Update on Stamford Merger

[efdcapt115 1,511]

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

Yes thank you. But honestly I think you missed the meat of the question; you got the potatoes. My question to you is more directly about your mindset; where or how could you think this plan will not have some sort of negative effect on the Stamford job in the near to near-distant future?

How could you sign off on a final document that does little to resolve the problem of "division of fire services within a city" when it most obviously creates two. Any unification process, and any fire chief worth his/her salt is going to tell you this is just plain wrong; and I feel confident saying this only having followed this thread with interest for a while, and knowing a few chiefs in my lifetime including my dad, that's all.

I mean, are you trying to reinvent the wheel and convince us of otherwise? Nobody disputes that the department will remain divided. When good, honest Stamford fire officers and firefighters come on this site and lay it on the line....I believe them. Because I also spent a career in this service, and it has more integrity than we ever got or get credit for. I could give a hoot about the credit, but trust me I know about the integrity of people in the fire service. Politics and unions aside; the bottom line is these people are driven to do good in their lives. And the fire service has always improved because of that integrity, and pushing laws and construction changes that ended up meaning safer living conditions in this country for milllions of people.

Your plan would put careers in possible jeapordy guy. You have got to know, the lawyers are going to come out of the woodwork on this one.

But besides that, is the compassion that seems to be lacking. To put forth and endorse the prospect which COULD, I'll say could here, endanger firefighters job; why would one want to endorse this position; particularly in light of the fact that you are apparently a proud firefighter working in service of our mighty military?

I don't know your mayor or the whole picture. But I can tell you 35+ firefighters got layed off in Yonkers NY. And 9 in White Plains NY. Political figures come and go, they lose elections, etc. I honestly hope somebody finds a legal way to challenge this whole thing, and this time let the Chief step up to the whiteboard. From what I've read the Stamford Chief endorsed something entirely different than your proposal. That makes me seriously question the whole issue up there; the politicalization of the process that ends up with potentially career guys taking it on the chin. Nah, no good.

[FFPCogs 863]

Yes thank you. But honestly I think you missed the meat of the question; you got the potatoes. My question to you is more directly about your mindset; where or how could you think this plan will not have some sort of negative effect on the Stamford job in the near to near-distant future?

How could you sign off on a final document that does little to resolve the problem of "division of fire services within a city" when it most obviously creates two. Any unification process, and any fire chief worth his/her salt is going to tell you this is just plain wrong; and I feel confident saying this only having followed this thread with interest for a while, and knowing a few chiefs in my lifetime including my dad, that's all.

I mean, are you trying to reinvent the wheel and convince us of otherwise? Nobody disputes that the department will remain divided. When good, honest Stamford fire officers and firefighters come on this site and lay it on the line....I believe them. Because I also spent a career in this service, and it has more integrity than we ever got or get credit for. I could give a hoot about the credit, but trust me I know about the integrity of people in the fire service. Politics and unions aside; the bottom line is these people are driven to do good in their lives. And the fire service has always improved because of that integrity, and pushing laws and construction changes that ended up meaning safer living conditions in this country for milllions of people.

Your plan would put careers in possible jeapordy guy. You have got to know, the lawyers are going to come out of the woodwork on this one.

But besides that, is the compassion that seems to be lacking. To put forth and endorse the prospect which COULD, I'll say could here, endanger firefighters job; why would one want to endorse this position; particularly in light of the fact that you are apparently a proud firefighter working in service of our mighty military?

I don't know your mayor or the whole picture. But I can tell you 35+ firefighters got layed off in Yonkers NY. And 9 in White Plains NY. Political figures come and go, they lose elections, etc. I honestly hope somebody finds a legal way to challenge this whole thing, and this time let the Chief step up to the whiteboard. From what I've read the Stamford Chief endorsed something entirely different than your proposal. That makes me seriously question the whole issue up there; the politicalization of the process that ends up with potentially career guys taking it on the chin. Nah, no good.

Thanks efdcapt, but you like most here are missing the meat as well in that the Mayor's plan is NOT the one I proposed to the Task Force. Some aspects of what I proposed are incorporated, but some of the main facets are not i.e. volunteer shift coverage nights and weekends and more importantly the FACT that the proposal I put forth called for the VFDs to be staffed by EXISTING career personnel( that would work the same number of hours annually just under a different schedule), hence no layoffs or threats thereof. The proposal would also have required at least 2 new hires as well as a number of promotions of existing career personnel.

Why there is now this preoccupation with "my plan" is baffling since it is NOT the one on the table and most considered it a joke and dismissed anything in it out of hand just a few short months ago.

My mindset in supporting the Mayor's proposal as I understand it is quite simple: for me it does move in the right direction in terms of consolidating and standardizing the VFDs and creating two departments where there were six ,and that is a huge step due to the realities of how the Fire Service in Stamford is organized.

Cogs

Edited July 8, 2010 by FFPCogs

[FFPCogs 863]

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.

Well I disagree since the proposal that I put forth in a nutshell called for equal staffing in every firehouse in Stamford, standardized training, certification and promotional testing for all positions regarless of affiliation, unified incident command and ONE ultimate administrative command, whereas the City plan called for volunteer Chiefs to be ranked at least 2 grades below there career counterparts on scene simply because they are volunteers, volunteer officers would also only command volunteer personnel, (where's the unified command there?) and for the volunteer corp to become nothing more than a "farm team" or feeder for the SFRD.

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.

My apologies for my choosing the wrong words, you are correct the union and SFRD administration did not reject the proposal they simply ignored it completely. By the way there was no negotiation from any quarter regarding the proposal that I put forth since it was simply an option addressed during the public portion of those meetings. That some of the material was considered by the Task Force and may possibly be adopted is out of my control, but I'm sure you will have the opportunity to negotiate those aspects which effect the union..as you should.

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

So let me get this straight I "threw" my friend "under the bus at the first task force meeting"? Are you suggesting that I should have lied when asked who was accompanying me on said trip? Is lying a tactic you regularly employ in your dealings? Are you saying your union members cannot go where they want when they want on their own time? Well at least you can attest that the issue has been put to rest.

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.

I suggest you read all the proposals again..or maybe for the first time it seems

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??

You will have the opportunity to negotiate to retain that clause.

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

Well since you don't deny that my opinion is indeed your motive I think the point has been made, thanks for clearing that up.

Have a great day

Cogs

Edited July 8, 2010 by FFPCogs

[Geppetto 31]

Stamford Advocate Columnist

Angela Carella: Paid firefighters have their say

Thursday, July 8, 2010

Paid firefighters feel they've had little say in a discussion about fire service that began in February.

That's when a task force appointed by Mayor Michael Pavia started talking about how to reorganize the long-dysfunctional system of firefighting in Stamford, where there is one paid department and five volunteer firehouses. The volunteer firehouses either have paid members or, with one exception, get help from the paid department answering calls....

http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/article/Angela-Carella-Paid-firefighters-have-their-say-570505.php

[dartnk45 11]

hey matt did tommy brown just get premotted to the Deputy firemarshals slot too. ok if shawn wants 7's out lets fill up 8's and 9's and put the Captians and drivers down town to man Squad 1 to run out of HQ. but wait then Squad 1 would always be on the road backing up Springdale because they cant get a truck out with a four man company onboard. this plan is absultly stupid in my oppion. i grew up in that station and i hate to see what it has become. but times have changed and i believe if the mayor even thinks about using Shawns perposal the people in the district should move. this is just my two cents

Tom Tisano JR

[gamewell45 258]

hey matt did tommy brown just get premotted to the Deputy firemarshals slot too. ok if shawn wants 7's out lets fill up 8's and 9's and put the Captians and drivers down town to man Squad 1 to run out of HQ. but wait then Squad 1 would always be on the road backing up Springdale because they cant get a truck out with a four man company onboard. this plan is absultly stupid in my oppion. i grew up in that station and i hate to see what it has become. but times have changed and i believe if the mayor even thinks about using Shawns perposal the people in the district should move. this is just my two cents

Tom Tisano JR

Your post is difficult to understand due to all the spelling errors/typo's. As a suggestion, try using spell check before you post.

[dartnk45 11]

OK GameWell

1 IF shawn wants to save money by gettting engine 7 out of springdale lets use that man power to make engine 8 and 9 a four man rig.

2 then who is left over from making 8's and 9's a four man rig lets move them down to HQ and man Squad 1. but wait a minute tha rig would always be on the road back in springdale because from personal experience i have seen springdale roll out thier rigs with one or two guys on them. so Squad 1 would have to back up engine6 and engine 8 since they would be the closest city engine company.

3. i grew up in that station with my dad being one of the nine firefighters that were made SFRD in 1997, i have seen the ups and downs of that company and right now it is at its all time low.

4. i aslo asked Matt if it was true that Tommy Brown was premoted to the open fire Marshal's position.

Any other question just ask.

Tom Tisano JR

[gamewell45 258]

OK GameWell

1 IF shawn wants to save money by gettting engine 7 out of springdale lets use that man power to make engine 8 and 9 a four man rig.

2 then who is left over from making 8's and 9's a four man rig lets move them down to HQ and man Squad 1. but wait a minute tha rig would always be on the road back in springdale because from personal experience i have seen springdale roll out thier rigs with one or two guys on them. so Squad 1 would have to back up engine6 and engine 8 since they would be the closest city engine company.

3. i grew up in that station with my dad being one of the nine firefighters that were made SFRD in 1997, i have seen the ups and downs of that company and right now it is at its all time low.

4. i aslo asked Matt if it was true that Tommy Brown was premoted to the open fire Marshal's position.

Any other question just ask.

Tom Tisano JR

Much better; thanks.

[redddogg317 1]

For those who have not had the pleasure please visit www.stamfordfiretruths.org. Today the webmaster posted a factual play by play of some recent incidents in stamford. Here's the link:

http://www.stamfordfiretruths.org/in...orfd/#more-396

Enjoy...!!!!

[PCFD ENG58 1,085]

For those who have not had the pleasure please visit www.stamfordfiretruths.org. Today the webmaster posted a factual play by play of some recent incidents in stamford. Here's the link:

http://www.stamfordfiretruths.org/in...orfd/#more-396

Enjoy...!!!!

Can't find it?

[mmwolf65 1]

Can't find it?

Try http://www.stamfordfiretruths.org/

[Guest Firediver]

Can't find it?

Go to the site and click on the first story (July 20, 2010) and click where it says "Read rest of this story". Edited July 21, 2010 by Firediver

[redddogg317 1]

Try http://www.stamfordfiretruths.org/

My apologies...try this link

http://www.stamfordfiretruths.org/index.php/2010/07/20/how-many-incidents-will-it-take-another-no-show-for-torfd/#more-396

[TRex 9]

Heard from a number of reliable sources that the votes are not there for the full board to approve this hair brainded plan. Job well done by getting the TRUTH out (Stamford Fire Truths . ORG) and quelling the lies from Bennent the rest of the non professionals like him.

[Geppetto 31]

Fire & Rescue chiefs weigh in on plan

Friday, July 23, 2010

Stamford Advocate - Letter to the Editor

http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/default/article/Fire-Rescue-chiefs-weigh-in-on-plan-588914.php

[redddogg317 1]

Fire & Rescue chiefs weigh in on plan

Friday, July 23, 2010

Stamford Advocate - Letter to the Editor

http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/default/article/Fire-Rescue-chiefs-weigh-in-on-plan-588914.php

As a side note 2 of the Mayors fire task force panel members ( Chiefs Brown and Conte) have signed this letter along with 99% of our Senior staff members ( with 1 exception ). They along with 2 other members of the task force are in aggreement that this plan was not drafted by the panel at all. Let your imagination wander as to how and when this plan was REALLY drafted and by who.

Edited July 24, 2010 by redddogg317

[FFPCogs 863]

They along with 2 other members of the task force are in aggreement that this plan was not drafted by the panel at all. Let your imagination wander as to how and when this plan was REALLY drafted and by who.

Which 2 members of the Task force are you referring to?

[redddogg317 1]

Which 2 members of the Task force are you referring to?

If the upcoming article in the Stamford Advocate holds true and his part of the interview is published than one member will let his feelings be known, the other well let's just say will also speak his true feelings if he is asked directly...he will not speak out against the Mayor because of their relationship but he will not tell any fairy tales if asked. I have spoken to these men directly and choose to keep there names to myself at this time.

[FFPCogs 863]

I have spoken to these men directly and choose to keep there names to myself at this time.

How convenient. Since the veracity of this information cannot be verified and you will not divulge the names of these supposed dissenters many will think this is nothing but more PR firm orchestrated hearsay spread to support the agenda of defeating the Mayor's plan...much like that union sponsored epitome of objectivity, stamfordfirelies...ooops, truths.com

[redddogg317 1]

How convenient. Since the veracity of this information cannot be verified and you will not divulge the names of these supposed dissenters many will think this is nothing but more PR firm orchestrated hearsay spread to support the agenda of defeating the Mayor's plan...much like that union sponsored epitome of objectivity, stamfordfirelies...ooops, truths.com

Yes very convenient.

Isn't most of what you spout out on these boards nothing but hear say and "propaganda" also?? Your claim to have inside information on a number of subjects is falling on deaf ears.

Each and every issue on stamford fire truths can be backed up by facts and documentation. Can you say the same?? No, you are going on the hear say of the mayor who to the dismay of many of the board of reps has not provided any documentaion to back up his claims. Why, what is he hiding?? Show the true figures of this fire tax fee..stop fooling the public and yourself with that tax word, any taxes you pay to a form of goverment is deductible...this is fee is not ,just ask Trumbull.

Oh and Mr Laribina used Trumbull as an example of a town with a fire tax that works. Really, I guess he didn't know that Trumbull is ALL VOLUNTEER fire department with 3 paid employeess and the budget is still over 1.5 million.

What do you think 61 employees will cost?? Plus lowering the mill rate to compensate the fire fee amount only lowers the amount of actual deductible dollars the taxpayer is able to use, taxpayers loose...smoke and mirrors

[FFPCogs 863]

Yes very convenient.

Isn't most of what you spout out on these boards nothing but hear say and "propaganda" also?? Your claim to have inside information on a number of subjects is falling on deaf ears.

Each and every issue on stamford fire truths can be backed up by facts and documentation. Can you say the same?? No, you are going on the hear say of the mayor who to the dismay of many of the board of reps has not provided any documentaion to back up his claims. Why, what is he hiding?? Show the true figures of this fire tax fee..stop fooling the public and yourself with that tax word, any taxes you pay to a form of goverment is deductible...this is fee is not ,just ask Trumbull.

Oh and Mr Laribina used Trumbull as an example of a town with a fire tax that works. Really, I guess he didn't know that Trumbull is ALL VOLUNTEER fire department with 3 paid employeess and the budget is still over 1.5 million.

What do you think 61 employees will cost?? Plus lowering the mill rate to compensate the fire fee amount only lowers the amount of actual deductible dollars the taxpayer is able to use, taxpayers loose...smoke and mirrors

Tax increase and layoffs are on top of the list of that site's BS. The threat of both of these eventualities are the staples of firebull.com which have NO basis in fact....they are at best only speculation. But this isn't about that site..or me for that matter, it's about you making statements about Task Force members and their involvement or lack thereof in the process and then you refusing to identify them...that is rumormongering at it's best. A lie of omission is still a lie. Edited July 24, 2010 by FFPCogs

[CTFF 65]

Tax increase and layoffs are on top of the list of that site's BS. The threat of both of these eventualities are the staples of firebull.com which have NO basis in fact....they are at best only speculation.

So Coggs you acknowledge a tax increase and layoffs are a possible outcome of the Mayor's plan yet it's BS for the StamfordFiretruths.com website to talk about them?

[Bnechis 3,961]

much like that union sponsored epitome of objectivity, stamfordfirelies...ooops, truths.com

So the last couple of fires in Long Ridge didn't happen? or is it they are lying about volunteer rigs not responding to calls or showing up 20-30 minutes after SFRD? Please tell us are these lies?

Tax increase and layoffs are on top of the list of that site's BS. The threat of both of these eventualities are the staples of firebull.com which have NO basis in fact....they are at best only speculation.

If the are eventualities then they must be the truth? Which is it...you can have it both ways.

The leadership in the VFD's has claimed that the 61 career firefighters in the proposed volunteer FD will help them cover the volunteer daytime manpower shortage, But both Fires in LRFD and the missed calls have occured during the times they claim that they have good coverage.

How many units are needed to properly cover No. Stamford? I have not seen any study and I do not know the area well enough to give a number, but I understand that there are 5 stations, now lets assume that each station in the new VFD staffs an engine and a 2nd unit (ladder, tanker, rescue, etc.) thats 10 units if we average it at 3ff's (most should have 4) thats 30 FF's per shift x 4 shifts is 120. If there comes a time that the volunteers are no longer willing or able to respond, then this will be the rock bottom number of career staffing that would be needed. Looks to me like I just doubled the tax. Oh what we have a promise that this wont happen........

But this isn't about that site..or me for that matter,

If its not about the site, why do you keep bringing it up in your posts?

[gamewell45 258]

Calm down. There's nothing to be gained by attacking each other.

[FireMedic049 597]

Tax increase and layoffs are on top of the list of that site's BS. The threat of both of these eventualities are the staples of firebull.com which have NO basis in fact....they are at best only speculation.

I'm willing to agree that at this point, the layoffs are only speculation since it's been publicly stated that no layoffs are supposed to happen. However, the same can't be said about the tax increase since I've seen reference to a tax increase in multiple articles regarding this new plan.

But this isn't about that site..or me for that matter, it's about you making statements about Task Force members and their involvement or lack thereof in the process and then you refusing to identify them...that is rumormongering at it's best. A lie of omission is still a lie.

Yes, the lie of omission is still a lie. However, it's a lie because the person is attempting to deceive by omitting the "truth". I didn't see any omission of truth in his statement. The only thing I saw being omitted was the actual identity of the people being referenced and omitting their identity doesn't necessarily mean that the content of the message is not true.

[SFRD372 43]

Hey Pete Cogs....what is your educational qualifications, fire training, supervisory skills, etc. to even dream up such a plan.......and stop harping on the only thread that you have left that the career firefighters want to get rid of the volunteers, that simply IS NOT the TRUTH!

[redddogg317 1]

I'm willing to agree that at this point, the layoffs are only speculation since it's been publicly stated that no layoffs are supposed to happen. However, the same can't be said about the tax increase since I've seen reference to a tax increase in multiple articles regarding this new plan.

Yes, the lie of omission is still a lie. However, it's a lie because the person is attempting to deceive by omitting the "truth". I didn't see any omission of truth in his statement. The only thing I saw being omitted was the actual identity of the people being referenced and omitting their identity doesn't necessarily mean that the content of the message is not true.

Brothers thank you for having my back.

I was simply acknowledging the request of the one individual to not let his name out until the article in the Stamford Advocate came out...for which it did today. It's not available online yet but now I will state that Mr. Dudley Williams is not at all in aggreement with the mayors plan and he was a member of the task force..the other if well lets just say he just turned down a job managing a team in Florida.

That being said Pete I need to address you on your comments towards me and me lying by omission. You state in many of your rants about you know this because, or I was told this because, without stating who you information came from, I for one have NEVER seen you at any of the " merger" meetings between the city, the union, and the volunteer chiefs because I WAS THERE FOR ALL OF THEM, so I guess you get your information second or maybe even third hand. My point was proven like I stated it would be once the article came out. Again can you say the same...I doubt it.

Today there are more important things to worry about since we lost to brothers in Bridgeport yesterday so this big bad union is making sure that our brothers in Bridgeport get all the support they need and deserve.

[FireMedic049 597]

Brothers thank you for having my back.

Anytime.

Today there are more important things to worry about since we lost two brothers in Bridgeport yesterday so this big bad union is making sure that our brothers in Bridgeport get all the support they need and deserve.

Absolutely!

[Guest Firediver]

Today there are more important things to worry about since we lost to brothers in Bridgeport yesterday so this big bad union is making sure that our brothers in Bridgeport get all the support they need and deserve.

x2, and I'm still baffled how a guy over 7800 miles away knows more than some of the SRFD Union personnel.

Edited July 25, 2010 by Firediver

[Jason762 2]

Today there are more important things to worry about since we lost to brothers in Bridgeport yesterday so this big bad union is making sure that our brothers in Bridgeport get all the support they need and deserve.

Some people (we all know who), have no idea and never will, about what the brotherhood is all about. They may call themselves firefighters, but WE know the truth. WE will keep on doing the right thing, and fighting the good fight.