Update on Stamford Merger

[FFPCogs 863]

The taxpayers who's homes burned to the ground 80 pages ago suffered because not enough volunteers showed up? It does not mater how many you have if they do not show up in sufficient numbers every call.

This is true, there has to be enough that actually show up to make a difference, hence the staffing initiative. I do not advocate a come as you want response at all, but rather each trained and qualified member woud have an assigned duty tour to cover the hours required. One way to help achieve that is to use one of your favorite methods, incentive programs. There are a number of them that we believe can work while maintaining the goal of no increase in expenditures.

Cogs, you have explained how you would provide the coverage and how its done in other states, but the volunteers in No. Stamford have not shown any interest in "staffing" the stations so the coverage would actually be 24/7.

Well that's not exactly true. BFD has at least a 4 man crew in house every night 6p - 7a and weekends, generally though that number is 8 or more so that's 2 rigs on the road at least, and that's just from the in house personnel. Other VFDs have also had some success with nightime and weekend staffing I've been told, but not on as regular a basis as BFD. So the groundwork is there, but this must be addressed and formalized to ensure 100% coverage. I firmly believe that by requiring duty tours to ensure the necessary coverage the stations can be staffed by volunteers nights and if necessary weekend days as well as nights. Weekdays however remain a problem to a varying degree dependent on department and this is why I advocate paid staffing days only across the board during these hours. This paid staff can be SFRD, but if need be it can be SVFD or housemen for that matter if there is no impetus to compromise by SFRD.

Cogs

Edited October 31, 2011 by FFPCogs

[FireMedic049 597]

You are making statements about taxing and the fire service in Stamford without having an understanding of the basic concepts of why the taxing districts in Stamford are set up the way they are.

Mr. Strangio was kind enough to provide you with a primer of some information to enlighten you. And he did a succinct job of giving you info you could have learned for yourself with a little time googling.

I really wasn't trying to make statements about the taxing and fire service in Stanford. I was initially sharing some observations from an outside perspective regarding what appears to be a somewhat disjointed city and asked a very simple question - why not have a single tax district?

Instead of actually answering the question, you gave an ambiguous answer regarding having multiple tax districts in Stamford (something that was already known). So, I made another observation that something about the tax situation didn't seem very uniform and that based on that observation, it would seem that it wasn't very fair to all. I also asked why wouldn't everybody be taxed the same in a single municipality.

Again, instead of answering this simple question, you resorted to essentially insulting me - twice now.

So what is it that's got your knickers in a twist?

[sqd47bfd 20]

I really wasn't trying to make statements about the taxing and fire service in Stanford. I was initially sharing some observations from an outside perspective regarding what appears to be a somewhat disjointed city and asked a very simple question - why not have a single tax district?

Instead of actually answering the question, you gave an ambiguous answer regarding having multiple tax districts in Stamford (something that was already known). So, I made another observation that something about the tax situation didn't seem very uniform and that based on that observation, it would seem that it wasn't very fair to all. I also asked why wouldn't everybody be taxed the same in a single municipality.

Again, instead of answering this simple question, you resorted to essentially insulting me - twice now.

So what is it that's got your knickers in a twist?

Unfortunately, far too many people are operating with bad information, speculation or uninformed opinions on this matter.

(ps good morning Jimmy I see you lurking!)

[Geppetto 31]

Belltown Fire Department fills out volunteer ranks

Belltown: Amid pending consolidation, all-volunteer fire department adapts, thrives

Jeff Morganteen

Stamford Advocate

November 2, 2011

http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/article/Belltown-Fire-Department-fills-out-volunteer-ranks-2249372.php

[FFPCogs 863]

Belltown Fire Department fills out volunteer ranks

Belltown: Amid pending consolidation, all-volunteer fire department adapts, thrives

Jeff Morganteen

Stamford Advocate

November 2, 2011

http://www.stamforda...nks-2249372.php

Well all I can say about the article is it's about time the Ragvocate gave credit where credit is due.

On a personal note:

I am extremely proud to be a member of the Belltown Fire Department and to have had the honor of serving as a Captain this past year. These guys are second to none and I want to thank all my fellow members for the sacrifices they make to serve our community. Through their efforts we have maintained the respect and support of the people of Belltown who know they can always rely on us just as they always have.

Great job guys!!!!

Belltown Fire Dept. "A t W" since 1928 and still going strong!!!

Cogs

2nd Captain

Belltown Fire Dept

Edited November 3, 2011 by FFPCogs

[Geppetto 31]

Noreaster Storm Becomes A Fire Plan Battlefield

Using last week's storm as a basis, is it possible to predict the future impact of Mayor Michael Pavia's Volunteer Fire Department Plan?

Stamford Patch Opinion

Jamal Powell

11/03/11

http://stamford.patch.com/articles/noreaster-storm-becomes-a-fire-plan-battlefield

[Geppetto 31]

Pavia discloses details on fire plan

Jeff Morganteen

Stamford Advocate

November 26, 2011

http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/article/Pavia-discloses-details-on-fire-plan-2294255.php

[Bnechis 3,961]

Pavia discloses details on fire plan

Jeff Morganteen

Stamford Advocate

November 26, 2011

http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/article/Pavia-discloses-details-on-fire-plan-2294255.php

>> "Twenty-eight firefighters would earn $45,182 each, while drivers would earn $55,917. The new department also expects to hire 10 transfers from Stamford Fire & Rescue at base salaries of $72,500."<<

28 ff's earn $45,182 each.

19 ff's earn $55,917 each.

10 ff's earn $72,500 each.

Let me predict what will happen if this comes to pass. At the 1st meeting of the career firefighters, they will determine that the pay scales are unfair and they need a union to fight for their rights. They will either form their own local or will potition to join SFRD's local.

I do not know what the labor laws in CT. are, but I suspect the administration will have a hard time defending this practice and very rapidly will need to negotiate a "fair" contract.

BTW: if they are all brought up to the $72,500 level, thats an additional $1,079,981 (plus benefits) cost that has not been factored into this "new" dept. Add that to the manpower shortages they have already built into the scheduling and the taxpayers in North Stamford are going to get slammed.

[CTFF 65]

The long ridge guys are going to be paid in the area of 80k, the costs keep climbing...

[FFPCogs 863]

Well at least we can all agree that the cost of additional career firefighters, regardless of who they work for, will apparently be astronomical. Maybe it's high time some of that money gets invested into the volunteer sector in the form of proven incentives such as per call and duty stipends since both plans currently on the table will require more and more career personnel in the very near future to effectively cover the City. And that, as those wonderful SFL ads on the radio so eloquently point out, is something the public neither wants or needs. Utilize the resources available more effectively and everybody wins, don't and we all lose.

Stay Safe and Happy Holidays from now rain soaked Kandahar Afghanistan

Cogs

[FD828 77]

Maybe I will put in for one of the "transfers", that is more then the current top FF salary at SFRD!

[Dinosaur 844]

Well at least we can all agree that the cost of additional career firefighters, regardless of who they work for, will apparently be astronomical. Maybe it's high time some of that money gets invested into the volunteer sector in the form of proven incentives such as per call and duty stipends since both plans currently on the table will require more and more career personnel in the very near future to effectively cover the City. And that, as those wonderful SFL ads on the radio so eloquently point out, is something the public neither wants or needs. Utilize the resources available more effectively and everybody wins, don't and we all lose.

Then lets call a spade a spade and do away with this 800 pound "volunteer" anchor weighing us down. If you're going to pay people per call or have a duty stipend, they're getting paid and shouldn't claim to be volunteers anymore.

Create one fire department for the entire town with one eminently qualified Chief of Department and have full-time FF, part-time FF, and per call FF that all meet a minimum standard for fitness, training, etc. Staff the apparatus with 3 FF and an officer and it won't matter whether its a per call FF or a full-time FF because they're all the same!

The City isn't so big and the fire load isn't so high that this can't be done. It just takes people's willingness to accept change.

Edited November 28, 2011 by Dinosaur

[FFPCogs 863]

Then lets call a spade a spade and do away with this 800 pound "volunteer" anchor weighing us down. If you're going to pay people per call or have a duty stipend, they're getting paid and shouldn't claim to be volunteers anymore.

Spade a spade? Ok by Webster's definition people recieving a stipend would no longer be strictly volunteer, but according to Federal labor Law (FLSA) they would be so long as that stipend(s) is less than 20% of the gross pay of a career firefighter or Officer ect. Now while this may offend the sensibilities of some, in the end it's not those sensibilities or even Websters that matters but the Law. I prefer the term retained as it better describes the status of members recieving stipends, but it's really nothing more than semantics. What term is used to describe a members status is irrelevent, call them whatever you want. My only concern is providing enough qualified firefighters at a reasonabe cost to protect the City, I believe "retained" personnel in concert with the existing career force can accomplish that goal.

Create one fire department for the entire town with one eminently qualified Chief of Department and have full-time FF, part-time FF, and per call FF that all meet a minimum standard for fitness, training, etc. Staff the apparatus with 3 FF and an officer and it won't matter whether its a per call FF or a full-time FF because they're all the same!

Funny some of us have been saying that all along, but have met feirce resistance from both sides of the fence. Why? Because niether is willing to compromise for the common good. Egos, agendas and politics at their finest.

The City isn't so big and the fire load isn't so high that this can't be done. It just takes people's willingness to accept change.

No it isn't but accepting change has to be a two way street that encompasses the needs of both "sides". Change should seek to maximize the similarities and minimize the differences between the career and volunteer sectors. It should seek to utilize the resources availabe to build a professional, efficient and effective fire dept to best serve our community. The continued useless arguments over semantics and the unwillingness of most to even entertain an approach other than their own just shows that goal to be the furthest thing from most of the players minds. Like I said egos, agendas and politics at their finest. Valuable time, experience, energy and the desire to serve has been and continues to be wasted with the public coming out as the biggest losers...and that is something every FF in Stamford (yes including me) shares the blame for.

Cogs

Edited November 28, 2011 by FFPCogs

[CTFF 65]

Well at least we can all agree that the cost of additional career firefighters, regardless of who they work for, will apparently be astronomical. Maybe it's high time some of that money gets invested into the volunteer sector in the form of proven incentives such as per call and duty stipends since both plans currently on the table will require more and more career personnel in the very near future to effectively cover the City. And that, as those wonderful SFL ads on the radio so eloquently point out, is something the public neither wants or needs. Utilize the resources available more effectively and everybody wins, don't and we all lose.

Stay Safe and Happy Holidays from now rain soaked Kandahar Afghanistan

Cogs

Cogs,

I recently read a story recently in the Advocate that Belltown has a waiting list for volunteers. Belltown has done this without incentives, right? I have a tough time understanding why incentives are needed when one dept in Stamford excels without them.

[FFPCogs 863]

Cogs,

I recently read a story recently in the Advocate that Belltown has a waiting list for volunteers. Belltown has done this without incentives, right? I have a tough time understanding why incentives are needed when one dept in Stamford excels without them.

C,

You've hit the nail right on the head...only ONE department has managed to do this. And while I am extremely proud and confident of my FD, one is not enough for the whole city. I have done this for 32 years and niether asked for nor recieved anything for it.....nor am I looking for anything now. But like so many have said here over and over again times have changed and to maintain an adequate cadre of volunteers, regardless of which plan is ultimately chosen, will require new methods. There is a much larger picture here than SFRD or BFD alone and until we recognize that, we will continue to get lost in the irellevant and counter productive bickering and intransigence that has led us to where we are and prevented a resolution. Like I stated earlier that is something for which we ALL share the blame. Time to work harder at working together!!!

Ok time again to set off to work in this mud encrusted craphole.

Stay Safe

Cogs

Edited November 28, 2011 by FFPCogs

[FireMedic049 597]

Spade a spade? Ok by Webster's definition people recieving a stipend would no longer be strictly volunteer, but according to Federal labor Law (FLSA) they would be so long as that stipend(s) is less than 20% of the gross pay of a career firefighter or Officer ect. Now while this may offend the sensibilities of some, in the end it's not those sensibilities or even Websters that matters but the Law. I prefer the term retained as it better describes the status of members recieving stipends, but it's really nothing more than semantics. What term is used to describe a members status is irrelevent, call them whatever you want.

I disagree with the notion that the term "volunteer" best describes a person receiving compensation for their work. Ask anybody outside the fire service if a person who volunteers doing anything gets paid for whatever task they are doing and I doubt you find many that say yes.

It's one thing to receive a nominal stipend to offset incidental expenses over the course of the year and still be "volunteer". However, once you cross over into a pay per call and/or duty shift type of situation, then the term "volunteer" no longer applies. Volunteers are unpaid workers. If the IRS and/or Federal Labor Laws want to treat a compensated "volunteer" the same as an uncompensated volunteer so be it, but that doesn't mean that it's appropriate to mislead the public.

If terms describing members are truly irrelevant, then why does the volunteer fire service get so worked up over the term "professional firefighter" when used to describe firefighters who get paid to be firefighters? It's certainly a more accurate term than using "volunteer" to describe pay per call firefighters.

[FFPCogs 863]

I disagree with the notion that the term "volunteer" best describes a person receiving compensation for their work. Ask anybody outside the fire service if a person who volunteers doing anything gets paid for whatever task they are doing and I doubt you find many that say yes.

It's one thing to receive a nominal stipend to offset incidental expenses over the course of the year and still be "volunteer". However, once you cross over into a pay per call and/or duty shift type of situation, then the term "volunteer" no longer applies. Volunteers are unpaid workers. If the IRS and/or Federal Labor Laws want to treat a compensated "volunteer" the same as an uncompensated volunteer so be it, but that doesn't mean that it's appropriate to mislead the public.

If terms describing members are truly irrelevant, then why does the volunteer fire service get so worked up over the term "professional firefighter" when used to describe firefighters who get paid to be firefighters? It's certainly a more accurate term than using "volunteer" to describe pay per call firefighters.

Personally I don't give a rats a** what term is used to desribe FFs who willing choose to serve their community in addition to holding down other employment as their primary source of income. And as far as misleading the public goes, in everuy case I'm aware of it is open and common knowledge that the "volunteers" serving the community recieve "pay" by the citizens. To the best of my knowledge no community has raised an objection to the use of the term volunteer nor have they complained about being misled in any way, shape or form. I suppose the consternation expressed here by some over the use of the term volunteer is in the same league as that espoused by volunteers who bristle at the use of the term "professional" to descirbe all career FFs. In the end it is service to the community that matters and all who underatke to provide that service, be they career, or volunteer, professional or hobbyist, share the same goal to protect and serve the community. It is truly a shame that so much interferes with that basic fact and everyone suffers for it.

Stay Safe

Cogs

[nfd2004 750]

What I really don't understand is why a City like Stamford would need two seperate depts. By comparison, the City of Bridgeport, Connecticuts LARGEST City has 9 Engins, 4 Trucks, 1 Pumper/Rescue, and two Battalions to cover the entire city. Why would the City of Stamford need more than that. Right now I believe that the Stamford City fire dept mans 8 Engines, 3 trucks, and one Rescue (correct ?).

I have to agree that Bridgeport has had to use mutual aid much more now than they did years ago, but it seems to work for them.

And a similiar comparison can be made with Connecticuts other larger cities, both Hartford and New Haven.

Edited November 28, 2011 by nfd2004

[FireMedic049 597]

I suppose the consternation expressed here by some over the use of the term volunteer is in the same league as that espoused by volunteers who bristle at the use of the term "professional" to descirbe all career FFs.

I wouldn't consider it the be in the same league, but rather opposite in nature. The one term describes what that member actually is and the other describes what that member actually isn't. Opposition to the one term is based IMO on a group feeling "slighted" by its use and the opposition to the other is based on the term not accurately depicting the members of that group.

In the end it is service to the community that matters and all who underatke to provide that service, be they career, or volunteer, professional or hobbyist, share the same goal to protect and serve the community. It is truly a shame that so much interferes with that basic fact and everyone suffers for it.

I would tend to agree.

[IzzyEng4 427]

What I really don't understand is why a City like Stamford would need two seperate depts. By comparison, the City of Bridgeport, Connecticuts LARGEST City has 9 Engins, 4 Trucks, 1 Pumper/Rescue, and two Battalions to cover the entire city. Why would the City of Stamford need more than that. Right now I believe that the Stamford City fire dept mans 8 Engines, 3 trucks, and one Rescue (correct ?).

I have to agree that Bridgeport has had to use mutual aid much more now than they did years ago, but it seems to work for them.

And a similiar comparison can be made with Connecticuts other larger cities, both Hartford and New Haven.

Willy,

Just to focus on the size of the towns / cities, Bridgeport is CT's largest city by population with New Haven and Hartford's populations being #2 and #3, Stamford is #4 in population in the state. Stamford is 52.1 sq miles (37.7 sq miles of land, 14.3 sq miles of water area) versus Bridgeport which is 19.4 sq miles in area (land being 16.0 sq miles and water area of 3.4 sq miles). Same with Hartford and New Haven, the total area of Stamford is quite larger. The largest town by size in the state is New Milford at 63.7 sq miles of area (61.6 sq miles of land and 2.1 sq miles of water), however the town has far less population. Also look at their neighbor to the west, Greenwich, pretty similar in land / water size but again quite less in population. Stamford has a very wide coverage area compared to the three "bigger" cities of the the state. To put it in perspective, it would be like you coming from the Greenville station in Norwich having to run to Mashantucket if you were to travel north border to south border.

Edited November 28, 2011 by IzzyEng4

[FFPCogs 863]

I wouldn't consider it the be in the same league, but rather opposite in nature. The one term describes what that member actually is and the other describes what that member actually isn't. Opposition to the one term is based IMO on a group feeling "slighted" by its use and the opposition to the other is based on the term not accurately depicting the members of that group.

As expected on this point we respectfully disagree. Like most things none oft this is as cut and dry as it may seem. Are there volunteers who are not '"volunteers" in the strictest sense of the word, yes absolutely there are, but as we all know only too well, not every career FF is a professional by any stretch of the imagination either. What it comes down to is what the citizens are willing to pay for no matter what terms or "misleading" nomenclature is used to describe the members of the particular fire department(s) that serve them. In respect to Stamford, there are legal precedents that allow for what some might consider "paid" volunteers but ultimately it will be up to the community to decide if those "volunteers" are what they want and that is as it should be since they will foot the bill.

I would tend to agree.

See it is possible to agree... ... from there anything is possible. I'll say it again, it is time to work harder on working together.

Stay Safe

Cogs

BTW thanks Joe for explaining the geographic circumstances which make Stamford somewhat different from CTs other larger cities..

[nfd2004 750]

Willy,

Just to focus on the size of the towns / cities, Bridgeport is CT's largest city by population with New Haven and Hartford's populations being #2 and #3, Stamford is #4 in population in the state. Stamford is 52.1 sq miles (37.7 sq miles of land, 14.3 sq miles of water area) versus Bridgeport which is 19.4 sq miles in area (land being 16.0 sq miles and water area of 3.4 sq miles). Same with Hartford and New Haven, the total area of Stamford is quite larger. The largest town by size in the state is New Milford at 63.7 sq miles of area (61.6 sq miles of land and 2.1 sq miles of water), however the town has far less population. Also look at their neighbor to the west, Greenwich, pretty similar in land / water size but again quite less in population. Stamford has a very wide coverage area compared to the three "bigger" cities of the the state. To put it in perspective, it would be like you coming from the Greenville station in Norwich having to run to Mashantucket if you were to travel north border to south border.

Izzy, on the issue of square miles and response areas we can compare a place like Fairfield (CT) to Stamford. I believe that many parts of Fairfield are very similiar to that of what could be found in certain parts of Stamford.

Lets take this point. Stamford, with its roughly 52 sq miles being protected by 9 Engines means each Engine Co protects approximately 5 sq miles. Fairfield, with its 31 square miles and 5 Engines is protecting approximately "6 Square miles" each.

As for Ladder trucks, in Stamford each ladder company protects approximately 17 sq miles, while in Fairfield each ladder company protects approximtely 15 1/2 sq miles.

In my opinion, based on these facts, square miles in this case may not really be a key factor in determining if Stamford would be adquately protected. It appears to me that Stamford would be adquately protected with its 9 Engines,3 Trucks and a Rescue company.

I ask this question, if you feel 9 Engines, 3 Trucks, and a Rescue Company is NOT enough for a city the size of Stamford, then how many Engine and Ladder Cos would be needed to protect this city.

[mstrang1 213]

Nfd-

In addition to the 9 engines in Stamford, Long Ridge runs out of two stations and covers a huge response area. Even from engine 9, which is about a half mile south of the parkway, we have response times of over 10 minutes to the northern parts of the district.

[FireMedic049 597]

As expected on this point we respectfully disagree. Like most things none oft this is as cut and dry as it may seem. Are there volunteers who are not '"volunteers" in the strictest sense of the word, yes absolutely there are, but as we all know only too well, not every career FF is a professional by any stretch of the imagination either.

You see this is probably the heart of the problem. I'm using the term to describe an occupational status (no different than the term "professional athlete") and you're talking about "professionalism".

[CTFF 65]

C,

You've hit the nail right on the head...only ONE department has managed to do this. And while I am extremely proud and confident of my FD, one is not enough for the whole city. I have done this for 32 years and niether asked for nor recieved anything for it.....nor am I looking for anything now. But like so many have said here over and over again times have changed and to maintain an adequate cadre of volunteers, regardless of which plan is ultimately chosen, will require new methods. There is a much larger picture here than SFRD or BFD alone and until we recognize that, we will continue to get lost in the irellevant and counter productive bickering and intransigence that has led us to where we are and prevented a resolution. Like I stated earlier that is something for which we ALL share the blame. Time to work harder at working together!!!

Ok time again to set off to work in this mud encrusted craphole.

Stay Safe

Cogs

But if the four departments are becoming one wouldn't it make sense to continue down the path the belltown has? You could save the taxpayers from stipends and tax breaks. It's seems to me you've pushed for some type compensation for a bit now, to say otherwise is flat out lying.

I also agree that to come up with a better solution there needs to be cooperation from all sides. I don't see that happening from the Mayor or those pushing hard for his plan because they have something personal to gain from this.

[IzzyEng4 427]

Izzy, on the issue of square miles and response areas we can compare a place like Fairfield (CT) to Stamford. I believe that many parts of Fairfield are very similiar to that of what could be found in certain parts of Stamford.

Lets take this point. Stamford, with its roughly 52 sq miles being protected by 9 Engines means each Engine Co protects approximately 5 sq miles. Fairfield, with its 31 square miles and 5 Engines is protecting approximately "6 Square miles" each.

As for Ladder trucks, in Stamford each ladder company protects approximately 17 sq miles, while in Fairfield each ladder company protects approximtely 15 1/2 sq miles.

In my opinion, based on these facts, square miles in this case may not really be a key factor in determining if Stamford would be adquately protected. It appears to me that Stamford would be adquately protected with its 9 Engines,3 Trucks and a Rescue company.

I ask this question, if you feel 9 Engines, 3 Trucks, and a Rescue Company is NOT enough for a city the size of Stamford, then how many Engine and Ladder Cos would be needed to protect this city.

Nfd-

In addition to the 9 engines in Stamford, Long Ridge runs out of two stations and covers a huge response area. Even from engine 9, which is about a half mile south of the parkway, we have response times of over 10 minutes to the northern parts of the district.

I don't know what would be the best for Stamford, I'm not a resident there nor do I know anything about their operations what is or what is not needed, that is up to them. I'm not a consultant and I don't think my opinion on what is best for them matters. The question is really up to all of those who work or volunteer at the FDs and the residents of the city.

Fact is this is how many stations there are:

Long Ridge VFD - 2 stations

Turn of River VFD - 2 stations

Belltown VFD - 1 station

Glenbrook VFD - 1 station with SFRD Engine 6

Springdale VFD - 1 Station with SFRD Engine 7

SFRD - 7 stations (Stations 8 & 9 are temporary stations)

Total number of stations in Stamford: 14

Here is a map for all the stations in Stamford from Local 786 website: http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=en&ie=UTF8&msa=0&msid=112186084110624058650.0004537d99859a74c9ec9&ll=41.068481,-73.508835&spn=0.236578,0.432587&z=11

You have to look at everything; density, travel times, street layout, ect. Plus also have to take into consideration call volumes. I'm sure Fairfield's call volume would be half of what Stamford's, including medicals.

Like I said, this is not my battle, I don't know what is best nor will I comment what is best.

[FD828 77]

Personally I don't give a rats a** what term is used to desribe FFs who willing choose to serve their community in addition to holding down other employment as their primary source of income. And as far as misleading the public goes, in everuy case I'm aware of it is open and common knowledge that the "volunteers" serving the community recieve "pay" by the citizens. To the best of my knowledge no community has raised an objection to the use of the term volunteer nor have they complained about being misled in any way, shape or form. I suppose the consternation expressed here by some over the use of the term volunteer is in the same league as that espoused by volunteers who bristle at the use of the term "professional" to descirbe all career FFs. In the end it is service to the community that matters and all who underatke to provide that service, be they career, or volunteer, professional or hobbyist, share the same goal to protect and serve the community. It is truly a shame that so much interferes with that basic fact and everyone suffers for it.

Stay Safe

Cogs

I have to respectfully disagree on this one. IMO most residents have absolutely no idea who or what department responded to their emergency let alone if they were career, volunteer, or paid per call. I don't think the average citizen has any idea wether or not the volunteers are receiving compensation of any kind. I am not saying that if they knew they would have an issue with it, I am just saying they don't know. They see a BRT show up and ff's take care of whatever the emergency is period.

[FFPCogs 863]

You see this is probably the heart of the problem. I'm using the term to describe an occupational status (no different than the term "professional athlete") and you're talking about "professionalism".

So you do not see professionalism as being an integral part of being professsional? Does simply recieving a paycheck make one a professional? Well according to our friend Webster yes it does, and there in lies the rub. The dictionary says one thing when the reality is something quite different. It appears IMO that it is many career FFs that are hung up on the semanitics and the liberal, although perfectly legal and therefore appropriate, use of the term volunteer.

Cogs

Edited November 29, 2011 by FFPCogs

[JayT464 1]

I have done this for 32 years and niether asked for nor recieved anything for it.....nor am I looking for anything now. But like so many have said here over and over again times have changed and to maintain an adequate cadre of volunteers, regardless of which plan is ultimately chosen, will require new methods.

Maybe you can clear something up for me, I thought the volunteers were going to save the city money because they would do the same job for free? Now you guys want to get a stipend? At what point are you no longer volunteers? 5 or 10 years down the road the stipend wont be enough, they will want more. The key to maintaining a active pool of volunteers isn't offering them dollar incentives, it's whatever you've got going on at Belltown.

You've got to look at the big picture, this shouldn't just be about what might work in 2011. The city needs to design a system that will work now, and will also work 15, 20 or 30 years from now. How much longer do the taxpayers have to suffer?

Edited November 29, 2011 by JayT464

[FireMedic049 597]

So you do not see professionalism as being an integral part of bieng professsional?

Not saying that at all.

I think we can all agree that many professional athletes (NFL, NBA, etc.) display less than professional behavior on a routine basis. However, despite that conduct, they are still a professional athlete since they are being paid to play their sport.

Similarly, as I've already stated, the use of the term "professional firefighter" refers to occupational status, not actual behavior or professionalism itself.

Does simply recieving a paycheck make one a professional? Well according to our friend Webster yes it does, and there in lies the rub. The dictionary says one thing when the reality is something quite different.

You're right that's where the rub is, but not necessarily as you see it. The rub is that the volunteer side typically jumps to the conclusion that "professional" means behavior (i.e. professionalism), when in reality the intended meaning is engaged in firefighting as an occupation rather than as a non-occupational secondary activity.

It appears IMO that it is many career FFs that are hung up on the semanitics and the liberal, although perfectly legal and therefore appropriate, use of the term volunteer.

If we're talking strictly on the use of the term "volunteer", I'd be inclined to agree that more career FFs have issue with the liberal usage of such. However, I think a lot more volunteers firefighters are hung up on the usage of the term "professional".

Also, "legal" does not necessarily equate to "appropriate".