FFPCogs

True dat. Not endorsing simply citing an example.

True enough, but once enacted a municipality is on the hook to pay LOSAP just like it is to pay the pensions of it's full-time employees. A deal is a deal is it not? So yes past "earnings on the incentive must be paid, but a LOSAP or any other program could be dropped from date X forward and the payments for all those who would become eligible transferred to other programs to be used in the here and now. The will of the voters is often ignored until the voters get fed up with those ignoring their voice and remove them. I'm sure there are voters out there right now who feel that public sector employees are getting too much and feel their voice is being ignored in that regard. Once enough people agree there will be a shift in the commissions, or politicians who make those decisions....ala Wisconsin and Ohio et al. So while it may take awhile it IS the voters who ultimately decide. And to be frank uneducacted voters or worse those who don't vote really have very little ground to stand on when complaining or being ignored. It is not the fault of FD X that the voters didn't act when they had the chance to be heard now is it? Cogs

Well to paraphrase that great American writer Mark Twain: I guess the "rumors of their death have been greatly exaggerated"

Nowhere in any State does it say they can't either. I understand that some find any benefit offered to volunteers to be the antithesis of what it means to volunteer, and to an extent that is true. But by the same token new challenges require new thinking. As everyone knows volunteerism is down and while many (including myself) volunteer and neither want nor recieve any benefits, not everyone thinks as we do. To attract enough new members and keep the ones we have in the world of today means that we have to adapt to the realities of the situation we're in. That reality is that very few people do something for nothing today. I'll be the first to admit that the jury is out on many incentives that have come down the pike, but not all programs are failures everywhere either. It may be time to reevaluate what is and isn't working. If it works keep it, if it doesn't find something new and try it. Remember that ultimately it is not volunteers who decide but the taxpayers, for they foot the bill for the service they get. Volunteers, even well compensated ones, still cost far far less than a full time career service, and it is up to the taxpayers to decide how and in what amount they want their money spent for their fire dept. Just one last thing on this to reiterate what was already addressed. If any volunteer feels adamant that taking an incentive or benefit offered is morally, ethically or in any other way wrong than they can voluntarily not take it. That is their decision to make for themselves, but it is not one they can make for all volunteers. To get back on topic, while I see the pratical application of coverage to be a difficult endeavor, it is also one that just might be worth the effort to the benefit of all volunteer FFs. Cogs

Matt, Like everyone else here I'm sorry to hear about your illness and hope that you recover fully and quickly. And like most here I think that extending the same health coverage to volunteers or should I say payment for that coverage would be extremely difficult at best. Personally I think the only viable option would be to allow volunteer FFs to enroll and self pay in a municipality's group plan for it's employees. This might be helpful to some members such as those with no coverage or those who would pay less going thru the city as opposed to their employers. But the idea of having volunteer and career FFs recieveing the same health benefits becomes too complicated either because 1) it woud be a nightmare to maintain any such program based on participation (as 38ff pointed out) or 2) it would simply be too expensive for full coverage based solely on membership with no criteria to recieve the benefit. That said I will address that IMO I think every active (i.e. particpating) or veteran volunteer FF should recieve whatever benefits their department's can legally secure for their services. For those who feel this is "against" what it means to volunteer, by all means they are entitled to that opinion, but they are also entitled to refuse or return any such benefits offered them if that is their personal belief. Cogs

I'll take a bite on this one. I agree 100% with the courts decision. The First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech and association, even when those associating and their speech is unpopular. Although this lunatic and his followers are a reprehensible, dispicable and ignorant bunch as far as I'm concerned, that doesn't mean they should be stifled. To silence these people would open the door to far more insidious censorship and curtailment on the liberties of all of us. If you think it can't happen here, think again. A look back into the history of just the 20th century amply shows us that. Everyone knows of Hitler (or should) but do they know that dictatorship in Germany didn't start the day Hitler and his Nazis were voted into power, it came about over time as laws were enacted that elimated personal freedoms "for the good of the Country" in the name of the "people". Silencing opposition is step number 1 in the dictator's handbook and it starts with the silencing of the unpopular. It is also the one we in this Country have the most power to prevent taking hold through our commitment to upholding the First Amendment...even when we disagree with messages spewed in the name of hate. Freedoms are precious...all freedoms...but maybe none more so than our freedom to speak and associate, because without them you will never have the rest. Cogs

Good to see FDNY is sticking with what has proven to be THE BEST aerial platform. No one else even comes close.

http://www.firehouse.com/news/top-headlines/worcester-deputy-chief-touts-rational-aggressiveness Worcester Deputy Fire Chief John Sullivan tackles the question, "Are we losing our edge in the name of safety"? I hold off on this for now other than to say yes, I think we are. What about you? Why? Looking forward to a good discussion. Cogs (edit) Correction: Chief Sullivan was not the IC at the Cold Storage fire.

The Daily News didn't have much in the way of his injuries, it just stated that he is expected to survive. I hope he is doing well and has a speedy recovery. Apparently the shooter won't be taking shots at anyone else since the PD put him out of our misery. Thanks NCPD. Cogs

I'm not sure you do. As I stated earlier the career vs volunteer debate manages to creep into many of the threads here (and elsewhere) regardless of the topic at hand. Invariably the lines get drawn as neither "side" looks at the issue for what it is but dutifully stands toe to toe on their "side" of the fence. A good example being this thread which is not about career firefighters but volunteers, yet here it is again. Another would be the ubiquitous use of the standard caveat "but" as in "volunteers help the community but....." or "paid really care about the community but....." Now if some think I'm "single minded" or anti-career, that's fine, we are all entitled to our opinions. I happen to believe differently. A review of the topics here will amply demonstrate who stands where and who is willing to be objective a majority of the time, and who is consistently "single minded to a fault" in expressing their opnions of the issues. It will also show who reaches out across the "line" regularly and who doesn't. Great, we need more like you then. People who have a truly objective view of the fire service and who realize that both career and volunteer firefighters share the commitment to provide for the safety and welfare of the communities they serve...communities by the way that have chosen their service. Thank you Cogs

This argument is laughable and I'd be laughing if the same beliefs weren't held by so many here. This attitude is why we have problems. To equate volunteer firefighting with leisure fishing is just idiotic. Fair enough. By that logic then career FFs don't need coverage either, after all you knew the risks when you got hired. Too bad if your family suffers. Don't like it get a job as a fisherman. Cogs

I too have no problem being held (and having been held) to a higher standard as we are in positions of trust. As for the headlines, as most have said nothing but shock value. I remember a case here in Stamford not too long ago involving a volunteer FF and allegations of child pornography. Now this individual was an accountant (?) yet our wonderful Ragvocate had to make sure the headline said "VOLUNTEER FF arrested blah blah blah. How about "accountant arrested"..hmmm just isn't as eye catching is it. Unfortunately by virtue of our service (paid and violunteer alike) we will be scrutinized more closely and our failings used publically for the amusement of others. Best to stay clean and have no worries. BTW IMO if guilty they both deserve whatever they get and more for preying on the weak. Cogs

Grow some skin huh? learn something? Please...my hand is always extended in the spirit of Brotherhood and working together and always will be regardless of the fact that it has been slapped away by my career "Brothers" so many times I've lost count. Maybe some should review the threads on this site (and others) and see just how many times the great divide shows itself even when the threads themselves have absolutely nothing to do with it...this one being a case in point. This thread isn't about career FFs at all but volunteers, yet here again the lines are drawn and the debate rages. Just look back in this thread and see where it turned. Now there's a lesson to be learned. Also, just because I or others disagree with many of the views held by some of our career counterparts doesn't mean we're anti-career, it means we disagree with their views, nothing more nothing less. Cogs

So to sum up this and just about every other thread: Volunteer: Black Career: White Volunteer: Up Career: Down Volunteer: Dog Career: Cat Volunteer: Left Career: Right Volunteer: All firefighters are Brothers Career: Only career firefighters are Brothers, volunteers are untrained, uncertified, unmotivated, uneducated scabs Volunteers: We all face the same risks when the bell hits Career: Only career firefighters face risks, volunteers are untrained, uncertified, unmotivated, uneducated scabs Volunteers: We are professional in the performance of our duty Career: Only career firefighters are professional, volunteers are untrained, uncertified, unmotivated, uneducated scabs Volunteer: We want to work together Career: Only career firefighters can work together, volunteers are untrained, uncertified, unmotivated, uneducated scabs Volunteer: We meet the standards required Career: Only career firefighters meet standards, volunteers are untrained, uncertified, unmotivated, uneducated scabs Volunteers: We should be indemnified because we risk our lives to help others Career: Volunteers shouldn't be indemnified, volunteers are untrained, uncertified, unmotivated, uneducated scabs Volunteer: I'm better than you because I don't get a paycheck Career: I'm better than you because I get a paycheck, volunteers are untrained, uncertified, unmotivated, uneducated scabs I think you get the point. Cogs

I always like to get the insights of my colleagues in the fire service on incident management and size up. In that vein I'm starting this topic to tap into the knowledge and experience of the contributors here. While pictures are good I like videos as they offer a more dynamic and true representation of what's going on. In this one the FD is not on scene yet, so it's open and there's no action to critique. (edit) When posting replies to this video please identify that your response is in regards to scene #1 ( there are now 2 different incidents in this thread to discuss) Here is scene #1: I'll reserve my comments on the video so as not to spoil it. Take a look with no audio and describe your tactics based on the following; You're the officer, you have a driver and 2 FFs on the crew with you. This is what you pull up on. It's unknown if anyone is inside and the next due Engine and the Truck are still 3 mins out......what would you do? Cogs ps If anyone has any other videos in which the FD has not yet arrived or is just arriving please post them for discussion.

Chief it's good to see that you realize how what we post exposes our feelings vis a vis all firefighters. You have made your feelings known quite clearly time and again. Thankfully as you said repetition breeds retention for our younger more impressionable contributors. Cogs

Exactly!!

I also see the Chief's point but your comments hit the nail squarely on the head. The community that relys on volunteers in any way, shape or form must offer them the same protections. You are correct it is no different that workmen's Comp. Maybe some contributors here believe volunteers are not entitled to that coverage either if they are injured while performing their duty. I always love a good hearty laugh, and your assertions that I consider myself a "have not" is one of the best ones I've had in quite awhile...thanks. The point of my previous post is simply that volunteers have the same right and responsibility to provide for their memberships as career firefighters do, regardless of whether or not they meet your or anyone elses "standards". It is no different that a union providing for it's members by bargaining for the best possible conditions regardless of how "good" some of those firefighters are. Do I oppose minimum staffing? No I do not, but the point was made. Were the rest of the items cited also ludicrous? Of course they were, just as ludicrous as the arguments that support denying firefighters coverage because they don't meet your standards. That is not your choice to make, but that of the community which chooses to rely on volunteers, because, to use your own words, "Some where along the line the government entity" felt that volunteers "were better deal for the citizenry as a whole then the alternatives" . Part of that deal is providing for those volunteers who willingly accept the responsibility of being a firefighter for that community. As I see it the ugly truth is there are firefighters who believe a paycheck entitles them to a monopoly on being deemed a firefighter. Sorry but that just ain't so by a long shot. And JohhnyOV I agree 100% that there should be absolutely no diference in standards between career and volunteer firefighters. Be that as it may for now at least there are and that is not by my choice but by the choice of those empowered to make that choice. Given the authority I would indeed tie coverage, incentives and any other "perk" to performance standards, but until that time comes I will strive to ensure volunteers are provided for under the conditioins that exist ...if for no other reason than they risk their lives in the service of others. After all is that not the cornerstone of what it is to be a fireman? Cogs

While this may be true according to Websters the fact is the law says differently when defining a volunteer...and it is the law not Webster's definition that matters. The very same reasons that are often cited for the lack of volunteers or their "standards" cuts both ways. If we are to require considerably more training, certification ect from our members we need to offset that committment somehow for the impostion those requirements put upon them and their families. Or do you feel this is an unfair arrangement? If so I would find that somewhat hypocritical since it's no different than a union bargaining for conditions over and above their base salary for hours worked in order to "look out" for their members. Do you honestly believe that a VFD should not do all it legally can to "look out" for it's members? Well again if so please practice what you preach and stick to negotiating salaries for hours worked, because as a taxpayer I don't want to pay (nor should I have to) for your sick leave, vacation, overtime, health benefits, training, minimum staffing or any other item or compensation beyond your base salary that you negotiated and recieve to do your job. Cogs

Great replies thus far. There's not much to add to scene 1, you guys have done a good job of covering the factors involved. I'll just throw in my $.02 to say that with a crew of 4 I too would hit the plug on the way in. That amount of visible smoke coming in would definitey indicate to me that there's a good fire working and I'm gonna need water. I tend to agree with the idea of hitting the garage from the exterior with the deck gun to get a quick knockdown of the visible heavy fire with my tank water. Although I would leave that to the Chauffer while I did a 360 and my remaining FF stretched an 1 3/4 to the front door. Like everyone else I would assume roof trusses unless I knew otherwise, (which if this was my 1st due area as a good officer I would). But that doesn't negate that we still have to get a primary search going if we're unsure if anyone is still inside. With the other units on the box still a few minutes out, once that heavy fire is darkened down and my plug is charged it falls on us to get that search going as we stretch our line inside the front door towards the garage. Depending on conditions in the main house, I may very well leave one FF with the line at the door to the garage while the other FF and myself search. I have noticed that some hold fast to the 2 in 2 out "rule" and I do not in any way fault that decision. For me though I believe that an aggressive attack is called for in most cases to achieve a succesful outcome. That is not to say suicidal actions, but more so calculated risks based on the circumstances and the experience and abilities of my crew and myself. To me both scenes 1 and 2 allow for what I call "safely aggressive" action (as opposed to aggessively safe) on the part of the 1st due Engine. And this even if every member of my crew is not a highly experienced grisled old Jake. I'm a firm believer in the following philosophy (from FDNY Engine Company Operations chapter 5 color and italics are mine): 5.1 ENGINE COMPANY OFFICER 5.1.1. The engine company officer will have more influence on the outcome of a fire operation than any other member on the scene. The attitude this officer displays will become a model for the unit's firefighters to follow. The manner in which orders are given and assignments made sets the tone for the entire engine company operation at a fire or emergency. Officers who are serious about training and expect a high level of professionalism from the members of their company will see it reflected in their unit's performance at drills, fires, and emergencies. For me I tend to lean towards a more aggressive posture as a matter of course, but that posture is (and has to be) tempered by the facts, the safety of my crew, what they are capable of and what my experience tells me. Hope to see more input on both scenes Cogs

You're right Chief, sorry for confusing the thread. But since we already have 2 seperate incidents here we can identify each as such Scene #1- Garage fire Scene #2 - Multi house fire. I'll try to edit my posts above to reflect this update. If anyone wishes to pass along their insights please identify the scene accordingly. To that end here is some more video for scene #2 shot from the rear. Cogs

I'd say so.

Ok here's one that's a bit more......interesting. (edit) When posting replies to this video please identify that your response is in regards to scene #2 ( there are now 2 different incidents in this thread to discuss) Here is scene #2 Same deal as before, you as first arriving officer, a driver and 2 FFs. Additional units are still few minute out. I'll get it started. As stated above it's a given we will be on scene operating alone for a few minutes. Based on that I would drop off 1 FF to wrap and charge the plug on the way in and position our rig between the center house and exposure 4, leaving room in front of both for the Truck Companies. Upon arrival I would immediately request additional resources..i.e. at least another full box assignment for manpower, master streams, FAST and the utilities co. while making a quick 360 of the scene. I would order my other FF (w/Can/Hook) to spend a minute or so doing a survey from the front of the center house to determine if anyone is viable inside (there's a car in garage) while my hydrant man charges the plug. Once my plugman gets to the front of the house and upon completing my 360 we would to attempt to get to any known victims(maintaining radio contact with the Chauffer throughout). Since there doesn't appear to be any fire or smoke on the 1st floor and fire seems to be only in the rear 3/4 corner of the 2nd and the majority of it is in the attic to me it's worth the risk to at least check it out as much as conditions allow. If no immediate rescue exists or is possible then I would write off that house and concentrate on all of us getting a 2.5 into position upstairs inside exposure 4 (gray/green house on right) since the wind is blowing in that direction and that is the most threatened exposure. My goal here would be to cut off the fire spread and save as much of that house as possible. If the position becomes untenable I would withdraw and regroup as additional units arrive. I would assign initial incoming units as follows unless conditions rapidly deteriorate to the point where the operation becomes defensive only: My Engine - Chauffer operates deck gun to control exterior fire on exposure 4 and then hit main body of fire in building of origin while we stretch line inside exposure 4. 1st due Truck - set up in front of center house for master stream and primary search of exposure 4 2nd due Engine - hit a different plug and provide water supply for 1st due truck and back up line into exposure 4 3rd due Engine - come in from opposite direction to hit another plug for it's water supply, position the rig between exposure 2 and center house and have Chauffer operate deck gun to control exterior fire on exposure 2 then hit main body of fire in building of origin while crew stretches 2.5 into exposure 2 Rescue - Primary search of exposure 2 After that it's the Chief's ball game. I'm sure some might find my tactics questionable so hopefully this will spark some good discussion. Cogs

Thanks Mbendel. I revised my original post to make things a little more interesting once I realized my audio wasn't working. I've asked all to watch it without audio so we are not aware of the status of any occupants. Cogs

Guys, Let me throw a couple of tidbits out here that hopefully all (paid and volunteer alike) will heed in the future. 1) A longtime ago a very wise person once told me "careful what you say (or type in this case) because once it comes out of your mouth (or keyboard) the harm is done and you can NEVER take it back". Moral of the story....think before you speak (or hit enter) 2) When you point at others there's three fingers pointing back at yourself. ( If you don't think so point with your index finger...where are the middle, ring and pinky?....yep that's right, pointing right back at you) Moral of this story....Look at yourself before pointing out the faults of others or their departments Just one more for thought from Eleanor Roosevelt: " Great minds discuss ideas Average minds discuss events Small minds discuss other people" Which are you great or small? More importantly, which would you rather be? Cogs