Update on Stamford Merger

[x152 179]

Pete, I hate to sound like an extremist, but many (such as yourself) have invested time and personal capital to try and prevent this type of continued behavior and hostility.

 

To try and sabotage a negotiation that has taken more than 5 years for the Union to reach is nothing short of a "nuclear" sized mistake on the part of these 5 "chiefs".

 

I am not surprised that a couple of these people would continue to fan the flames in Stamford, but having all 5 take part appears to be a collective effort by all remaining volunteers.

 

Disagreements over each departments operations, tactics, hose lays, policies, vehicle colors, etc. are understandable within the fire service....attempting to affect the livelihood of the families of 280 union members is inexcusable and something that will not fade with time.

 

If the volunteer Chiefs wanted to unite Stamford career firefighters behind one common enemy for many, many years to come, they will have finally succeeded at something. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[AFS1970 504]

This letter is only one of two times I ever say all five departments actually agree on something in writing. So if there is a silver lining maybe that is it.

 

That being said, I read the letter and got a totally different feeling from it. I got a feeling of frustration with the city. This is something that the union knows all too well. The VFD's were told certain things and many of them have not been realized yet. I think that to some extent they feel that settling the union contract, regardless of specific language, while not really working at the integration plan is a slap in the face. I don't agree with that but I can understand it. I can also see how they are upset at having a command structure become part of labor negotiation, because while it is certainly a work rule issue, it will effect the VFD's and they see it as a deal between the city and the union with no input from them, despite being told they are stakeholders. As we saw with the Springdale agreement the city has no problem promising the union one thing and the VFD's something else, and letting the courts sort out which contract is more important. The bottom line is that the city is the one dragging its heels on this. There could have been an integration plan in place quite a while ago. That plan could have involved participation from all involved, but it has not happened. To some extent I thin the union has become a convenient scapegoat for the volunteers because of years of animosity.

[FFPCogs 863]

6 hours ago, AFS1970 said:

This letter is only one of two times I ever say all five departments actually agree on something in writing. So if there is a silver lining maybe that is it.

 

That being said, I read the letter and got a totally different feeling from it. I got a feeling of frustration with the city. This is something that the union knows all too well. The VFD's were told certain things and many of them have not been realized yet. I think that to some extent they feel that settling the union contract, regardless of specific language, while not really working at the integration plan is a slap in the face. I don't agree with that but I can understand it. I can also see how they are upset at having a command structure become part of labor negotiation, because while it is certainly a work rule issue, it will effect the VFD's and they see it as a deal between the city and the union with no input from them, despite being told they are stakeholders. As we saw with the Springdale agreement the city has no problem promising the union one thing and the VFD's something else, and letting the courts sort out which contract is more important. The bottom line is that the city is the one dragging its heels on this. There could have been an integration plan in place quite a while ago. That plan could have involved participation from all involved, but it has not happened. To some extent I thin the union has become a convenient scapegoat for the volunteers because of years of animosity.

Alan there is no integration plan because no one wants one, it really is as simple as that. Each "side" in this debacle bears responsibility for the impasse and neither 'side" is willing to give in order to make a plan...no, all would rather take lest they have to give up something. Speaking strictly for myself and how I see things there are two major factors that have created this ongoing drama:

 

1) The union leadership wants Stamford's volunteers gone, adios, bye bye. Volunteers are an impediment to a unified fire service in their eyes...and I suspect an impediment to increased staffing and union dues

 

2) The volunteer leaderships are under the extremely misguided impression they have a say in their own destiny any longer. They don't, they forfeited that "right" when the Charter was changed...a change by the way which could have been different or maybe even prevented had those leaderships actually led rather than sat on decades old laurels from their heydays.

 

Right now there are two diametrically opposed forces at work and the scales are tipped to the floor in favor of the union, if for no other reason than Stamford's career firefighters actually respond to calls each and every time. As you know Alan that cannot be said of all of the VFDs and it was this simple yet undeniable fact that led to the Charter being changed.  

 

The letter in question is nothing more than a waste of the paper it was printed on.

[x152 179]

Update - The Firefighter's contract was passed by the Board of Representatives tonight with a vote of 20 in agreement and 4 abstentions. 

[AFS1970 504]

Pete, I will agree that neither side really wants integration. That being said integration is probably the only option that contains any long term survival for the volunteers. One does not need to look very far from home to see other communities that have dealt with similar issues. The solutions are there for the taking. One side effect that any integration plan will have is fleet reduction (call it consolidation if you want) because 1 department will need far less duplication than 6 departments ever did.

 

I will disagree on one point. I think the volunteers will have a voice in their own destiny. However that is probably not the voice of the current leadership, which seem to be divided into two camps: 1) Fight to the death over minutia and 2) total capitulation for its own sake. I do not think either camp is right. If you see each individual issue as a battle, the old adage of choosing ones battles wisely comes into play. They need to decide what is worth fighting for and what is not, which oddly enough is similar to the union negotiating process.

 

As for the scales being weighted to the union, yes they are. However I don't blame the union for this. The VFD's over the years created a system where non response became the rule not the example. There were many factors that contributed to this, too many to list here. Some are systemic and not specific to Stamford by a long shot. The fact of the matter is that adapting back to a response norm is proving difficult. I think the saving grace will be new members who did not know the old system, because the dinosaurs are just sitting in their tar pits waiting to become fossils.

[x152 179]

Alan's last point is one that should not be missed. The new members are a critical component of what the future will hold. The same holds true on both sides as the Stamford Fire Department has seen a huge influx with new members over the past 5 years.

 

How will we teach them? Will they be polluted from issues lingering long before they arrived? (in some cases..born?).

 

The contract that was finally settled last night took more than 5 years to come to an agreement. There are MANY changes contained within. I do not speak for the membership, but not all of the changes will be digested easily, but they will be carried out. I give a lot of credit to my Union for their willingness to lead and also take some risk with some of these changes. The easy road for them would have been to sit back and negotiate a bland and safe contract that maintains a status quo with little more than wage increases. 

 

As not to disagree with many of the points made by here, I would challenge the same leaders within the volunteer fire service that were quick with their poison pen and speed dial to see what type of collective change they have agreed to? 

 

I can think of several that have completely buried their heads in the rear end of their puppet "leaders" and will continue to operate as if it is 1975. I really can't believe that none of them did not realize or comprehend the magnitude of their last minute campaign to try and defeat the labor contract?

 

In the end, the career firefighters have finally settled their contract (without opposition) and the volunteer Chiefs spent more time and energy to try and sabotage the career and volunteer relationship (and completely failed at it..again).

 

At some point, do any of these Chiefs ever conduct a progress report for their own Departments or decisions?? 

 

I can think of only one Department in Stamford that could find any type of positive response to that question.

 

I wonder if the members that continually elect these same clowns into office will start asking the same question about a progress report and find the courage to remove those that have not provided a ounce of progress in decades? (but I think I already know the answer to that question).

 

 

 

 

Edited August 9, 2016 by x152

[nfd2004 750]

As I followed this story from the very beginning, I could NOT believe that a city the size of Stamford,... Connecticut's Fourth Largest city with a population of about 127,000 people, would be in such turmoil.

 

Then with the most recent turn of events, a letter being submitted by the five volunteer fire departments in an effort to destroy that career department, justice finally prevails. I am quite sure that the Stamford Firefighters contract does NOT state, "do away with any volunteer firefighters".

 

I certainly had my doubts lately but now as I had felt in the past, "Stamford can become a Role Model to other departments". Both sides can learn from the experiences over the past several years. Stamford can now PROVE to both sides that a combination Career/Volunteer FD can work. And it can work in Connecticuts Fourth Largest City.

 

 Stamford has become a "Cosmopolitan City" with it's downtown high rises and exclusive Manhattan style restaurants. I have had the opportunity to witness the Stamford Fire Dept in action and "they are second to none". If I was a young volunteer firefighter in Stamford, "I would love to have my name associated with that department".  "I would pick those guys brains all the time and try to learn from their experience". Basically I would completely reject what some may try to brain wash my mind with when it comes to "us versus them". As a volunteer firefighter for five years, working directly with a group of career firefighters, I can tell you I learned a lot from those guys. We became good friends and most helped us to follow in their footsteps. And I'm not speaking on behalf of myself only.

 

As a career firefighter for 30 years, I had to face many of the same battles these Stamford Career firefighters have had to face. My job was constantly being threatened by a group of individuals who liked to be referred to as "A Brother Firefighter" but who would gladly cut my throat given the chance.

 

 I have often disagreed on here with members like "AFS1970" or "FFPCogs". But I certainly must commend them here for their most recent post on this thread. This is a positive step in the right direction. YES, it can be done and volunteer and career firefighters CAN work together. There are many places in existence today where that is successfully happening. That includes some of the most PROGRESSIVE Departments in the Country.

 

 To "x152", I am very happy to hear that your long awaited contract is finally settled. I'm sure it wasn't easy for you or your Brother/Sister Firefighters. I appreciate reading your comments here and thank you for keeping us all advised as to what's going on. So please tell all my Stamford Firefighter friends, Willy D says "congratulations to all". 

 

 Many through out the fire service here would consider me a "Dinosaur". But that's okay with me. In fact there are times when being a dinosaur is something to be very proud of. But maybe for some, it's time to get rid of the kind of dinosaurs who would write letters going against those who fight fires for a living. Because whatever the City of Stamford does, "we need to do the same thing here". Put the real reason back into what firefighters are SUPPOSED to do - Save Lives and Property, NOT fight against each other.   

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 9, 2016 by nfd2004

[AFS1970 504]

The "metropolitan" nature of our growing downtown and south end areas is exactly why we can not afford to rob Peter to pay Paul in terms of apparatus & manpower deployment. The area that is still in the middle of one of the largest urban redevelopment projects in the history of the state, including many high rises was, not that long ago, thought of as a place we could close a truck company to open another engine company in the northern residential areas. That is just madness. One of the engines (E9) that was opened up in the northern areas is frequently called downtown because it is the closest available rig for the assignment. In my opinion the rigs being career or volunteer are incidental to proper deployment. However there are some that are short sighted enough to just want expansion at any cost no matter if it is good for the citizens or the department, they are just as wrong as those that want to maintain rigid borders.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[FFPCogs 863]

On 8/8/2016 at 0:35 PM, AFS1970 said:

 

 

20 hours ago, AFS1970 said:

As for the scales being weighted to the union, yes they are. However I don't blame the union for this. The VFD's over the years created a system where non response became the rule not the example. There were many factors that contributed to this, too many to list here. Some are systemic and not specific to Stamford by a long shot. The fact of the matter is that adapting back to a response norm is proving difficult. I think the saving grace will be new members who did not know the old system, because the dinosaurs are just sitting in their tar pits waiting to become fossils.

I don't blame the union either, nor do I think they are a scapegoat, the leadership of 786  is just doing what they should be doing...and that is looking out for their membership and expanding it if possible. No, while I might have issue with some of the tactics employed over the years, I in no way blame them for the problems with Stamford's VFDs, that fault lies squarely with the VFD leaderships. If there is one complaint it is that in many instances the union seemed unwilling to negotiate a solution, but here again that is a tactical decision on their part and quite frankly a good one at that. I said earlier (and Alan you sat in more than a few BFD meetings where it was plainly stated), the solution for the VFDs is to meet the issues cited by the union head on and accept them as fact. Yeah I know the standard argument...for everything a VFD does to meet a standard, the union will only demand the standards be changed and more difficult to attain. Been hearing that one for years and I'll say now what I said then...that's a bullsh!t excuse. Let's be realistic here, had we done even half of what was proposed on numerous occasions, we wouldn't be having this discussion right now. Why? Because the VFDs would be responding, they would be trained to a standard and accountable for that training, their officers would be able to show a quantifiable level of competency, apparatus fleets would have been reduced, and a staffing matrix developed and in place utilizing all volunteers collectively to ensure if not 100% station coverage than at least evenings and weekends. It's all here in these 70 odd pages. Nothing was unattainable except the willingness and courage to put the residents first, face the challenges head on and do something about them.

 

Leaders lead...ours unfortunately, living in their fantasy of a bygone age where politicians and citizens alike favored them, were incapable of doing so. They simply were not up to the task. They refused to see the writing on the wall, despite all of the pleas by some of us to do so before it was too late. In their arrogance they seemed to think they could somehow turn back the clock, ignoring all of the evidence that was right before their eyes to the contrary. Such was their folly, the results of which are now starting to hit home..

 

 

You mention that the next generation, not knowing the  old system, will be a saving grace. Well in some respects I think that's may be true, but I think they will find a landscape far different than the one you and I inhabited in terms of what they can and cannot do. In my crystal ball I see a future Stamford volunteer fire service that is nothing more than a "farm team" of bottle changers and hose packers dutifully servicing their career counterparts while awaiting their "turn" to get hired...which by the way most of them won't.

Edited August 10, 2016 by FFPCogs

[nfd2004 750]

3 hours ago, AFS1970 said:

The "metropolitan" nature of our growing downtown and south end areas is exactly why we can not afford to rob Peter to pay Paul in terms of apparatus & manpower deployment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I will say this in response to needing that apparatus.

 

The City of Bridgeport, the largest city in Connecticut operates with 9 Engines, 4 Ladders, 1 Rescue. They certainly have their fair share of hazards just like Stamford. But is it the amount of apparatus that is needed OR the manpower that is really needed.

 

 The Stamford Career Department has 8 Engines, 3 Ladders, 1 Rescue (I think). A fair comparison to Bridgeport covering a population of about 20,000 people MORE. So using Bridgeport's number of apparatus serving that larger city might be a good example. So I ask; "how many more pieces of fire apparatus does Stamford really need" ?

 

  I'm not familiar with the manning levels of Stamford on each piece, except I believe some might be four firefighters and some might be three. That's where the need comes in. Not the number of trucks BUT the number of people.

 

  Now with a total of 12 pieces of fire apparatus covering Stamford, would it someday be possible for one or two volunteer firefighters to ride each piece of apparatus as additional manpower. It worked in Fairfield a while back and I think it is still working there today. It also works well in many other places throughout the country. NOT replacing manning BUT adding to it.

 

 The advantage to the many younger volunteer members is they would learn the job very well working in this city environment. Of course the disadvantage may actually come into play with the more senior members who like to be the Commanders. That's because Stamford already has the Commanders needed who competed very hard to get to where they are. "If a Retired U.S. Army Colonel, with two masters degrees, can ride a career engine in a county in Virginia and do what he is told, I'm sure the Volunteer Firefighters of Stamford can do the same". He does it because he enjoys it and just wants to help. I would think that is the reason everybody else does it too.

[x152 179]

NFD2004,

 

The Stamford FD currently has 9 career Engines, 3 career Trucks, and 1 career Rescue that all ride with 4 person minimum (the latest contract increased E8 and E9 to 4 minimum from 3). The on-duty Deputy is staffed with 2.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[nfd2004 750]

10 hours ago, x152 said:

NFD2004,

 

The Stamford FD currently has 9 career Engines, 3 career Trucks, and 1 career Rescue that all ride with 4 person minimum (the latest contract increased E8 and E9 to 4 minimum from 3). The on-duty Deputy is staffed with 2.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Understood "x152", thank you. You know the place much better than I do.

 

I am certainly glad to hear that Engine 8 and Engine 9 has now received a Fourth Firefighter. That extra person makes a HUGE Difference when seconds count. Hence, that is why you guys wanted to increase your manning level from 54 to 56 (?) per shift. It all makes sense to me and once again, Congratulations on a successful contract after such a long wait (and battle).  

Edited August 11, 2016 by nfd2004

[AFS1970 504]

Geography & Traffic are also factors in deployment. While call volume may be able to be handled by the current rigs the distances traveled by some apparatus, especially the Truck companies is frankly unacceptable. I would like to see a fourth truck company and possibly a second rescue company in service, as well as a second command car.

[nfd2004 750]

57 minutes ago, AFS1970 said:

Geography & Traffic are also factors in deployment. While call volume may be able to be handled by the current rigs the distances traveled by some apparatus, especially the Truck companies is frankly unacceptable. I would like to see a fourth truck company and possibly a second rescue company in service, as well as a second command car.

 

 I'm sure you won't get much argument on that. In fact, as I remember, the Stamford FD once had a Fourth Truck Co in service, along with a Squad Co. as well. Manning of course is the main problem. I know that Rescue 1 Stamford Firefighters are all very well qualified in their duties. Those duties include confined space rescue, scuba divers, high angle rope rescue, and Haz Mat tech (I think). Could that be provided within a Second Rescue Co., that would be an ideal plan.

 

 Geography and traffic factors need consideration in any city or town. Do you know of any recent problems in which there was a much longer delay as a result of this ? I'm sure traveling east or west on I-95 or the Merritt Parkway for a car accident, or a car fire, during rush hour would present a traffic problem no matter where they come in from. I've seen that myself with Rescue 1 going up to I-95.

 

 

[letsgo1547 50]

In those 9 engine companies,are they all engines because I know Stamford use to run quints as an engine company

[x152 179]

1 hour ago, nfd2004 said:

 

 I'm sure you won't get much argument on that. In fact, as I remember, the Stamford FD once had a Fourth Truck Co in service, along with a Squad Co. as well. Manning of course is the main problem. I know that Rescue 1 Stamford Firefighters are all very well qualified in their duties. Those duties include confined space rescue, scuba divers, high angle rope rescue, and Haz Mat tech (I think). Could that be provided within a Second Rescue Co., that would be an ideal plan.

 

 Geography and traffic factors need consideration in any city or town. Do you know of any recent problems in which there was a much longer delay as a result of this ? I'm sure traveling east or west on I-95 or the Merritt Parkway for a car accident, or a car fire, during rush hour would present a traffic problem no matter where they come in from. I've seen that myself with Rescue 1 going up to I-95.

 

 

 

The only problem has been from those with a fear of change from past practice. There are many on both sides of this equation that suffer from a lack of exposure to other and much larger systems and are often consumed with only accepting things being done as they witnessed solely within the confines of the Stamford system.

 

Since the operational and reorganization changes that first started with the formation of Engine 7 in 1997, I can recall those that were quick to scream that the sky would fall if this or that happened....

 

To my knowledge, the sky has not fallen...yet. In Stamford's case, quick change occurs slowly, but with the finalization of this contract, many new changes will occur to the Stamford fire service. 

[LayTheLine 108]

New member here. I posted a paragraph and it didn't save. Now testing but I can't delete this post. Sorry! 

Edited August 19, 2016 by LayTheLine

[AFS1970 504]

Historically T4 (an open cab snorkel I believe) was at station 4 in the Shippan section of town. This is a fairly wealthy neighborhood although it is close to many less wealthy areas. However geographically it was about as far removed as you could get being at the top of a peninsula that extends into Long Island Sound along our eastern border. Any new Truck 4 would have to be put somewhere where responses make more sense. I can think of two stations that would be decent options, although both have their pluses and minuses in terms of response factors. 

 

As for the quints, I think we only have one left and that is now considered T4 ( a reserve) but due to being a quint can be put into service as an engine also. Makes for a versatile reserve. When we had quints at E5 & E6 they were never realy utilized as such. I know there are staffing issues when you call a quint a quint, but I never understood why those companies could not respond as EITHER an engine or a truck. The fix could have been accomplished in our dispatch computer but there was no desire to do this, so they were considered engines and the IC could use them as needed once they were on scene. I personally consider Stamford's quints as a failed experiment.

 

 

[x152 179]

Engine 6 is still running a quint.

 

Engine 5's former quint is being used as a reserve.

 

Both rigs are tired and will probably be retired in the next few years.

 

 

 

 

[AFS1970 504]

So I recently found a second letter by the VFD Chief's to our Board of Representatives about the IAFF contract. It wasn't exactly what I had thought but I think I was pretty close. That kind of frightens me that I can think like a Chief, as it was made abundantly clear to me that I would never be a chief officer.
 

One thing to note in here was that up until the management agreements, the VFD's chiefs did have a major role in negotiation with the career firefighters in their departments. Sometimes those chiefs were members of the union themselves and directly benefited from those contracts, which is a whole other can of worms. After the management agreements, the role was still there but most if not all of the chiefs essentially abdicated that role. I do know from one letter I saw that the city did not encourage participation from the VFD chiefs in this process, but they could have asserted themselves back then for better or worse. Now they have no direct role, and I think this is why they get their dander up over certain subjects of negotiation. I am only in regular contact with a couple of chief officers any more, so my ideas may not be the insight I think they are, but anyway here is the second letter which was received before the board voted.

p29076_ltr_160808.pdf

[FFPCogs 863]

On 8/24/2016 at 9:16 AM, AFS1970 said:

So I recently found a second letter by the VFD Chief's to our Board of Representatives about the IAFF contract. It wasn't exactly what I had thought but I think I was pretty close. That kind of frightens me that I can think like a Chief, as it was made abundantly clear to me that I would never be a chief officer.
 

One thing to note in here was that up until the management agreements, the VFD's chiefs did have a major role in negotiation with the career firefighters in their departments. Sometimes those chiefs were members of the union themselves and directly benefited from those contracts, which is a whole other can of worms. After the management agreements, the role was still there but most if not all of the chiefs essentially abdicated that role. I do know from one letter I saw that the city did not encourage participation from the VFD chiefs in this process, but they could have asserted themselves back then for better or worse. Now they have no direct role, and I think this is why they get their dander up over certain subjects of negotiation. I am only in regular contact with a couple of chief officers any more, so my ideas may not be the insight I think they are, but anyway here is the second letter which was received before the board voted.

p29076_ltr_160808.pdf

I read this second letter and here's my answer to it. You gotta produce to be heard. To date and to the best of my knowledge NONE of the VFDs produce fully.  BFD does make all their calls with a completely volunteer staff save a houseman, but the level of FFs responding is often in question. Long Ridge makes theirs due to paid drivers 24/7,  but they are often responding alone. As for the rest, well...anything under 100% response is not producing at even a marginal level.

Beyond that;

NONE of them can bring a quantifiable means of measuring the competency of their officers to the table.

NONE of them can produce training records for ALL of their active members that meet even a minimal standard.

NONE of them ensure all of their active members attend even one live burn annually per OSHA

NONE of them can say 100% of their active members are physically fit per NFPA 1582

NONE of them can guarantee a response 24/7 or try to even reach that goal

NONE of them can cooperate to meet the needs of the residents they are there to serve...NONE of them. All are too concerned with only themselves and there own agendas instead of the only agenda that they should be concerned with...SERVING IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE PEOPLE OF STAMFORD who have donated to all of them for decades.

 

I think you get the idea. 

 

As one who fought for years to build things up to meet the challenges listed above and many more beyond them, I can say this: I have absolutely no sympathy for their whining and foot stomping.  Boo hoo hoo, whaah whaah whaah, somebody call a Whaaahmbulance for these poor Chiefs. 

Look,  I sat with all of these Chiefs alone and as a group too many times to count to try to work out ways to meet the coming storm. Time after time I watched as heads nodded yes but actions said no to facing the realities of firefighting in Stamford in 2010,11,12, 13 14, 15. I bit my tongue then in the interest of keeping everyone together and trying to move forward. But no more. The whole "Pavia plan" and everything subsequent to it were a farce that even the Marx Brothers couldn't dream up...and to top it off they left Mike out to dry by not taking responsibility for the abortion of a plan it was that THEY THEMSELVES dreamed up.  No...no sympathy here, these Chiefs made the bed they all must now lie in because of their own arrogance.  ignorance, ineptitude and pettiness and frankly they deserve what they get, or don't I should say....I only wish the memberships had been better served by their "leaders".

Edited August 26, 2016 by FFPCogs
typos

[AFS1970 504]

Minimum standards will always be a problem, in any department career or volunteer, as long as we accept the minimum.

 

That being said, I know that in days past Glenbrook & Turn of River both worked towards better standards for officers, although I think both have since been watered down or worked around. I know Spingdale had standards but they were old enough to be based on a system that no longer existed and would not be seen as anything other than a quaint historical note by most neighboring departments. BFD fought tooth and nail against any kind of standards increase for firefighter or officer when I was there.  I am not all that familiar with Operations in Long Ridge. However based on what I have either experienced or observed in a few area departments, any time a standard is proposed somebody is always suspicious about the motivation and the charge is usually made that it is being done to move up one candidate over another. Some, like New Canaan & Darien have been somewhat successful in this area. Some like Greenwich still have a double standard.

 

I am not sure if anybody in our area is doing an NFPA physicals, but then again I have been out of the mix for quite a few years. I know the ones from St. Joseph's in my day were not, the ones from Concentra were even worse. I once talked with a doctor about the need for physicals and his answer while probably based on common sense and years in practice was nowhere near the NFPA.

 

As for reaching response goals, most of those gave that up years ago. This was due partially to the changing nature of responses, the increasing volume of responses and a dependence on career staff that eventually turned into a sense of complacency. That being said, there was also a growing culture that tried to beat down volunteers who wanted to be active and try to reach goals. I can remember being asked by senior members why I was at the firehouse and being told I should just go home, they would page us if there was a call. Those were often the same members who would make a point of canceling rigs that rolled behind them. Guess what, that kind of behavior chases members away. I can't imagine that any one station was more than a little different from the others. Some of these attitudes are still present in some surprising areas.

[FFPCogs 863]

The Chiefs are their own worst enemy and they have dragged the entire volunteer system and alot of good, hardworking and skilled volunteer firemen down with them. Not even to save their own asses and that of their departments could they suck it up and work together..and that even after a variety of means to do so were handed to them. And that my friend is not only irresponsible, it constitutes a dereliction of duty.  The founding members of each VFD must be rolling over in their graves, thoroughly disgusted with what has become of their hard work and dedication. What a sad legacy for over 100 years of service to that city. 

 

After all that's been said and done...but more importantly not done...I think it may be time to thank the VFDs for their years of service and shut them down. Maybe after that it might be possible to build a new volunteer service more in tune with the realities, but quite frankly after so much damage that may prove impossible. Like many other communities, the VFDs of Stamford have become an anachronism at this point, and one that is no longer needed. For the annual price of the VFDs collectively, about 20 new career personnel (or one company and a second DC x 4 groups ) could be put on the books. That along with a redistribution of some apparatus and all of Stamford could be covered 24/7 365 by SFD. As you well know, that fact was the premise on which a few of us, with just a microscopic speck of forethought, based our attempts to develop a workable and valuable volunteer system. One that would serve into the future with,  not instead of, our career colleagues. But alas it was not to be, even that speck of forethought was too much to accept. Better these "leaders" thought, to rest on the laurels and revel in the glory of the good ole days while pining and scheming for a return of their paid driver pals....what a pathetic joke, the brunt of which was borne by the residents served by the VFDs. 

 

Sorry but in the big picture, the days of the VFDs being a financial and operational value are long gone and aren't going to return. Sadly now there's not even a minimal return on the investment made in them when taken as a whole....and like it or not, in 2016 they are taken as a whole by both the politicians and average Joe on the street alike.  As painful as may be to admit, it's time to pack it in and call it a day...and by doing so they just might be able to salvage a modicum of the dignity and respect so tirelessly earned by so many in the good ole days. 

Edited August 27, 2016 by FFPCogs
typos..again

[LayTheLine 108]

Hi. First time I've posted here. I used to live in the area and know the workings of the, then, Stamford Fire Departments. The "Big Five" and all. City took care of downtown and volunteers took care of the north section. Worked pretty well. But the world has changed and it's time for the Stamford Fire Department to make a change to a full-time Fire Division and a volunteer Support Division. Two separate divisions within the same department that work together to achieve a common goal. Let me explain....

 

The Fire Division would be made up of career firefighters (black coats) and their job is to put the fires out, respond to accidents and run EMS calls. I don't know the exact numbers needed, but let's say the City Fathers and the citizens vote on and put into service a full-time fire force of 11 Engines, 4 Ladders, 1 Heavy Rescue & 1 Deputy Chief. All units would be staffed with 4, except the Deputy would have 2. That's 16 pieces with 4 and 1 piece (deputy) with 2 for a total of 66 on-duty.

 

The Support Division would be made up of volunteer firefighters (yellow coats) and would be activated anytime there was a "Working Fire" in the whole city or upon request by the IC. They would man an Air/Light Vehicle, a Rehab/Canteen Vehicle, a Large Diameter Hose Wagon (no pump), and a Salvage Unit. Ideally, the volunteers would have one or two of their own stations to call "home" and the career staff would have their stations to call "home". The volunteers would need to be FFI & First Responder trained. Drivers would have to be EVOC certified. An incentive for the volunteers would be they earn one point per year toward the city's firefighter exam, up to five points. A lot of the old-timers volunteers wouldn't go for this and drop out. True dedicated volunteer firefighters and one's who want to become full-timers would stick with the program.

 

Now give this some real thought:

 

The full-timers are the ones that put the fires out and do the frontline work. However, how could they have any animosity toward the volunteers if they:

 

1) Handed them water and set up misting fans at a fire.

2) Set up lighting at the scene of a fire or accident.

3) Covered and preserved property that the career firefighters pull out of a burning structure.

4) Helped roll-up the hose after a fire.

5) Refilled their air bottles and got them ready for return to duty after rehab.

6) Laid out 3,500 feet of 5 inch hose for the career department to use at a large fire (and then helped pick it up).

7) Carried air bottles, hose and tools to the 15th floor of a high-rise building fire that's on the 18th floor (basically mules). High-rise firefighter is very manpower intensive!

8) Help to pull apart and overhaul a deep seated brush fire out in the woods.

 

The career chain-of-command would be:

Chief

Assistant Chief

Deputy Chief

Captain

Lieutenant

Firefighter

 

The volunteer chain-of -command would be:

Senior Crew Chief (Is the administrative and operational person who reports to the fire chief)

Crew Chief (1 per unit)

Assistant Crew Chief (1 per unit)

Support Firefighter

 

Of course at the scene of a fire the highest ranking volunteer would report to the command post and report to the IC for assignments. The orders are then given to the units by the volunteer representative at the command post. Three examples: (1) Deputy Chief running an incident, an Assistant Crew Chief is the highest ranking volunteer. He/she goes to command post. (2) An Assistant Chief shows up at a greater alarm fire and the Senior Crew Chief is there. He/she goes to the command post. (3) Two engines are wrapping up, overhauling a deep-seated brush fire under the command of a Captain. A Crew Chief is there and reports to the Captain, who asks, "Can you set up some misting fans, a tent, and get some bottles of water ready? If you have the manpower, would you mind helping us pull the hose out of the woods."  "Sure, Cap, no problem." "Thanks"

 

This is the only solution I can see working. Within 5 years a lot of the animosity would go away. New blood would come in and be taught how things run. At large-scale incidents the volunteers could supply 20 or 25 firefighters to assist the career staff. Let's face it, like most cities, Stamford isn't rich enough or busy enough to have 100 firefighters on-duty. But if the city decides that 66 on-duty can handle the majority of the calls, then how can anyone argue having all these trained, extra sets of hands show up?

 

Of course this would not preclude the recall of off-duty staff to man reserve pieces to respond to the scene or cover the city. Hey, if I were a career firefighter who just got "the snot kicked out of me" on a 3rd alarm fire and people volunteer to come and give you water and towels, help roll your hose, and set up lights enough for a ballgame to start up, I'd be the happiest guy in the world. Come on in, we can use you.

 

Give it some thought, LayTheLine

[FFPCogs 863]

Sorry LayTheLine but to me, it's best for the VFDs to close up shop completely rather than to be reduced to what you're suggesting. Beyond that it could only work if every volunteer member who is or has been an actual firefighter were forced out. No one and I mean no one who has actually fought fires there would agree to that plan and neither would I. No,  better to walk away with heads held high knowing a contribution was made over the years than to be reduced to go-fers, bottle changers, hose packers and rehab specialists sitting around waiting for a promised job with the "real" fire department that will rarely, if ever, appear. 

Edited August 31, 2016 by FFPCogs

[nfd2004 750]

Since the very beginning I have followed this thread very closely. I've never lived in Stamford and never was a part of the fire dept there. Most guys who have written about the issues have first hand knowledge of what exactly is going on.

 

 But as an outsider looking in, I can totally relate to Big Brother Stamford and exactly the kind of thing going on 100 miles away, in Little Brother, Norwich, Ct. That is why I have always been hoping for the best for Stamford. Were a group of individuals could all work together to protect lives and save property. Just as it is done in so many other places where the combined efforts of both career and volunteer firefighters perform exceptionally well together. Some rated today as the Best Departments in the country.

 

  The problem in Stamford is the EXACTLY the Same Kind of Problem we have here in Norwich. A group of FIVE Volunteer Fire Chiefs who want nothing to do with any change for the best, regardless of who they hurt along the way. It is all about a group of guys with just one thing in mind. Their own selfish-self egos. And they preach their ideas on any members within their departments and do whatever it takes to fight against a group of career firefighters. Who they are afraid will take their civic power away.

 

  I of course agree with "FFPCogs" in his dealings with these individuals. I've watched the same thing happen here over the last 40 years. Shake hands and smile, then first chance, stab those they are so jealous of right in the back.

 

 I also agree with many things "Lay the Line" states, except like Pete says, waiting around for a fire to use some type of support services would quickly loose interest for many. Perhaps one member riding a Stamford unit in that support would be making much better use of these volunteer members. But let's all understand one thing. Very clearly, there really is no comparison to the amount of training and skills required to be a career firefighter. It goes way beyond that of NFPAs Firefighter I or II, or Fire Officer etc. From the very beginning a weekend course can NOT compare to that of a minimum 40 hour Monday-Friday mandatory Recruit School for about 16-18 weeks. Followed by a probationary period under the watchful eye of his commanding officer.

 

  To compare career officers to volunteer officers, the requirements are much more stringent as well. It's not just sit down and take a written test and pass. It's about getting the highest score based on a written, oral, and perhaps an evaluation by a higher ranking member. Then everything is added together and the competition is keen among the best.

 

  I want to see Big Brother Stamford succeed. Your younger brother, Norwich, is counting on it. Don't let him down. He has three engines and one truck with two firehouses. One B/C and 12 Firefighters per shift on duty. And like you there are also Five Separate Volunteer Fire depts. within the same city.  And perhaps like Stamford, most of the blame for any failure of the system falls on it's Five Volunteer Fire Chiefs as well. If things don't change, eventually my guess is there will be trouble ahead, and those five chiefs just might find themselves right in the middle of it.

Edited August 31, 2016 by nfd2004

[x152 179]

Laytheline,

 

Sorry, but you are about 8 years late to this story and discussion. The time to debate structure, charter requirements, chain of command, etc. has long been established through a series of charter revisions, court actions, and collective bargaining agreements. 

 

The staffing and number of career apparatus are contained within the CBA and recently include an increase by 2 per shift. 

 

I am sure that future CBAs with the Union will discuss and hopefully include staffing adjustments to include additional Battalion Chief or equivalent level supervision. In addition, the Long Ridge paid drivers issue will eventually and inevitably include some type of incorporation into the City staffing levels. 

 

The chain of command has also now been clearly defined within the latest CBA.

 

As far as the fate of the remaining volunteer companies, with the exception of one, they are almost all now nonexistent.

 

Simply put, due to the woefully inept "leaders" that continue to be voted into place by their members, they have allowed themselves to serve more as gadflies then a respectable ally in service. I do not believe any of them have the ability to assess the pathetic state of their organizations or their future.

 

They only know strife and discontent and now appear to relish at new opportunities to spend their energy and money on issues outside of public safety or strengthening their Departments.

 

Sad, but the crafty lingo that some of their T shirts would be more appropriate to read: "I have seen the enemy and the enemy is us".

 

 

 

 

[FFPCogs 863]

On 8/31/2016 at 8:22 AM, nfd2004 said:

 

On 8/31/2016 at 8:22 AM, nfd2004 said:

 

Post deleted

Edited September 2, 2016 by FFPCogs

[FFPCogs 863]

On 8/31/2016 at 8:22 AM, nfd2004 said:

 I also agree with many things "Lay the Line" states, except like Pete says, waiting around for a fire to use some type of support services would quickly loose interest for many. Perhaps one member riding a Stamford unit in that support would be making much better use of these volunteer members. But let's all understand one thing. Very clearly, there really is no comparison to the amount of training and skills required to be a career firefighter. It goes way beyond that of NFPAs Firefighter I or II, or Fire Officer etc. From the very beginning a weekend course can NOT compare to that of a minimum 40 hour Monday-Friday mandatory Recruit School for about 16-18 weeks. Followed by a probationary period under the watchful eye of his commanding officer.

 

  To compare career officers to volunteer officers, the requirements are much more stringent as well. It's not just sit down and take a written test and pass. It's about getting the highest score based on a written, oral, and perhaps an evaluation by a higher ranking member. Then everything is added together and the competition is keen among the best.

 

Willy, I can fully appreciate your point about the training differences between career members who attend an academy or Recruit School full time and volunteers who don't. And while it is true that career members are far more immersed in their training due to the environment in which they learn, that doesn't mean a good number of volunteers are not well trained and competent as well. What matters in the end is performance on the fireground and I have to say, in my experience, that performance is close to equal more often than not...at least for the Stamford volunteers with whom I served. 

 

As I stated in my earlier tirades, some of us tried like Hell to develop and implement changes to improve not only the quantity but more importantly the quality of our volunteers, including training standards to minimize the differences as much as possible. To that end we started at the beginning by creating our own Recruit school to teach new candidates basic firemanship and get them certified to at least EMR. The big change here was we did so as a whole, in other words all new recruits trained together as a large group of 25-30 instead of as small individual department groups or 4 or 5. We managed to get two such classes done successfully before that endeavor was in effect shut down, in part due to the fact that (not to seem conceited) I am no longer there to push, pull and force the program forward. But I digress. To be fair the course we presented was not the course we originally envisioned, which had to be watered down, but it was a start and with each minor success the validity of the overall multi step plan became more obvious and achievable. And what was that "plan"?  Step 1: Bring people in to the volunteer service in Stamford, provided them standardized basic recruit level training and then assign them to a department based on a simple criteria that heavily emphasized needs over wants. In other words once the candidates completed the recruit program, the pool of recruits was to have been divided among the 5 departments with those most in need of members at any given time taking the lion's share of the available recruits from each class. Step 2: From there was to standardize the training of all volunteers using a training program developed and run by a training division comprised of qualified and certified Instructors from each VFD under the supervision of the newly created Asst. Chief of Vol. Services. Step 3: Was to use all of these trained volunteers more efficiently an effectively. How? Well, since all volunteers received the same training, which would have included any department specifics necessary such as tanker ops or tower ladder ops ect, the personnel would then be capable of serving anywhere, anytime. Which brings us to Step 4: This was all done to reach the ultimate goal of utilizing all volunteers to fill shifts to ensure station coverage at all (or most) VFD houses, with the manpower necessary to fill those shifts assigned as needed regardless of department affiliation....much like how career personnel are distributed. Now as one of the progenitors of this plan I am of course biased, but I think most would agree that each one of these steps on their own constituted an improvement, but when combined they offered a solution. 

 

As an aside this plan also included the means to standardize and quantify the competency for VFD officer candidates. Again another criteria was developed, which I have posted here numerous times, to achieve this goal including standardized testing for each rank for both career and volunteer personnel alike...i.e all LT candidates take the same test, all Capt candidates take the same test, ect ect. Is this a perfect solution, no of course not, but it is one that would at the very least reduce most of the differences between both "sides" and thus create a better combination fire department overall.

 

 

I say all this because this "plan" was discussed at length and in great detail with all of the VFD Chiefs and an agreement to proceed with it was given verbally time and again. Unfortunately each step in applying the necessary steps was filled with obstacles, obstructionism and hostility by these very same "leaders". There was a way to build a better mousetrap in Stamford...one that would have ensured at least minimum standards and levels of competency among all of the City's firefighters, which in turn would have provided the residents with the service they deserve at a cost they could afford. The foundation of this plan was the long history of service to the community by all of the VFDS. Keeping that in mind, it was designed, after much thought and hard work, to make the VFDs not only viable but valuable as part of an integrated and unified Stamford Fire Department well into the 21st century...but actions speak louder than words, due to the shortsightedness and pettiness of the "leadership", it was not to be. 

 

Sad that so many opportunities were squandered needlessly, when with just a little foresight, courage and fortitude so much could have been achieved.

Edited September 2, 2016 by FFPCogs

[nfd2004 750]

Pete, if that training is a fact in Stamford, then Stamford is by far the exception to the rule.

 

 To begin with, before most new career probies in any Connecticut city even ride on any fire truck, they must successfully attend and pass a full time Recruit School. That school consisting of a 40 hour week, for 16 weeks. I think now it has been boosted up to 18 weeks, I'm not sure. At 16 weeks, that is 80 days of fulltime training or equal to about 640 hours. That's just the start.

 

Once they enter the firehouse, it's not quite over yet. The training continues whether on an individual basis or among the entire shift. Just say an average of 2-3 hours a day, maybe twice a week. They continue to be evaluated by their company officer in which case, most places this will require regular evaluations by that firefighters officer. Again, most places, up to one year.

 

 It was also common practice, at least where I was, to advise the probie to go to the main apparatus floor to demonstrate what they know. Sometimes while creating difficult and stressful conditions. Every type of scenario stressing "what if" must be successfully proven.

 

  If there are any volunteer firefighters out there that have the time to undergo similar training, personally, you have far exceeded the expectations.

 

  The other thing I wanted to mention was the two recent letters sent to the BOR by the Five Volunteer Chiefs. In the first letter, it is apparent that these chiefs are totally AGAINST the request of the Stamford Firefighters union to get an additional firefighter for Engine 8 and Engine 9.

 

  Then I read the second letter as posted here. In that letters second paragraph it says:  QUOTE:

   "In fact, the volunteer departments fully support our career counterparts who deserve a fair and reasonable contract".

 

  In the First letter posted here on August 5th, (page 69) the Five Volunteer Chiefs speak AGAINST the Stamford Firefighters union. Then the Second letter posted here, just 19 days later on August 24, (page 70), the same Five Volunteer Chiefs tell how they SUPPORT that Stamford Firefighters union. So as I see it here, "YOUR EITHER WITH THEM OR YOUR NOT". Which letter should we accept as the true feelings of the Stamford Volunteer Fire Chiefs ? But let's ask this first; "Did you, the Five Vol Chiefs, submit both letters" ? Or did somebody else submit one of them using your titles and names ?

    

Edited September 2, 2016 by nfd2004