rights?

 

Day Two. I haven’t moved from my desk since my last sentence. I must draw on all my strength and background as a volunteer firefighter for a perspective.

 

When I got into the fire service as a volunteer, our fire department didn’t have a library of reference materials from which to learn. The only fire magazine we got was Fire Chief and the chief wouldn’t share it (Rank has its privilege!). The training officers for the fire department at the time were twin brothers who worked for the local telephone company. Great guys! They could find a bad phone line and could affix a button to a fire phone and have it blow the fire siren, but they didn’t know beans about SCBAs or fire behavior. Their knowledge of building construction consisted of helping the one build the other’s garage!

So, where did a volunteer go to get their much-needed introduction into firefighting?

 

Neighboring department? Well, sometimes, but basically, they had the same problems.

 

Fire marshal’s office? No; they set standards, curriculum, the DATES of the training and certified training through testing. Weekend dates back then were non-existent. Weekdays or weeknights; usually during the hours when volunteers were at their paying jobs.

 

Fire service institute? Ding, ding, ding! That’s where it started for me and can anyone take a wild guess at who taught the classes? Career firefighters!

 

And it intimidated the HELL out of me. You know how they always said, “In my classes, there are no stupid questions”? Well, I wasn’t willing to take the risk, so I sat silently; listening, and in total awe of the knowledge of my instructors. I didn’t even want to hear about friction loss or hand tools. I wanted to hear the stories about the “big ones”, the rescues and using ladder trucks. Even when my early instructors were telling me their war stories, I was learning from their experiences that were gained every duty day that they worked. You aren’t going to learn that kind of stuff from someone who hasn’t had an occupied, structural fire in three (3) years! You can only get it from a career smoke eater who is willing to moonlight as an instructor. If some of you don’t think that career firefighters don’t care about volunteers, then why do so many of them teach us?

 

Fast forward to today. I am no longer intimidated by career firefighters. They taught me well. Some of my very best friends are still career or retired from career. And they will always have my gratitude, respect and friendship.

 

I can remember a time when some career fire departments had a “no fraternization” policy with volunteers. Back in the day and before sensibility prevailed, volunteers were right up there with dirt under the fingernails! BUT THOSE DAYS ARE OVER!

 

Why does the air get so charged with negative energy when someone mentions a career/volunteer issue? Whether it’s interoperability, mutual aid, funding, promotions, health and safety, fire tactics and on, the discussion immediately deteriorates into a flurry of insults and insensitivities as soon as someone attaches the labels of career or volunteer to their reply with such pronouncements as “volunteers; we do it for free” or “career; nobody does it better”.

 

From the volunteer perspective (mine), I think some of it is manifested in the attitude that we see when the discussions turn to benefits, wages, unions, fire standards, fire training and legislation that addresses career firefighter issues and excludes the volunteers from much of it. It appears that the focus moves away from public service to one of self-serving. Look at the discussion of the Niles, OH FD and Weathersfield FPD. It took a New York minute for that FH.com thread to turn into a career/volunteer “fist fight”. Volunteers were screaming that they would have gone out of their district-some said by “jumping” the call-to put the fire out. Of course they would have, because many small departments are salivating to catch a working, structural fire! That’s part of that jealousy that exists between career and volunteers. Career FDs without any doubt catch more structural fires on the average. More vehicle accidents; more rescues; more HazMat and MORE PUBLIC ATTENTION. There are very few volunteer or combination departments in the U.S. that have more call volume. They are the exception.

 

WE choose our career paths. Some chose to go to full-time fire departments. Others, like me, chose to go to work for a company and then volunteer their time on a fire department and as I said; we chose that.

 

But it’s our communities who choose what type of fire protection that they want. Full time coverage will most likely cost more and taxes paid will bear that out. Volunteer coverage might be less expensive, but with some drawbacks, such as manpower, rapid response time, age and condition of equipment and level of experience/knowledge of the firefighters. Let’s be honest; many volunteers question the abilities of their officers and vice versa. Again; career firefighters choose their career paths and are promoted to rank by training and testing. Volunteers are, in many cases, still being elected, selected and by entitlement, are aspiring to their rank. But that is being addressed in many departments and is a topic for another article!

 

Whenever there seems to be a push to get ALL firefighters to a level of firefighting skill that will insure an appropriate response to mitigating an incident, it is usually the volunteer sector yelling “foul”. We can all, and I do mean ALL, train to the minimum standards, but will always lose the “in-service”, continuing education and the on-the-job hours to the career departments and that’s a fact!

 

Let’s switch to the career perspective; also my perspective.

Some career firefighters still harbor attitudes towards volunteers that date back to the early ‘80s. And we will not change that attitude. Don’t try! You won’t penetrate that crust with a jackhammer!

 

The majority of career folks knows and understands the socio-political reasons for volunteer firefighters and their skill levels, because they are still training them. If I am an instructor, I will take it very personally if my classes of volunteers were not adequately trained. But that’s the ones who will show up for class, ready to learn.

They know that we all do what we do for the same reasons. I am tired of that well-worn cliché that says career or volunteer-we are all professionals. Well, “professionals” do not treat each other with so much disdain. They treat each other with respect. And we know that respect is not given, but is earned; everyday and not just when the tones drop. There has to be respectful dialogue and honesty between us. Respect for the fact that, even we, as firefighters from different career paths, are “a different tool in the fire service tool box”. And it’s the communities who select “the tools”. That may over-simplify it, but the point is that we employ our skills when advancing on a fire in the same way with the goal of suppressing the fire. Being effective is not a career/volunteer issue, but is all of our duty.

 

Career personnel have to do it right and do it better with every work shift. The law of averages says that if they don’t, then Murphy’s Law will get them. I don’t think for a minute that they are “jealous” of the volunteers. Quite the opposite. I am somewhat jealous that they can “live the dream and even eek out a living at it. Most are just like the rest of us; saddled with mortgages, car payments, college tuition and taxes that are too damned high! Yeah; I’m jealous of that!

 

I would be remiss if I didn’t address the “other” segment of career firefighters; those who started out as volunteers. I can feel nothing but unmitigated pride for them. They remember their roots and they are quick to give credit. And that can only help to bridge the “old” arguments and perceptions.

 

In closing, I will use the analogy of athletes and firefighters.

I know that there were better athletes than me in my high school class, just as I know that there were better firefighters than me. Isn’t our goal to always work towards getting better?

 

What it comes down to is natural ability, desire, practice and the right attitude. Working hard with a “losing sucks” mentality. Getting everyone on the team to believe in themselves for the sake of the team. And then going out and beating the snot out of the opponent; in our case, fire.

 

And, as a volunteer, I will say that being on a rural, volunteer fire department doesn’t make us the Farm Team!

 

Sorry. I couldn’t resist one last time.

 

And be safe above all else.

 

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

 

Posted by chiefreason on January 18, 2009 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , ,

Just Follow My Lead

No comments

First Published 8/23/03

 

My day job is as a safety director for a large company. My duties encompass all of the loss control issues, including worker injuries.

 

Because of my specialty, I am a member of the American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE). As a benefit, I get a monthly copy of Professional Safety magazine. In the July issue, there was an article entitled Risk Taking Among Firefighters-Identifying Key Attributes For An Incident Commander.

 

Many of us have participated in discussions about those traits that we look for in our fire service leaders. Though the article limits its scope to incident commanders, I believe that the same holds true for all officers-company officers and chief officers alike. And I think that it all comes down to your firefighters. They will not LET you lead them if they don’t respect you and therefore, trust in you.

 

I would like to discuss the key components of this very interesting article. Interesting, in that; in my world as safety director, risk taking is unacceptable behavior that must be modified to reduce the likelihood of injury. But in a firefighter’s world, an acceptable risk is, well, acceptable. And therein lies the rub!

 

The author of the article, David L. Fender, is not from the firefighting community, so his views are taken from the professional safety perspective.

 

Fender begins with: Key factors in firefighter injury and death involves the risks that firefighters are willing to take in the performance of their tasks and supervisor control of risk taking. This study used focus groups made up of paid and volunteer firefighters to define the content domain of the knowledge, attitudes and practices of firefighters towards risk taking in firefighting. Results indicated that firefighters are willing to take a higher level of personal risk and may be willing to violate their training and procedures in order to save lives. The principal factors that affected whether firefighters obeyed an incident commander, even in cases of life and death, were how well they knew the individual and whether they trusted his knowledge, judgment and expertise. To keep risk taking at an acceptable level, researchers recommend that incident commanders possess the following attributes: be knowledgeable, trustworthy, self-confident, levelheaded and have mutual trust with the crew.

 

I have always said that firefighters will, at that critical moment where a life is at stake, take everything that they have learned, ponder it ever so briefly and make their decision; not from the head, but from the gut! They will at that moment risk their life for another’s.

 

In a letter to the editor of Fire Engineering magazine in 1997, retired fire officer W. A. Witt wrote: Safety must be stressed at all times, but there are times when we have to do what has to be done.

 

As firefighters, we understand what Witt is saying, but in “doing what has to be done”, it can sometimes expose us to unnecessary risks or at the very least, risks that did not need to be taken. The most recent example of risk taking that resulted in the supreme sacrifice of 343 of New York City’s bravest is, of course, the response to the World Trade Towers on September 11, 2001. The debate will go on forever. I won’t debate it, because quite frankly, I wasn’t there and can only imagine what went through the minds of everyone who responded after the terrorist attacks.

 

What is known about emergencies is that there are always unknowns, so there cannot be a “cookie cutter” response. You should have written procedures. Will you follow them to the letter? Doubtful. BUT, they must be the template for your response; especially your command structure.

 

So; what motivates you? Why did you become a firefighter and why do you do what you do? In Buckman’s address to the International Association of Fire Chiefs in 1993, he identified three factors: achievement, affiliation and power. The very things that we take great pride in may cause us to take great risks. Fender writes that according to L. Davis: Firefighters-both paid and volunteer-join firefighting organizations for many reasons. Some want to help fulfill the need for community safety and security or in rural areas, to help neighbors. Others are attracted by the excitement, thrill and adventure. Others see firefighting as an opportunity to transform themselves into a ‘macho, death-defying hero’. Davis also describes other motivations including the hot-rod syndrome, which involves the thrill of operating fire apparatus….still others desire recognition from the community. R.D. Beaton states that firefighters frequently develop strong kinships and friendships with fellow firefighters. Corneil’s examination of traumatic stress among firefighters found that social support from coworkers had a strong protective effect from stress disorders. Additionally, teamwork and reliance on fellow firefighters in life-and-death situations provide strong reasons to support their fellow firefighters and to take risks to help them. Another factor involved in firefighter deaths and serious injuries is trust in leadership, which affects whether they follow orders from those leaders.

 

So, we know that firefighting is a risky business. How do company officers or incident commanders identify unnecessary risks and control the taking of necessary risks only? The primary safety concern in any occupation is personal safety first. It is stressed over and over again in firefighter training. What causes us to place our safety second? The focus groups that were used in this article yielded some interesting results on how firefighters felt about taking personal risk, when they were willing to take higher personal risk and the relationship of risk taking to supervision.

 

Common themes shared by career and volunteers regarding firefighting were:

  • Recognize the generally high risk and risk of death
  • Many unknowns in firefighting
  • Unusual hours
  • Sense of pride
  • Saving lives is satisfying
  • Helping people is satisfying
  • Sense of teamwork (career)
  • Lack of respect from public (volunteer)
  • Lack of respect from government entities (career)
  • Teamwork very important
  • Saving lives is primary objective, then property
  • No building is worth a human life
  • Dream to be a firefighter
  • Take the most risk to save a life
  • Take more risk for younger victims (mixed opinion)
  • Take the least amount of risk to save property
  • Always assume the worst at the scene
  • Highest risk taking involves saving lives
  • Highest routine risk taken is driving to incident.

 

Common themes between career and volunteers regarding obeying incident commanders were:

  • Incident commander is responsible; follow their orders
  • Incident commander is responsible for the safety of everyone at the scene
  • Must trust the incident commander and do what they say-lives depend on it
  • Would disobey if a life could be saved
  • Only disobey incident commander for a very good reason

 

More likely to obey an incident commander if they are:

  • Experienced
  • Knowledgeable
  • Respected as an individual
  • Trustworthy
  • Self confident
  • Level-headed
  • Willing to listen

 

More likely to disobey incident commander because of:

  • Lack of experience
  • Not part of team
  • Has a quick temper
  • Non communicator
  • Made too many past mistakes
  • Indecisive
  • Lack confidence in them
  • Inattention to detail
  • Too willing to put crew in danger

 

The author of the article states that: When a firefighter does not trust the leader’s judgment, the command structure begins to disintegrate. The firefighter starts to think on his own, disregarding the incident commander or even the good of the team and tragedy can result. Although incident commanders may prefer ‘blind obedience’ from their crew, due to Human Nature, mutual trust is more achievable. The study results and tragedies such as Mann Gulch and South Canyon all indicate that trust in leadership is critical in firefighting situations. R. A. Angulo states that based on his experience firefighters must have trust and confidence in their leadership BEFORE they will do what they are told; particularly when they think that life is at risk.

 

Fender concludes his article with the following: Based on the results of this study and other research, a command structure with the following attributes is more likely to achieve the best effort and most appropriate risk taking in firefighting operations:

1)    Knowledge and experience of the incident commander. The incident commander needs to be experienced and the firefighters need to know and have confidence in them.

2)    Trustworthiness. The incident commander must inspire trust in their crew. Trust is only gained over time and through working together.

3)    Mutual trust. Incident commanders must admit that they do not know everything and be willing to listen to others. Training together will boost this trust.

4)    Self-confidence. The incident commander must be aware of what they do or do not know and must ask for help when needed. When one is self-confident, there is no shame in asking for another opinion or double-checking when the information is critical.

5)    Levelheaded. The incident commander should remain calm and stay in control. They should not be afraid of making decisions and should be ready to re-think decisions when conditions change. It is not a sign of weakness to change an order when required.

 

As a practitioner of safety and a former chief officer of a volunteer fire department, I cannot in good conscience, advocate risk taking. But off the record, I understand why we do. I believe that there are decisions made that use our best judgment at that moment in time. Call it a calculated risk, if you will. You cannot be faulted for making your decisions based on all of the information that you have and have weighed it against the expected outcome.

 

Though I do not endorse the article, I do not dismiss it, either. I have brought it before an esteemed group of fire service leaders for their discussion. So please; discuss it!

 

As I finish this, I have posted a news article that is ironic, given its timing. The news article is entitled Moline firefighters lack confidence in chief. Read and compare.

 

As always, I welcome your thoughts.

 

And stay safe above all else!

 

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

Posted by chiefreason on January 18, 2009 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , , , , , ,

When Is It The Right Time To Ask Why?

No comments

First Published 11/10/08

 

The reason that I ask is because the “why” always leads to the “how”.

 

Firefighter Killed While Working At A Vehicle Accident Scene.

Why was he/she killed? What was he/she doing at the time? How did it happen?

 

Firefighter Dies After Returning To The Station.

Why did he/she die? What was he/she doing at the time? How did it happen?

 

Firefighter Dies At A Structural Fire.

Why did he/she die? What was he/she doing when they died? Where was he/she when he/she died? How did it happen?

 

Firefighter Dies At Fire Due To Equipment Malfunction.

Why was there an equipment failure that killed the firefighter? What equipment failed, causing the death? How could that happen?

 

You look at the “headline” and the questions that I pose are reasonable and in my mind, are but a few of the many questions that will come post incident.

 

Why?

 

Because a firefighter died. The “why” always leads to “how”.

 

Take my first headline and break it down. The firefighter, based upon news reports, was struck by a vehicle who failed to slow down and move to the farthest lane. That answers the “why”. According to reports, the firefighter was returning from the apparatus with a tool when he was struck and killed. That answers the “what”.

 

The “how” is the question that gets most of the emotionally-charged attention and debate. Those who were at the scene or who are close to the department are immediately and irrevocably devastated by the death of their loved one. They are angered by the senselessness of it. They were there to help. Though risk is a part of the job description, DYING is not!

 

This death of one of their own is very personal. At this time, the only question that matters is how are we going to get through this?

 

The only information to be shared is the details of the memorial and funeral. This isn’t “school” and “lessons learned” will have to wait.

 

Emotions have paralyzed a department that, just a few moments earlier was whole and robust.

 

The fire academy graduation picture of the fallen firefighter is sent out across the nation. To his comrades-his grieving brothers and sisters-it is the face of their fire department. It is the face of honor, bravery, commitment, integrity and compassion. Those qualities ARE the firefighter and they resonate through the department and cannot be separated one from the other, even through death. He defines the fire department and the fire department defines him; locked together by decades of those who came before him and tempered by the finest of traditions.

 

And what about the rest of the nation’s fire service; the brothers and sisters, who on any given day, could die serving their fellow Man?

 

They must find a way to make some sense of it, to come to grips with their own mortality, to offer solace to the aggrieved and when the time is right, to ask “why”.

 

When the “why” is asked, which leads to the “how”, I ask, not because I speculate that someone did something wrong; I ask because I don’t want to do something wrong.

 

Questions are asked out of our selfish need to know, but it is incumbent upon leaders to study fatality reports to add anything that they can learn from it to strengthen their decision-making.

 

I firmly believe that sound decisions-right decisions-can be made and yet, have a wrong outcome. Firefighters must make their decisions based upon their knowledge through training and experience within seconds of conditions that can change within seconds and do so with the conviction and belief that everyone goes home.

 

A firefighter will fight fire with the strength of a hundred men, because they know that it will become a destructive and hateful monster that will grow and consume everything in its path. It will leave booby traps that will collapse upon you, gain strength from whatever it consumes, generate more energy and KILL, unless we kill it first.

 

It will hide under its cloak of smoke, will inhale a small breath of air and explode into a fiery fury to destroy, were it not for the firefighters standing between it and its quest.

 

It has been written that the fire service has a romance with Fire; that we speak to it with a certain romanticism. Fire has been the object of worship. Some will light a fire in the fireplace to “set a mood”. Others will sit around a fire and tell stories or sing songs, mesmerized by its almost hypnotic powers.

 

But firefighters see its ugly underbelly, its aftermath of destruction and death. There is nothing “romantic” about that. There is only hate; a hate that is manifest from the misery, pain, suffering, sadness, sorrow and fear that a fire causes.

 

I hate it for another reason.

 

I hate it because it leaves me to ask “why”, which always leads to the “how”.

 

Yet, I’ll never know when it is the right time to ask.

 

I only know that the questions will be asked as long as proven leaders-leaders who lead from the front-and firefighters with promising careers that will never be-continue to die.

 

God bless them.

 

God, please protect us.

 

TCSS.

 

 

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

Posted by chiefreason on January 12, 2009 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , ,

Firefighter Arsonists

No comments

First Published 9/24/08

From article on two Texas firefighters recently charged with arson:

Ervin said Southard has no previous criminal record or activity and had been recognized as rookie of the year and firefighter of the year by the Cloverleaf department in 2004 and 2005, respectively.

“He wanted to be a firefighter all his life,” Ervin said. “He’s a nice, intelligent kid from a good family. This is one of these things that’s just hard to figure other than as an immature act.”

Southard had attended San Jacinto College and received his basic Texas firefighter certification in 2006, his lawyer said.

Romero has two previous theft convictions, one of them for stealing equipment from another fire department where he served. The second conviction brought a 10-month state jail sentence.

Question: did these two “firefighters” know the difference between right and wrong when they set the fires? Did these two “firefighters” know that it violated the law to set the fires? Did these two “firefighters” know that it was reasonable to believe that their actions would cause damage to the properties?

The answer in all cases is “YES”! And for that, they should be convicted and sentenced to the fullest extent of the law. Add five (5) more years because they were firefighters.

The reason that I put the quote at the beginning is because, when I read it, I see someone making excuses or at the very least, offering a rationale for why the fires were set by these two. The tone of the article would lend itself to, were it not for these fires, Southard would still be a portrait of the “all American boy”. His actions were characterized as “immature”. IMMATURE? Let me tell you; an immature act would be putting your hand in your armpit and making farting noises. Setting a fire is not, by any stretch of the imagination, an immature act. It is a CRIMINAL act. When we, as a fire service, make any effort to trivialize the criminal act of a firefighter, we are enabling them. When we fail to cry out for harsh punishment for those who are caught, tried and convicted of setting fires, we are turning a deaf ear and a blind eye. And that is very troubling to me. We have become a society who wants to believe that there is no longer any personal accountability for our actions. We grasp for reasons, no matter how absurd they seem, in an effort to justify the act. We have to make it more palatable to deal with the unpleasant fall out of the reality.

Why can’t we simply say: “you screwed up; you got caught and now you must atone”?

I can’t speak for the rest of you, but I am sick and tired of the excuses. From the time we are born, we are taught the difference between right and wrong. Even if kids never see their parents, lacked a “home” life, school would step in and fill the void. If we walked down the street and violated a law, a cop would correct it. So, to claim that someone didn’t know the difference between right and wrong is indefensible.

Yeah, yeah, yeah; let’s not forget the “insanity” plea. But this testament to the power of the lawyer lobby has been diluted and polluted to the point that the person is no longer insane; it’s that they and their attorney put forth a defense that, because it was so eloquently presented, wins the hearts and minds of the judge and jury. They get style points, an “A” for effort and the criminal is acquitted of their crime. Don’t get me started on “innocent by reason of insanity”. We are insane to accept that as a rule of law.

So, we continue to see firefighters who are “bored” setting fires. Articles continue to indicate that, absent of this ONE act; these are fine, upstanding members of our community. They are family men, our neighbors; someone we trust with our lives. Which is why, in my mind, they are SCUM. They should never wear the uniform again or serve with a fire department anywhere in the continental United States. There should not be a “get out of jail free” card for them and there should not be a second chance as a firefighter. Firefighters know all too well the destructive powers of a fire on an emotional and physical level and should never, never set a fire for other than training. It violates our mission and it destroys the public trust in an entire organization.

If these mutts want forgiveness, they can get in line right behind the crack heads and career criminals. THEY have reasons for what they do, too.

 TCSS.

Posted by chiefreason on January 12, 2009 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , ,

Firefighter or Firesetter?

No comments

First Published 3/17/08

 

That is a question that we are asking ourselves with more frequency.

 

To me, that’s like asking if Count Dracula is in charge of the Blood Bank. It doesn’t make any sense to those who understand the tradition and history of the fire service.

 

How can we believe for a minute that our citizens will continue to support us once word gets out that there is an arsonist in our ranks?

 

To say that it is not a stain on the entire fire service is simply wrong. These same people who called us “hero” after 9/11 will brand us all as betrayers to our call to duty. They will no longer trust nor support us.

 

My personal opinion is this: the trust that exists between a community and its fire department is every bit as strong as a doctor/patient, priest/confessor, husband/wife or teacher/student. This bond, if broken, provokes a powerful, emotional response and forgiveness, when sought, will be elusive until some act of contrition is completed. It could take weeks, months, years or NEVER.

 

Arson is terrorism. It is not a property crime, as many think. It is a mind crime! It preys on a human’s basic fear of the unknown. I would compare it to treading in shark-infested waters; not knowing when they will attack you.

 

The legal description for arson is “the malicious burning or exploding of a dwelling house, commercial or public building or the immediate area around it”. A perpetrator’s “intent” adds more weight at trial than “motive”. It is a felony in the first, second or third degree. Arson has been committed if the intent was to injure/kill someone or defraud an entity of money.

 

As you can see, a firefighter arsonist does not exactly “fit” the conventional definition of an arsonist. Firefighter arsonists do not typically set fires to injure/kill someone or to defraud an insurance company.

 

The FBI profile of the firefighter arsonist is:

1)     White male, age 17 – 25.

2)     One or both parents missing from home during childhood. If they are from an intact home, the home atmosphere was mixed and unstable.

3)     Dysfunctional. One of the parents left the home before the child reached age 17. Cold, distant, hostile or aggressive relationship with the natural father.

4)     Poor marital adjustment. If not married, still living at home with the parents.

5)     Lack of stable, interpersonal relationships.

6)     Poor occupational adjustment. Menial laborer, skilled laborer or clerical jobs.

7)     Interested in the fire service in the context that it provides an arena for excitement; NOT for the sake of public service.

8)      Alcoholism, childhood hyperactivity, homosexuality, depression, borderline personality disorder and suicidal tendencies.

9)     Mixed findings on intelligence, but most found to have average to higher intelligence, but poor academic performance.

 

Researchers have found that firefighter arsonists are usually relatively junior and in their first, three years of service. They tend to use available materials, such as paper or clothing, together with an accelerant and matches or cigarette lighter. They generally work alone, but have been found to work as a group. In a team setting, they may appear to be cocky, arrogant and overbearing. Younger individuals may be overly “eager” to please or to seek attention.*

 

Now; armed with this information, is there any reason why you could not fashion an application or interview process that addresses the potential of hiring arsonists?

 

There has to be a “due diligence” involved in your hiring process. Without it, your department could be slapped with charges of “negligent hiring”.

 

Filling openings in your department’s membership roster with “warm bodies” may very well come back to bite you when things heat up with several, suspicious fires, ultimately ushering in charges of arson against one of your own.

 

My advice is to stack the deck, load up on the front end and make every effort to create a culture where new applicants clearly understand your department’s expectations.

 

Otherwise, all of your hard work to gain your public’s trust could go up in smoke!

 

Take care and stay safe.

 

 

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

Posted by chiefreason on January 12, 2009 • Filed under: My Size Up • Tagged: , , ,