antiquefirelt

My issue has nothing to do with what happens in the firehouse. My dept. has actual leaders and followers, and rules and policies with discipline and consequences. Subsequently, most of our personnel remain completely professional most of the time. But not everything can be as black and white, such is the case with Facebook and other social media websites. First, it's more to do with petty BS becoming and issue between personnel. The computer/texting/FB do not show emotions well. It's hard to tell when your getting you balls busted or someone's truly slamming you. It's also far easier for people to "say" what they think in a non-confrontational manner, then realize later that it may cause confrontation. Second, there has been a plethora of media recently about firefighters/EMS personnel posting inappropriate things on FB and Youtube. Such as video of a fatal accident with graphic details, etc. Not only must administrations worry about HIPAA but also what we used to call morale responsibility. just because it's technically "legal" doesn't make it right. Posting pictures from an accident may not violate specific laws, but it violates the publics trust. We cannot afford to lose any more public support in these economic times. Not to mention just doing the right thing and being stand up people. My third issue is the lack of camaraderie and a sense of "family" within the firehouse. In years passed, we watched TV, played cards, BSed and generally spent time as a group. Now everyone is off in their corner, texting away, talking on the phone or otherwise being a complete individual. This lack of a bond will erode the firehouse until we're just another group of employees. Gone are the days when this was a calling. And last for now, is the silly thought that everyone must know everything about what everyone is doing. We used to call people who wanted to know all this stuff "busy body's" or "nosy", now it's mainstream to post that you had to double flush. Get over yourself, the people that really want or need to know already had plenty of mediums to keep track of your goings on. This is just my opinion, you can't have it, it's mine and I don't care if you agree. I also won't be disappointed if you disagree, I'm a big boy now. /rant

I gotta say I think Facebook is degrading the firehouse and probably the nation in general. Suddenly everyone has to know everyone's business and still even more feed the need by ridiculously posting, tweeting, twitting or whatever they call it, every little thing they do. Now the minute something happens int he firehouse, every firefighter and his wife, girlfriend and their friends are discussing it on the web. It is a very difficult medium to police as sadly some people do need a little policing when it comes to what should be publicized and what shouldn't. I've seen guys nearly ready to throw down over stupid comments their GF's or in one case, mother made. How absolutely childish and embarrassing. Grown men chatting like school girls. I believe that I am one of only two members of my FD that are not on FB. Maybe more to come, as we've seen at least a few relationships end due to FB. As an information medium, Facebook is fast and easy, but far too many negatives exist. maybe I'm showing my age, but I generally am not so resistant to change when it happens at a manageable rate, but the internet, texting and Droids are developing issues faster than we can figure them out in a reasonable manner.

Awesome. Nice to see some good news spread once in a while.

True enough. That's why I noted we'll see it come circle in a few more revisions. Previous studies showed the need for oxygenated blood, newer studies find the need to blood to be moving. Likely there's s balance that'll be found sooner or later and that will become the goal. Or maybe not, I do know that I'll never have to do mouth to mouth again without a mask, so everything else is really no big deal.

I'm almost certain that we're only one or two revisions away from doing CPR the way I first learned in the mid 80's. Shortly after I got my EMS license, a study out of Boston showed that providers needed to hyper-oxygenate the patient, as moving unoxygenated blood was though to be next to useless. We used to do 5 to 1 compressions to breathes and then we went to bagging on 1,3 and 5! None of which changed our outcomes until we got our first defibs.

I was thinking the guys on the ladder either came down and hugged the nozzle crew or knocked them out! Excellent work under terrible conditions. Anyone else read anymore about the brownouts and whether the first due companies would have been there sooner?

We "celebrate" both. Today was a paid holiday and everything around was closed up, other than restaurants catching the last of the "Leaf-peepers". BTW it's Patriots' Day we have in ME and MA; September 11th is now Patriot Day.

While our team has conducted a few high rappels into patients in confined spaces, none presented nearly the difficulty of getting gear and people into place such as this. When we work employ our team as the standby crew in one of our larger industrial complexes, the crew always does a full recon first thing and works up the plan, reporting to the duty officer any special needs. Given the plethora of problems that can arise preplanning and pre-positioning to be effective is pretty mush the only way to insure a safe outcome. Incidents like this water tower show how well versed a team must be, and how much luck was with the workers that day.

Lucky, this is clearly a case where a standby confined space rescue team should have been in place, on top of fall protection and a manned retrieval system. Two guys operating in an elevated confined space with no entry supervisor or system to call for help other than a cellphone is crazy, though much cheaper I guess.

Clearly you fail to understand how EMS in the rural areas often rely on licensed fire responders at all levels to begin care. Having started in a small rural community where the closest mutual aid ambulance was 20 minutes out, I can attest that having members properly equipped to assist patients is not a disservice of any sort. Aside from administering oxygen, bleeding control, assisting with EPI-pens, spinal immobilization, CPR and even defibrillation are often performed by first responders with success. Not to mention being able to assess the situation and ammend the response appropriately.

This was my point earlier regarding the indignation of letting a house burn. What's worse, the subscription FD letting it burn or a funded FD making the taxpayers think they're getting a service then failing miserably to deliver?

Ah good point, I forgot about the Class 10 rated areas. Replacing the doublewide in TN is likely the same as replacement value of a room and contents in Westchester. I was in Westchester last month and couldn't believe the appraised value of a relative's home! The same house here would be less than 1/3 in value and 5 times less in taxes, for similar services.

Like I said, I'm surprised that those companies insuring properties in this area, would not either require the $75 fee be paid or make up the difference in far higher premiums, as the non-paying subscriber will collect far more that a paying subscriber. No doubt there are companies out there that will insure anything at any risk, for a price. I'd be interested to know what these folks paid in premiums if the insurance company even knew about the subscription style FD response" .

IAFF General President Harold Schaitberger said, "Professional, career firefighters shouldn't be forced to check a list before running out the door to see which homeowners have paid up. They get in their trucks and go." How about maps Harry? Should we check maps? If we're closer, shouldn't we just get in our trucks and go? His simplistic views are typical grandstanding. I know he'd love to dictate to the taxpayers how fire protection will be served up, but he doesn't. In the end many/most of us would be so much better off with fully 1710 complaint career FD's, though few could afford it. Or can we afford not to?

The true question here is whether or not a recognized "government" of any level is obligated to ensure the safety of it's citizens? I suspect it should mirror our model of fireground responsibility: If it isn't properly delegated it moves upward until it reaches the top. If the IC doesn't delegate the Safety Officer, the responsibilities lie with him. Similarly, if the township has no fire protection it falls to the town, then to the county, then the state and finally the federal government (the likeliest of scenarios!). This is the way Law Enforcement is. I suspect few crimes escape someone's jurisdiction. Next, can the recognized governmental entity enter into a contract with a private company to provide fire protection? If so, then must they bill the taxpayers as a tax or allow the private entity to collect their own funds? Can a subscription service be used? How would they be different than the VFD that raises all their money from chicken BBQ's and upon failing to secure enough funds,can't fund fuel, proper apparatus, training, etc? I'm surprised the insurance and mortgage companies do not require those properties within subscription services to be fully "subscribed" via escrow accounts to protect their investment. It appears that we as a society do not require property fire protection as a basic necessity that every citizen must be protected by, thus allowing the no-subscribe, no-fight-your-fire dept's. One can understand the basic necessity for the FD to let a non-subscribers home burn. In fact I'll bet other non-subscribers are writing out $75 checks as fast as they can.

Of all the places we visited in Scotland Inverness was my favorite! No, but the respone time will often not prevent injury or death when it is imminent, so in cases like fire, the response time escapes reality for making a difference. The similarity in this case would be that someone from the State of TN will likely investigate the fire regardless of who's did or did not provide extinguishement. I'll go out on a limb and say this has probably happened. The difference is that in life or limb cases the FD would have acted immediately. Do so many of you not understand that this system was the choice of the taxpayers at some point? None of us are above our taxpayers, regardless of our "duty to act". If you're not employed as a firefighter, you have no duty to act as one, right?

Damn Chinese are trying to kill us slowly, first lead paint, then tainted dog food, now CFL's. This is war! :angry: Just kidding.

I find it interesting to read some of your indignations on how this happens. Subscription fire services are not totally uncommon and kinda meet the user fee structure so many places are heading now given the economy. If you believe it is the municipality's responsibility to provide fire protection (and I'd agree),to what level does this requirement measure up to? Minimum response times? Minimum staffing? Minimum training levels? On one hand we say the taxpayers have the ultimate say (and they do)but then "we" look on with shock at the system they have in place in their area? If you're taking the taxpayers money and advertising a service will be provided for that tax, what level of service do you provide?

Excellent point. My FD's policy requires the duty officer make the decision, not the dispatcher. The dispatcher merely relays all pertinent information for us to make an informed decision. Clearly this works well in a single house scenario and clouds the issue unless the first due is also the first on the air to report how the response will go. But in a situation such as FDNY where so much is already being decided by the dispatcher by protocol, it wouldn't seem a big stretch to have them state the response is hot or cold with modification by the first due company officer(s) if they feel it's in the best interest. That puts a lot of responsibility on the officer who goes against the dispatchers call, but allows some discretion by the officers who will actually be commanding the incident.

I find it interesting that many people argue that RLS and unnecessary in many cases everywhere else, but seem to think NYC is a complete different situation? I've driven there plenty and would agree that traffic congestion is among the worst,but I don't see a difference between them and LA,Boston, the DC metro area, Honolulu, you name it. Slower response times? Sure to non-emergencies: who cares? Our monthly reports to City Council do not include the response times to non-emergency calls. Only calls where the NFIRs report shows a "Priority Response" (RLS) are factored into our average response times. The same points ring true about the dispatch info in NYC as they do in Podunk: if you can't trust the dispatchers, work on that. Given the traffic issue, maybe calls that are questionable get bumped up to emergency responses vs. down to non-emergency? The citizens don't like waiting for non-emergency calls? Good, stop closing companies. This can only serve to cement the fact that closures will significantly impact all calls for service, emergencies or not. If response times are an issue, properly deploy stations and apparatus, don't make up the time recklessly speeding to boxes, which is not only dangerous to members but counterproductive to ensuring proper staffing. Of course all this is far easier to say than get done. And even more so in today's financial climate. Running RLS to non-emergency calls is similar to doing more with less. The list of what's an emergency and what isn't is really going to be the key to ensuring life and limb are not endangered no matter what.

While a single set of outboard stabilizers makes set up easier, when it comes to the actual jacks, E-One's come out the least and at an angle. They call them "underslung jacks", and the overall jack stance is generally far less than other similar size aerials, reducing the overall footprint. Also given their design you can slide them very close to a vehicle or other obstacle, where the radial arm style typical of Aerialscope may come into contact with the obstacle. The standard out and downs, also could contact the same obstacle if it was angle up and toward the apparatus. This is one of the reasons Boston FD has had such a love affair with E-One aerials. We bought a MM tower a few years ago (2006) and really looked hard at E-One. Had it not been for some other design features we couldn't get changed to suit our needs, we would have probably bought one. It's hard to argue with their record on zero aerial failures and the smallest footprint jack system in the industry.

This is why there are no absolutes in this line of work. We cannot justify running RLS all the time, nor can we ignore that sometimes RLS are warranted. Our policy does not spell out exact rules when or when not to use RLS. We allow for the crews assessment of the dispatch information. Our personnel know the administration takes operating safely seriously and generally makes responsible/defensible decisions. Typically our buses run RLS to any unconscious, chest pain, SOB/DB, GSW's, motor vehicle accidents with no other info, industrial accidents, significant trauma/bleeding, and others. Additionally any unconscious, industrial accidents, MVA's and significant falls get an Engine assist. On the other hand, we run cold to closed fractures, typical musko-skelatal injuries, general illness, nausea/vomiting, headaches, etc. We used to run cold to stroke calls, but our local hospital has become a "stroke center" and we are participating in a study that requests we respond to and transport any suspected stroke patient with onset <60 minutes, ASAP.

I'd have to disagree here. The only time that really matter is the time that 911 recieves the call to the time that a provider arrives and begins the assessment/care. Overlooking the time taken to process calls, dispatch them and get a unit enroute is putting all the emphasis on the driving time, leading to people driving faster and more recklessly as they try to cut the total response time.

I didn't know Alan Brunacini smoked. Kinda hypocritical.

Why do you have to? In my state and I presume most if not all others, the driver is still responsible for driving. This means you're liable if you drive without due regard for the safety of others. It is no stretch for 12 of your peers to determine that if you used lights and sirens for a hang nail, you did not use "due regard". Our Fire/EMS dept. is dispatched without the EMD codes but we are given the chief complaint, pertinent history and usually the pt's age. From this information the EMS crew assigned to the bus will determine how to travel. They announce "enroute, emergency status" or "enroute non-emergency". This was if the dispatcher has more information that would change their mind, they give it to them or let their impression be known. This also allows the duty officer to interject if he feels they've made an error in response mode (very rare). We also tried responding to AFA's and other calls with a single unit using lights and sirens and others responding cold. This turned out to be a more dangerous situation where we are based out of one station. Drivers were very confused with how to react after pulling over for the lead unit running lights and sirens and then pulling back out in front of other apparatus that had no lights or sirens. Now all units respond in emergency fashion to calls that we feel warrant it, and many others the responding units respond cold, usually typical single engine calls like bark mulch fires, dumpsters without exposures, odor in the area, spilled fluids, etc.