TSull

I was in a bar talking to a friend whom I had met when he and his family visited my firehouse several years earlier. As we talked, we were approached by 4 drunk guys who said they were "firefighters from London Fire Brigade here on holiday". They had overheard us talking, realized I was a Firefighter, and wanted to know if my firehouse was close by so they could visit. I said "no problem, the firehouse (not mine) is at 48th and 8th" (54 Engine/Ladder 4). I even told them to specifically ask for my friend, Steve, who was working. Out of the bar they stumbled and a 1/2 hour later I got a not-so-nice text from Steve telling me what he thought of me sending the guys for their "visit". I thought it was funny.

I believe the correct terminology is "the fire (or incident) is 'doubtful'" after the first full incident size-up. After that, the fire or incident is considered doubtful until the IC places the fire or incident "probably will hold".

What does a "parade" have to do with anything? It is the crux of the whole article/lawsuit. The article/lawsuit states that: "the Brewster Fire Dept attended a parade on the night of July 11, 2013 hosted by the Mahopac Fire Dept. As is traditional and custom, participating BFD members were allowed to consume alcoholic beverages before and after the parade and were invited back to the firehouse for a social gathering after the parade. Upon Ratajack's arrival at the firehouse, there was a gathering outside of smoking members. Observing this group more closely, Ratajack noticed members including Steven Miller and Paul DeBartolomeo, who had chosen not to be in uniform or to march in the parade, drinking and socializing with members that had marched. Because parades are integral to a volunteer FD's team building and public visibility, the BFD has historically has not allowed members to join the social event following a parade unless they have marched in the parade. This group had decided to come to the party but had not done any of the work to prepare for the parade, to march in the parade, or to clean and return the equipment to service so that it would be available for a fire call. Miller and DeBartolomeo, among others, were "free-loading" at the expense of the other volunteer members. Ratajack went upstairs to the main hall of the firehouse, but, could not ignore the member's free-loading and undermining behavior. Ratajack exploded, spewing obnoxious and derogatory words and phrases about the non-participating members, including every swear word Ratajack could think of at the moment such as "f******", "niggers", "pieces of s***", "bullshit". On information and belief, none of the non-marching members heard Ratajack's tirade nor do they belong to a racial or ethnic minority. Ratajack then went downstairs to discuss ejecting the non-participating members with 2nd Assistant Chief Phillip McMurray. As the second in command, it would have been disrespectful of the chain of command to walk over McMurray and order the non-marchers to leave. Chief Ratajack, pointing at the group of non-participants, said to McMurray that it was a "bunch of bullshit" and Chief McMurray should not allow the non-marchers to remain. Instead of supporting his superior officer, 2nd Asst. Chief McMurray tried to move Chief Ratajack back into the building while challenging Ratajack's authority to act, and rebuking Ratajack for his choice of vocabulary. Their argument continued at the top of the stairs and inside the front vestibule of the firehouse and was heard by more then it should have been. Chief Ratajack again used several common swear words referring to the "free-loaders" as a group. On information and belief, none of the non-marching members heard Ratajack's tirade nor do they belong to a racial or ethnic minority. The argument ended with Chief Ratajack reminding Chief McMurray of the chain of command saying 'we needed to get on the same page or it's going to be a rough two years when I become Chief'". This comes directly from the lawsuit lines 43-49.

I would think the 5th reason is because the streets are so tight that aerial ladders are next to impossible to get into proper position.

Captain Morris was my Captain at Ladder 28 and at Rescue 1. It was an honor and a privilege to have worked for him. As a "proby" in L28, I made a mistake at a fire and thought for sure he was going to rip me apart for it. Instead he said "do you know what you did wrong, did you learn from it, and will you never make the mistake again?". That is the essence of leadership. Last night at his "Last Tour Party", I reminded him of a conversation we had back in L-28 after he had turned down Battalion Chief for the final time and I asked him why and his response back then was "I still have 10 miles of hallways to crawl down and doors to force". Last night I asked if he had made the 10 miles of hallways and he said he came close but the clock ran out. I congratulate the Captain on his retirement and thank him for letting me serve in his companies. As a friend said to me the other day: "the man had a lot of influence on my fire department career".

Good luck to the new "Stamford Fire & Rescue Department". While there will be "growing pains" I hope everyone works together to do the right thing. I wonder what EMTBravo is going to do with all the forum space!????!

So if a bunch a people having fun at a parade is "unprofessional", can someone please tell me what a "professional" department at a parade is supposed to look like? I understand all about comraderie(spelling), brotherhood, teamwork, everyone working towards a common goal, and all the other catch phrases that get thrown around. But what does it mean to be "professional" or "unprofessional"? Let me pose a scenario: You and your department are at your neighboring department"s parade and your tones are hit for a call in your district. Knowing that all active members are getting ready for the parade a member suggests that he and a couple other members will take the rig (brand new) and respond to the call. The member's request is denied because the rig "is being judged tonight" and it takes over 30 mins for mutual aid to get to the scene of the call. In the parade, your department wins a trophy but you find out later that what was dispatched as a "Stroke" turned out to be a "CPR" call. Question: was the department in question "professional" or "unprofessional"? And yes, when a post is made to look at the next photo to see how "unprofessional" a department looks, that is "bashing" that department. I am sure people are going to tell me to let it go but I believe "x4093k" owes the members of the Mill Plain Vol. Fire Department an apology for "bashing" them on this forum. Just my opinion.

Really? Really? You are saying that a bunch of people having fun at a parade is "unprofessional". Are you kidding me? The real joke is that marching in a parade is even considered anything other then being fun. When departments take parades so seriously that members get reprimanded and "lose points with the judges" when they smile and wave at friends and family who are watching the parade, that is a joke. Marching in a parade and winning shiny trophies does not make you a good firefighter or a good fire department. Mill Plain is a GREAT fire department, who for years won A LOT of trophies marching in the "professional" manner and guess what? The guys are having more fun now then they did then. Keep things in perspective.

I took the Mass Civil Service Exam for Firefighter test back in the 90's. At the time of the test, you had to list 4 cities/towns you wanted your score released to. I listed Boston, Springfield, Worchester?, and Chelsea. From Boston I received notification that I was #800 on the "Veteran, non-minority, non-resident list". Needless to say I was never reached on that list. The first list was "Veteran, minority, resident", the 2nd list was "veteran, non-minority, resident", and so on. Maybe someone else can correct me, but I also believe Boston has a residency requirement for new hires that require them to live in the city while employed by the city. Chelsea MA reached me on their list and offered a conditional appointment but it never panned out.

Check with Danny "Detroit" Alfonso in FDNY E-75. He has spent a lot of time in motown and has the photos/stories to prove it!

I think that is the rig that responded to my house when we had a chimney fire the saturday morning after Christmas 1981!

I think another thing to look at is whether or not the long term event is going to be classified as a "disaster" and whether or not "disaster assistance" is going to be allocated by either private, state or federal resources. If yes, then every department that provided "mutual aid" should be compensated/reimbursed for costs incurred. Look at the FDNY's mutual aid response to the city of New Orleans after Katrina. Every FDNY member who responded was paid for his/her entire deployment (24/7 x 2)plus their shifts in NYC had to be covered details/ot. I am sure the City of New York then requested reimbursement from FEMA after all the accounting was done.

As we look at this issue and other issues concerning fire ground operations, remember the 6 "P"'s: Piss Poor Preperation Prevents Proper Performance. A committment needs to be made that all interior firefighters should have FF1, FF Survival, FAST, OSHA/BBP,NIMS 700/100 at a minimum. And each interior firefighter needs to complete refresher training in these basic competencies each year. JMO

24 is less then the "51" needed in the mayor's plan.

The answer is yes to the question if you can hold both a CFR and EMT certification at the same time. In New York State I am a certified EMT-D #185331 since 1993. I am also a certified CFR-D # 185331 since 2000 when I was hired/trained by the FDNY. There have been 3 times since then when I have taken my recertification exam for CFR-D at Ft Totten in the morning and then taken my EMT recertification exam the same night in Putnam County where I live. And yes I am aware that I have the same number but each time I recertify, the state sends me a new EMT card and a new CFR card