FFPCogs

Please understand I am in no way trying to hijack this thread, but since some very valid questions have been posed by Sq47, I felt I should address them. The test can be compiled using a variety of generic and readily available older State certification tests and/or career promotional tests updated to reflect current trends, as well as information specific to any given department(s). The test can be compiled by the department training officer/division, a collective of nearby departments training personnel, or better yet the State fire academy or a private firm. The testing can be adminstered by any proctors deemed appropriate by the department these include but are not limited to in house personnel either appointed or chosen by the membership (yeah I know voting again), from nearby departments or through the State's fire training division. In somer cases where possible again an outside testing firm could be used. To ensure the most equitable outcomes candidates should be given randomly assigned personal identification numbers and differing test versions at the commencement of the testing process. Obviously no system is foolproof, but testing does help level the playing field as well as helps to determine ones qualifications for a position. Additionally testing increases the likelyhood of garnering the "best" people as they have put in the time and effort to become eligible. To me this is yet another area in which we volunteers need to move past our long held traditional methods to embrace the climate of today's fire service. Cogs

Your departments policy on reading list and study material is also just what I had in mind...but since I've been accused here on EMT Bravo of being "long winded" I was trying to keep it short... . In regards to your view on step 4 and as much as I may agree with it, for many VFDs voting candidates into officer positions is a cornerstone tradition. And while tradition can at times be an impediment to progress (as we ALL know), to me the whole point of the first 3 steps is to get a qualified personnel pool from which to choose. This would allow for a continuance of a very strong tradition, while narrowing the possibility of simply placing the most popular in place...at least to some degree. Any member popular or not would have to put in the minimum of time and effort to even be considered eligible for a slot. Not perfect, but possibly better than some other criteria/selection processes VFDs use out there. Cogs

Spin, I will not speak for anyone else..but I will say that there have been many reasons expressed as to why a unification of Stamford's volunteer fire dept.s WON'T work. I came up in the "system" here and I have just have to say that for all the myriad of reasons attempting to consolidate won't work, there is one pressing reason why it HAS TO work. I would hope that the survival of any and/or ALL of the VFDs here would outweigh any reasons there may be to not try it. Cogs

AMEN !!!

Spin..... FINALLY someone who gets the point !!!!! Cogs

BMeehan, Thanks for the compliment. I have in the past and continue to believe that volujhteer coverage 24/7-365 is possible. It is in place and working elsewhere, and for all the desire to be "special", VFFs in Stamford are no different than those anywhere else. If they can do it, so can we. Is it a daunting task to set up and implement such a system...absolutely Is it possible to do..absolutely. We can do something or we can do nothing, the choice is there for people to make....and once made we will all have to live with the consequences. Cogs

Yes, MA still requires all FFs hired through the State civil service system to be non-smokers, as do a number of other states and individual depts. I'm sure any off duty activity could also be prohibited given the right legal and lobbying team. In regard to the health and safety issues faced by career FFs volunteering in another jurisdiction, as I said their doing so would be well... voluntary, and the volunteer dept would have take the responsibility of workers comp in case of injury ect. Long term effects are what they are...(although I do not have the source in front of me) I believe statistically more off duty career FFs are injured pursuing their secondary means of income than by responding to fire/emergencies as a volunteer FF. By the logic of the argument that off duty activities can be regulated, ANY off duty activity that may POSSIBLY result in injury should then be prohibited. No side jobs as a plumber, electrician, roofer ect. especially since those types of work activities do carry a very real potential for injury..just as much as volunteering as a FF. To that end drinking alcohol off duty would fall in that category as well..everyone knows drinking can lead to long term health issues, not to mention DWIs and injury from aclohol related accidents. We could go on and on about the health and safety concerns..fact is career FF volunteering is just as safe as any other off duty work activity. And to simply address city A having responsibilty for protecting village B. It really boils down to a firefighter who works for city A taking responsibilty for protecting his own village be it B, C D or E. In the end, I will say again that if life safety is the PRIMARY concern then a career FF volunteering is only doing what is in THEIR communities best interest by doing so...they are protecting the lives of their neighbors. Cogs

And why shouldn't we....after all the IAFF ruling directly affects many small city and town volunteer departments who formerly relied on those career FFs who were members to cover the usually short daytime hours. This they did OF THEIR OWN FREE WILL for nothing more than their desire help their community, to remain loyal to a department many of them started out in , and to help keep their own taxes lower. I must say I've often heard the argument that public safety is the number one priority, and that if volunteers can't guarantee it than FFs MUST be hired. While this is true, isn't prohibiting trained, and experienced people from volunteering of their own free will depriving a community of a resource to provide that safety? Isn't a career FF volunteering doing just that...keeping the community safe by their CHOICE to respond? Does their recieving a paycheck for that response somehow make people safer? Remember it would be their decision to volunteer of THEIR OWN FREE WILL, so who loses really? What a shock that SOME union members find a problem with people simply wanting to help their communities for the sake of doing so. Cogs

In answer to the question, and based on the premise the joint is full of tires and going good, I'll try and answer in a nutshell. First off, ascertain if there are any people trapped..if no one's around a perimeter check and check for signs of occupancy will offer some insight as to that possibility. Ok we have victims....get a large caliber stream in operation and establish a water supply...(and here's one where CAFS may be a welcome bonus)...to prevent further extension. Simutaneously or quickly thereafter some good horizontal ventilation...get as much smoke as possible moving away from upstairs. Ladder the building (at least 2 portable ladders to those windows pictured and 1 in front) and get a crew or better yet crews upstairs searching and venting as they go ( I know about fire spread ect..but this is extremely toxic smoke, more so than usual so we have to open this place up as much as possible). Next get FAST in place and ready to act. Then comes another control line (if and where needed) and additional search crews to conduct secondary search operations (if possible depending on conditions). Once the search is complete, surrond and drown.

Indeed they do. It is truly amazing (and sad) what has happened to Stamford's Fire Services. Cogs

PJ, Very well put. Cogs p.s only 4 words...LOL

Stay safe, and watch out for the camel spiders.

Very good points indeed. What strikes me most here though is that many answers seemed to be based on the experiences of those posting. It seems most (and definitely me) had the notion of a 1 to 2 story average ranch. RR or colonial style single family dwelling in mind. But there are many departments in which as well as these there are many larger multi-family 1 or 2 story private dwellings to contend with. JFLYNN makes some excellent observations and I must agree with his thinking regarding these larger structures...especially with limited manpower. So thanks JF for coming at this from a different (at least from me) angle. In the end for all the SOP/Gs in the world conditions dictate actions. Cogs

At the front door....what if there's a problem with the line or pump..better to find out before entering than when you have fire rolling at you.

No

Tom (hope I'm thinking of the right person), While it is true that I haven't been in Stamford as a resident for the last 8 years, I have been following the "story" for a while and have always kept an ear open for the goings on amonst the FDs of Stamford. Please understand as well that I meant and mean no personal disrespect to you (or anyone) when posting here. As is obvious I lean heavily on the "side" of the VFDs but I am not against Stamford's paid FFs, many of whom I consider friends..the City administration is another story. I must agree that there may be and most likely are VFFs who are influenced by the "ideology" and others who feel pressured to either keep quiet or follow the party line. But again in all fairness that "ideology" and pressure argument works both ways. There are career FFs who may not share the "party line" who also feel it is not in their best interest to speak their minds. As with almost any situation there's the proverbial your side, my side and the truth that lies somewhere in the middle. Are there volunteers who want to "keep the City FFs out"..yes. Are there career FFs who want the volunteers gone...yes. It is our job as concerned and committed FFs to silence these extremes, and work towards a better combined service, in whatever form it may take, for our community. For me personally, I'll happily work with anyone until such time as I'm made to feel or treated as inferior because I don't recieve a paycheck. I have a record of working well with others, especially recently with my service overseas. I look forward to the opportunty of working alongside you again as well. The point is that all sides of this issue must understand and respect the other views, and I believe I have done well in supporting and promoting that idea. I know what's at stake here as do most of Stamford's FFs, and I agree with all those who call for serious and determined action to resolve the problems. People don't have to agree, but to me they do need to put aside those "party lines" and open themselves up to alternatives. The fire service here has devolved quite a bit in the last 20 years, and the fault for that lies with ALL of us who allowed it to happen. We, ALL the FFs of Stamford should look towards moving forward as allies and friends to serve the citizens of Stamford and ourselves ...not as adversaries bent on pushing agendas. On a side note, as our nation's financial concerns grow, it is not impossible the envsion tougher times for the fire services of Stamford, which may result in severe budget shortfalls..i.e. layoffs (God forbid). As I remarked to a career FF friend the other day..we in the fire service are generally reactive..here with all our troubles we have the opportunty to be proactive....to forge a stronger relationship to better serve the community should such a terrible scenario come upon us...let us not squander it. Cogs

To be fair, FD828 is correct in that SOME anger or blame if you wish, should be directed north. It is the VFDs who, through their continued belief in individuality and pride, have refused to address the issue in a concerted fashion. It is incumbent on the VFDs to resolve thier differences and consolidate operations, administration and finances to better serve the citizens of Stamford north of the city fire district. It is also incumbent upon them to develop the policies and procedures to accomplish this, then in concert with their career colleagues implement a system that effectively provides the necessary resources, manpower and uniform tactics to meet any need. Personally, I don't believe that the VFDs are responsible for preventing the career department from responding..as it now stands the SFRD responds anyway regardless of if they are "wanted". Nor do I believe that a system similar to Fairfield's where volunteers perform specialized tasks/assignments such as Rescue Co. or brush response will fly in Stamford. I believe that any such system would result in the VFFs being relegated to secondary assignments and will soon lead to a situation similar to Hamden or East Haven where VFFs are ultimately simply support and clean-up crews. As a volunteer who has spent years training and fighting fires I find that prospect abhorrent, and any who believe that that should be my fate as a volunteer to be arrogant, self serving and uninformed as to the reality of what contributions/sacrifices we volunteers make. Unlike some, I remain an optimist and believe that workable and acceptable alternatives are possible. As a now "official" ( just registered to vote..lol) Stamford resident I will seek at every turn to see them become reality. I truly hope there are others here and within Stamford's fire services who believe the same. I stand ready to serve. Cogs

Gentlemen, Witholding funds is the root cause of the issue. The Mayor and Co. decided to force the VFDs to accept an agreement to which they are opposed, by witholding their operating budgets. That's called extortion no way around it. And like it or not, right or wrong the VFDs have EVERY right by charter and as seperate INCORPORATED entities to disagree without budgetary reprisals. It is 888 Washington Blvd that has reduced the operating budgets of the unwilling VFDs by 90%, funds that cover essential items such as training, equipment repair/replacement, building maintainence ect. So indeed the real root problem comes from 888 Washington Blvd. You know many career FFs spout off about public safety, staffing, ect...why don't those "concerned" FFs rebel against an unjust statute of their union bylaws and volunteer to HELP those citizens of Stamford who so sorely need them NOW !!! I know all about taking another guys job, overtime blah blah blah, but hey if public safety is paramount and we have all these professionals around then the details don't matter do they? Their paychecks or the VFDs existence..who cares..the public will be safe and then that should solve the problem. Not quite that simple is it? Nor is simply placing a FF "with a different patch" so simple. As has been evidenced by recent letters linked here and elsewhere, that wonderful SFRD and VFD "working together" scenario is not quite a reality. There appears to be two commands at some incidents, and a complete lack of coherence in actions...not very good examples of "working together". And truth be told these breakdowns are the fault of ALL involved...no monopolies here on arrogance, intolerance, misconception and intransigence. Squeezing the VFDs to force them "into line" is surely not the right tactic, nor is obliviously living as if things are as they were. Substantial changes are needed.....but in all fairness change is a two way street. While the arguments of the City and SFRD are correct in their view of guaranteed staffing and it's likely improvement in safety , some important factors such as INCREASED cost overall and an unwillingness to accept any opposing opinions or solutions are not. Just as the VFDs have valid arguments about jurisdiction and command within THEIR districts, and the very real possibility of their demise, it seems they too suffer from an inability to see any other solutions. As has often been stated here THERE ARE SOLUTIONS that can offer a compromise...all that is needed is the willingness to explore them. Cogs

I agree wholeheartedly. Direct the anger where it belongs. 888 Washington Blvd. Cogs

Many great memories of that muster...wish it were still around.

Geppetto, Thank you for the link, some very interesting reading there. All: It appears that toes are being stepped on, and there are times when no definitive protocols are either in place or more likely being followed regarding incident command where SFRD and VFD personnel are working together. Working together is a two way street, and to my mind a paycheck does not in and of itself automatically guarantee incident command to Stamford's "professional" fire officers when they respond into what are still independent jurisdictions. The OIC should be the highest ranking officer of that jurisdiction, until such time as command is relinquished or no VFD officers are on scene. It appears from the letters that this is not always the case...at least from the point of view of some. But the SFRD officers are not the sole cause of these breakdowns of the ICS...like I stated earlier, working together is a two way street. The VFDs should transfer command when the situation requires it..such as when a 3 or 4 year member who is 2nd LT is the IC and you have a more seasoned and experienced SFRD officer on scene or some such similar situation. This is common sense..which I must say has become the most glaring casualty of this whole mess. Like it or not as it now stands (to my understanding), the VFDs and the SFRD are going to be working alongside each other regularly. To ensure that "things" move along smoothly the parameters stipulated and agreed to by each must be respected and more importantly followed. I truly hope that all have moved beyond the fourth grade and can act as the professionals they claim to be. As for Mr. Bs letter, Well he has explained quite well the shortcomings of that incident as he understood them. All FFs in Stamford should look at these shortcomings and work to correct them in whatever capacity they can.....under the conditions that NOW exist. Here again as I stated in an earlier posting, identifying problems (real, percieved or potential) is a great first step...but just that... a FIRST STEP. The important thing is what steps follow. As FFs in Stamford paid or volunteer you are all your brothers keeper on scene...the less friction and miscommunication the better for ALL your sakes. Lose the attitudes and gain the respect you all deserve for what you do in this community. Cogs

Due to the fact I'm "in transit" moving back to Stamford I haven't had steady internet for a couple of weeks..seems I've been missing the show . There is STILL time to have a "Big 5" sit down (yeah Joe "family style" like the Cosa Nostra ) and work out an INTERIM program to ensure volunteer coverage with the current SFRD response. But this is a TEMPORARY solution at best. For long term stability and success there must be a willingness to look beyond what is in place now and develop and implement programs and policies that will ensure the necessary staffing and resources are ALWAYS available. Now if the VFDs can't meet that need, than there is no other choice....firefighting in Stamford will be the sole domain of the SFRD. Volunteers may remain, but under the direction and control of the SFRD. On the other hand, if the VFDs can work through their petty differences and more importantly their operational, administrative and financial divisions, there is NO reason why a more effective and reliable firefighting force wouldn't emerge. I just have to say once again...fingerpointing and Monday morning quaterbacking does ABSOLUTELY nothing to help. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to identify the problems. What IS required is professional "advice" on the part of those who post here and a desire to compromise to achieve an outcome in EVERYONE'S best interest. I am staunchly in favor of a Stamford Volunteer Fire Dept comprised of the current Big 5, that is capable of fulfilling the needs of the residents of their districts. I have offered up ideas to that effect and sincerely hope to see such an outcome. But I am no fool (believe it or not) and realize that there are many other avenues yet to be explored which may or may not be the right "fit". The past is just that...the past..all we can do is LEARN from yesterday, we can't change it..so why not put eyes forward for the citizens of Stamford? Cogs

The public is indeed clueless about most issues relating to the fire service. They call we show up. It is our job to educate them to ALL the facts...objectively....to move forward towards a reliable, long term solution that is in THEIR overall best interest. That the initial manpower available for the Mill Spring fire was abysmal has given the VFDs of Stamford their one and only wake up call. I couldn't agree more that public safety is the absolute priority and as such a good hard reevaluation of the state of affairs is in order. As I've often stated, for continued volunteer coverage to be a viable or even acceptable alternative to career personnel then it is time for them to collectively to step up and devise a sound, practical and safe plan to ensure the necessary coverage...period. This time the VFDs by the grace of God and good fortune came upon a fire in which the occupants were safe....they absolutely CANNOT count on that being the norm. If staffing or responding personnel numbers are being falsified it has to stop NOW!!!! The first step in solving a problem is admitting there is one. If one house is short the others must try to contribute to keep staffing levels to at least the bare minimum or by somehow redefining mutual aid agreements and responses to provide the necessary resources in personnel and equipment. This morass just seems to get deeper and deeper, and the warning signs it seems are being ignored. The 5 VFD Chiefs need to sit down, burn the midnight oil and do whatever it takes to make sure this type of "lapse" does not occur again. You can rest assured "Big 5" Chiefs that if it does and God forbid there are civilian deaths/injuries you will all suffer the consequences and the volunteers of Stamford will be finished. Cogs

The money is for recruitment amd retention...let's hope it is used wisely.

Good !!