Does your Department issue this?

[EJS1810 7]

British Columbia Firefighters Issued Unisex Undies

The Toronto Star

The troubled Richmond fire department has banned front-line firefighters from wearing their own undies, briefs or boxers while on duty.

Both sexes are now wearing mandatory standard underwear and it's costing the city $16,000 to provide each firefighter with six pairs.

The mandatory standard translates into plain, sensible Stanfield boxers, said Richmond city official Ted Townsend.

"You can buy them anywhere," he said. "There's nothing special about them."

The one-style-for-all is part of the city's attempts to make the department gender-neutral and provide an environment in which men and women will feel comfortable, said Townsend.

When firefighters are called out they remove all their clothes down to their underwear and don protective firefighting gear, said Townsend.

Everyone strips in a common area and the standardized underwear came "from a sense in the department" that this was the best approach to the issue, he said.

The department has been rocked by allegations from four female firefighters that they have been victims of sexual harassment and other forms of harassment from male colleagues.

All the women walked off the job. Two have returned to work and one is suing the city.

Investigations by labour negotiator Vince Ready and lawyer Susan Paish made a number of recommendations to prevent problems. In his report, Ready described the workplace culture at Richmond as "characterized by juvenile and hostile behaviour" towards women.

Only active firefighters on Richmond's 215-member force will be required to wear the standardized underwear.

"It won't be a requirement for persons in the department who don't attend fires," Townsend said.

Canadian Press

Sounds like a novel approach. any thoughts?

[SRS131EMTFF 471]

Certainly a unique approach

[FirNaTine 370]

How about wearing your pants underneath your bunkers, eliminating a $16,000 expense? Just a thought.

[Scottyk107 9]

I agree unless your sleeping I never saw too many people strip down before putting bunkers on

[Guest]

Thats becaues theres not really need to strip down before putting bunkers on, lol (not trying to bust your chops)

Advice To Anyone Interested, I find It easier when wearing my bunkers to wear shorts (not so much jean shorts but they will do). Before I go to my drills I usually change into shorts. (But now its getting cold out so I dont know what I should do). Its Easier to pull up, its looser, its not as hot, and it can possibly shorten your responce time from where you park your car/truck to the scene. I know for the guys on duty you like to wear the navy jean pants and matching dept shirts. But for the vollys responding from home or where ever you may be its so much easier wearing shorts. Atleast in the summer and spring time.

Just my opinion, If you dont like then just ignore it.

Edited October 27, 2006 by NRFDTL11Buff

[RWC130 594]

NR,

Bunkers? C'Mon.... Johnny Gauge & Roy didn't need Bunkers.

They put out the Fire in Work Pants and Shoes with Turnout Coat,

Helmet, and SCBA.

Bunkers only at night!

Anyone ever catch that? haha

EMERGENCY!

"Station 51 responding, KMG365"

[CTFF 65]

I guess they can't go commando there anymore.

So what do they do there when they are out in public and get a call? They have to go shopping and do inspections right?

What about the poor junior guy who has to get into gear at a school demonstation?

[Guest]

NR,

Bunkers? C'Mon.... Johnny Gauge & Roy didn't need Bunkers.

They put out the Fire in Work Pants and Shoes with Turnout Coat,

Helmet, and SCBA.

←

haha,

Well theese days everone loves walking around in bunkers looking hardcore, lol. (not trying to "bash" if thats what you want to call it on anyone but its true)

In backdraft they went in with a turnout coat, scba, and now as we use them, flood boots. And the boots were not even pulled up when they went in. I know it was just a movie but that is how they did the the time of "old school firefighting". Now we have advanced in protection so much. We have Build in knee pads, harneses, and everything you can think of. Every year there is somthing new and better to protect us even more from "the old school days" all the way to 2006.

Edited October 27, 2006 by NRFDTL11Buff

[X615 0]

mandating underwear? assinine! everything associated with running a fire dept. & that's the biggest problem they could find to deal with let alone throw 16k at it. history has shown administrators unable to deal with real, challenging issues will pick something idiotic to make a stand on so they can fool themselves they're really making a difference. this is absurd.

[CTFF 65]

In backdraft they went in with a turnout coat, scba,

I don't remember SCBA's in backdraft, am I wrong?

[EJS1810 7]

I don't remember SCBA's in backdraft, am I wrong?

←

Common, stay on topic.

[27east 19]

I don't remember SCBA's in backdraft, am I wrong?

←

They were there, never used, but there.

[10-Buff-4 0]

NR,

Bunkers? C'Mon.... Johnny Gauge & Roy didn't need Bunkers.

They put out the Fire in Work Pants and Shoes with Turnout Coat,

Helmet, and SCBA.

Bunkers only at night! 

Anyone ever catch that? haha

EMERGENCY!

"Station 51 responding, KMG365"

←

I did indeed notice that one Cap! I always wondered about that, especially because Johhny and Roy never had knee length coats. I think LA City FD still does that at non fires, like Technical Rescues.

This is downright stupid. Regulation underwear? Maybe if the city was providing UnderArmour as a service, but, this is ridiculous, especially for $16,000. What is this, the QUeen of England's under things? And also, stripping down is a rarity, so far as I know. Them Canadians and their lack of strong unions..... (And if I'm wrong on that front, my apologies.)

-DA BUFF

[IzzyEng4 427]

I remember a story about my grandfather in the 50's running out the house door to the firehouse got his 3/4 boosts on and long coat and drove the truck to the call and couldn't understand why there was a draft up his pants. Then he realized at the 4am alarm he only had a t-shirt and boxers on. Does that count????

Edited October 27, 2006 by IzzyEng4

[Guest]

Agreed, unique approach, but what the hell?

[Sean11FD 3]

interesting...?

[xfirefighter484x 234]

Ok, random question. Do they wear the same gear/same style gear we do here in the good old US of A? I know that in some places, they were working on making a 1-piece jumpsuit, supposedly to eliminate the time to get ready, or just ease of use.

Hopefully it does not sound stupid, but is there the possibility they wear a different style that requires them to wear no other clothing underneath?

[x129K 1,393]

I agree unless your sleeping I never saw too many people strip down before putting bunkers on

←

I've seen a bunch of truck guys from Yonkers do it!

[firecapt32 282]

Hey mabey its a union issue---some stupid ohh sorry chiefs -- come out with a order telling every employee must ware the same clothing or something like that--- Union says if thats what you want us to have them buy them. far fetched?? I dont think so

What about chiefs that put out a memo-- socks must be white while on duty?? or you cant ware black socks with uniform pants??

far fetched??

does the department have to buy socks?? union issue for sure.

What about sleeping naked in the bunk room ?? do you have to sleep in undies?? lots of things to concider....... I am sure you guys have more opions.

[res6cue 67]

Ok, random question. Do they wear the same gear/same style gear we do here in the good old US of A? I know that in some places, they were working on making a 1-piece jumpsuit, supposedly to eliminate the time to get ready, or just ease of use.

Hopefully it does not sound stupid, but is there the possibility they wear a different style that requires them to wear no other clothing underneath?

←

It's Morning Pride gear, same as ours.

Also, at least according to someone from that area who was posting on the same topic at FH.com, their Morning Pride dealer specifically told them they were supposed to wear their gear that way. In all my years dealing with turnout gear dealers from Globe, Lion-Janesville and Morning Pride, I can safely say I've NEVER heard such a thing, nor have I ever read it in or on any manufacturer's literature or website.

[hudson144 150]

remember-brown stripe to the rear and yellow to the front!!!

[xfirefighter484x 234]

It's Morning Pride gear, same as ours.

Also, at least according to someone from that area who was posting on the same topic at FH.com, their Morning Pride dealer specifically told them they were supposed to wear their gear that way. In all my years dealing with turnout gear dealers from Globe, Lion-Janesville and Morning Pride, I can safely say I've NEVER heard such a thing, nor have I ever read it in or on any manufacturer's literature or website.

←

Wow, seriously, I never would have guessed. As far as I had always been told, you should wear an extra layer (i.e. pants) underneath your bunkers just to provide you with that extra protection. As much as your gear protects you, if you get into a high heat environment, we all know our gear can heat up quite a bit, and even worse, steam-scenarios.

Thank you, res6cue for that update!!!!