SteveC7010

If I remember correctly, I think Hartford still had pull up boots until some guys got burned on a ladder a few years ago. Sadly in the fire service we learn from other peoples misfortune.

It's a great job that I've done now for 26 years with a 25 year retirement, my department has moved away from the police patrols of our 400 acre campus to a community based fire safety job, I am a certified code enforcement officer and we cover 9 counties, with the closure of most of the facilities it's a transition from being a police job to an emergency service dept. Where we can be deployed throughout the state to assist as needed in the event of disaster such as Sandy and the heavy snow fall this past winter in Buffalo. I have no complaints and I enjoy my job as a Sgt. with the agency

Seth, sadly I think that there are still a lot of departments out there who believe that the rules just do not apply to them. It should not have taken the death of a firefighter and subsequent OSHA investigations to bring about these changes.
For example, I just finished advising a fire department about matters related to 501©3 tax exempt status and it was a real horror show. There are influential members in the department that still do not believe that they will have to file full 990 tax returns even though their annual income is clearly large enough for returns to be required by law. (Federal tax law requires complete tax returns for income $50,000 or more per year. Under $50K, you file a 990-N which contains no financial information. It's a simple affirmation that your agency's income was less than $50,000.) They don't think their annual reports are public information and must be disclosed promptly without the need for FOIL requests. They truly believe that they will receive a very large gift from a donor without being 501©3. Luckily, one or two much cooler heads have prevailed and they are on the right track.

Do not fool yourself, taxes will not go down. Just because those local taxes are no longer paying for the fire service does not mean that they will come back to the people. Governments are very good at finding more things to pay for with existing money.

Personally, I found this part validates much of Yonkers Fire union's claim.
Despite criticism by its own union president in recent years that the department is understaffed, Davis said the department has an "adequate complement" of firefighters but that relying too heavily on overtime during occasional shortages was cost prohibitive.
"The days are gone when we had unlimited budgets," the mayor said. "If we spend it all on overtime, we can't buy trucks, we can't upgrade (equipment)."
The Mount Vernon Mayor is essentially saying that they could handle more of their own business, but rather than using overtime and/or having their taxpayers shoulder the financial burden to do that, they are consciously putting that burden onto the taxpayers of other communities.

I'm no where near Putnam County, and had no part in providing that information to Radio Reference. Whatever is there was provided by scanner folks down in that area. You'll have to verify this with someone down there. All I have done is pointed you at a very useful resource.

The DEC is putting into service new Dodge Durangos (pictured below) and Ram pickups (not pictured).

Do we owe the public the truth about their fire depts. ability to handle a structure fire? What I mean by that is we ask the taxpayers for money to run the dept, yet in truth, on any given day at any given time, it takes more than THAT dept to control the situation. Forget career / volunteer bs, this is across the board. This is not about the big one or needing a tanker/tender shuttle operation, this is the room and contents, fire that your patch on your sleeve proudly says WE CAN HANDLE.
Mutual aid to cover the empty fire houses, no problem.
Why is it the neighboring taxpayers responsibility to send its tax dollar funded dept to assist with your BASIC fire.
something is wrong here, and the longer we put our heads in the sand......................

Here is a link to the RadioReference.com page on Putnam County. The info there is updated by scanner enthusiasts on a regular basis. There is also quite a bit of info on individual department frequencies, and there is a link to the FCC's complete database of radio licenses in the county.
http://www.radioreference.com/apps/db/?ctid=1864

It does not matter. Age was not part of the job description so it has to be disregarded by law. And, realistically, these days there are an awful lot of very healthy and active people in their sixties who are fully able to perform as well as they did in their forties. I am one of them. Conversely, there are a bunch of mid-forties to mid-fifties paid men in terrible shape in departments all over the country.
I'd also want to see the job description before arguing this point any further. A lot of departments like this hire "paid drivers" or similar titles rather than full firefighters even though they're required to be certified. Since it is possible that the job description may not have required full firefighter physical ability, until we know for sure, debating that point isn't accurate or productive.
Interesting point for everyone, the plaintiff was among the top five on the list, but they hired none of them, picking someone lower down on the list. NYS Civil Service law generally requires hiring from the top three on the list. Sounds to me like they shot themselves in the foot several times over.

It does not matter. Age was not part of the job description so it has to be disregarded by law. And, realistically, these days there are an awful lot of very healthy and active people in their sixties who are fully able to perform as well as they did in their forties. I am one of them. Conversely, there are a bunch of mid-forties to mid-fifties paid men in terrible shape in departments all over the country.
I'd also want to see the job description before arguing this point any further. A lot of departments like this hire "paid drivers" or similar titles rather than full firefighters even though they're required to be certified. Since it is possible that the job description may not have required full firefighter physical ability, until we know for sure, debating that point isn't accurate or productive.
Interesting point for everyone, the plaintiff was among the top five on the list, but they hired none of them, picking someone lower down on the list. NYS Civil Service law generally requires hiring from the top three on the list. Sounds to me like they shot themselves in the foot several times over.

It does not matter. Age was not part of the job description so it has to be disregarded by law. And, realistically, these days there are an awful lot of very healthy and active people in their sixties who are fully able to perform as well as they did in their forties. I am one of them. Conversely, there are a bunch of mid-forties to mid-fifties paid men in terrible shape in departments all over the country.
I'd also want to see the job description before arguing this point any further. A lot of departments like this hire "paid drivers" or similar titles rather than full firefighters even though they're required to be certified. Since it is possible that the job description may not have required full firefighter physical ability, until we know for sure, debating that point isn't accurate or productive.
Interesting point for everyone, the plaintiff was among the top five on the list, but they hired none of them, picking someone lower down on the list. NYS Civil Service law generally requires hiring from the top three on the list. Sounds to me like they shot themselves in the foot several times over.

Nearly 30 years ago, I built a log home. I specified full 3/4" plywood for the main subfloor with 2x12's for floor joists. Being a log home, we used double thickness 2x12's for the rim to support the extra weight of the exterior log walls. I also spec'd the joists to be 18" on center instead of the usual 24" that most builders will do unless told otherwise. That also contributed to more load bearing capacity on the rim.
I did consider the OSB "I" beams as they were just gaining acceptance in the manufactured housing industry at the time but rejected them as being too susceptible to water damage and possibly fire damage.
Guess I made a good call.

Nearly 30 years ago, I built a log home. I specified full 3/4" plywood for the main subfloor with 2x12's for floor joists. Being a log home, we used double thickness 2x12's for the rim to support the extra weight of the exterior log walls. I also spec'd the joists to be 18" on center instead of the usual 24" that most builders will do unless told otherwise. That also contributed to more load bearing capacity on the rim.
I did consider the OSB "I" beams as they were just gaining acceptance in the manufactured housing industry at the time but rejected them as being too susceptible to water damage and possibly fire damage.
Guess I made a good call.

Nearly 30 years ago, I built a log home. I specified full 3/4" plywood for the main subfloor with 2x12's for floor joists. Being a log home, we used double thickness 2x12's for the rim to support the extra weight of the exterior log walls. I also spec'd the joists to be 18" on center instead of the usual 24" that most builders will do unless told otherwise. That also contributed to more load bearing capacity on the rim.
I did consider the OSB "I" beams as they were just gaining acceptance in the manufactured housing industry at the time but rejected them as being too susceptible to water damage and possibly fire damage.
Guess I made a good call.

Nearly 30 years ago, I built a log home. I specified full 3/4" plywood for the main subfloor with 2x12's for floor joists. Being a log home, we used double thickness 2x12's for the rim to support the extra weight of the exterior log walls. I also spec'd the joists to be 18" on center instead of the usual 24" that most builders will do unless told otherwise. That also contributed to more load bearing capacity on the rim.
I did consider the OSB "I" beams as they were just gaining acceptance in the manufactured housing industry at the time but rejected them as being too susceptible to water damage and possibly fire damage.
Guess I made a good call.

Bottom of Da Hill, on 03 Feb 2015 - 11:28 PM, said:
why stand by fd units from ossining isnt that a little far away?maybe armonk or west harrison white plains ?
Bottom of Da Hill, on 04 Feb 2015 - 01:47 AM, said:
or maybe just maybe the dispatcher is a member of said FD? thats what it is?you have fairview hartsdale sleepyhollow tarrytown just a few miles away.favoritism with few dispatchers i noticed.
Bottom of Da Hill, on 04 Feb 2015 - 02:06 AM, said:
i know all about mutual aid very well and i agree with you to a point.but there is favoritism.
Bottom of Da Hill, on 04 Feb 2015 - 03:16 AM, said:
the grand scheme should get what you need there sooner then later kinda like a fast team? thats my experience tells me its not a parade.get what you need ASAP.i dont think the dispatchers should have that kind of power to show favoritism to the dept they belong to.
Well all the departments you listed including Ossining are a 12-15 minute drive to Valhalla's station. It's not about speed and who is closest for relocations, it's how to balance all of the resources in the county. A relocation is not an emergency per se. It is better to skip over several departments so that wide gaps in coverage aren't created in the process. Hawthorne, Valhalla, North White Plains, Elmsford, Thornwood, and Briarcliff had units committed to this job during rush hour. Leaving TFD, SHFD, PHFD, WHFD, AFD, untouched meant that whichever company relocated to VFD would have had a full complement of second due departments nearby available to respond to another major incident.
You're hung up on Ossining but the fact of the matter is that they've got a half dozen engines two trucks rescue and support equipment plus a lot of manpower. I'd like you to name a major job North of White Plains from the past 20 years that they haven't been on or relocated for. An 3 man engine or 1 man truck from Hartsdale on a relocate... That's just silly. If I was Greenville, Hartsdale, or Fairview I'd decline the request for a relocate knowing that if have to call back manpower to cover my first due.
The box was filled appropriately and just because a few Ossining members work for or have previously worked for 60 control does not indicate favoritism. If it's big and in northern Westchester you can be sure Ossining, Bedford Hills, and/or Yorktown are going to be part of the job.

I don't know your county and can not speak to your personal experiences but generally speaking your arguments against a regional 911 system are flawed. The State of Rhode Island uses a statewide 911 center and as you get further away from the northeast more and more people approach things at the regional level. Not just dispatch but everything, hmmmm. Wonder if they're on to something.
1. Accountability at the local level is a joke. I have heard incompetent local dispatchers and they worked for decades because there was zero accountability.
2. Protocols get established by the dispatch center and the agency. There isn't a take it or leave it line in the sand. Although some completely unrealistic expectations may not be met.
3. If local dispatchers were moved to a regional 911 center they would still have the local knowledge. It isn't like Yonkers would suddenly be dispatching Albany or vice versa.
4. If the system is built properly this doesn't happen. Westchester's trunked system wasn't built properly. It was never really designed for emergency services and because NYC also uses some of the frequencies, the county had to limit where some frequencies are used and their power or some nonsense like that.
Westchester's demographics are ripe for all kinds of consolidation. Nobody has the balls to do it though. But sticking to the communications issue, there are so many radio frequencies in the county that they could probably build a state of the art system using combinations of VHF and UHF with repeaters and all that other geek stuff that would be truly impressive. Of course nobody wants to do that.

Comparing NYC to Westchester is like apples to oranges. In NYC, companies can move from one borough to another. In Westchester, it's usually a neighboring department moving over - sometimes only a mile or two.
Here in Westchester, the majority of relocates usually move over to another district, where they generally don't go anywhere else or on any runs in that district they're covering, with some exceptions. Sometimes, resources get relocated that aren't even usually in that district... but I'll digress. And sometimes units that are relocated aren't even moved up to the scene of a working fire, while others are called from several towns away and PASS THE ONES COVERING! Again, I won't elaborate.
Being requested to cover another district while they operate at an incident or multiple incidents is a PRECAUTION. It's moving things around and getting them closer in the event something else happens or additional help is needed at a pre-existing event. It is NOT an emergency. If you are driving from your quarters to someone else's and you get sent to that scene or to another call in their district, you can easily throw a switch and light it up.
Some of us have districts that are larger or spread out uniquely, requiring 10-15 minute responses. Should we turn out lights and siren on to get back to quarters in case another call may happen on the other end of the district?
When you send an apparatus out for repair, do you always have an apparatus to cover that unit? For example, if your department has only one Tanker, do you have a Mutual Aid Tanker come sit in your fire station until it returns? Do you drive back from the repair shop lights and siren because there might be a fire it needs to go to? I doubt it.
I'm sure I won't make friends here and will offend some of you, but let's be realistic. Going from one firehouse to sit at another firehouse isn't an emergency.
Chief Benz - you're 100% right that an accident can happen anytime, and we ALL know that we'll usually be the ones getting the s*** end of the incident. But - to me and me only - relocating to someone's firehouse is not an emergency and not worth me risking an accident.
As for the Greenville incident - I call bullshit and feel there is some other issue / underlying agenda here. Hopefully this incident passes, no wrong-doing is cited and Greenville gets the money the need and deserve.

When did you take up comedy, Chief?

There have been and continue to be deployments from the Capital Region. One department in our county sent their Argo and 3 guys. Another sent a Polaris off-road vehicle and men as well.

Seth, opinion only:
AHA just teaches high quality compressions and rate along with ventilation and defibrillation (acknowledging the 2015 AHA changes are about to hit the street) even for rescuer level.
REMSCO protocols just specify the need for CPR and, much the same as AHA, just rate and quality, defib cycles, etc.
Neither has anything to say about how one gets the patient into a position where "ideal" CPR, defib, and other measures plus transport can be performed. In my view, it's the kind of thing that could be adopted and practiced at the local agency level. Nothing in the procedure appears to be contrary to AHA or REMSCO protocol. It actually calls for and requires continuous, high quality, uninterrupted CPR.
I showed the video at our monthly ambulance squad meeting this evening. There was a lot of enthusiasm and interest from all the folks present, including our local fire chief.

I give the LeLand Fire Department a lot of credit for having members who realized after one of their members had gone down on a scene that doffing gear from a downed firefighter can be a tremendously hard thing to do. The 10-step method they devised seems to accomplish doffing gear and providing immediate care while minimizing how many people would be drawn away from the other tasks at hand on a fire scene and actually looks great and very easy to accomplish. I can't wait to ambush some unsuspecting firefighters who wander by the firehouse on a slow day to practice the method on a mannequin and see the plusses and minuses. Immediate compressions (if he does not need it, I'm sure the firefighter might let you know quickly enough) and it is through gear at first, so no additional damage, plus it has you remove the helmet and mask fairly quickly to see how responsive or not the FF is and provides clear access to airway in case there is vomit in the mask or air gone and mask sucked to face, etc. The video shows the procedure can be technically done by 4 firefighters, and once the FF is removed from pack and coat, the EMS people can swarm over him and take further measures.
Always wondered how we would be able to get gear off quickly enough. Luckily, have never had to find out... May even work to get gear off collapsed heat exhaustion FF much more quickly than the lengthy time it usually takes to strip them down - minus the compressions, of course .
Worth looking into, at any rate. Kudos to them for thinking outside the box. Gets cramped and stuffy in there sometimes.

Seth, opinion only:
AHA just teaches high quality compressions and rate along with ventilation and defibrillation (acknowledging the 2015 AHA changes are about to hit the street) even for rescuer level.
REMSCO protocols just specify the need for CPR and, much the same as AHA, just rate and quality, defib cycles, etc.
Neither has anything to say about how one gets the patient into a position where "ideal" CPR, defib, and other measures plus transport can be performed. In my view, it's the kind of thing that could be adopted and practiced at the local agency level. Nothing in the procedure appears to be contrary to AHA or REMSCO protocol. It actually calls for and requires continuous, high quality, uninterrupted CPR.
I showed the video at our monthly ambulance squad meeting this evening. There was a lot of enthusiasm and interest from all the folks present, including our local fire chief.

Seth, opinion only:
AHA just teaches high quality compressions and rate along with ventilation and defibrillation (acknowledging the 2015 AHA changes are about to hit the street) even for rescuer level.
REMSCO protocols just specify the need for CPR and, much the same as AHA, just rate and quality, defib cycles, etc.
Neither has anything to say about how one gets the patient into a position where "ideal" CPR, defib, and other measures plus transport can be performed. In my view, it's the kind of thing that could be adopted and practiced at the local agency level. Nothing in the procedure appears to be contrary to AHA or REMSCO protocol. It actually calls for and requires continuous, high quality, uninterrupted CPR.
I showed the video at our monthly ambulance squad meeting this evening. There was a lot of enthusiasm and interest from all the folks present, including our local fire chief.

If only it were that simple. First, there are only two agencies with CON's for our area. Us and a small commercial outfit that is in deep financial trouble. Yes, we could call them, but there's no guarantee that they will even be available and if they are, that they will accept the run.
It's even worse to the north. Distance to an EVD hospital is greater, and they are backed up by the same commercial outfit that we are.
And even if BEMS granted some kind of waiver on the CON system for the EVD crisis, we still have limited options. If us little guys are dealing with a PUI or worse, we can be pretty sure that the larger squads and the commercials are dealing with even more. Their availability is doubtful at best. If they'd even accept the job would be even more doubtful.
There are other commercials in the region but they do not have CON's for our area. I suppose we could meet them at the border, but by then we've already contaminated the ambulance so we might as well go all the way.
In all fairness, all of us here need to be conscious of the great differences of these things around our state. What works well in the more populous areas won't fly in the rural and wilderness areas. What we do up here on a routine basis would be laughed at or scorned in other areas.