FFPCogs

Saluting is a tradition that could stand a resurgence. Cogs

I couldn't agree more, very well written and insightful article Fact is despite all the debating many of us here have unofficially already started the process Rep Heaphy speaks of. Now if we could just get the powers that be to follow suit we'd be well on the road to a lasting solution. Cogs

Well it's been a little while since I wrote so I thought I'd give a quick update. Overall things have settled down a bit. I've been reasigned back to the main station since my counterpart there went on R&R, and am now the Officer of Engine 3. Ths puts me back on the airfield which means lots of noise all day and all night. But this also allows for some intensive training on the various aircraft stationed here. A high point of that being the tour of an AC-130 or what we refer to as the flying death. Armed with a 25mm gatling gun capable I'm told of 6000 rounds per minute, a 40mm cannon and the big boy 105mm howitzer, this baby can really dish out the pain. And dish it out it does much to the dismay of our towel headed friends outside the wire. Call wise it's been rather slow with only one structure fire the past couple of weeks. Unfortunately due to it's rather remote location on base and the delay in notification there wasn't much left to save upon arrival. Other than that nothing but a few dumpster fires and smells and bells. On another front we have been recieving daily mail from the Taliban which usually consists of 6 or 7 rockets at about 5am. Some of the boys on the North side got a bit of a rude awakening the other morning as one of those rockets bounced not more than 50ft from their tent, careened over the runway and hit an unattended garbage truck without exploding. Maybe it was made in China. Seems there's a target of particular importance to our pals in the hills surounding the base on the North side and after a little research I managed to find out what it is...a fuel point with thousands of gallons of JP8 on hand. Needless to say with limited water and foam capabilities this is one of our "nightmare" scenarios. So far though their aim has been anything but true and the ordinance mostly duds..thanks again to the communist work ethic. But for all that the seriousness of life here has come crashing home the past week with a number of our boys being sent home on their final journey. I don't wish to upset anyone or dreg up memories but the other day was an especially sad one here as 5 service members were loaded aboard the now way too familiar C-17. As I stood on the tarmac adjacent to the ramp ceremony and watched as one by one each flag draped casket was taken aboard I drifted back in time. With "Amazing Grace" on the pipes playing from the loudspeakers my mind went back to the many times I stood in that long blue line on a surburban street, in front of a church as yet another of the 343 was driven past on the way to his final resting place. Now over my years working here or in Iraq I've been to alot of ramp ceremomies and at all of them I would think of the 343, but for some reason on this particular day the emotion and anguish felt on those days so long ago swept over me like a tidal wave. I thought of the loss to the families of these young soldiers. How in a split second the lives of so many people were irrevocably changed and with those thoughts came the realization that for 343 families back home that loss, that void has never been filled, and it never will be. I thought of these young boys who have given their lives in defense of our nation and all that is good about it. And with that I thought about the sacrifice of the 343 and how they exemplified what it means to be a fireman, what it means to be a hero. Under vastly different circumstances the honor, courage and strength of the American spirit shown brightly through the acts of these brave souls on the battlefield here and in the Towers on that fateful September morning. Finally as the ceremony drew to it's conclusion I thought about the sacrifices made by so many and felt the anger well up inside. The fanatics here have brought so much anguish to so many famiies back home and for what. Blind hatred and ignorance. Since that day last week I have often thought about the events of 10 years ago and what they have meant to me, my family and my Country. The anger persists, but it has been tempered by the realization that, be it the soldiers that I see here making their final journey home or the 343 brave heroes of 9/11, the world is a better place for all of them having been in it....even if only for a short time. Life goes on as it must, but as we move forward let us not forget the sacrifices made by so many and let us all try to do right by those who have given all so that others may live. Stay safe Cogs

I guess I'm just way to old school. Given the choice I prefer a hosebed that you don't have to leave the ground to access to stretch from and that includes mattydales (crosslays). But as we see time and again rigs just seem to get bigger and bigger as Depts, due to budget constraints, try to fit more into one package. I have never been a fan of multi-task Engines, (and even less so of quints) as my experience is that once everything is crammed unto a rig to perform multiple tasks it ends up not doing any of them particularly well. I can understand higher hosebeds due to the need to carry sufficient water, but even that has it's limits. Anything you need a ladder to access( and that includes repacking) is just too damn hgh to be truly practical..IMO. If a rig needs to carry more than 1000 gallons buy a damn tanker and leave the hose work to the engine. But hey I'm spoiled my FD has hydrants every few hundred feet and truth be told we could do without 5" as well.....but that's another topic. I guess the key point to remember when spec'ing out Engines is that when all is said and done FFs are going to have to operate off those rigs so the easier and safer it is for them to do so the better. Cogs

Well the truth of a random guy on the internet saying he has seen the document is really no different than the truth of a random guy on the internet saying it doesn't exist and he has never heard of it. But like you I believe the proof is in the pudding so an effort is underway to track down and produce said documnent...I guess only time will tell if in fact it does exist. Cogs

Well I had heard and suspected it existed, in fact a former BFD member supposedly has a copy of the letter from the IAFF to Stamford's local supporting the rival designation, but I had not seen it. Now we have a person that actually has seen a document that specifically cites Stamford's VFDs (sans Glenbrook what a shock) as rivals. An interesting turn of events to say the least with potentially far reaching implications. Cogs

Thanks for clearing that up. Upon rereading the info it seems that I was reading an older version of the By-laws from prior to Resolution 43 being passed. My apologies if I was in error.

OK fair enough, but don't the IAFF By-laws state that volunteer FDs along with a host of other "secondary jobs" are considered rival organizations? Cogs

Well it would appear that the U.S. DOL reversed or should I say amended that 1993 decision in 2002. The criteria established by the U.S. DOL in response to challenges to FSLA prior to 2002 and the CT law passed in 2008 prohibitiing CT City's from entering into CBA's that prohibit itheir career FFs from voluntering have created the legal justification for SFRD FFs to volunteer in Stamford. Should any choose to pursue that option and face ther wrath of their Union is another matter entirely. Cogs

How long ago was ther case you refer to decided? I did find references to a case in Montgomery Cty from the 1980's and while looking found this rather interesting article pertaining to career FFs volunteering from 2002 (especially the italicized paragraph) http://firechief.com...t_labor_adopts/ I also found this bit of the article to be of particular interest: ""The casual reader might conclude from this bulletin that “within their employer's jurisdiction” means the jurisdiction of any fire department employer. And many casual readers did. Within a day or two of the release of McCutcheon's opinion letter, I'd fielded at least 20 phone calls from fire chiefs of combination fire departments who wanted me to confirm that DOL had seen the light and freed them from the shackles of FLSA's overtime requirements. But I couldn't help them. The “jurisdiction” that DOL's Lockhart and McCutcheon addressed was limited to A county or city fire/rescue department,With career employees,Who volunteered with an independent private non-profit corporation fire (or rescue) department in the same county or city,Which “exercise day-to-day control over what positions volunteers hold, what they do and when they do it.”If your fire department jurisdiction meets all four of the criteria listed above, your career firefighters — like those of Virginia Beach and Montgomery County — have new volunteer opportunities. If not, hang onto your FLSA reference materials, because you still need them." I'll be the first to admit that I'm no labor lawyer but the Federal DOLs decision letter on FSLA as it applies to career FFs volunteering in the same jurisdiction does seem to me to allow SFRD employees to volunteer with Stamford's VFDs when using the above criteria: A county or city fire/rescue department, SFRD is a city fire department With career employees, SFRD is staffed by career employees Who volunteered with an independent private non-profit corporation fire (or rescue) department in the same county or city, Stamford's VFDs are independent private non profit corporation fire departments in the same city Which “exercise day-to-day control over what positions volunteers hold, what they do and when they do it.” The VFDs do excercise sole day to day control over what positions volunteers hold, what they do and when they do it So using the above as a guideline it would appear that as I have stated in fact it is the union's stance not FSLA that prohibits SFRD members from volunteering in Stamford. Cogs

As the example cited shows I really don't need a specific statement from L-786. Your Union General President on numerous published occasions has explained the Union's official and his personal stance vis a vis volunteers. So unless L-786 is going to go against your duly elected General President and the decisions of the Conventions the proof is quite clear to anyone with eyes to see. Let's look at this another way. Are you saying unequivocally and in an official capacity that L-786 does not now and never has viewed Stamford's VFDs as rivals? And are you also saying the L-786 does NOT prohibit it's members from volunteering in Stamford and that prohibition is due solely to FSLA? Cogs

As far as your questions in point one, well since I am not a member of 786 I cannot answer them. I can say in regards to L-786 citing of the VFDs as rivals that this is a commonly held belief. Although to be fair it seems that while most believe a document exists stating such apparently no one has actually seen it. But we do have the fact the CT saw the need to pass a law in regards to career fFFs volunteering as stated earlier and statements from the IAFFs General President to that effect such as: "Let me be as clear as possible. We as a union, by Convention actions, do not represent or condone volunteer, part-time or paid on-call fire fighters. This is also my personal position, as it has been from the time that I first joined the IAFF. It remains my position today as your General President, and I have reiterated this position to affiliate leaders on a number of occasions." Definition of CONDONE transitive verb: to regard or treat as acceptable So if your General President and by Convention your union does not condone volunteers, by definition it regards and will treat them as unacceptable..or in other words, rivals. On to the questions posed in the remainder of your post. Since I cannot definitively answer them and to speculate would most likely only inflame the situation i will only say that quite franky your concerns are those many of us share as well. And finally FSLA: My understanding is that under FSLA laws one cannot volunteer for their employer, which in the case of SFRD personnel is the City of Stamford, not the VFDs. I would also take that to mean that any future SVFD employees hired as firefighters would be prohibited from volunteering as such for the SVFD. Cogs

Well if changing the laws or updating them didn't happen I can think of a whole host of things we take for granted today that would still be illegal, including collective bargaining. We as Americans have every right to pursue what we believe to be fair or "right", so while some may disagree with this law the fact is those in favor persevered, presented their case well and ultimately got the change they sought...much to the benefit of many communities throughout the State. Cogs

True. I do believe that here in CT a law was passed a couple of years ago prohibiting municipalities i.e. the employer from prohibiting their career firefighters from volunteering so long as that activity does not conflict with Garcia (FSLA). Excerpt from Fire Chief magazine: Jun 13, 2008 11:13 AM Connecticut enacted legislation that codifies the right of career firefighters to volunteer during off-duty hours. The bill, An Act Concerning Volunteer Service by Paid Emergency Personnel or Paid Firefighters (H.B. 5646), received final legislative approval on May 7, became a public act on May 19, and was formally signed during a ceremony June 9, the National Volunteer Fire Council reports. The new law bars municipalities from entering into a collective bargaining contract that prohibits paid emergency personnel, including firefighters, from serving as active members of a volunteer fire department during off-duty hours. It also directs the state fire administrator to develop model guidelines for municipalities with paid emergency personnel and municipalities with volunteer emergency personnel to develop agreements authorizing career personnel to volunteer. “Both our career and volunteer firefighters are among Connecticut’s bravest public servants and an integral part of our communities,” State Rep. Sandra Nafis, the sponsor of H.B. 5646, told NVFC. “We’re pleased to have received the overwhelming support of the legislature to insure that our career firefighters have the choice to continue to serve as volunteer firefighters and support their communities.” Of course Union By-laws can still prohibit volunteering as long as that language does not appear in the CBA. Cogs

Yours is one side of a perfectly legitimate argument supporting your point of view. Others believe differently and in some cases have fought and won to retain their right to volunteer as firefighters in their communities. So while you say if your on the job and don't like the rule, quit ,others who stand on the other side of that perfectly legitimate argument will say if your on the job and don't like the rule fight it and win. Some have done just that. Unlike speed limits, seatbelt laws, helmet laws and booze consumption laws, volunteer firefighting is to many a noble and valuable service rendered to their community. To that end many feel that the right to do so shoud not be infringed upon because a law was passed in 1985 to protect migrant field workers that were being exploited by their employers. But in the end while a stimulating discussion, for now at least in terms of SFRD members volunteering in Stamford the law stands with you. Cogs

While I do understand the rationale behind this aspect of the stance, to me the individual should still retain the right to make his/her own decisions in regards to what they do with their life in their off time. What you see as justifiably "{protecting people from themselves" others see as an infringement on their personal freedom of choice. But here again this is a non sequiter since, as was pointed out earlier, the law (FSLA) restricts that choice as well. Cogs

If they are hired as firefighters than they would not be allowed to volunteer for the SVFD as firefighters under FSLA, Now should some other arrangement develop than I quess their ability to double dip will be dependent upon the terms of their contract. To that I would have to think that they would be as eligible for any "perks" as any other active volunteer that meets the rquirememts of any incentive program....lest someone decide they are being discriminated against. Cogs

Well you might have a case at that, but in the end it is irrellevant. As I stated earlier your union Local forbids it's mermbers from volunteering (in Stamford at least) and enforces that ban, that alone is reason enough that double dipping will not be an issue. Cogs.

You are absolutely correct CT, thank you for pointing that out. My apologies for being remiss in stating such. Although to be fair some believe that technically SFRD employees could volunteer for any of the City's VFDs since as independent entities the VFDs are not their employer. It is my understanding that FSLA is meant to prevent abuses by employers in forcing employees to work for no pay. Not sure about that but that is why I did not mention FSLA and cited only the union's stance. Cogs

To be fair the answers I will give to the above are based on what information I have from other members, as I was not in Stamford at the time this debacle began. My understanding is that the tax abatement was brought up to the previous administration and denied. I am not sure what supporting info, if any, was given to that administration other than the fact that tax abatements are in use a large number of CT cities and towns. As far as budgeted recruitement and retention, I do not beleive much if any City operating funds were dedicated to that purpose, in part I believe because with paid employees in house no one foresaw the need. In regards to other more substantial incentives, to the best of my knowledge they have not been pursued, because the general consensus is that any request for them would be rejected. I can say that of the various incentive packages we have put together there has been "proof of results" in the form of actual statistics and statements from the managers and administrators of similar programs. As of yet these proposals have not progressed, but our efforts continue to rectify that situation. As far as dues go BFD does not collect them so for us this is a non sequiter. i cannot speak on the other VFDs. At Belltown we have discussed an in house incentive program based on accumlated points. (For BFD we use a point system whereby each call, drill, meeting, work detail ect constitutes a point and to remain in good standing members must achieve the minimum annual point totals). What this wouod entail is say for 100 points a member recieves a helmet flashlight, for 250 maybe a new harness, 500 a new pair of boots, 1000 a new leather helmet or gift card, and so on. To be fair annual points would be cumulative so that each years totals can be saved towards a more desired "perk". or towards items not yet recieved...after all how many flashlights does a guy need. This program would not use City funds, but rather funds accumulated through fund raising efforts specific to that program. I am not sure what the status of that proposed program is at the moment. Cogs

My understanding is that many of the VFDs former paid personnel were on par with SFRD LTs or in some cases Capts, but quite honestly I do not know for sure. I for one advocate for a more reasonable salary situation to the tune of FFs recieveing FFs pay across the board. As far as I'm concerned those that seek higher wages can do so by taking the SFRD test, getting hired, puting in the time and then getting promoted. Let me just add that here again when considering costs the cost for incentives for volunteers pales in comparison to the salaries in question. After posting earlier I did a little quick math. Even at 13k per vollie the number of personnel gained far outstrips a career service by a margin or 6 to 1. So in other words when managed properly for that investment in dollars the SVFD could gain 6 active volunteers for the price on one career FF at top scale including benefits. $13000 + 2500 (t.o gear) + 1000 (FF1,2 / EMT) x 6 = $99,000 1 x $100,000 (65k salary + 35K OT/benefits) + 2500 (FF 1,2 / EMT at the Academy) + 2500 (t.o.gear) = $105,000 Cogs

I have no problem with you or anyone calling it part-time paid firefighters either, but whatever term you or I may want to place on firefighters that recieve such incentives, the fact is the law states that they are considered volunteers. And let me clarify that while incentives may be allowed up to $13,000 it is a sure thing that no such amount would be granted...and truth be told it is not sought at this time either. I am fervent in my belief that some of the options listed above will serve our needs and thus the community. This belief has gained a considerable following and is growing. If or when any action is taken to encourage the implementation of such a program is quite another matter. For my part I will pursue the incentives option as far as circumstance and reason dictates as will other like minded individuals. Unlike our career colleagues, we do not enjoy the luxury of an international organization dedicated to looking out for our interests, so we must do so for ourselves. Other than in the retention of current SFRD members jobs, whether or not that effort is viewed negatively by the IAFF in general or L-786 in particular is frankly of little concern to many of us, for neither I or any other volunteer answers to that organization. Quite honestly the contemptous view that is so often portrayed of volunteers by the Local along with the specific citing of SFCo,, TOR, LR and BFD as rival organizations, speaks volumes about the cooperative relationship that we can expect to exist under the SFRD plan. There is now growing number of us that believe that volunteers can and more importantly will provide the service necessary to our City, an incentives program is but one tool in the toolbox to help realize that goal. Cogs

Incentives can be tough to make work, especially when not managed properly. One of the key elements of successful incentive programs is that ithey are not tied to one aspect alone. When I say comprehensive that is exactly what I mean. We have found plans that offer stipends for particpation, as well as pay-per-call, along with inclusion in municipal health plans and a LOSAP. Others have all that plus certification stipends, college tuition assistance for fire related courses, tax abatements, scoring preference on ALL municipal civil service exams, gym memberships and live in opportunities. Now some may look at all these "perks" and see only the expenes involved, but no matter how expensive these perks may be they are without fail considerably less than the cost of salaries + benefits to expand an all career service. This is why communities support them. And by the way while compensating volunteers does in fact negate the term volunteer by definition again it must be remembered that the definition is irrellevant as far as the law is concerned. To put this in perspective Federal law allows incentives, or nominal compensation, of up to 20% of the salary for a particular job. For our purposes the top wage of a Stamford FF is roughly $65,000 sans benefits. This allows nominal compensatiion in all forms combined for volunteers of just shy of $13,000 per member while retaining the status of a volunteer under the law. This may cause consternation to some, but for others it is an opportunity and it is one that we as volunteers have every right...if not responsibility... to pursue in our efforts to provide adequate and effective fire protection to our community.. Fire protection no matter how it is provided is an investment and the single greatest failing of Stamford's volunteers has been in not reminding City Hall over the years of that fact. I would venture to bet that had these programs been actively and vigorously pursued in years past this 70+ page discussion would not be taking place. This will change since even as we speak many more eyes are being opened to the fact that volunteers are an investment not an expense and, when utilizing the guidelines advocated, they are one that will prove cost effective. Cogs

Well here's another quick update from always sunny Kandahar Afghanistan. The past week has seen us relatively busy running about 5 calls a day on the structural side of the house. Most of these are smells and bells calls which have turned out to be nothing. My conrades on the crash side have had a few calls as well a day, mostly hot brakes although they did get an engine fire on a fully armed Harrier yesterday. All turned out well. Now for us structural boys yesterday was for us a busy one. 15 calls ,only two of which involved any actual fire though. Both of these were vehilcle fires. The first was a Humvee with the engine compartment going, which was doused immediately. The other was a large "Jingle" truck/tanker hauling fuel. A 'jingle truck" by the way is what the locals use to transport material. They are so called because the exterior of the vehicle is adorned with small bells and murals depicting any number of religious or cultural scenes. Anyway this particular Jingle had the cab rolling good and impinging on the loaded tank on arrival We hit the cab fire while cooling the tank and all ended well...for us. The driver on the other hand lost his indentity cards in the fire as was thus escorted off base by the MPs after a brief interrogation. We have had a number of rockets come in of late. no injuries or fatalities and only minor damage. During these episodes we are routed to the sector points closest to the impact zone to stand by, under cover of a bunker of course, until the all clear is given and we then do what needs doing. Of course in the event of injuries we are expected and have in the past responded into the "hot" zone while under fire. But of late that hasn't been necessary. I also got the opportunity the other day to go to a part of the base I had not yet seen. This is on the Northside. As we drove along checking our EMPs (emergency water points) in the 125 degree midafternoon sunshine it dawned on me that "hey, we at the wire". And sure enough we were, not more that 10ft from Talibanistan. I watched as some local shepards tended their flocks a mere 100 ft away. They waved and we waved back and everyone was all smiles....of course I was thinking something entirely different like "is this guy trying to find a hole in the wire"? Well not to worry there were guard towers aplenty and guards to man them too. But it did make for an interesting afternoon diversion. One more note and this is a sad one. Yesterday saw two ramp ceremonies next door to the main fire station on the airfield. We happened to be there for both occassions so I attended with the permission of our Chief. For those who do not know, a ramp ceremony is held when the body of one of our soldiers is loaded aboard an aircraft, in this case C-17s, for his final trip home. While one of these ceremonies was ongoing I saw two medivacs choppers as well as a C-130 dropping off more wounded. Our Fire Station is adjacent to the hospital. It is these tragic events that bring the reality of what our boys endure here front and center. God Bless em. Unfortunately I don't have any pictures as of yet to share, but when I do I will post them. Of course due to security we are extremely limited as to what we can and cannot share, but I'm sure you all understand. Thanks to all for serving back home, especially my fellow " Belltown Boys"...ATW since 1928 Stay Safe Cogs

Incentives are generally tied to participation, and that is the avenue that we see as the most practical. As for who is eligible. well as Pat said we're not looking to hand out "perks" like candy nor should we. Active members, those who respond, participate and work to the required levels would recieve any incentive, those that don't, won't.. Now what that level of particpation will be has to be determined. I favor very stringent rules and guidelines that include not only call responses but training, certifcation, scheduled duty tours and in house work duties as well. Others I'm sure favor a more lenient approach. As with anything compromise will dictate the final result, and that is how it should be. Since your union forbids active volunteering I don't forsee this as a major problem in Stamford. SFRD members that also hold non-active membership in any of the City's VFDs cannot and do not respond, to do so means they face sanctions from your union as we have seen in the past. So no I don't think any of your union brothers will jeaporidize their employment for any nominal perks offered by the VFDs. Nothing and frankly so what. If a person joins and meets the minimums required then they would be entitled to recieve those "perks" would they not? They get their "perks" and we get the level of service we require. A win-win. Believe it or not so do I, but be that as it may I am a pragmatist. The world in which we live is a far different one than it was in 1980 when I joined the BFD. Without going into a long diatribe on why the fact remains that times have changed. You know over and over in this very thread I have seen it said that Stamford's VFDs cannot live in the past. I couldn't agree more. Moving forward into the 21st Century...progress... takes many paths, one of them being implementing a comprehensive volunteer incentives program. Cogs