emt301

Gotcha !! I do understand your point.

more times than not? I understand what you're saying...as a calltaker, I can only go with the information the caller gives me, and as a dispatcher, I can only go with what's given to me by the calltaker. But...more times than not the information is wrong? That, my friend is a bit overblown....I've also been a responder in the field, and the majority of the time the information was either dead on, or at least very close/in the ballpark.....no offense intended, just a friendly disagreement here.

Unfortunately, in many areas of the country you can also add 911 and police dispatchers to the group of red headed step children as well....often joining ems workers in last place in terms of pay and recognition. They're often verbally abused by the citizens who call on the phone for help, and considered just "those damn dispatchers" by many responders in the field.

Up here in Dutchess, Interstate 84 was an absolute mess. NYS Thruway Authority had plenty of lead-time on this storm, and should have been prepared...I-84 from Fishkill to Stormville became a total parking lot for hours...and despite the heavy precipitation, there was really no excuse for how bad the road conditions were allowed to become. Now of course, given the lead-time, motorists that weren't enroute to a wedding, funeral, or sick relative should really have just stayed off the roads during the storm...plain and simple...but that's a different topic for a different day (called lack of common sense by the public).

I wonder if while Airbus was designing this monstrosity, whether anybody took into account the amount of manpower and equipment that will be necessary when one of these things eventually crashes. No airport or community will be ready when it happens (and it eventually will). These companies need to learn that just because something can be designed and built...that it doesn't mean it should actually be produced & sold for public use. 500 passengers in a flying metal tube? This thing is a tragedy waiting to happen....

Hmmmm.....whatever happened to plain, good old honesty? I have difficulty understanding how people who lie on their residency can feel good about themselves when they get hired...knowing that they just screwed guys who've done the right thing & been honest out of a job. It's kind of ironic, considering how noble and honorable the profession of firefighting is...I guess it's just a sign of the times in which we live, where the ends always seem to justify the means. I have a friend who lost out on a job with City of Poughkeepsie a few years ago under these circumstances...a real good & talented guy with city residency who would have made an outstanding firefighter...unfortunately he lost out to a candidate of lesser caliber who lived out of the city in a nearby town, and who lied on his residency to get the position....a loss for both my friend and the City of Poughkeepsie Fire Department.

Tell that to the families of EMS personnel who were injured or died (and those who breathed in toxic air and will get sick down the road) on 9/11 trying to help their fellow New Yorkers. Yeah, right, they don't risk their lives.

That was what I said in my first post on this subject, and implied in my last one where I referred to junior officers responding on the mutual aid apparatus. In terms of chiefs responding, I was merely stating that I'm not opposed to one QUALIFIED (competent) chief responding mutual aid from a department, and that the chief could be useful to an IC depending upon the situation...I'm against multiple chiefs responding mutual aid from the same department, especially when it leaves the hometown area stripped. Obviously, any officer, responding to any call, should be qualified to do the job...or else they shouldn't hold the title. An incompetent officer can at the very least be an obstacle in mitigating the emergency, and in the worst case get someone killed.

Nice to hear a voice of reason out there....only 1 chief going on mutual aid...at times a rare thing indeed in Westchester!!!

Just so nobody gets sensitive, offended, or insulted...my comments below are not directed at any particular department... While I still don't believe it's necessary in all cases (and it seems to happen most, if not all of the time in Westchester with the volunteer departments...even for relatively small scale incidents like car fires), I certainly understand how having a chief responding in with his mutual aid equipment can be useful for the IC. But with all due respect...2 or 3 chiefs from each mutual aid department? It's overkill if you've got mutual aid coming in from 3 or 4 departments....you could end up with 6-12 chiefs responding...all making transmissions to the dispatch center and IC, with 6-12 more vehicles contributing to an already congested scene, and creating more risk to themselves & the public with 6-12 vehicles responding code-3....and also potentially leaving the mutual aid company's hometown/hometown taxpaying citizens with no chiefs for coverage if a call drops. In terms of getting apparatus to the scene, that's what a fireground channel can be used for...the incoming apparatus/junior officers on board can contact Command for any necessary directions and for their assignment at the scene. It works fine here in Dutchess, and we don't end up with an excessive number of chiefs, extra radio transmissions, & extra vehicles at large incidents. Yes, there can be...too many... chiefs on scene, sometimes creating confusion, freelancing, and I hate to say it, but even personality/power conflicts (the old "I'm in charge here, no I'm in charge here" syndrome). It's unfortunate in the age of ICS, but I've seen it happen more than once... Now in terms of even more additional chiefs responding...this type of situation helps contribute to the "buff" comments made in other posts. If every department does this in a big operation, you end up with extra chief officers hanging around but not doing a whole lot since they (understandably) don't want to commit...when in reality they should be standing by in their home quarters with a crew in case their station gets a call for their hometown/home taxpayers. No disrespect is intended in this post, just my opinion from having seen things from a number of different angles over the last 10 years...as a volunteer firefighter, an airport ARFF supervisor, and fire dispatcher.

The rule of thumb here is....."Have radio, must talk"...."Have fancy car with lights & siren, must respond"....whether they're actually needed on the scene or not !!!! I agree with ALS....send your junior officers such as captains or lieutenants with the mutual aid equipment and leave the chiefs in their home fire district. If a captain or lieutenant can't be responsible for his/her crew on a mutual aid call, then maybe he/she shouldn't hold the position in the first place. If you absolutely need a chief to respond mutual aid, then make it 1 and only 1!!! It's absolutely ridiculous for 2 or 3 chiefs in a department to respond mutual aid to a neighboring department's call...and certainly not in the best interest of their hometown taxpayers.

Congratulations...you'll do great !!!!

Unless things have changed since I was at 60-Control...it still is a Transcare unit. As of October of 2005 when I left 60, Transcare was the ambulance provider for New Rochelle, with FDNR providing ems first response. Has something changed since then? (i.e...has the city taken over EMS?)

Ya got that right...not that different at all !!!!! Just call us "Westchester North"!!!

Some of it's tunnel vision...but sadly, some of it is that many people really don't care anymore. More than once lately I've taken calls in the dispatch center for auto accidents right in people's front yards. When I've asked the homeowner if anyone's hurt, they've replied they don't know. When I then proceeded to ask them if they could step outside and ask if anyone is hurt, they've actually replied in one case...I'm in my shorts, working out and I don't want to go outside, and in the other case....it's cold out and I've only got slippers on my feet. When asked again, the person in his slippers still refused. Talk about someone being absolutely self-centered and useless. Bet they wouldn't appreciate that response if their family members were involved in the accident. Unfortunately, some people just don't give a crap unless the accident involves themselves or someone they know.

ALS.... I think we agree on things...perhaps I just wasn't clear in making my point. My point is that Dutchess 911 has 1 dispatch frequency, 1 frequency for command, 1 frequency for response, a frequency for helicopter operations, and multiple firegrounds...and it works out pretty well even when things get real busy like they can during a storm or if there's multiple structure fires. After working as a fire dispatcher in both counties during the past 3 years, I can say from experience that Dutchess's system, while not perfect, is much more efficient than the chaos that Westchester frequently experiences on the radio. The other thing is that in Westchester, even if dispatching is narrowed down to 1 frequency, without a central dispatching point you theoretically can have more than one agency trying to send out tones & dispatches at the same time. As unlikely as it may be, you could have (and I'm not picking on any particular departments here...only making an example) Mohegan, 60 Control, and Somers all trying to dispatch equipment at the same time on 46.26 & covering each other...with centralized dispatch you eliminate that problem.

Yes, I do have a suggestion....CENTRALIZED FIRE/EMS dispatch by 60-Control...it won't eliminate all radio problems, but would certainly help a great deal....it works GREAT up in Dutchess.

"The time is right for an upgrade," said County Executive Andy Spano. "We haven't had any problems, but that's why we want to address the situation now. When it comes to emergency response, Westchester should continue setting the standard with top-notch capabilities" ????? If I didn't know better, I'd think Spano was refering to Dutchess County. WC unfortunately has a VERY long way to go before they set the standard with top-notch capabilities for dispatching emergency response....they need a CENTRALIZED 911 center if they are going to be top notch. Top notch capability is not achieved by having 50 some odd PSAPS, with some FD/EMS agencies being dispatched by 60-control, others by the PD's, and still others self-dispatching themselves. Not that Dutchess is perfect (it certainly isn't), but at least the county leadership managed to get all of the agencies together on the same page & cooperating with each other. Even if ALL FD/EMS agencies could be dispatched by 60-control, with PD dispatch remaining separate, it would be a HUGE improvement in dispatch quality & emergency response for the citizens of Westchester. If centralized 911 isn't possible, at least let the professional Fire/EMS dispatchers at 60 handle Fire/EMS, and let cops dispatch cops.

You were lucky then...in northern Dutchess County there were hundreds of trees knocked down by the storm, and several homes with trees now on top of them!!!! The towns of Rhinebeck, Milan, and Stanford were hit especially hard, with just scattered problems elsewhere in the county.

Amen Brother !!!!

Don't forget about the dispatchers too....

I know where you're coming from with this, but it's also a bit exaggagerated...for the most part, the fire & ems agencies up here in Dutchess get messages through to the 911 center effectively using plain english, transmitting clear and "to the point" messages (there are, of course, occasional exceptions...but not enough to create much of a problem).

Res6cue, I didn't mean to imply that the ONLY reason for 10 codes is "buffiness"....was just stating that in some departments they are obviously used that way at times, especially with phrases like "10-75 the BOX" and "10-4 K". Having worked for both 60-control in the past and Dutchess 911 currently, I can honestly say from experience that plain english is much simpler to use. For instance, there were times at 60 control when 2 units from the very same department would call out 10-19 AND 10-84 for "on the scene"...kind of ridiculous...are you 10-19 or are you 10-84...pick a 10 code for your department and stay with it. There were also times when units would call out 10-19 when they were 10-17, and vice-versa. It's obvious that in some departments the radio training is severely lacking, and for that reason plain english simplifies things for both FD personnel and the dispatchers who have to communicate with them.

"10-75 the Box" isn't "buffy"? How about just saying we've got a working fire!!!

Over the past few academies, the following departments have looked to the county list for candidates (county list meaning that individual town/village residency is not required...though residents can still obviously have an advantage in any hiring depending upon the individual department): Scarsdale FD Town of Mamaroneck FD Pelham Manor FD Larchmont FD Ryebrook FD