DannyB119

You illustrate my point exactly. It's not like there's this pervasive unavailability in opportunities to train, so I still don't understand how "many" Westchester departments can feel that they don't have the training, skills, equipment, manpower or leadership to rescue one of their own members, or the members of another department.

"Many" is pretty vague. Which ones in particular seem to feel that way? What makes them feel that way? If that's the way they feel, then why not train some more? As has been previously stated in another thread, Westchester is one of the highest taxed counties in the entire State, and I know from direct, firsthand knowledge, that the ability to train at the FTC is only a phone call away, so it's not like it's that hard or even that cost prohibitive to hone some skills in the areas that are lacking. So, that said, is it really an accurate statement that "many" Westchester Fire Departments don't believe that they have the proper knowledge, skills, and abilities?

This is on a slightly different track, but I cannot find the option for me to create a thread. I'm currently in a Master's Degree program, and I've decided to write my thesis on the efficacy of pre-employment psychological examinations in the public safety field. With recent events, both here and in the world in which we live, I decided to write a little bit about it here to gain a little bit of a "real world" perspective that is generally not published in textbooks or in research material. As public safety professionals, we're often held to a higher standard. This higher standard applies both on the job and in our personal lives. But, with the increase of psychological diagnoses in the population-at-large, as evidenced by the increase in television commercials advertising the myriad psychopharmacological options that we as a society have at our disposal, how are public safety agencies capturing the most qualified personnel from the applicant pool when the tests that they often administer aren't completely on pace with the ever-developing medical community? What I mean by this is that many of the personality exams (MMPI, NFSI, NCJOSI, etc.) are dated within the recent 5 or so years, but whenever one watches television, there seems to be a new drug being advertised that is designed to treat either an existing or new medical or psychological malady. (As an aside, during a recent one-hour block of prime-time television, I counted that out of the 18 minutes of commercials, 13 minutes consisted of drug advertising. Out of the 13 minutes, 8 minutes dealt with psychopharmacological issues.) So, with that said, what seems to be the prevailing thought process when analyzing a potential applicant for his or her fitness for duty? While nothing is completely foolproof, how efficiently are we - as public safety professionals - doing when it comes to selecting the best qualified applicants in favor of those who may do our industry and our reputations harm?