firefighter36

Hopefully our future brethren will not have to experience things like complacency, ignorance of politicians, budget shortfalls, and staffing shortages.....

Some strong words in that article. No matter what, it seems as though we are the ones who they attack first during a fiscal crisis. Also, the NYS Conference of Mayors put out a pretty strongly worded report regarding controlling costs of public safety employees. Link posted below is from the NYS Professional Firefighters Website. http://www.nyspffa.org/Docs/NYCOMReport.pdf

Fairview (Dutchess) 1716, up from 1594 in 2009.

Bravo. And for the record Capt., that's exactly how it is today as well

Watch out for online higher education. Seth, I sent a PM about my experiences. Meanwhile, take a look at this episode of Frontline from PBS. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/collegeinc/view/?utm_campaign=viewpage&utm_medium=grid&utm_source=grid

If my memory serves me correctly, NYS PESH prohibits the pump operator from being a part of the safety team... Not sure about the others, but logic dictates that ICs and Chauffeurs have enough responsibilities at a scene as well, besides being a safety team.

The council and mayor appear to all be part-time. Searching their salaries, they make about $9000.00 each in 2009.... Like the old addage goes, you get what you pay for!

With the loss of an engine, what will happen to the department's ISO rating? Will insurance rates go up along with the taxes? If I owned a business in Newburgh, I'd sure be concerned....

Hopefully they handle it by sending the City a bill to recover the cost of their services....

Did some research, I have 2 more years until I am eligible to run!

I think a different poster in a different topic already said it. The elected "leaders" are oftentimes the ones who cannot be rescued.

All of that from a Town where the Median home value is over $1.1 million... Check out the Community's Demographics. http://www.city-data.com/city/Westport-Connecticut.html

If the staffing was done any other way, there would be no legal mechanism for EMS billing. Look at NYS law. Technically, the VFA, the VFAVAC and the Fire District are all separate entities. If my knowledge and research is correct, the Fire District Contracts for volunteer services with the VFA, and the career members are employees of the Fire District. By keeping the VAC separate with separate staffing, they can continue to bill. If the fire district were to take it over, they would not be able to bill for EMS services. I would also venture to say that any other means of staffing other that contracting the way it is could violate a whole other bunch of labor laws. Regardless of intent, let's not forget that NYS case law prohibits EMS billing by a municipality for purposes of making a profit. The argument therein would ask is the VFAVAC a municipal agency? I would infer that several different arguments would be made.

I'm sure plenty of taxpayers, as well as the Attorney General, NYS Insurances Dept., or NYS Comptroller's Office care plenty!

Our jobs as FD/PD/EMS is to help people. FD-Based EMS is just that, helping people. Whatever the solution, the level of service and response, we have an obligation to put our best foot forward and provide courteous, prompt, and professional service to our respective areas. People and the safety of the community need to come first. I don't think anything relating to such a venture could be looked at as having to potential to produce a profit. NYS law and several court decisions regarding ideas just like this one clearly state that a municipality cannot engage in EMS billing to create a "Funding Stream." I.E. the municipality cannot create a City Ambulance as a "business" to support the city. The law does however state that a municipality can bill for EMS Services rendered for the sake of "Cost Recovery," meaning that the City has the right to seek reimbursement from a patient's insurance company for the reasonable costs of treatment and transport to definitive care. I think the above description lays forth how the politicos and the city-manager types often view this service. Second, I would advocate for FD-Based EMS based on another factor: Firefighter Safety. In my estimation, EMS calls do a number of things to help our safety. First and foremost, they get us out in the community and allow us to have our ears to the ground. Through EMS, we can see and understand the human condition in our response areas. Additionally, we see the changes in construction, and we get the opportunity to enter a lot of occupancies, commercial, residential, industrial, etc. that we may not have access to. (Remember, not every FD is empowered with inspection & enforcement powers relating to Codes.) Doing EMS allows us to help people, and be on the look out for dangerous situations that could compromise us should we enter an occupancy during a fire or rescue-type scenario. Knowledge is power, and having the knowledge that can be gained through EMS Calls is another tool in our arsenal that can keep us alive and healthy. As for call volume, and all the other excuses, in a political system where bottoms lines, numbers, and excel spreadsheets take precedence over than life safety to some, well, I'll let everyone draw their own conclusion. Just my $.02

Awesome shots. I was able to get a tour there when I was in town and meet up with IzzyEng4 while I was there. Great group of brothers and sisters working there!

After reading through everything relating to the recent fire in Stamford, I decided to start this topic. To those career and volunteer brothers and sisters in a combination department, how does your chain of command work? What are the requirements for officers, etc.? What are your staffing levels and membership rosters, etc?

Bingo! Do you think it is the drastically different in training requirements that fuels much of the resentment and friction we sometimes see?

Great question! To be honest, that is something I feel changes based on the situation. I took the rural water supply class a few years ago, and it was an eye opener coming from a place that is mostly hydrants. Anyhow, in our evolutions, there didn't seem to be as much of a distance of supply line as there was an emphasis for the proper number of tankers to keep an uninterrupted supply of water showing up to the attack rig from the various water sources. As a matter of fact, the instructor showed over time into the final exercise that we were 1 tanker short of keeping a constant attack. (We ran multiple master streams, hand lines, etc.) Why would it change? Availability of manpower, tankers, and location of static water sources. The lay of the land is an important factor, how far down a long driveway, up or down hill, etc. The impression I got from the class was that departments need to have the right equipment and the right plan. Unfortunately, there are departments out there that think an engine with a larger booster tank is sufficient. Is that really the case? or are Tankers not as near and dear to member's hearts as an engine or truck? Also, food for thought, at a relatively large fire, in a hydranted area, we laid 1000 ft of 5" along with a dual lay of 3" and 2.5" not because of any kind of friction loss formula, but because we needed to hit a 2nd hydrant and quick to maintain water supply based on a change in water pressure from a main.

I have been in two different combination fire departments. They operate a bit differently that each other, but much differently than other departments than I have seen. Fire Department A has 4 fire companies in their jurisdiction. All but one of the 5 stations are manned with career firefighters, in addition to the volunteer companies. Career-staffed rigs respond on dispatch, and volunteers respond to the firehouse and respond on their own apparatus. When rigs are staffed appropriately, they can be first up in the 911 computer. Most notably, this was done when the rescue had a full crew and would take medicals over the career engine. (This was before an ALS program was put online.) The career firefighters answered to a shift commander, the volunteer firefighters answered to a volunteer LT or CAPT, who then answered to the career firefighters or the shift commander, who all ultimately answered to a chief officer. Typically, at scenes, volunteer companies would be assigned tasks just as the career companies would be, and we had few, if any problems. We did our training with the career firefighters, and few, if any career vs volunteer rifts occurred. Fire Department B has one station and a volunteer fire company, with career firefighters that cross-staff the apparatus. Volunteers answer to their volunteer officers, who answer to the career firefighters and career officers, who answer to chief officers. Due to the difference in the size and staffing of the department, it is not uncommon to see the career and volunteer members working together to accomplish tasks. The volunteers also train with the career staff, and ride as extras if in the station, or respond to the scene in their POV for alarms. In a nutshell, that is what I have experienced. I have heard of other departments that have volunteer chiefs and other officers overseeing the career side of the department as well, does anyone have a view of a department that operates as such? Could the Stamford incident serve as an example of what could adversely affect such an operation? I am not looking to Monday morning quarterback, just looking to find others who work in different systems and their experiences and all the good/bad/crazy points that come into play. We have touched on differing qualifications of officers as mandated by NYS State Law on here. Should NYS standards be standardized across the board? How can this be done without sacrificing necessary training and experience?

A lot of it comes down to who is responsible for water service in the jurisdiction. If I remember correctly, Cities and Villages have to provide water to their residents. Towns do not. As BNechis has said in a different post, plenty of jurisdictions pays billions to maintain water systems worth millions. I think that the infrastructure of a town reflects how seriously they take fire protection, and how much pride they town has in itself and its people. There are plenty of places around here that have million dollar homes with million dollar views, and there is no municipal water or fire rated hydrant system to protect them. It is ludacris and irresponsible for a town to allow such growth and development without the infrastructure to support it. Furthermore, the fact that developers cut corners and pinch pennies in just about every facet of their operation just makes a recipe for disaster. This is no fault of the fire district, as fire districts are not directly responsible for municipal water. (There is only 1 fire and water charter district in NYS) I do however, wonder how many fire districts advocate for the need for municipal water and fire-rated hydrants in their areas. I know this isn't possible everywhere, but there are plenty of places where it is.

You sure about that? I hear an awful lot of 2nd, 3rd, 4th dispatches, Calls turned over mutual aid because of lack of a response, etc. where I am, and I doubt staffing meets either NFPA 1710 or NFPA 1720 standards. If the job is getting done, it sure as hell isn't getting done safely, or promptly as dispatch logs can probably show. Anything that can increase available QUALIFIED and WELL-TRAINED staffing and an appropriate compliment of equipment to emergency scenes sounds worth looking at to me.....

Makes you wonder where people's priorities lie.... Remember, in NY each Fire District (Fire Districts Cover Towns and are separate governmental entities) has 5 commissioners, Chiefs, etc. Throw in Municipal (city & village) politicians, the current law, and the mess in Albany, and well, you get one hell of a mess and a system that gets to stay broken for lack of political support. Throw in a political organization that lobbies to lower training standards and raise service awards, and well, you get the point....

If I'm not mistaken, the above training, Bloodborne Pathogens, and Right to Know are the only mandated annual training (about 8 hours) for volunteer FFs in NY.

I think asking for dispatch times and a play by play is more than appropriate. We are accountable to both ourselves and the public. How does multiple dispatches to get the appropriate equipment/staffing responding to alarms reflect on the fire service?