Major Changes To The Stamford Fire Departments

[Guest BrotherFF]

Malloy unites fire services

--------------------

By Natasha Lee and Donna Porstner

Staff Writers

June 1, 2007

STAMFORD - Mayor Dannel Malloy is consolidating Stamford Fire & Rescue and four of the Big Five volunteer fire departments into one paid fire department to save more than a half-million dollars next year.

Thirty-two firefighters now working for Stamford Fire & Rescue will be redeployed to the volunteer departments to provide consistent fire coverage citywide while overtime is cut at the volunteer companies, officials said.

The reorganization, announced after a meeting with the fire chiefs Wednesday, was prompted by $545,000 in budget cuts by the Board of Finance and the Board of Representatives, Malloy said.

"We have more than enough people to cover the districts, but the way we have staffed it in the past has not been terribly efficient," he said.

The system is costly because the Belltown, Glenbrook and Turn of River volunteer departments have separate staffs and often pay employees overtime to cover for co-workers out sick or on vacation, Malloy said. By sharing employees among departments, he can increase staffing from two or three paid firefighters per shift at the volunteer houses to four, while reducing costs, the mayor said.

"This is a group plan that saves $545,000 without laying off firefighters and, I want to add, increasing coverage in the Belltown, Glenbrook and Turn of River districts," Malloy said.

Volunteer chiefs, however, are skeptical and intend to present a counter proposal within the next few weeks.

No changes are expected for Springdale, which already is staffed by Stamford Fire & Rescue firefighters, or the Long Ridge Fire Company, which gets city funding but is not staffed by city employees.

If the departments are not unified, there would have to be layoffs in all of the fire departments because there is not enough money in the budget for the fiscal year that starts July 1 to continue operating as they have, Malloy said.

Under Malloy's plan, employees of the Belltown, Glenbrook and Turn of River fire departments would work for Stamford Fire & Rescue and would be covered under the same union contract as the firefighters downtown.

Bill Callion, director of public safety, health and welfare, and Stamford Fire & Rescue Chief Robert McGrath met with the fire union yesterday to create an interim agreement that will remain until the city conducts a strategic study of fire services that might prompt additional changes.

Fire union President Brendan Keatley said the plan would help get the departments through budget cuts and keep paid firefighters employed. Keatley said the plan did not violate the contract.

"The city's fire service budget has a huge cut in it this year, and I have to do whatever I can do to avoid people being out of work come July 1," he said. "I don't think this is the best plan for the city, but it's the best alternative."

The volunteer chiefs would retain oversight of volunteers and continue to receive city funding for gasoline and operating expenses.

Paid firefighters would be assigned to fire trucks and engines when responding to calls, reducing the number of staffed apparatus from 15 to 13.

Fire marshals would continue to have jurisdiction over their districts but would work out of the government center and report to Chief Fire Marshal Barry Callahan.

Response times, oversight and management should improve, Malloy said.

The new system mirrors recommendations from a 1995 fire protection study commissioned by the city. The study concluded Stamford's system is distressed, with understaffed volunteer fire departments. It called for redistributing Stamford Fire & Rescue firefighters to the volunteer departments as a cost-effective way to improve public safety.

Volunteer chiefs said the new system violates agreements they have with the city that give them the authority to hire and deploy their paid firefighters. The five volunteer companies are autonomous under the city Charter and have their own ways of staffing their firehouses and responding to calls.

Malloy agreed the reorganization would require the city to terminate management agreements with each department, but he said those would be terminated anyway because the city cannot afford the manpower prescribed by them.

"My hands are tied," Malloy said. "We've got to cut spending by $545,000 and it's got to be real."

Attempts over the last 10 years to give the city more control over the volunteer departments failed.

Malloy issued a statement Wednesday evening saying the plan was developed by Callion in consultation with fire officials. But the volunteer chiefs said they were informed of the changes and were not a part of the decision-making.

"We had one prior meeting with him where he just put this on our laps and (said) 'This is how we are going to do it' and he just wanted our input," Turn of River Fire Chief Frank Jacobellis said.

Springdale Fire Chief Shawn Fahan said he questioned Callion on how the plan would save the city $545,000 but was never given an answer.

"They're still employing the same people, they're just sending them to different buildings," he said.

Belltown Fire Chief John Didelot said the volunteer chiefs were not given anything in writing outlining the reorganization.

The chiefs said they left the meeting unclear about who would supervise the paid firefighters at their volunteer companies. The paid staff at the volunteer companies now report to the volunteer chiefs.

"No official answers have been given to a lot of the questions, yet," Jacobellis said.

Malloy said some of the responsibilities might be shared.

"Those issues have to be worked out," he said.

Callion said it will not be a major change because he is ultimately responsible for all fire service in the city - paid and volunteer.

"The buck stops here," he said.

Didelot is working with Glenbrook Fire Chief Frank Passero to develop an alternative plan they hope to present to Callion within the next couple of weeks.

"It's no mystery that Stamford Fire & Rescue is overstaffed, and it's no mystery that the volunteer companies are understaffed," Didelot said. "No one is questioning the over and the under, we're questioning the implementation of getting the two of them together and trying to get it together in 30 days."

Jacobellis said he favors changes that save taxpayers' money but said Turn of River wants to maintain control over the paid firefighters working there. Having two chiefs -Eone for the volunteers and one for the paid firefighters -Ewouldn't work, he said.

"A fire scene is confusing as it is. It's organized chaos is what it is," Jacobellis said. "If you've got people not listening to orders you're going to have people get hurt."

Callion said that concern is unwarranted because two or three departments frequently respond to the same scene "and you don't hear yelling and screaming."

If the leaders of the departments set an example of working together the rank-and-file will follow suit, Callion said.

"If the leaders are positive, the team is positive," he said.

Didelot said assigning firefighters to specific equipment limits firefighters' abilities to respond to calls and could jeopardize public safety.

"Employees at the firehouse need to be able to take the apparatus as needed to an incident." he said. "You can't just assign a firefighter to one piece of apparatus, and leave all the rest in the firehouse, when the incident calls for a different piece of apparatus."

As for Malloy's assertion that response times would improve, Jacobellis said it's unlikely.

"I don't see any changes in response times," he said. "They are still going to be at the same station. They are still going to be going through the same traffic."

Fahan, the Springdale chief, said the plan would create more tension between the volunteers and paid firefighters, and sharing equipment would lengthen response times.

"I think the reorganized plan is going to be disorganized," he said.

Copyright © 2007, Southern Connecticut Newspapers, Inc.

[Guest]

Interesting...Let's see

First lets establish some facts about fire protection in Stamford.

Stamford Fire rescue is a career department that covers the city of Stamford area and provides a engine to Springdale, the area covered is about 5 square miles. It has about 208 firefighters

The rest of the city is covered by the combination departments about 34 square miles. 45 career firefighters cover this area. 35 of which are members of the same local that covers Stamford Fire Rescue.

1) The city is now trying to implement a staffing plan from a 1995 consultants report that determined that Stamford Fire Rescue was overstaffed and the combination departments were understaffed.

2) The mayor negotiates a new contract with Stamford Fire Rescue in 2006 which includes increases in manpower. Wait? Didn't your consultants report from 1995 say that you already had too much manpower? Mr. Mayor had you reviewed the consultants report prior to signing this contract you would see no mention of the four man truck companies thoughout downtown.

3) Fast Foward one year to 2007 the city budget has been cut and now Mayor Malloy is forced to propose a savings plan that shifts man power around. Remember this is based on 1995 consultants report. This plan fails to recognize some key parts of the city charter, and after year one will cause significant increase in taxes paid by residents now served by the combination fire districts. While the purpose of this new plan is to save on overtime, it will probably only lead to more in the future.

4) What about the employees of the combination of departments, some of whom have been paying union dues to the same local as Stamford Fire Rescue for over 25 years. Recently, they have been told that they will become day one employees of Stamford Fire Rescue. Meaning the kid that graduated from the fire academy two weeks ago has more senority then the guys who have been paying dues for 20+ years. Remember this is all the same local.

5) Local 786 who are you looking out for? Why do some members have greater benefits and protection the others? Why have the guys in the combination departments not had a new contract? How can you stand for you members being threated by human resources, told to agree to this merger or be laid off?

Stay tuned this is going to get very interesting

Edited June 4, 2007 by stamfordff

[LTNRFD 266]

Why does it take over 10 years for Mayors to act on "consultants reports". Stamfords' report was from 1995 and Larchmonts' report was written in 1996. Nothing like using up-to-date information to make important decisions!!!!

Do you think that the fire department and the community may have changed a little in over 10 years?

Edited June 5, 2007 by LTNRFD

[Guest partyrock]

Leave to a politician to take an idea that sounds good and might have some potential to turn it into a nice steaming pile of FUBAR

[x152 179]

Interesting...Let's see

First lets establish some facts about fire protection in Stamford.

Stamford Fire rescue is a career department that covers the city of Stamford area and provides a engine to Springdale, the area covered is about 5 square miles. It has about 208 firefighters

The rest of the city is covered by the combination departments about 34 square miles. 45 career firefighters cover this area. 35 of which are members of the same local that covers Stamford Fire Rescue.

1) The city is now trying to implement  a staffing plan from a 1995 consultants report that determined that Stamford Fire Rescue was overstaffed and the combination departments were understaffed.

2) The mayor negotiates a new contract with Stamford Fire Rescue in 2006 which includes increases in manpower. Wait? Didn't your consultants report from 1995 say that you already had too much manpower? Mr. Mayor had you reviewed the consultants report prior to signing this contract you would see no mention of the four man truck companies thoughout downtown.

3) Fast Foward one year to 2007 the city budget has been cut and now Mayor Malloy is forced to propose a savings plan that shifts man power around. Remember this is based on 1995 consultants report. This plan fails to recognize some key parts of the city charter, and after year one will cause  significant increase in taxes paid by residents now served by the combination fire districts. While the purpose of this new plan is to save on overtime, it will probably only lead to more in the future.

4) What about the employees of the combination of departments, some of whom have been paying union dues to the same local as Stamford Fire Rescue for over 25 years. Recently, they have been told that they will become day one employees of Stamford Fire Rescue. Meaning the kid that graduated from the fire academy two weeks ago has more senority then the guys who have been paying dues for 20+ years. Remember this is all the same local.

5) Local 786 who are you looking out for? Why do some members have greater benefits and protection the others? Why have the guys in the combination departments not had a new contract? How can you stand for you members being threated by human resources, told to agree to this merger or be laid off?

Stay tuned this is going to get very interesting

←

StamfordFF - some interesting "facts", most properly cleansed in an attempt for you to make a point.

Allow me to correct some of your "facts":

<<The mayor negotiates a new contract with Stamford Fire Rescue in 2006 which includes increases in manpower. Wait? Didn't your consultants report from 1995 say that you already had too much manpower? Mr. Mayor had you reviewed the consultants report prior to signing this contract you would see no mention of the four man truck companies thoughout downtown.>>

Yes, the 2006 agreement had an increase in manpower for Trucks 2 and 3. This brought the assigned minimum staff strength from 1 Officer and 2 Fire Fighters (3) to 1 Officer and 3 Fire Fighters (4). This was done so that Truck Companies can perform as Truck Companies, not as a partially-staffed equipment wagon.

There is this document ,affectionately known as NFPA 1710, that kind of mentions this concept. There are also hundreds of career Departments across this country that staff their Ladder Companies to this standard (or higher). Perhaps it would make some interesting reading for you.

You also state that the Mayor should have reviewed a 12 year old consulatant report before allowing an increase in staffing. Should an elected official (or anyone for that matter) base their decisions on what the needs of a community were 12 years ago? The last time I checked, this City looked very different today, than it did just 12 years ago. I am also aware that there is a 37 story apartment building breaking ground within the next month and numerous high-density residential and commercial projects currently underway or in the process of approval. It should also be noted that the Mayor did not have final say regarding the staffing increases. This was done by a 40 member Board of Representatives (I am sure you know the political split). Regardless, the vote was unanimous of those attending and voting. I am not sure if you were present for the discussion at the meeting (I was). However, several members (from both political parties) commented during the approval process and spoke of the need to increase the staffing due to the extreme amount of development that has occured within the City. The words "long overdue..." were repeatedly heard. But again, you state this was the Mayor's doing?

<<While the purpose of this new plan is to save on overtime, it will probably only lead to more in the future.>>

Would it be possible to quantify this remark.? The last annual salary analysis (using the final W2's of all Firefighters) indicated that on average Firefighters working under your (infallible) system were earning between 20-40 thousand dollars more than the same Firefighter working for Stamford Fire and Rescue. You can also vaildate this by reading the top 250 employees in the Advocate. Firefighters in your system earn almost or more than Deputy Chiefs downtown (wait, then again, some up there still claim to be career Lieutenant's or Captains, although no such positions exist...) Yet, Stamford Fire and Rescue will cause an increase in overtime???

<<4) What about the employees of the combination of departments, some of whom have been paying union dues to the same local as Stamford Fire Rescue for over 25 years. Recently, they have been told that they will become day one employees of Stamford Fire Rescue. Meaning the kid that graduated from the fire academy two weeks ago has more senority then the guys who have been paying dues for 20+ years. Remember this is all the same local. >>

If you have such a problem with this representation, you should really work to organize into your own Local. This offer was extended by the former Local 786 President (me) to all 3 employee groups about 4 years ago. There were no takers at the time.

<<5) Local 786 who are you looking out for? Why do some members have greater benefits and protection the others? Why have the guys in the combination departments not had a new contract? How can you stand for you members being threated by human resources, told to agree to this merger or be laid off?>>

This is an interesting statement. Considering that it is not the downtown/City firefighters who are facing a threat of layoff. The downtown contract is a signed, executed legal agreement, which clearly identifies staffing levels and the number of apparatus. As of this time, the threat of layoff deals with junior employees in the Belltown, Glenbrook and Turn of River Fire Departments.

YET.....the majority of the Union's members (City FFs) are being asked to consider concessions in order to save 10-15 member's jobs who they have probably never met or worked with. BUT who are they "looking out for..."

In 1990, when 8 City Firefighters were laid off, I do not know if the same consideration was offered by members outside of the downtown contract. But "who are they looking out for..."

If you would like to know the answers to ....."Why have the guys in the combination departments not had a new contract? How can you stand for you members being threated by human resources, told to agree to this merger or be laid off...' then I would suggest you find the proper forum.

Union meetings are scheduled for this Thursday and Friday night. If you are truly an interested party and a member of the Local (those removed in 1998 need not apply), I would recommend that you attend and bring your same concerns where they can be properly heard and hopefully addressed.

Edited June 5, 2007 by x152