Update on Stamford Merger

[TRex 9]

Hi all. I am new to the board. I heard from someone today that there is alot of good reading going on here. I am going to jump in here with both feet and just add my point of view from where I have watched this for a long time. I have been involved with the system in Stamford for over 35 years starting as a volunteer, then became a paid driver for one of the departments, served as a chief for that department for two years and have started my 31st year with Stamford Fire Rescue. As most of you may already know, and some of you may have figured out who I am, this is not a new problem.

This problem began a long time ago and it only has become worse. I know, when I worked as a paid driver in ToR I pulled up to jobs alone waiting for my counterpart from the other station and hopefully, a volunteer would arrive soon. And back then they did. Most of those volunteers are now career personnel. The fact of the matter is that the socio-economic make up fo this city (which I was born and raised in)has been ever evolving, from a manufacturing town, then as a bedroom community for NYC to what it is now as a metropolis for world headquarters. It has grown from the 6th to 5th , and now the 4th largest city in CT. What happened to the people who started here? I know there are still a lot of you still living here but the ratio has changed drastically. 2 maybe 3 out of 10 people who reside here now are originally from here, and I dare to say for the most part do not know what there fire department really is or how it is run. You are not getting the volunteer participation that is needed anymore. that is not anyones fault. It is just the way it is. Volunteers are dedicated, but so are career members.

When I began doing this stuff there were more volunteers than there were paid in each of the Big 5 then. It grew to a point where there were more paid members than volunteers. Most of those volunteers were off duty career, more than likely violating FLSA. So at what point does a volunteer FD no longer be considered volunteer when there are more paid members than there are volunteers? Springdale Fire Company used to be one of the most advid anti paid departments in the city. Their past leadership of 20 + years ago were always angry at ToR for consistently asking for more paid personnel at yearly budget hearings. I even had a past chief from Springdale get in my face for always asking for more paid men. He told me that I was killing the volunteers. I told him my responcibility was to the personnel already working for their safety, and the people we were entrusted to protect. He stormed off. Never heard from him again. I think he died.

There is one descriptive word that I have not read in these posts as yet. PROFESSIONAL. Meaning; Of or pertaining to a profession, or calling; conforming to the rules or standards of a profession; following a profession; as, professional knowledge; A person who prosecutes anything professionally, or for a livelihood, and not in the character of an amateur; a professional worker.

You don't neccessarily need to be paid to be professional, nor do you need not to be paid to be an ameteur. It really boils down to attitudes. So I will put this question out to all of you and end this post before it becomes a novel. Which of these two descriptions do you feel you fit into, Professional, or Ameteur? I think that those of us that feel this plan is a good one are ameteurs who are looking to feather their own beds. I further feel that the volunteer chiefs that realized what was needed like Glenbrook's Chief Passero, and (ironically) Springdale's past Chief J. Hoyt (who I was not refering to earlier) are examples of non paid professionals. I can't think of any paid ametuers, Oh wait a minute I am sorry I can think of maybe 6 or 8. They had a clandestine secret meeting a week or so ago at an empty volunteer station. (WE KNOW WHO YOU ARE).

Make no mistake about it. This is a political payback or a strong attempt to begin the process of the city getting out of the fire protection business. Like some of the posts already have raised the spectre of RURAL METRO. And for those of you who think this is a good plan because you are trying to get a back door job, what are you going to do when the new tax district (if it is formed) hires chiefs or administrators from elsewhere who have some kind of credentials. Does this plan specifically state who will be hired, and what qualifications will they need to possess. What qualifications do the current so called chiefs who support the plan possess? "Yesterday I wanted to be chief, today I are one?" Good Luck.

Edited June 24, 2010 by TRex

[junior215 0]

Question to the Board......a serious question. Enough union/vollie fighting. Is it wrong for a mayor, who is also the public safety director, to be one of those in charge of a brand new fire department, funded by a special tax district, that does not go through the Board of Reps or Finance, that will presumably be negotiating the terms of employment for the new members...............that will presumably be employing many people that were politically active in his campaign......quite possibly even the master of ceremonies at his inagural ball??????

Does this seem VERY WRONG TO ANYONE!!!!!!!! Political patronage is not unusual, but doesn't this seem to any rational human being to be morally and ethically wrong??

Again, think about this in terms of right or wrong, not from a vollie or paid perspective, PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Guest FDNY99]

Question to the Board......a serious question. Enough union/vollie fighting. Is it wrong for a mayor, who is also the public safety director, to be one of those in charge of a brand new fire department, funded by a special tax district, that does not go through the Board of Reps or Finance, that will presumably be negotiating the terms of employment for the new members...............that will presumably be employing many people that were politically active in his campaign......quite possibly even the master of ceremonies at his inagural ball??????

Does this seem VERY WRONG TO ANYONE!!!!!!!! Political patronage is not unusual, but doesn't this seem to any rational human being to be morally and ethically wrong??

Again, think about this in terms of right or wrong, not from a vollie or paid perspective, PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!

Very valid and EXCELLENT points Junior215

[CTFF 65]

Junior of course it's wrong but what should we expect from this Mayor. He did not and does not want an investigation into the fire on deep valley trail in Long Ridge. He knows a solid investigation into that fire will bring up more questions about his plan.

[jcoppola 52]

Question to the Board......a serious question. Enough union/vollie fighting. Is it wrong for a mayor, who is also the public safety director, to be one of those in charge of a brand new fire department, funded by a special tax district, that does not go through the Board of Reps or Finance, that will presumably be negotiating the terms of employment for the new members...............that will presumably be employing many people that were politically active in his campaign......quite possibly even the master of ceremonies at his inagural ball??????

Does this seem VERY WRONG TO ANYONE!!!!!!!! Political patronage is not unusual, but doesn't this seem to any rational human being to be morally and ethically wrong??

Again, think about this in terms of right or wrong, not from a vollie or paid perspective, PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!

Just for the record, I, personally, HAVE been giving my opinions, all along, based on the perspective of what is right and wrong. I firmly believe that there are not many worse things the Mayor and the City could have done to the ENTIRE fire service in Stamford. I am pretty sure that I am taking my licks in my old volunteer house (BFD) which I still feel that I owe my start to the fire service to, as well as from close family members, but I feel that I cannot let those emotions cloud facts. I worked in this system for 3 years as a paid driver, and I saw the good of it as well as its deficiencies. The good of it is that we had a strong base of volunteers who got along very well, forged some very long-term friendships and even went on to career jobs in very respectable and busy departments together. The bad...inconsistent manpower and a certain lack of respect for the men who depended upon the volunteer department for thier livelihood and being treated as they were only suppliments to a volunteer force. That is what drove me out of the job I held at BFD and was my motivating factor to get on a fully paid department. (that and the extra activity that comes along with a bigger city department).

Enjoy the rest of your reading. It gets quite entertaining.

[Geppetto 31]

Letter to the Editor

Stamford Advocate

Friday, June 25, 2010

from Chief R. McGrath - Stamford Fire Rescue Department

http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/default/article/Letters-to-the-editor-537723.php

[Guest Gamewell093]

Just for the record, I, personally, HAVE been giving my opinions, all along, based on the perspective of what is right and wrong. I firmly believe that there are not many worse things the Mayor and the City could have done to the ENTIRE fire service in Stamford. I am pretty sure that I am taking my licks in my old volunteer house (BFD) which I still feel that I owe my start to the fire service to, as well as from close family members, but I feel that I cannot let those emotions cloud facts. I worked in this system for 3 years as a paid driver, and I saw the good of it as well as its deficiencies. The good of it is that we had a strong base of volunteers who got along very well, forged some very long-term friendships and even went on to career jobs in very respectable and busy departments together. The bad...inconsistent manpower and a certain lack of respect for the men who depended upon the volunteer department for thier livelihood and being treated as they were only suppliments to a volunteer force. That is what drove me out of the job I held at BFD and was my motivating factor to get on a fully paid department. (that and the extra activity that comes along with a bigger city department).

Enjoy the rest of your reading. It gets quite entertaining.

GOOD LUCK STAMFORD!

Hello, I want to wish any City of Stamford employees the best of luck. The "man" that your Mayor just tapped as the new director of Labor Relations formerly held that position in New Havem.

He was considered by mamy as "the poster boy" for genuine incompetence. He took the City of New Haven to an all time low and he spearheaded the idea to layoff of over 100 city employees.

He was clueless as far as Public Safety is concerned and treated the Police & Fire Unions with minimal regard.

His only interest was to see his name in the local newspapers.

Again, Good Luck to all city employees

[SDaly64 1]

From The Stamford Advocate:

Stamford lawmakers address response to destructive fire

Edited July 2, 2010 by SDaly64

[Guest Slayer61]

From The Stamford Advocate:

Stamford lawmakers address response to destructive fire

saying the homeowners shouldn't have lit a fire...priceless.

[hfd0044 0]

From The Stamford Advocate:

Stamford lawmakers address response to destructive fire

"...At one point, Bennett said the homeowners shouldn't have lit a fire:..."

What does this guy tell those that were in car accidents? "You shouldn't have been driving a car to get groceries, sir/ma'am?"

Blaming the taxpayers that fund their activities (in a public forum, with the public present).....that's a good move, and great for longevity of careers. Instead of 60 new paid firefighters for the Stamford Volunteer Fire Department, maybe they should invest in a spokesperson to handle all outward communication.

[Geppetto 31]

Stamford firefighters protest Pavia's service proposal

07/02/2010

By TOM EVANS

Stamford Times Staff Writer

STAMFORD -- The union representing the city's professional firefighters took to the lobby of the Government Center on Thursday evening to publicly criticize Mayor Michael Pavia's proposed plan for fire services in the city....

http://www.thestamfordtimes.com/story/488486

[Guest CaptPhil]

From The Stamford Advocate:

Stamford lawmakers address response to destructive fire

In case you don't believe it, you can hear it here...

“They should have just turned on the damn furnace”… HOW UNPROFESSIONAL!

http://www.stamfordfiretruths.org/index.php/2010/07/02/they-should-have-just-turned-on-the-damn-furnace/

[Guest capnlinus]

After this showing last night (one of the most unprofessional public displays by a fire service "leader" in my 15 years in the fire service) and some of the things that have been posted on here about taking jobs and so forth......

Anyone here still believe there isn't a hidden agenda at work?

[Guest FDNY99]

Glen as you can see after being confronted here with the facts...one of the biggest antagonists and pot stirrers has disappeared as a poster just as he did on CTfire-ems...he still checks in on the topic...but no longer posts. When he was called out he had his chance to make his case on the agenda issue....as we can see by his silence on both boards with a thread on this topic it is very clear there are agendas at work here. It will be interesting to see how this plays out...as for the comments made by the Long Ridge fire chief pertaining to the homeowner not starting the fire...I count that as 1 against the plan

[FFPCogs 863]

Glen as you can see after being confronted here with the facts...one of the biggest antagonists and pot stirrers has disappeared as a poster just as he did on CTfire-ems...he still checks in on the topic...but no longer posts. When he was called out he had his chance to make his case on the agenda issue....as we can see by his silence on both boards with a thread on this topic it is very clear there are agendas at work here. It will be interesting to see how this plays out..

First off Aron you would realize that I am not the "author" of the "plan" if you actually bothered to read what it is that I proposed about fixing Stamford's problems rather than simply jumping blindly on a bandwagon. Your ignorance here is amazing and honestly quite unexpected. If nothing else though there is one small area of agreement and that is that there is an agenda behind this whole mess, unfortunately it's just not the one you think it is.

Secondly when it comes to antagonizing and pot stirring you and a few others here have that honor sewn up

Stay Safe

Cogs

[Guest Firediver]

Unless there is more behind what this "chief" said, I am still trying to pick my jaw up off the floor.If I didn't know better I would have thought VP Biden was speaking.

[Guest FDNY99]

First off Aron you would realize that I am not the "author" of the "plan" if you actually bothered to read what it is that I proposed about fixing Stamford's problems rather than simply jumping blindly on a bandwagon. Your ignorance here is amazing and honestly quite unexpected. If nothing else though there is one small area of agreement and that is that there is an agenda behind this whole mess, unfortunately it's just not the one you think it is.

Secondly when it comes to antagonizing and pot stirring you and a few others here have that honor sewn up

Stay Safe

Cogs

I would beg to differ, as I am not the one who is on here saying I would take a job on the backs of others. Secondly the plan researched, developed, and presented on paper which I read with my own eyes by you, and your cohorts...card carrying members of 786 looks VERY similar to the one put forward by mayor Pavia. I have had only one thing to say towards you in this whole thing...and it was a question which you still have not answered.

[FFPCogs 863]

I would beg to differ, as I am not the one who is on here saying I would take a job on the backs of others. Secondly the plan researched, developed, and presented on paper which I read with my own eyes by you, and your cohorts...card carrying members of 786 looks VERY similar to the one put forward by mayor Pavia. I have had only one thing to say towards you in this whole thing...and it was a question which you still have not answered.

I was asked a direct question about taking a job to which I answered directly...that is NOT stirring the pot. The responses to that answer on the other hand are.

As for the Mayor's proposal, yes some of what I proposed to the Task Force does seem to be incorporated into his draft, but there is much that is not especially in regards to paid personnel. Maybe you should reread with your own eyes just exactly what it is that was proposed and who it was that developed it....here's a hint: there were NO 786 members card carrying or otherwise that were actively involved.

Cogs

Edited July 4, 2010 by FFPCogs

[Bnechis 3,961]

As for the Mayor's proposal, yes some of what I proposed to the Task Force does seem to be incorporated into his draft, but there is much that is not especially in regards to paid personnel. Maybe you should reread with your own eyes just exactly what it is that was proposed

It very hard to read it since I have yet to see a full version. It seems no one reaaly wants anyone to know whats really in it.

What I did find was most interesting:

1) Why doesn’t the City just create one fire department instead of separating volunteers from the city fire department?

"Having one fire department would be an ideal solution, but unfortunately, legal limitations, state statutes and the City’s own Charter prohibit us from creating a single fire department. In the long term, a single citywide fire department may be given further consideration; in the near-term this combined approach is the best option".

Written By Mayor Michael A. Pavia

So 1 is better than 2 and thats what the Mayor thinks you will have in the long term. In other words the obsticles can be overcome, but not by him.

[Guest FDNY99]

I was asked a direct question about taking a job to which I answered directly...that is NOT stirring the pot. The responses to that answer on the other hand are.

As for the Mayor's proposal, yes some of what I proposed to the Task Force does seem to be incorporated into his draft, but there is much that is not especially in regards to paid personnel. Maybe you should reread with your own eyes just exactly what it is that was proposed and who it was that developed it....here's a hint: there were NO 786 members card carrying or otherwise that were actively involved.

Cogs

Here is a hint I know for a fact that at least 1 member of 786 DID put his name on the cover of your proposal. And now that he is in a position to be brought up on charges he is crying up a storm. What would your position be if all the D-2 guys got sent back up north to staff this "plan" and there were few to no jobs to be had?

Cogs you have gone from volunteer duty crews like they run in places like PG County to now Belltown needs paid guys, why the change?

[FFPCogs 863]

Here is a hint I know for a fact that at least 1 member of 786 DID put his name on the cover of your proposal.

His name was put on MY proposal by ME because he is a friend that listened to me detail the outline incessantly when I was working his side job with him. It was an acknowledgement of his patience and friendship that's all. And since I'm the one that put his name on it I'm the one who KNOWS why it was put there

And now that he is in a position to be brought up on charges he is crying up a storm.

He has every right to defend himself since this is nothing more than a witch hunt and one that is indicative of the union's true motivations.

What would your position be if all the D-2 guys got sent back up north to staff this "plan" and there were few to no jobs to be had?

That is in essence what I proposed...although I simply said all paid FFs could be SFRD under the right parameters...so no problem, but you already know that from our previous discussions.

Cogs you have gone from volunteer duty crews like they run in places like PG County to now Belltown needs paid guys, why the change?

There is no change Aron, that was, is and will be what I believe to be the best option for a whole host of reasons that we have discussed in the past. To be clear though I have always advocated (and still do) paid DAYTIME positions at ALL the VFD houses with night and weekend coverage by volunteer shifts, but again you know this already since you have panned that idea repeatedly here and elsewhere

Cogs

Edited July 5, 2010 by FFPCogs

[Guest FDNY99]

Unfortunately due to a simple numbers game and economics if this plan goes through, I can see SFRD firefighters getting laid off. It is just simple math, and with Pavia's right hand man Larobina running around laying off people left and right it becomes a no brainer. When you take the amount of slots from one organization and allot them to another that organization will eventually get smaller. Simple government finance lessons I picked up from my better half who has over 20 years in government finance in the position as a finance director. This is where the problem lies Cogs. Because of the fact that your friends name appears on a plan that even remotely resembles the plan put forward by Pavia, add to it what I just mentioned above and BINGO...HUGE problem! I have to tell you, as far as I know he has been treated like a gentleman compared to how he would be treated in other places. When a fellow co-worker does something that threatens the lively hood of others it can get down right nasty! I don't think he is the focus of a witch hunt at all...on the contrary I think he should be made to explain himself.

Edited July 5, 2010 by FDNY99

[Guest capnlinus]

His name was put on MY proposal by ME because he is a friend that listened to me detail the outline incessantly when I was working his side job with him. It was an acknowledgement of his patience and friendship that's all. And since I'm the one that put his name on it I'm the one who KNOWS why it was put there

Cogs

Ok, 2 questions- Did you put his name on it without asking him, and if so why would you do that? If he knew his name was going on it then he has a bit of an issue I would suspect. If he didn't my second question is when are you going to reach out to the President of Local 786 to make this right? Because your buddy would seem to be in quite a jackpot because you threw his name on a report to thank him for his friendship.

Local 786 is doing exactly what they are supposed to do. Protect their members' rights. And, please, stop saying there will be no layoffs. It makes you look naive at best.

Edited July 5, 2010 by capnlinus

[Guest Firediver]

I too am curious as to why you put his name on it. Was it just another name to add? or was it the fact that his name was associated with 786? What purpose does adding HIS name to your plan serve? You stated that NO card carrying members were actively involved, and IF this is true then why add HIS name? The fact that you stated you put his name on there because "he listened to you" is a tad bit bizarre.JMO

[FFPCogs 863]

Ok, 2 questions- Did you put his name on it without asking him, and if so why would you do that? If he knew his name was going on it then he has a bit of an issue I would suspect. If he didn't my second question is when are you going to reach out to the President of Local 786 to make this right? Because your buddy would seem to be in quite a jackpot because you threw his name on a report to thank him for his friendship.

Local 786 is doing exactly what they are supposed to do. Protect their members' rights. And, please, stop saying there will be no layoffs. It makes you look naive at best.

From the other site:

Quote:Well Cogs, for the benefit of the guys not following the thread on the other forum here is what I posted for you on that thread:

Ok, 2 questions- Did you put his name on it without asking him, and if so why would you do that?.

Yes I did so for the reasons previously described. What most are overlooking is the fact that the proposal I put forth was designed to integrate SFRD and the VFDs so there was no problem about job loss ect, but the union leadership in it's infinite wisdom rejected that option out of hand

Quote:If he knew his name was going on it then he has a bit of an issue I would suspect. If he didn't my second question is when are you going to reach out to the President of Local 786 to make this right?.

I have already addressed this issue with the Union's E-board in writing (and if necessary I will do so again in person when I am able), but apparently they want to continue this idiocy which is indicative of the real motives behind this whole issue.

Quote:Because your buddy would seem to be in quite a jackpot because you threw his name on a report to thank him for his friendship?

Yes and why is that? Could it be because the proposal I presented sought to truly integrate the VFDs and SFRD with NO threat to jobs and was in fact the only proposal to do so?? Again it has to make one wonder about the union's true agenda in this affair. Add to that the fact that we have now gone from decrying or supporting the Mayor's plan to a courtroom drama about a persons alleged involvement in an option presented to the Task Force. An option by the way that is considerably different than that which emerged from the Mayor.

Quote:Local 786 is doing exactly what they are supposed to do. Protect their members' rights. And, please, stop saying there will be no layoffs. It makes you look naive at best

786 is doing exactly what it is supposed to? OK well you are entitled to your opinion. As far as layoffs go until such time as a pink slip appears there is NO reason to doubt the Mayor's sincerity on the issue of jobs especially since 786 has a no layoff clause in their contract.

If you want to go back to discussing the pros and cons of the plan than lets go, if not then enjoy posting to each other...I'm done with this bull****.

Cogs

Edited July 6, 2010 by FFPCogs

[FireMedic049 597]

Quote:Because your buddy would seem to be in quite a jackpot because you threw his name on a report to thank him for his friendship?

Yes and why is that? Could it be because the proposal I presented sought to truly integrate the VFDs and SFRD with NO threat to jobs and was in fact the only proposal to do so??

What exactly does "truly integrate the VFDs and SFRD" mean?

Quote:Local 786 is doing exactly what they are supposed to do. Protect their members' rights. And, please, stop saying there will be no layoffs. It makes you look naive at best

786 is doing exactly what it is supposed to? OK well you are entitled to your opinion. As far as layoffs go until such time as a pink slip appears there is NO reason to doubt the Mayor's sincerity on the issue of jobs especially since 786 has a no layoff clause in their contract.

He's an elected official, isn't that reason enough to doubt his sincerity?

Besides, if your city administration is anything like my city administration, then having the contract say something isn't supposed to happen doesn't mean that they won't try to do it anyway, even if there's an arbitration award supporting the contract.

[redddogg317 1]

From the other site:

Quote:Well Cogs, for the benefit of the guys not following the thread on the other forum here is what I posted for you on that thread:

Ok, 2 questions- Did you put his name on it without asking him, and if so why would you do that?.

Yes I did so for the reasons previously described. What most are overlooking is the fact that the proposal I put forth was designed to integrate SFRD and the VFDs so there was no problem about job loss ect, but the union leadership in it's infinite wisdom rejected that option out of hand

Quote:If he knew his name was going on it then he has a bit of an issue I would suspect. If he didn't my second question is when are you going to reach out to the President of Local 786 to make this right?.

I have already addressed this issue with the Union's E-board in writing (and if necessary I will do so again in person when I am able), but apparently they want to continue this idiocy which is indicative of the real motives behind this whole issue.

Quote:Because your buddy would seem to be in quite a jackpot because you threw his name on a report to thank him for his friendship?

Yes and why is that? Could it be because the proposal I presented sought to truly integrate the VFDs and SFRD with NO threat to jobs and was in fact the only proposal to do so?? Again it has to make one wonder about the union's true agenda in this affair. Add to that the fact that we have now gone from decrying or supporting the Mayor's plan to a courtroom drama about a persons alleged involvement in an option presented to the Task Force. An option by the way that is considerably different than that which emerged from the Mayor.

Quote:Local 786 is doing exactly what they are supposed to do. Protect their members' rights. And, please, stop saying there will be no layoffs. It makes you look naive at best

786 is doing exactly what it is supposed to? OK well you are entitled to your opinion. As far as layoffs go until such time as a pink slip appears there is NO reason to doubt the Mayor's sincerity on the issue of jobs especially since 786 has a no layoff clause in their contract.

If you want to go back to discussing the pros and cons of the plan than lets go, if not then enjoy posting to each other...I'm done with this bull****.

Cogs

Pete I was going to stay out of this but you started stating things about the union leadership...of which I am a part of, so I had no choice but to speak up...

1. As for YOUR plan you presented to the "task force" it in no way "intergrated" both sides as you stated. Second in our infinte wisdom rejected the plan?? How could we reject a plan when we were never ASKED to be a part of any negotiations or the task force to be in a position to reject anything. I hope your still not counting sitting in the audience to view that debacle as being a part of the process....No matter what you say or how you spin it we were not involved, and you've even said as much that we shouldn't have been involved since it didn't concern us.

2.The issue with your "friend" that you threw under the bus first at the task force meeting by stating his name and him being a member of SFRD ( obvious union affiliation) was taking the trip with you, then you add his name to your plan "just for coming down"...BS... The certain individual was man enough to face the body at our meeting stood his ground, heard the bodies displeasure on his choice and also gave his view...the situation is done and over

3. Your plan was in no way the only plan to cover the city and loose no jobs. I guess you forgot about the asst chief of SFRD's proposal to cover the ENTIRE city, create one command structure, ( as recomended in the past 2 fire evaluations) put the volunteers and career under one Chief, one set of SOGS...etc..AT NO EXTRA COST OR TAXES TO THE RESIDENTS OF STAMFORD.

4. As for the layoff issue, when asked when the plan could be put into effect Mr. Pavia answered 6 months to a year...hhmmm a year is exactly when our no layoff clause goes away. Strange timing huh??

And on a closing note about the comments you make referring to our motives, your motives have been made loud and clear to us all Pete

[efdcapt115 1,511]

Question for a 786 member: How many years have Local 786 members been staffing the positions that have come under question as a result of this plan?

Thank you.

I thought that mansion fire with the screwed up call from the IC up there, was going to move your department, and city in the right direction. I'm honestly flabergasted reading the plan that's being discussed here.

[efdcapt115 1,511]

Question for Mr. Coggs: I've noticed you stopped tagging your posts with:

Dyncorp/Logcap IV

Camp Leatherneck

Afghanistan

Without distracting from the topic (there seems to have been a lull here, no posts since last evening) it's just that you seem to be a very relevant player in the apparent creation of this plan, you apparently displayed your affiliation for quite a while in your posts, and I think it's legitimate to ask why you stopped using the tag. So I just googled it:

July 8, 2009DynCorp International Awarded New LOGCAP IV Task Order for Southern Afghanistan Support

FALLS CHURCH, Va., Jul 08, 2009 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- The Department of the Army has awarded DynCorp International (NYSE:DCP) and its two partners, CH2M Hill and Taos Industries, a task order for logistics support for the Afghanistan-South Area of Responsibility (AOR) under its existing LOGCAP IV contract. The task order value is $643.5 million for the one-year base period. The task order has a base year plus four one year options with a total evaluated value of $5.874 billion. The Army has directed DynCorp International to begin task order performance immediately.

Under this new task order, DynCorp International will provide existing bases within the Afghanistan South AOR with operations and maintenance support, including but not limited to: facilities management, electrical power, water, sewage and waste management, laundry operations, food services and transportation motor pool operations. DynCorp International will also provide various construction services for additional sites.

http://ir.dyn-intl.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=395115

SORRY EVERYONE! I'm not interested in dragging this off topic, just one response from Coggs maybe, just wondering about your mindset and where it comes from; the way I read it's in a place where civilians are doing most of the logistical, support type work that used to be done by soldiers. I'm sure you can't and don't want to talk about your job; it's probably classified anyway.

Watch out for them IEDs.

[FFPCogs 863]

Question for Mr. Coggs: I've noticed you stopped tagging your posts with:

Dyncorp/Logcap IV

Camp Leatherneck

Afghanistan

Without distracting from the topic (there seems to have been a lull here, no posts since last evening) it's just that you seem to be a very relevant player in the apparent creation of this plan, you apparently displayed your affiliation for quite a while in your posts, and I think it's legitimate to ask why you stopped using the tag. So I just googled it:

http://ir.dyn-intl.c...eleaseID=395115

SORRY EVERYONE! I'm not interested in dragging this off topic, just one response from Coggs maybe, just wondering about your mindset and where it comes from; the way I read it's in a place where civilians are doing most of the logistical, support type work that used to be done by soldiers. I'm sure you can't and don't want to talk about your job; it's probably classified anyway.

Watch out for them IEDs.

I work as a firefighter on Camp Leatherneck as part of LOGCAP IV which is the civilian support for miltary operations program. My job is not classified but I do have a security clearence since some areas of the base are. We do not travel off our 25 sq. mile base and are the providers of fire suppression and inspection/preventions services for the 15,000+ U.S. Marine Corp, Army and Air Force personnel stationed here.

The tag has been removed from my posts simply because I have very limited internet time here and it take me too long to type... .

Cogs