Bnechis

Every "fire" call. ISO does not define this. It use to mean automatic alarms, but if you classify them as auto alarms and not "fires" thats another story. But any call that is reported as a fire (no matter how small) needs the full response. Once the IC determines it is not a "fire"he can turn everyone around or keep them in qtrs. but you need toget a list of who was there (most do that for points anyway).

Its paid for by NYS OFPC (Office of Fire Prevention & Control)not DES.

EMS providers and their patients would clearly benefit. The lack of available training is inpart due to a major lack of interest on the part of EMS in general. When the county set up the the mass decon program, we requested all EMS agencies send as many members as possible, we ran about 10 classes andwith the exceptionof FD EMS or membersof FD's we had almost no participation. Dozens of WMD awarness courses for EMS were offered and almost all cancelled when no one showed up. Over the last 20 years I've run 100's of classes and Ifindonly a small % of EMS providers are everinterested. That is because the classes are run by OFPC not DES (they are just the host). Many of the classes require that you are insured by your agency and all FD's are mandated by law to do that. Go back about 10 years and NYS did not provide rescue training (except vehicle) and if you wanted it you had to go private, that was for FD and EMS. For 18 years I ran classes all over the region (Westchester, Rockland, Dutchass, Orange and in NJ)and very few EMS providers got involved. I always felt it was because of $$$, but since I've also taught many freebies I don't think its true.

1) then who is going to do their work? I pay for them to maintain the city. 2) The training done on or off duty...who pays. 3) ISO will consider them on call only...so you still need 36 of them. 4) if you force them (make it a job requirement) They become career ff's then need the full traiining and will no longer be able to do the DPW job.

Mutual aid does not count. Automatic aid gets 90% credit, but only if the giving dept has the same or better rating than the recieving.

No problem. Its not 36 rostered. ISO requires 36 ff to actually respond on every fire unless you haved staffed stations. Then its 12. Part of that is with a 1 min turnout time (staffed) the fire will not be as bad as with an 6, 10, 20...etc. minute turnout time. ISO is saying that staffed houses are the way to go. ANd this is nothing new, they have been saying it for over 100 years.

Chris you are combining a couple of different posts of mine. ISO does not have a response time, they have a distance (1.5 mile for engines, 2.5 for ladders/service co.) and assume that your times are based on the distance. ISO's 12ff / 1 IC is the minimum # of responders you need "ON DUTY" in the firehouse. In VFD's without inhouse duty crews you need 36 ff's / 1 IC. ISO appears to be assuming that this response delay is going to require 3x the numbers (maybe to deal with the bedroom fire that 10 min later is the whole house). The 8 min resposnse is based on NFPA 1710 which uses the time/temperature curve to determine when flashover is likely to occur (which also means the fire has spread beyond the area of origin). It is also the ALS response time requirement for both 1710 and the AHA for cardiac emergencies. 1710 requires 15 to 16 career firefighters (at a minimum) be on scene in 8 minutes. The 3 additional ff's that 1710 wants over ISO is for FAST and FF accountability. NFPA 1720 is the vollie response standard and it just says you need to respond with enough people to get the job done. With no time standard. So 10 min with no response is considered ok by those that created the standard. HOW CAN THIS BE? We have 2 Different standards....career in 8 min and vol in whenever they show up?

Town of Mamaroneck Eng 37 ran a ward. it was replaced around 1984 New Rochelle E23, replaced in 1988. Was sold to Eastchester. Hit a pole behind lord & taylors and that was it. New Cannaan replaced tanker 8, this fall.

Of course they can. State law requires local government (City's, Villages, Fire Districts, etc.) have to provide fire protection. Thus they have a "duty to act". If the chief, commissioners, or gov officials are aware that a problem exists, then they have liability for not providing the service.

Well said chief

If you have been reading the news over the last month, County gov is more concerned with what the part timers at the top make. When you say "chief" of 60 Control are you refering to one of the Chiefs or the Commissioner? Maybe your chief makes more because he has seniority, most public safty jobs pay more based on seniority. Or maybe its because your chief actually had to pass the NYS Chiefs Civil Service Exam to earn the title.

When the union requests something added to the contract, the city insists we "pay" for it. So when the city has asked for this, is it not fair that we ask them to "pay" for it.

Yes, its called condition of employment. And the unions are not against it, but we work under a legal contract that covers all aspects of the condition of employment. When either side wants something changed you negociate a new contract. See above. Thats not how conract law works.

We have testing for hiring, promotion and major cause (like MVA with vehicle). The city wants random testing but its a contractual issue. THe union is not against it (they favor it) but they want the city to give something for it. which most members see as fair.

I've heard that rumor for almost 20 years....I don't see it coming anytime soon. Georgia did that, some say with the intention of eliminating vollunteers. The interesting issue is in NYS you need 120+ hours of training to "treat" a life and death issue, but you need over 1,000 hours to cut my hair.

Thanks Not much, too busy in NR. I am on the DOH regional faculty so I do teach in the CLI & CIC program. I also taught all of the Decon Trailer Programs.

I agree, but your never going to see 2 medics in most cases due to cost and availability. I also feel the basic EMT does not give enough, but I dont want to see it longer. I like the idea of being an EMT for a while then upgrading. You have a better sence of it and hopefully your skills are sharper then. You can use them under both direct & indirect (if the agency is an "I"). It would be useful, but the paid system is unwilling to pay for it and the vollie side never took interest. Thank for the compliment. Nice to see it in writing. My intention always was to make it a pre-medic. Some just want that far and decided it was as far as they wanted to go, others used it as the prep to being a better medic.

Having testified a few times (as a witness) I was amazed at how far the lawers stretched the terms. for example I was grilled for over 45 minutes on the little times box on the PCR. One of the lawers was able to make a 3 minute response time look like it could have been 12 minutes in the jury's mind. We could have walked the 10 blocks in that time. Agreed. My point was that I think there are safer ways to deal with this. I think this is a system that is used by commercial services to control employees, when proper training, supervision, personnel selection and equipment would be better.

That tells me that this system considers that a spotter is only important sometimes. It solves the abandonment issue, but if you hit the inside button, then the driver backs into something, I think your liability just went way up. You need a system that works every time. Back up sensors Camera's BackStop bumper mounted break system, etc.

While there are times you may have to leave the patients side, the lawyers will beat you solid on it. This is from a EMS Law firm: Abandonment EMT-Is may terminate the medical relationship without fear of being held liable for abandonment under the following circumstances: · Patient does not require medical assistance · Patient terminates the relationship · Patient care is transferred to another medical professional Getting out may be interpreted as temporary termination. Particularly if there are other methods to safely back the vehicle. In Fundamentals of Emergency Care By Richard W. O. Beebe, Deborah L. Funk They claim that leaving the patient for any reason is abandonment. On the stand when the lawyer asks you to read the highlighted portion.......you will have a problem. If your defense is its company policy, but the training from the state and the textbook say otherwise.

I've seen lots of people who should not be driving an ambulance. My quote was based on the statement "you can't back up without hitting it" I still question the wholw concept. While having a spotter is a great idea, if you don't have a 3rd, I believe you are abandoning your patient to stand behind the vehicle to back it up. Even if the pt is minr or BS...its still abandonment. In 1986 my ambulance (NYH-CMC HRIT) got a back up camera and that solves this issue. With the camera, the driver has no blind spots and with the audio system you can hear anyone who yells out. I see these camera's commonly on campers, busses, fire trucks, trucks and now mini-vans. But very few ambulances. It appears to me that municipal agencies are not turning to this system, but commercial servces are. Why is that? Is it there a difference between the two?

While it sounds like a good way to confirm that someone is back there, and save the agency money on the vehicle insurance, its a good way to get the crew killed. 1st the last place i want a crew member to go to when the rigis ready to back up is the drivers blind spot. 2nd I have been on a number of calls where the crowds got out of hand and the only way to save my patient, my partner and myself was to back out. If we had to get out of the rig, a) one of us was going to get killed and the rig still could not back up. 3rd I know of at least 3 calls in westchester where EMS raced in to a reported officer down and came under fire from the gunman. 2 cases were able to rapidly back up the 3rd, the gun man waited till they were out of the rig before he started shoting at them...they spent the next few hours under the bus. One of the medics proudly displayed the trauma box with the bullet hole thru it. While this does not happen often, installing these systems apears to be an extreme reaction, and shows that managment does not trust its staff (It could be that the staff can't be trusted, but thats another issue).

The stiger Act of 1970 is what created FED OSHA. The law is to protect workers in the private sector (not government). States were given the option to be "State Plan" states. If the State wanted to keep the feds out, they had to agree to enforce the law on private and public sector. The following States are full plan states: Alaska, Arizona, Californa, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, No Carolina, Oregon, So Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, & Wyoming The following states agreed to split to program with the feds: Conn NJ NY They cover the public,and the FEDS cover the private. The fine structure for private sector can be very high and even with reductions commonly is in the $100,000's The fine structure for public sector is often a joke. But it may open the door for major litigation and civil judgements. Since most governmental liability laws dont cover the gov if it has broken the law. As I see it the real issue is not "OSHA is the LAW" to worry about.....but the laws of physics. The fines for breaking those law can not be negotiated.

Nope, they are staffed by DEP Hazmat.

Good thing your retired, calling it truckengine 14 was a no no. LOL