FFPCogs

This topic is running on another site as well and this response fits just as well here as there I think: This scenario was left vague for a couple of reasons. First off because this was simply the situation as presented in our discussions here. Secondly I thought it would be interesting and enlightening to see how this situation would fit in regards to the latest trends vis a vis safety that have come into the fire service in recent years. What strikes me is that like many other aspects of the service like career v volunteer or smoothbore v fog there are two very distinct and divergent trains of thought at work here. As is obvious this hypothetical situation plays into the larger debate of overall fireground safety, but unexpectedly, at least to me, we find ourselves with two very different and opposing points of view regarding the lengths we should go to in saving a life . This particular scenario, in which we have a viable victim in our hands, but extreme and potentially fatal risks involved in saving them, pits what I'll call the "old morality" against the "new morality". In the world of the "old morality" we were taught and it was expected that you just did not leave a viable victim behind once you've found them, whereas in the world of the "new morality" to do so to save ourselves is not only justifiable, but expected. I make no judgements on what choice anyone would make in these circumstances, since as many have said we all have to live with ourselves and the choice we make in the end. That said I will pass judgement though on a fire service that is slowly passing into a new era. One in which we have become more important than those we are here to serve. One in which regulations and protocols replace good training, experience and fireground flexibility in making decisions. One in which lives other than our own have become increasingly expendable if risks are involved in saving them. To me, and this is just MY opinion, such a change is not only a travesty but in essence an abandonment of the four basic principles of good firemanship... Courage. It doesn't mean not being afraid, it just means being calm and doing what you have to do -- what others are relying on you for in a dangerous situation. Dedication. Being dedicated to your crew, the brotherhood, and to the public we protect. We demonstrate that when we study and train and put it in action during an emergency. Sacrifice. That is demonstrated time and again. We put ourselves in harm's way to help perfect strangers. Tradition. We remember the courage, dedication, and sacrifice of "the old guys," we live it and do it, and pass it on to the rooks. Tradition ensures that the other principles never die To close here's a quote, author unknown, that sums it up. "As a profession we must return to the basics of our trade: Hot, dirty, hard work that every generation has done before us. Keep yourself educated, in shape and be true to the job. Remember we are the fire service and it is only as good as we make. Do not forget Firemanship, because without it public works could do our job". Cogs

I think it's fair to say that this scenario would be an extraordinary event for just about any FD for a number of reasons. That said let me add this thought to the mix. As I and my partner move ever closer to the exit, we are also moving that victim we refused to leave along with us, thus bringing all of us closer to safety. Along with that we are also reducing the distance and TIME it will take for any relief personnel to reach us the closer we get to that exit. Cogs

This discussion has brought up some great points and while I may subscribe to the "cowboy" eithic the fact is it would all come down to a personal choice for us whereas for my British colleagues it is cut and dry...leave the victim. This may be one of the biggest differences I have seen between us. Almost every step taken across the pond is predetermined with little or no choice for personal "flexibility", which given the fact that London (meaning the UK national Health and Safety boys) dictates policy nationwide, is not suprising. This is not to say they are any less dedicated, they have just taken a far more nationally centralized and uniform approach to firefighting...much of which stems from the Blitz (for those unaware that's the Battle of Britain of WW2 where Germany tried to basically bomb and burn Britian into submission). That coupled with the fact that British officers can now be criminally prosecuted for LODDs has by their own admission had a profound effect on their overall aggresiveness and depending on who you talk to that's a good or bad thing. Here's a shocker, and no offense intended but the more rural and thus less busy guys tend to side with the Safety nazis, while the few here from the Liverpool and London Fire Brigades long for the days of getting in and just "doin the job". I will tell you that one of the most shocked looks I've gotten here was when I asked one of the Brits if they do a secondary search. The reply..."what in tha ell is dat mate"? When I explained that the for us a secondary search is done as a matter of course to verify everyone's out they replied that as professionals you should only have to do one search and they expect it to be done thoroughly the first time....anything after that is a waste of manpower. But this is just one of many differences. As for the scenario it was left broad on purpose and while I know there are any number of variables I was just curious as to the sentiments of you all back home given the choice of stay or go under the condition of low air. Great input so far thanks Cogs B, As a part the discussion here it came up from the other officer on our watch (from London Fire Brigade) a story of a confined space rescue there in which they very nearly lost 5 trying to save one victim. In the end they basically went with scenario 2 in that real incident and were soundly hammered for it by the UK Health and Safety board, so much so that they revampd their entire SCBA procedure nationwide. Cogs

A frequent "jibe" directed at us Yanks that while said with a smile we know is meant literally and derogatorily.

Option 1. They are taught and firmly adhere to the FF comes first mentality. Let's just say that the discussion took a decidedly vociferous turn when I was "advised" that option 1 was the only correct way to operate. A lecture ensued about the vaildity of such tactics with the basic premise being we're no good to anyone if we're out of commission or dead. And while I have to admit that such a view does hold water after a lenghty explanation in defense of the decision to leave a victim my simple retort was "well then I'm just glad I'm not the victim". Bottom line here is that as far as I'm concerned once I lay a hand on a viable or potentially viable victim I become responsible for that person's life and I'll be damned if I'm going to desert them. My duty is to save lives even if, at times, that means I must risk my own. I'm trained, equipped and prepared to work in that extremely hostile environment. I'm also trained to deal with situations when they go south...no one else but firemen are. If we're not prepared and willing to give everything than people might as well call the garbage man. That's my $.02 By the way like you guys I'll take my chances with option 2 Stay Safe Cogs

Hey all thought I'd start the new year off right with a couple of good articles I found on another site about why we should all be using better quality Halligans. Enjoy. http://ironsandladde...e-not-the-same/ http://ironsandladde...up-for-failure/ Here's another one with a few tips on how to fine tune your tool http://ironsandladde...-your-halligan/ Happy New Year!! Cogs

to all: I wish you all a very Happy and Healthy New Year. Thanks for your service in 2011 and may 2012 find you achieving all you aspire to. Cogs

I'll jump in here with my ever so humble opinion on "helping out" neighboring departments as it applies in the volunteer world. Personally I find nothing wrong with it so long as there is a mechanism in place to assure accountability and that when "helping" one is familiar with how things are done by the department they are helping, otherwise they become a hinderance at best. I can remember back to when the roster of my FD had a space on it under the heading "non members assisting" and I can recall many fires in which such assistance was offered and accepted. If a department is going to allow non members to work jobs it is up to them to ensure that anyone who may assist in anything other than lugging a hose or hitting a hydrant is versed in their SOP/Gs. In another of my departments we regularly trained with our neighbors and on a number of occassions I assisted them especially during normal working hours if I was available, but this was only after I and my capabilities were known from those training sessions. This was not and is not freelancing it is using your expertise to assist a department in need IF they want it, which more often than not in my experience they have. Bottom line here is that to me if you are capable, willing and available you should assist if that need exists and the "host" department accepts the offer so long as doing so does not adversely affect you or your department. Just my .$02 Happy New Year!! Cogs

Good topic. I tend to believe that a proactive approach will go much farther is reducing or eliminating freelancing that a reactive one. What I mean by this is that while negative reinforcement will provide an immediate answer it generally will not stem the problem. Suspensions, loss of pay ect will have an effect but usually won't correct the problem fully. To stop freelancing one must have it ingrained in them from the begining that such action is neither promoted, tolerated or accepted and this is done through training. SOP/Gs should adress the issue by having a clear and definitive process by which on scene activities are carried out whether it be while responding on the rigs or if arriving POV, and that process is how members should train. If your department has not specified this than you really can't blame your members for not following "rules" that don't exist. If mutual aid responses create a problem than address them with your nieghboring departments and come up with a standard procedure which everyone follows. Reactive measures, i.e. punishments have their place and Officers should not be afraid to use them when necessary, but a culture of no freelancing must have a constantly reinforced foundation first for any FD if they want to see results. Just my $.02 Cogs

I have to agree that this site and ones like it are most valuable when used as an educational and professionally enhancing medium and by and large this site does that. But like wraftery I tend to think that a good rant is a necessity at times as well. That means that sometimes it will be inevitable that some will get offended, and they have every right to be. In the end though censorship of subjects or views that are contentious is counterproductive and in fact breeds ignorance. What we as professionals must remember is that not everyone believes as we do and that's ok. We can put forth our opinions on this open forum and defend them if necessary without getting personal. This type of frank and open exchange, when kept civil and conducted by those with open minds, can be an invaluable asset to us as individuals and to the Fire Service as a whole. Ignorance may be bliss but it is also one of the prime reasons progress is stifled in the fire service. Without opposing views and civil discussion and even debate of those views, we cannot and will not move forward. Sometimes a rant is the catalyst that sparks that much needed, and with any luck productive, exchange of opposing views and ideas. As a case in point I will take the 80+ pages of the Stamford thread. For many this may seem like nothing more than an endless back and forth that offers no solutions. Maybe that is so for some but for me and a number of my colleagues our ongoing discussions in that thread have provided a wealth of information and more importantly understanding which only benefits those who seek a lasting solution. Another touchy subject is always the career vs volunteer discussions. Here again many see nothing more than a endless fight, when in fact much insight can be gained for those willing to be open minded enough to accept it. There will always be subjects which will cause disagreements and when inflammatory comments or opinions make their way into a thread it may be best to simply ignore them....ignorance has a way of alienating those who show it. Sometimes those who speak the loudest (or most offensively) only do so to get attention and depriving them of it has a far greater effect than reacting to it. On this or similar sites for me it is quite simple, I take what I want and leave the rest. Professionalism takes on many forms besides just doing well at a particular job and one of the most important aspects of being professional is a willingness to accept differing opinions and defending our own without making it personal. Stay Safe Cogs

Mine and my family's hearts and prayers go out to the family and friends of the victims. What a senseless tradgedy. To the guys at SFRD, SPD and SEMS my best wishes to you all as you deal with this horrific fire and it's aftermath. I know a good many of you and have had the good fortune to have worked with many of you at home. I know beyond any doubt that you all did all that could be done, thank you for those efforts. Having worked jobs in which chlidren and families have perished I know how hard that can be, but I cannot in any way fathom having such a thing happen on Christmas. If there is anything I or my family can do please don't hesitate to ask. For any out there who may be thinking of Monday morning QBing this incident..., back off and be thankful it wasn't you that had to deal with this horror. God bless all of you who worked the job and thank you. Cogs

I just thought I'd write a quick wrap-up now to my life here in Afghanistan for 2011 since it appears we will be undergoing internet adjustments for a few days or maybe a week and I will be out of touch. So as you all lie nestled in your beds awaiting Santa let me start off by wishing all of you a very Merry Christmas and a Happy and Healthy New Year!! Well here it is, the end of 2011, the end of another year of work, fun, family, friends and fires. We have had our share of all of these things out here along with a few suprises to liven things up, just as I'm sure all of you have. For me 2011 has been a good year professionally overall in which I not only spread some knowledge but gained far more. I have had the opportunity to learn from firemen from all over the world including our newest additions from Kenya and Turkey. Tactics and terms may differ, but the one overriding lesson learned this year has been that firemen are firemen the world over. The drive to serve, to help those in need, knows no boundaries or borders and not even a war can suppress it. England, Canada, the Phillipines and India, South Africa and Namibia, Sri Lanka, Kenya, Turkey and Ecuador and yes the Good ole USA are all represented in our FD here at KAF and all of us carry with us that unique trait that calls us to be firemen. It is that common denominator that as overcome language barriers, cultural barriers and as it turns out tactical ones too. At first there were discussions on how to do this or that, more often than not met with nods, but not agreement...my way is better was the real view most of us held, which is only natural since that's what we know. But over time and in some cases alot of time it came to be that we developed the Kandahar way which in essence melded the experiences of everyone into a workable and more importantly a practical doctrine of how we do our job here. Not an easy task really but for the one universal fact we all shared...we are firemen and firemen deal with adversity and overcome it to accomplish the job of saving lives. That sentiment, that truth is as much a fact of life in the most remote Indian or Phillipino village as it is in New York or London or my hometown, Stamford, CT. As I do every year at this time I use the Christmas season to reflect back on the year past and take stock. I have been fortunate in so may ways from my time here. Food on the table and a roof over my wife and children's heads. Experience in personnel management and incident command along with a host of new friends and professional connections. A better understanding of other cultures and people and the chance to learn about them. Travel and let's face it more sun than I ever wanted. These are just some of the gifts I have been fortunate enough to recieve this Christmas here in Kandahar, but even out here in this remore hell hole there is yet another gift I have recieved, and it has afforded me the ability to work on some issues from back home, and that is the gift of time. Our 24 hours on are filled with work, calls, training, gym, station duties and so on and on, but our 24 off are ours to do with as we please...inside the wire of course which is a bit like prison..LOL. But that time off has been well spent dealing all manner of personal, family and business issues as well as another EMTBravo topic's issues as well. Yes even 7000 miles way I'm still able to actively take part in helping to resolve Stamford's long standing fire service conundrum. The internet and skype have been invaluable in that work although the time difference can be a bit of a nuisance sometimes...especially if I forget I'm 9 1/2 hours ahead. But maybe the greatest gift of all I have gotten out here is to have been a part of history in the making and the time I have been able to spend working with and for the men and women of our military....truly priceless. We have had many a sleepless night and some long hot days of incoming fire from the Talibastards and some injuries from those attacks, but mercifully as of today, Christmas Day 2011, at 1:11pm local time, no deaths on base. I have seen some grievous wounds working in the ER as a helping hand and watched many boys go home in flag draped caskets, but this is a war and a brutal one at that, and that is a part of war. As 2011 winds down I find myself wondering if this is all worth it. I guess I'm a hawk in that yes, in the end I believe it is. But I am not alone in that belief by any means. Most of the soldiers, sailors and airmen I work for and with out here share that sentiment and this I know because almost all conversations end up relating back to what brought us all together and why we are here in the first place. We may not go outside the wire but the world outside of it is always present here, like a black cloud that will not lift and the effects of this war we see and feel everyday at some point. So to my towel headed friends outside the wire I would just like to pass along a couple of heartfelt words to sum up our feelings for them as we ring out 2011....F*&K YOU!!!!! Looking back and refelecting on the year and the season, I'm drawn to think of the closing lyrics of my favorite Christmas song since I first heard it in 1975... "I wish you a hopeful Christmas I wish you a brave New Year All anguish pain and sadness leave your heart and let your road be clear They said there'd be snow at Christmas They said there'd be peace on Earth Alleliuah Noel be it Heaven or Hell the Christmas we get we deserve" I've been fortunate and all things considered I've been handed a good Christmas and the one I think my family and I deserve, I hope you all have too. Thanks for all you do in protecting the homefront, especially my Belltown Boys "A t W" since 1928 And to all Take care Stay Safe and God Bless Merry Christmas and Happy New Year !!!!! Cogs

I'll answer the last question first. Both here at work and back home assignments are determined by your seat on the rig, but the Officer has discretion to change assignments as necessay. Engines Co. assignments for working fires at work: 1st due: Officer Chauffer Nozzle Back up /Irons Door Control (when available) 2nd due: Officer/ search team Chauffer/water supply/2 out Search team Back up line Nozzle/ 2 out if no OV Back up line back up/OV if no #6 OV/2 out (when available) For AFA investigations or vehicle, rubbish or dumpster fires at work (single Engine response) Officer Chauffer Irons Can Gopher/nozzle for fires Gopher (if available) Engine assiggnments are similar at home but since there is no set number personnel the most important functions especially gaining entry and getting the first line in place are priorities Ttruck Co, at home (with the same discretionary use of the avavilable crew based on priorities upon arrival) Officer Chauffer Irons Can Roof OV I do not find there to be too many cons to this arrangement so long as flexibility is maintained when circumstances dictate deviating from the norm...like our situation here in Afghan. We have only 10 - 12 men to accomplish our structural mission here at KAF so while we do use set assignmnents and they work great, we have to maintain flexibility and use our personnel according to the circumstances as they arise. One of the major Pros for me here (and by and large back home as well) is that by assigning jobs by seat it helps me in keeping accountability of my crew(s).for 95% of our incidents. In a nutshell if an assigned seat is empty but the jobs not being done there is something wrong. Another plus for me is that everyone knows their job and can get right to it more often than not so I don't have to give orders or hold hands. This method met alot of resistance here at first but through drills and actual incidents, at least for the structural crews anyway, all are now on board and things are working smoothly. I'm sure others will chime in with their views and I look forward to those responses. Merry Christmas!! Cogs

"Times they are a changin" indeed. With budgets, jobs and for some VFDs there very existence on the line, I think we will continue to see a spiraling shift towards an ever increasing demand for services other than firefighting being placed on all of us. Diversification will be necessary and in fact probably mandatory, more and more with each passing year. Welcome to the 21st Century Cogs

There are a number of opinions as to why the merger was attempted back in 2008. These run the gamut from an inability of the volunteers to cover their districts, to excessive overtime paid to the employees of the VFDs, to the desire of the union to expand and increase it's political influence and coffers, and my particular favorite, the desire of then Mayor Malloy to increase taxes which could then be siphoned off to feed pet projects and cronies. What ever the reason or reasons the attempt failed miserably leaving the City less protected not more and with the specter of tax increases ever more present. And while I see your point about having crews at the ready, with the redistribution envisioned the gaps will be enough to cause concern. A far better way must be found to staff firehouses and my personal belief is that volunteers can and should contribute to that coverage. If volunteers are available nights and weekends, which by and large they are, then they should provide dedicated staffing in their firehouses during those hours thus saving taxpayers the cost of career staffing. This along with a host of other initiatives to standardize training, certification, responses, command and equipment is how best to integrate...IMO. Thus far both "sides" have held firm to their belief that only their way is best, further complicating an already mind boggling assortment of legalities, egos and agendas. I too hope for all to turn out well, and believe that it will as the pressure to solve this mess increases forcing both "sides" to the same table. Cogs

As I've stated many times before here IMO the "no cost" option is only no cost on paper. The redistribution of SFRD assests will create gaps in coverage as units are either disbanded or moved. I think the taxpayers should be made aware of exactly what this plan entails in terms of those redistributions and the possible effect that will have on their safety. In short order the operational effects on the ability of SFRD to cover the entire City will be felt and will need to be dealt with...at a cost in dollars far above "no cost", not to mention the cost in potential property losses and life the redistribution threatens. I think it is fair and prudent to say that there is no "no cost" option available and to continue to promote that notion not only misleads the public but in fact hurts SFRD and 786 as they are backed into the corner of unrealistic expectations. Public outcry when it's time to go back to the till to ensure proper coverage would be very damaging indeed to ALL of Stamford's FFs and our standing in the community. The work done by all to bring plans to the table should not be dismissed, in fact we should thank those involved for their efforts even if we disagree with them, alot of time, energy and effort when into their development, but like all plans revisons are generally in order once the reality sets in. A combination of both options is where we should be looking now keeping in mind that we shoud do so as partners not adversaries. Liquidation of VFD assets is not something I advocate, but working to maintain our ability to serve, including serving to ease the financial burden on taxpayers, is. I said it before I'll say it again, it's time to go back to the drawing board. Although miles apart what these plans show is that the foundation is there, it need only be strenghtened to achieve what's best for Samford's residents. Cogs

So who do we marry off to end it...

RIP FF Townes mine and my family's condolences to the family and Mount Vernon FD.

RIP and mine and my family's condolences to the family and Worcester FD.

5 or 6 over the last few years that I know of, but to be fair there may have been operational commitments that made attending difficult or impossible for at least some of them, I don't honestly remember. As far as bashing the union goes I'm not. I'm saying that the union has done and is doing nothing to support a combined approach to solving this mess. Union members have stated the "BP" is flawed, yet the union continues to endorse it while hammering the Mayor's plan unremittingly. And correct me if I'm wrong but it's my understanding that the union voted to allow the VFD drivers into SFRD. And the quote "my way or the highway' in my opinion was the attitude in 2008 and it seems still is hence Stamford Fire Truths which is quite good at bashing as well. I meant what I said about repectiing SFRD and I also meant what I said about working together to create a REAL cooperative plan. We all have our predjudices and mistrust, to overcome to say otherwise is flat out BS. I'm not perfect (although I know that's hard to believe... ...) and if my opinions are misgiuded I welcome the opportunity to be set straight by sitting down and looking at the situation reailstically based on ALL the circumstances not just the ones we want. I may have a huge ego, but my desire to provide the best possible service to our community TOGETHER far outweighs it. I'm more than willing to be proven wrong, in fact I hope I am,. but the actions thus far have not done much to show a spirit of cooperation from either "side". Let's change that situation and break the stalemate...what have any of us got to lose? Cogs

As usual a very well written, erudite and valid response. In response I can only say, and this is for everyone's consumption, that I and the majority of volunteers want nothing more that to work WITH our career colleagues. It is unfortunate that although the same attitude seems to be prevelant by many of the SFRD contributors here, we still are unable to connect. From my perspective nothing can happen until we are assured that our concerns are acknowledged and our voices heard. I have the utmost respect for the guys from SFRD, whether they believe that to be true of not it is so, and am thankful for the opportunities to work with them. But be that as it may I strongly believe that there is a wealth of experience and knowledge on my side of the fence as well.that has every right and in fact duty to be an integreal part in building a unified service. As you can tell I am of the belief that the majority of the issues stem from SFRDs treatment or should I say indifference, to our needs and concerns. I'm also sure that my opinions are probably somewhat biased, but in spite of that I and a number of other volunteers have made genuine attempts to cross the bridge only to find it blocked at the other end. What then is the answer. I have been told that the union cannot implement anything and that is true to an extent, but it can influence what happens and what options they support just as a volunteer membership can influence the direction their department takes by doing the same. Seems to me then that if enough members from each "side" convene, and work together at developing a plan we could also encouage our leaderships to pursue it. This is not fantasy, it is a means to break the stalemate and it all starts with one step. My offer stands as it has for some time now to meet with anyone genuinely interested in building a better combined unified service. In the end if we accomplish nothing more than building bonds of mutual respect we will have accomplished alot. I'm home in February and my email is in my profile...I'll be waiting. Cogs

I too hope to get out to Pearl and visit the Arizona memorial in which 1600+ U.S. servicemen are still entombed. Everyone should remember that it was this event that catapulted us into the most destructive and costly war in human history to date. It was also for many the last "good war" in which our side was clearly the "good guys". From this event the U. S. lost over 500,000 dead and hundreds of thousands if not millions more wounded to rid the world of the evils of Imperialist Japan and Nazi Germany. Let us never forget the sacrifices of Dec. 7th 1941 "the day that will live in infamy" and the world war that ensued. To the rest of the world and any would be conquerors and terrorists out there may they learn from history that to attack America will spell their doom. Cogs

Yes at least from a BFD perspective. As one of a number of members that scrutinized the plan objectively and made recommendations on what points needed addressing, I again know for a fact this took place. We never dismissed this plan out of hand simply because it was developed by SFRD, far from it in fact. The problems arise from the stalwart refusal of the "other side" to acknowledge that deficiencies exist or even entertain the notion that they might when seen from "our side" of the fence. Again a complete unwillingness to compromise or even acknowledege that our concerns may have merit and sit down as the "bigger person" to address those concerns directly. Yes I can especially in the early stages of this entire debacle when negotiations broke down and the VFDs decided to forego Malloys ill conceived abomination of a plan because the position of the City, SFRD and the union was my way or the highway. Since then I know an open door has existed for quite some time to anyone from the "other side" who is prepared to sit down and truly look at this situation as it is and how best to fix it...keeping in mind that this collective effort must be two sided not just one. There is no room for unilateral action, nor is there the legal authority for the City or SFRD to do so either. Until that fact has been acknowledged and accepted by ALL the parties involved I fear you may be correct in that we will not resolve this any time soon. I mean no disrespect but it may be that you do not fully understand the complexities of the situation here. Your point is a valid and logical one, except that it does not take into account that the issue of control is a major one, not from a ego standpiont at all but more so from one of survival. Both Malloy's plan and the "BP" do not provide any legal means for the VFDs to be integrated at all. They will be tolerated until such time as someone get's a hair across their a** and decides a full career fire department is in order....regardless of the actual circumstances. And before you jump up thinking I'm paranoid, look around at the many places this type of process has occured over the years. You will find many active, productive and valuabe VFDs have gone the way of the dinosaurs as piece by piece their share of the pie was consumed by the needs of the career component. One of the reasons I have been so staunch in my view of the Montgomery Cty system is that from the outset they incorporated the operational parameters of their integration and the means to achieve them for both "sides". Maybe more importantly they have also provided legal avenues for conflict resolution for each "side"..conflicts that no matter how well organized or integrated, any combination system will face. Such is not the case here now, nor has it been for many "integrated" or better yet "absorbed" VFDs, with the end result being the extinction of volunteering and any benefit that may have provided the community. I am not opposed to a unified department, nor are many of my volunteer colleagues. But until such time as the "other side" accepts that we are partners and treats us as such, there is just no moving forward....nor quite frankly should there be. Just a couple of questions: Why is it that it must be the volunteers in general and Belltown in particular who take that first step as the "bigger person"? and By what right is it that Stamford's career FFs are entltled to the position of dictating to Belltown what is "best" for our community? Cogs

I would prefer the first choice, could work with the second, but as you can imagine not too keen on the third....yet Cogs

Yes they have in respect to things like negotiating the parameters of SFRD in the houses, requiring standardized certifiication for all FFs and Officers career and volunteer alike, standardized and mutual training and a few other points. like standardized apparatus and equipment, and volunteer representation in both administrative and operational capacities. All of these items have been offered by the VFDs as a means to integrate the "sides" and all have been rejected out of hand because 786 refuses to accept an integrated chain of command consisting of career and volunteer as one .In other words it's all about the infamous control and the unions stance that only career personnel are entitled to or deserve it.. I know for a fact all of the above items were brought before the Task Force with the full knowledge and approval of the VFDs. and rejected by SFRD in the room and 786 outside of it without even a cursory examination or discussion....and this I know for a fact since I'm the one who brought them up, And oif course on page after page after page here I have asked my union colleagues to meet, sit down and work with volunteers collectively to develop an option to bring to our leaderships, again rejected out of hand...,even though there is absolutely nothing to lose and quite possibly much to gain by doing so. If in fact working together with Stamford's VFFs is on the union agenda they sure have a funny way of showing it. Rejection is not usually the way to begin integrating with partners (which like it or not will be a part of any final plan), but it works real well at stalling that process. Cogs