Update on Stamford Merger

[Dinosaur 844]

Being retired and having nothing better to do (alright I just didn't want to rake the yard) I watched that video and have some thoughts.

The mayor made a very poor decision having that chief speak on his behalf. Instead of using negatives for everything he should have sold his plan with all of its positives (even if I don't believe half of his propaganda). I'm willing to bet that that chief's resume is on the top of the pile when the job is announced for chief of the new VFD. So painfully transparent.

Much of the presenters points were anecdotal, the presentation was too long and lacking in specificity that legislative bodies need and want and the constant attempts to smear the SFRD were as transparent as his claims about the proposed department seemingly false.

The mayor should have had an objective, neutral, professional staffer make the presentation highlighting the improvements and positive things that his plan would bring instead of the same old tired rhetoric.

All that said the Board of Representatives seems genuinely engaged and interested. They should work with the mayor and instead of this constant BS back and forth start with a clean slate.

The City limits are well established and they seek to provide comparable, consistent service to the entire City. They should take all that is currently available, personnel (paid and volunteer), apparatus, facilities, buildings, etc. and use NFPA 1710/1720 to set up the BEST system for the entire city. Having two or three different departments isn't going to be any better than the 5-6 they have now. They'll just have some fat-cat chief in a new paid position.

Map all the stations, position the apparatus, and start filling the busier stations with career personnel and backing them up with qualified volunteers. Roster all the FF the same way regardless of their pay status. If a company can be staffed entirely with properly trained volunteers, let it be. If it can't be, staff it with career guys. Make each rig roll with 3 FF and an officer. Building a system that will respond with 1-2 career guys is not the answer and since they're all willing to make some dramatic changes fix it right.

Develop a method for advancement within the volunteer ranks and a pathway into the career side for those who want a job.

Develop a single standard for FF training with two options for completing it - full-time fast track (career) and part-time for volunteers.

Stamford deserves a single, effective FD that covers the entire city instead of just shuffling the same problems around.

Start from the bottom and build yourselves a new system that as someone else here already said, will last the next 30+ years.

If people don't start letting go of the same old BS and complaints they're never going to get anywhere. But what do I know. I was just in combination department for my entire career.

[CTFF 65]

Then apparently you don't understand it. It should be niether the SFRD/Union way or the volunteer way...it should be...it MUST be...both. That you continue to see this as an us against them "battle" belies the fact that it is you who does NOT want to work together. With all due respect it seems that for many career members it must be their way or the highway just as it was under Malloy...remember him he's the guy who started all this. Unilateral action didn't work then and it can't work now if the public is to be served, why is that such a hard concept for some to grasp???

Cogs

I think you've got me wrong Cogs, I have no problems working with anyone when the core functions of the fire service ( protection of life and property) come first. For example you stated "For the volunteers that may mean things like more oversight, higher, standardized and more stringent training and response standards" I think all of these lead to a better service for the public. On the career side your example was "cross staffing" and I guess you mean rigs? I don't see hoping rigs as a benefit to the public, staffing, equipping and dispatching the appropriate rig to a call benefits the public.

I very much agree with Dinosaur's last post.

[CTFF 65]

Not to go off topic here- but was Stamford with holding their test results from last test becuase of all of this?!?

In my opinion the City has no idea how to handle the last test results within the context of also possibly having to hire for the SVFD.

[Geppetto 31]

It is my understanding that L786 had no seat at the table when the task force met to even discuss planning. But regularly they are bashed for labeling the volunteer companies as rival and pushing forth "plans". It is quite apparent that all things aren't equal. I'm sure the volunteer representation did not complain that L786 wasn't seated at the table either.

Since this "rival" term has gained so much attention, what was the impetus that caused the union to request it from the national organization? The letter is dated. And as such, something must have changed in Stamford's Fire Society which prompted this reaction.

If the volunteer company's want to always fall back on their ability to sue and previous whatever legal decisions exist, what can the union fall back on in it's defense?

[FFPCogs 863]

I very much agree with Dinosaur's last post.

As do I for the most part. The goal of a unified, standardized and integrated fire service in Stamford is one we should all be looking towards....it is the inability to compromise that has thus far obscured that vision.

I think you've got me wrong Cogs, I have no problems working with anyone when the core functions of the fire service ( protection of life and property) come first. For example you stated "For the volunteers that may mean things like more oversight, higher, standardized and more stringent training and response standards" I think all of these lead to a better service for the public. On the career side your example was "cross staffing" and I guess you mean rigs? I don't see hoping rigs as a benefit to the public, staffing, equipping and dispatching the appropriate rig to a call benefits the public.

I may misunderstand you and if so I do apologize. The examples cited in my previous posts were just that examples. Obviously there will be certain aspects of unifiying that will be non negotiable from both perspectives. Things like involvement in labor issues. I don't think volunteers as a whole should be involved in any labor negotiations between the City and 786, other than to lend "moral support" to our union brothers. Conversely I don't think 786 et al. should be involved in any volunteer incentives negotiations either, again other than to lend that same moral support. But I do believe that most operational aspects should be developed by both sides since it will be both sides that will be providing the service. And while I'm fully aware that there will be differences of opinion in terms of what constitutes effective operations, in the end through the process of examining the merits or lack of them of each of the "sticking points" those tasked with integrating the services will come up with what works best for Stamford. To that end I would say everything should be on the table and open to objective scrutiny. I mean no disrespct when I say this but career firefighters do not have a monopoly on either concern for the public's welfare or the anwers on how best to provide for it. To build an effective combined system, the one the people of Stamford deserve, will take the combined efforts and knowledge, experience, dedication and desire of people from both sides of our fire service coin. To that end it would be in eveyone's best interest to keep the attitude of "we won't" to a minimum by keeping one of " we can and will" as the driving force from the outset.

Cogs

Edited December 4, 2011 by FFPCogs

[Geppetto 31]

City should, but won't, have one fire department

December 2, 2011

Stamford Advocate - editorial

http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/article/City-should-but-won-t-have-one-fire-department-2341170.php

[CTFF 65]

Cogs,

There is no system in place currently looking for a compromise, the mayor and the supporters of his plan want their plan rushed through. I think the first step developing a better plan to stop the mayor's plan.

After the merger many suggested that the volunteers needed to consolidate in order to survive. Consolidation was a nasty word and was not an option. I have hope that by stopping the mayor's plan everyone will be willing to sit down again.

[FFPCogs 863]

Cogs,

There is no system in place currently looking for a compromise, the mayor and the supporters of his plan want their plan rushed through. I think the first step developing a better plan to stop the mayor's plan.

After the merger many suggested that the volunteers needed to consolidate in order to survive. Consolidation was a nasty word and was not an option. I have hope that by stopping the mayor's plan everyone will be willing to sit down again.

As far as the plans go, I can only say that i find fault with both current options. Whether or not the Mayor's plan will succeed is now up to the BoR, but in the event it doesn't IMO we should have an alternative in place other than the SFRD one. To do that requires a cooperative effort now. If there is no system in place looking for a compromise than we must create one...and in doing so show the public, which has been bombarded with nothing but tales of discord in THEIR fire service, that we all can work togerther for them.

Cogs

Edited December 4, 2011 by FFPCogs

[CTFF 65]

As far as the plans go, I can only say that i find fault with both current options. Whether or not the Mayor's plan will succeed is now up to the BoR, but in the event it doesn't IMO we should have an alternative in place other than the SFRD one. To do that requires a cooperative effort now. If there is no system in place looking for a compromise than we must create one...and in doing so show the public, which has been bombarded with nothing but tales of discord in THEIR fire service, that we all can work togerther for them.

Cogs

Cogs,

I think the SFRD plan deserves hearings just like the Mayor's plan has gotten. The Mayor has changed his plan nearly every time a question has been asked about it. The "Brown" plan was created and all we've heard is it won't work and we won't agree to it from the official volunteer side.

The Brown plan needs to be looked at, questions need to be asked and answered. To simply throw the brown plan away is wrong.

[FFPCogs 863]

Cogs,

I think the SFRD plan deserves hearings just like the Mayor's plan has gotten. The Mayor has changed his plan nearly every time a question has been asked about it. The "Brown" plan was created and all we've heard is it won't work and we won't agree to it from the official volunteer side.

The Brown plan needs to be looked at, questions need to be asked and answered. To simply throw the brown plan away is wrong.

Even though i do not support it in it's present form I agree that the "Brown plan" deserves a fair hearing and scrutiny...i have a few questions I'd love to ask...and from what I'm told it may very well get that opportunity. And quite honestly I wouldn't throw any of the plans away out of hand as they all have at least some points of merit...IMO anyway. But that said i also think that a better, far more suitable and jointly developed option lies just beyond the horizon that combines some new ideas with the best and most workable aspects of all the proposals brought before the Task Force. As best I can tell there will be no decision until some time next year,...it would be a shame to waste that time dwelling on what's wrong when we would all be much better served by buildiing on what's right.. And we don't need anyone's approval but our own to begin that process.

Cogs

[CTFF 65]

Cogs,

Here a post by Stephen Gladstone from another site, You think he wants to sit down and discuss the issue in Stamford in a serious and open manner?

"If I have no credibility, I'm lying, or I'm truly delusional then why are you reading my blog and commenting on it. I seem to be hitting a nerve with you. I can assure you I am hardly delusional. Also, I have asked that the so called Peter Brown plan expense be fully flushed out for all to see how truly expensive and unwieldy it will be... but it will have to include temporary quarters or buildings and property for all the new SF & R hires and equipment as the Board of Reps.need to know we will not participate in that plan should it be adopted. Todd and other veteran members will be invited to visit the Belltown Fire Department Museum and Social club, formerly a working 85 year old Fire Department. I have been assured by the other Volunteer Departments they would sooner liquidate then have this alternative plan allow the city or the union take over our mandated districts. Keep testing our zero credibility..."

[FFPCogs 863]

Cogs,

Here a post by Stephen Gladstone from another site, You think he wants to sit down and discuss the issue in Stamford in a serious and open manner?

"If I have no credibility, I'm lying, or I'm truly delusional then why are you reading my blog and commenting on it. I seem to be hitting a nerve with you. I can assure you I am hardly delusional. Also, I have asked that the so called Peter Brown plan expense be fully flushed out for all to see how truly expensive and unwieldy it will be... but it will have to include temporary quarters or buildings and property for all the new SF & R hires and equipment as the Board of Reps.need to know we will not participate in that plan should it be adopted. Todd and other veteran members will be invited to visit the Belltown Fire Department Museum and Social club, formerly a working 85 year old Fire Department. I have been assured by the other Volunteer Departments they would sooner liquidate then have this alternative plan allow the city or the union take over our mandated districts. Keep testing our zero credibility..."

And here is my reply from that other site:

I can assure you that Mr.Gladstone does not speak for me. I do not believe the "Brown Plan" is a realisitc one and that's no secret, and I will not support it as it is. But it is my department as a whole that will decide if we would accept it should that be the plan that emerges. Many of us believe however that WE, and that means the people of Belltown as well as the BFD, stand to lose far too much to simply agree to the terms of the "BP" without further scrutiny. The BP" can work for us only if it can ensure that our district is going to be better off than it is now...which as proposed I do not believe it will be. It is my belief that as a proud and productive department that has served our community well for 82 years, our membership and our neighbors together will do what is necessary to retain our right to continue serve that district. IMO liquidation as a department, by 786's hand, by SFRD's hand, by the City's hand and most assuredly at our own hand, is not an option that has merit in Belltown. Those among us who feel differently are free to move on.

Cogs

You know where I stand on this whole situation...or at least I hope you do after 80+ pages... . And while I and many of my BFD colleagues stand by our beliefs we do not do so to the point we are unwilling to explore and accept other plausible and mutually beneficial options to better serve the public. While there is still a real divide I do believe that some of us, career and volunteer alike, have made great strides in respect to a willingness to at least listen to what other possibilities exist...and that's a far cry from the situation 3 years ago. And let me reiterate that for as long as I live and breathe I will do everything in my power to ensure that the BFD remains to serve the people of Belltown and beyond professionally, responsibly and to the level they deserve in a manner befitting our history.

Cogs

Edited December 5, 2011 by FFPCogs

[FD828 77]

And here is my reply from that other site:

I can assure you that Mr.Gladstone does not speak for me. I do not believe the "Brown Plan" is a realisitc one and that's no secret, and I will not support it as it is. But it is my department as a whole that will decide if we would accept it should that be the plan that emerges. Many of us believe We, and that means the people of Belltown as well as the BFD, stand to lose far too much to simply agree to the terms of the "BP" without further scrutiny. The BP" can work for us only if it can ensure that our district is going to be better off than it is now...which as proposed I do not believe it will be. It is my belief that as a proud and productive department that has served our community well for 82 years, our membership and our neighbors together will do what is necessary to retain our right to continue serve that district. IMO liquidation as a department, by 786's hand, by SFRD's hand, by the City's hand and most assuredly at our own hand, is not an option that has merit in Belltown. Those among us who feel differently are free to move on.

Cogs

Correct me if I am wrong, but wouldn't Belltown under the "BP" stay exactly the same as it is now? Belltown is all volunteer and is responding to all of their calls. They are staffing the station 24/7 with volunteers, training regularly and are bring in more members then they can handle. So I am a little confused on "the people of Belltown as well as the BFD, stand to lose far too much to simply agree to the terms of the "BP"". What exactly are you losing? You don't have paid ff's now so you wouldn't lose them. The "BP" basically leaves BFD to remain all volunteer and continue to respond as such. I just don't see what the down side is for Belltown. If I were a BFD member I would want to distance myself as far away from the other departments as possible.

[FFPCogs 863]

Correct me if I am wrong, but wouldn't Belltown under the "BP" stay exactly the same as it is now? Belltown is all volunteer and is responding to all of their calls. They are staffing the station 24/7 with volunteers, training regularly and are bring in more members then they can handle. So I am a little confused on "the people of Belltown as well as the BFD, stand to lose far too much to simply agree to the terms of the "BP"". What exactly are you losing? You don't have paid ff's now so you wouldn't lose them. The "BP" basically leaves BFD to remain all volunteer and continue to respond as such. I just don't see what the down side is for Belltown. If I were a BFD member I would want to distance myself as far away from the other departments as possible.

While I see your point, from MY perspective I think one very important aspect of this situation is being lost. We, the Belltown Fire Dept, do provide a valuable and effective service to our community and the City, on this I think most will agree, but the simple fact is we can only continue to do that because the City Charter grants us that abilty. One of the key components of the "BP" is a Charter change eliminating the Vol. Fire districts. Now in and of itself this step is not necessarily an operationally bad thing per se, but as history has shown we do face the very real possibility of extiction should the Charter be changed... and with that our residents will lose. How so you might ask, and to that I will simply refer to the situation that began this mess. Malloy sought to withhold our funding and in effect starve us into submitting to what was a flawed plan on a number of levels. This attempt failed due to our legal right as Belltown's AHJ as granted by the Charter. Had that proviso not existed we would not be having this discussion. Unfortunaely the "BP" does not incorporate any specific means by which the volunteers, including Belltown, will be represented in terms of funding, operations or administration as they are under the Charter and it provides no means to redress any situation which may arise involving them. Without specific sageguards in place what's to stop another despot in a month, a year or a decade from cutting off the tap once again for any number of reasons having nothing to do with our operaional capabilities and forcing our demise? To me the risks to our residents and my department in aspects both financial and operational are just far too great to accept the "BP", which provides no such safeguards, as is. In effect as far as I'm concerned this is a matter of our very existence and the benefits that continued existence means for Belltown's residents. As I see it until such time as the BFD is either unable to provide a high standard of responsible, professional and committed service to our community or we are guaranteed representation at every level by binding agreement because of our ability to meet those standards, we must look for other alternatives while continuing to serve our district.

Cogs

Edited December 5, 2011 by FFPCogs

[FD828 77]

Well again, as you have stated, the "Brown Plan" needs a fair examination. Chief Brown has no say in how the VFD's are/would be funded, so I imagine that's why it wasn't included in his plan. And it was not the SFRD that decided to make sweeping changes to the VFD's and their funding. We were not in a great spot either when all of this happened and not all of us were for the changes. So if the city administration and the VFD's could fairly examine this plan and all the possible positive outcomes, you and everyone else involved might just find this plan to be better then you thought. What if the VFD's kept their funding, and worked out all those concerns? Would it be so bad for SFRD to be the paid staff in the combo houses? So the X-TOR chief couldn't control and hand pick who will work in his fire station, you would still have the paid staff the VFD's are looking for. There are provisions for training together, riding out with the career staff, and creating a pathway for those that would like to make ff a career choice.

And who's to say that it can't be some combined form of the 2 plans? Oh wait that is 888 and the VFD's. Everyone forgets the fact that the union has no say in any of this. We can petition the BOR and the public, but having actual say and input? Nope. We have to accept whatever the final outcome is. There are so many questions and assertions about the union and the contract, yet never has the union been asked to speak or provide data for the BOR meetings.

[FFPCogs 863]

Well again, as you have stated, the "Brown Plan" needs a fair examination. Chief Brown has no say in how the VFD's are/would be funded, so I imagine that's why it wasn't included in his plan. And it was not the SFRD that decided to make sweeping changes to the VFD's and their funding. We were not in a great spot either when all of this happened and not all of us were for the changes. So if the city administration and the VFD's could fairly examine this plan and all the possible positive outcomes, you and everyone else involved might just find this plan to be better then you thought. What if the VFD's kept their funding, and worked out all those concerns? Would it be so bad for SFRD to be the paid staff in the combo houses? So the X-TOR chief couldn't control and hand pick who will work in his fire station, you would still have the paid staff the VFD's are looking for. There are provisions for training together, riding out with the career staff, and creating a pathway for those that would like to make ff a career choice.

And who's to say that it can't be some combined form of the 2 plans? Oh wait that is 888 and the VFD's. Everyone forgets the fact that the union has no say in any of this. We can petition the BOR and the public, but having actual say and input? Nope. We have to accept whatever the final outcome is. There are so many questions and assertions about the union and the contract, yet never has the union been asked to speak or provide data for the BOR meetings.

I have read the "BP" and based on that I do have issues with it...there is nothing personal or anti-union about those issues either. Can these concerns be addressed? Well I would hope so, but it has been up to this point that the union has supported the "BP" as it is and NOT even acknowldeged that it may well need revision before it can be implemented. So we are left with a "my way or the highway" proposition about working with SFRD...again. Funny that argument about having "no say" is much the same one many in 786 have about the Mayor's plan. Let's get down to brass tacks here shall we? Both plans are wrong for Stamford as they are, on that can we at least agree? So if that's the case then both the career side and the volunteers side need to step up and say "whoa this ain't right...neither one of these plans are gonna work boys, time to go back to the drawing board". It's been awfully quiet out there save for a few lone voices in saying that. At what point will the members here, career and volunteer, who freely voice their concerns about BOTH plans on this forum step up and speak up? I and a few others already have publically and in our Department meetings...have any of you? If the union truly does have concerns about the "BP" or believes that a combined form of both plans may be better then now is the time to speak up and do something about it...after all it is ALL of our futures and that of the public we all serve that are at stake.

Cogs

Edited December 5, 2011 by FFPCogs

[CTFF 65]

Cogs,

Being 100% honest I don't see The Brown plan as being wrong for Stamford. Though I do see your concerns about the future of volunteer firefighting in Stamford as The Brown plan is written now. I think much of that lies withing the scope of the assignment that SFRD was given, it will be up to the everyone to make the Brown plan works. I think we can.

We can argue for ever about the positive and negative's about each plan, it's not changing anything.

[FFPCogs 863]

Cogs,

Being 100% honest I don't see The Brown plan as being wrong for Stamford. Though I do see your concerns about the future of volunteer firefighting in Stamford as The Brown plan is written now. I think much of that lies withing the scope of the assignment that SFRD was given, it will be up to the everyone to make the Brown plan works. I think we can.

I wouldn't expect that you would see the "BP" as being wrong, but if one "side" has that view of it then in fact it is, since we all must contribute to it's success. And that goes for the Mayor's plan as well. One weak link in either and both plans are wrong for Stamford. I believe that, when taking into account the realities of our circumstances, these plans could have merit, but there needs to be revisions to them both for them to actually work as intended

We can argue for ever about the positive and negative's about each plan, it's not changing anything.

No we may not be changing anything...yet. Our discussions on the merits (or lack thereof) of each and other options as well allow for an examination of all of them which in turn has the potential to change everything.

Cogs

Edited December 5, 2011 by FFPCogs

[CTFF 65]

Cogs,

We're getting nowhere slowly with thinking along your lines. Just because one side see's something as wrong does not make it wrong.

I expect at the end of this if we are able to improve this service it will be a service we ( all Stamford firefighters) can operate and thrive in but won't make everyone 100% happy.

[FD828 77]

I have read the "BP" and based on that I do have issues with it...there is nothing personal or anti-union about those issues either. Can these concerns be addressed? Well I would hope so, but it has been up to this point that the union has supported the "BP" as it is and NOT even acknowldeged that it may well need revision before it can be implemented. So we are left with a "my way or the highway" proposition about working with SFRD...again. Funny that argument about having "no say" is much the same one many in 786 have about the Mayor's plan. Let's get down to brass tacks here shall we? Both plans are wrong for Stamford as they are, on that can we at least agree? So if that's the case then both the career side and the volunteers side need to step up and say "whoa this ain't right...neither one of these plans are gonna work boys, time to go back to the drawing board". It's been awfully quiet out there save for a few lone voices in saying that. At what point will the members here, career and volunteer, who freely voice their concerns about BOTH plans on this forum step up and speak up? I and a few others already have publically and in our Department meetings...have any of you? If the union truly does have concerns about the "BP" or believes that a combined form of both plans may be better then now is the time to speak up and do something about it...after all it is ALL of our futures and that of the public we all serve that are at stake.

Cogs

The union can say anything it wants, THEY HAVE NO SAY IN WHAT HAPPENS. The union has no authority to implement anything. So your statement of "my way or the highway" is nothing but union bashing. The union has it's opinions sure, but no way to implement anything. It is the mayor and your chiefs that have to be willing to look at other plans.. The unon is an outside party looking in.

[FFPCogs 863]

The union can say anything it wants, THEY HAVE NO SAY IN WHAT HAPPENS. The union has no authority to implement anything. So your statement of "my way or the highway" is nothing but union bashing. The union has it's opinions sure, but no way to implement anything. It is the mayor and your chiefs that have to be willing to look at other plans.. The unon is an outside party looking in.

You are correct, the union ultimately will not have the final say in anything, but they can influence everything, just as volunteer members can. So in regards to having no say then one must ask: what about Stamford Fire Truths? (which by the way is a very influential public forum in which the union unrelentingly bashes volunteers and the Mayor's plan). Amazingly this very same forum could be used to express the union's misgivings about the "BP" which every 786 contributor here has stated exist...after all, that very influential site is all about telling the "truth" isn't it? Wouldn't the claims made here by 786 members stating that neither the Brown Plan or the Mayor's plan are "the answer" and that "most SFRD members feel the same" be considered the truth? Shouldn't the public and the SFRD administration be made aware of that truth? Couldn't that truth along with the same from volunteers expressing the misgivings about the plans currently on the table then influence the BoR and thus the outcome of the pending decison on them? Isn't it even remotely possible that in turn that truth could then stimulate the formation of a new plan, one more suited to our situation? The fact is if the union has no say than there is no need for Stamford Fire Truths and radio ads and banners and billboard trucks now is there? No one is union bashing, I'm simply pointing out inconsistencies. Maybe the union can't implement anything but it sure as hell can have a major influence what gets implemented, wouldn't you say? So yeah in the end the attitude is my way or the highway. Actions speak louder than words my friend and each of us have had the opportnity to act. In spite of all the statements made here and in the public about wanting to "work together" the actions of the union in regards to this whole situation have been loud and clear. If in your eyes pointing that out is union bashing than so be it.

Cogs

Edited December 6, 2011 by FFPCogs

[FFPCogs 863]

Cogs,

We're getting nowhere slowly with thinking along your lines. Just because one side see's something as wrong does not make it wrong.

I expect at the end of this if we are able to improve this service it will be a service we ( all Stamford firefighters) can operate and thrive in but won't make everyone 100% happy.

Then why are we in this mess? Because one side (the City) saw something as wrong even when the other side (the VFDs) didn't and tried to change it unilaterally. Until such time as the Charter is changed the views of boths sides must be taken into account and honored regardless of the "rightness" of either view, otherwise there will be no resolution. Working together means accepting that both views are legitimate and, through our leaderships acting on our behalf, building something cooperatively from them. Not an easy task to say the least and one sure not to garner 100% support, but if the end result is a better service in which we can all operate and thrive, which it will be, then we have done our duty and it will be the community that benefits.

Cogs

Edited December 6, 2011 by FFPCogs

[FireMedic049 597]

Actions speak louder than words my friend and each of us have had the opportnity to act. In spite of all the statements made here and in the public about wanting to "work together" the actions of the union in regards to this whole situation have been loud and clear.

The actions of the volunteer side have been loud and clear too. They want no parts of anything that involves SFRD or their Local. They appear to be "all in" on the Mayor's plan and have no interest in anything else.

[FFPCogs 863]

The actions of the volunteer side have been loud and clear too. They want no parts of anything that involves SFRD or their Local. They appear to be "all in" on the Mayor's plan and have no interest in anything else.

Yes they have in respect to things like negotiating the parameters of SFRD in the houses, requiring standardized certifiication for all FFs and Officers career and volunteer alike, standardized and mutual training and a few other points. like standardized apparatus and equipment, and volunteer representation in both administrative and operational capacities. All of these items have been offered by the VFDs as a means to integrate the "sides" and all have been rejected out of hand because 786 refuses to accept an integrated chain of command consisting of career and volunteer as one .In other words it's all about the infamous control and the unions stance that only career personnel are entitled to or deserve it.. I know for a fact all of the above items were brought before the Task Force with the full knowledge and approval of the VFDs. and rejected by SFRD in the room and 786 outside of it without even a cursory examination or discussion....and this I know for a fact since I'm the one who brought them up, And oif course on page after page after page here I have asked my union colleagues to meet, sit down and work with volunteers collectively to develop an option to bring to our leaderships, again rejected out of hand...,even though there is absolutely nothing to lose and quite possibly much to gain by doing so. If in fact working together with Stamford's VFFs is on the union agenda they sure have a funny way of showing it. Rejection is not usually the way to begin integrating with partners (which like it or not will be a part of any final plan), but it works real well at stalling that process.

Cogs

Edited December 6, 2011 by FFPCogs

[CTFF 65]

Then why are we in this mess? Because one side (the City) saw something as wrong even when the other side (the VFDs) didn't and tried to change it unilaterally. Until such time as the Charter is changed the views of boths sides must be taken into account and honored regardless of the "rightness" of either view, otherwise there will be no resolution. Working together means accepting that both views are legitimate and, through our leaderships acting on our behalf, building something cooperatively from them. Not an easy task to say the least and one sure not to garner 100% support, but if the end result is a better service in which we can all operate and thrive, which it will be, then we have done our duty and it will be the community that benefits.

Cogs

Well nothing is going to change until the city decides to bring all the parties together to talk, the BOR intervenes or the charter changes and at this point I'm fine with any of those options.

[FFPCogs 863]

Well nothing is going to change until the city decides to bring all the parties together to talk, the BOR intervenes or the charter changes and at this point I'm fine with any of those options.

I would prefer the first choice, could work with the second, but as you can imagine not too keen on the third....yet

Cogs

[FireMedic049 597]

Yes they have in respect to things like negotiating the parameters of SFRD in the houses, requiring standardized certifiication for all FFs and Officers career and volunteer alike, standardized and mutual training and a few other points. like standardized apparatus and equipment, and volunteer representation in both administrative and operational capacities. All of these items have been offered by the VFDs as a means to integrate the "sides" and all have been rejected out of hand because 786 refuses to accept an integrated chain of command consisting of career and volunteer as one .In other words it's all about the infamous control and the unions stance that only career personnel are entitled to or deserve it.. I know for a fact all of the above items were brought before the Task Force with the full knowledge and approval of the VFDs. and rejected by SFRD in the room and 786 outside of it without even a cursory examination or discussion....and this I know for a fact since I'm the one who brought them up, And oif course on page after page after page here I have asked my union colleagues to meet, sit down and work with volunteers collectively to develop an option to bring to our leaderships, again rejected out of hand...,even though there is absolutely nothing to lose and quite possibly much to gain by doing so. If in fact working together with Stamford's VFFs is on the union agenda they sure have a funny way of showing it. Rejection is not usually the way to begin integrating with partners (which like it or not will be a part of any final plan), but it works real well at stalling that process.

Cogs

While all of this may be true, it doesn't really disprove my point. You appear to chastise the Union and SFRD for doing pretty much the exact same things that the volunteer side is also doing. Did the VFDs seriously consider the "Brown Plan" before rejecting it outright? Based on the support of the Mayor's plan, the VFDs admit that they need career personnel in order to provide adequate response to the community, yet they refuse to house existing career staffed Engine Companies because they belong to SFRD.

We can fingerpoint at each other all day long, but that won't resolve the issue. At some point, somebody has to step up and be the "bigger person" and show real leadership and a willingness to work together in order to do what's best for the community and not just the FD personnel. Can you honestly say that the volunteer leadership has done that while the other side hasn't?

Edited December 7, 2011 by FireMedic049

[Guest truck1234]

HERE'S A QUESTION IF SFRD AND THE VFD'S RESPOND TOA STRUCTURE FIRE AND IF SFRD IN THE FIRST IN CO. AND THE VFD'S IS SECOND CAN THE VFD'S GAURANTEE 100%OF THE TIME THAT THEIR PERSONEL ARE ALL INTERIOR FF?

[FFPCogs 863]

While all of this may be true, it doesn't really disprove my point. You appear to chastise the Union and SFRD for doing pretty much the exact same things that the volunteer side is also doing. Did the VFDs seriously consider the "Brown Plan" before rejecting it outright?

Yes at least from a BFD perspective. As one of a number of members that scrutinized the plan objectively and made recommendations on what points needed addressing, I again know for a fact this took place. We never dismissed this plan out of hand simply because it was developed by SFRD, far from it in fact. The problems arise from the stalwart refusal of the "other side" to acknowledge that deficiencies exist or even entertain the notion that they might when seen from "our side" of the fence. Again a complete unwillingness to compromise or even acknowledege that our concerns may have merit and sit down as the "bigger person" to address those concerns directly.

Can you honestly say that the volunteer leadership has done that while the other side hasn't?

Yes I can especially in the early stages of this entire debacle when negotiations broke down and the VFDs decided to forego Malloys ill conceived abomination of a plan because the position of the City, SFRD and the union was my way or the highway. Since then I know an open door has existed for quite some time to anyone from the "other side" who is prepared to sit down and truly look at this situation as it is and how best to fix it...keeping in mind that this collective effort must be two sided not just one. There is no room for unilateral action, nor is there the legal authority for the City or SFRD to do so either. Until that fact has been acknowledged and accepted by ALL the parties involved I fear you may be correct in that we will not resolve this any time soon.

Based on the support of the Mayor's plan, the VFDs admit that they need career personnel in order to provide adequate response to the community, yet they refuse to house existing career staffed Engine Companies because they belong to SFRD.

We can fingerpoint at each other all day long, but that won't resolve the issue. At some point, somebody has to step up and be the "bigger person" and show real leadership and a willingness to work together in order to do what's best for the community and not just the FD personnel.

I mean no disrespect but it may be that you do not fully understand the complexities of the situation here. Your point is a valid and logical one, except that it does not take into account that the issue of control is a major one, not from a ego standpiont at all but more so from one of survival. Both Malloy's plan and the "BP" do not provide any legal means for the VFDs to be integrated at all. They will be tolerated until such time as someone get's a hair across their a** and decides a full career fire department is in order....regardless of the actual circumstances. And before you jump up thinking I'm paranoid, look around at the many places this type of process has occured over the years. You will find many active, productive and valuabe VFDs have gone the way of the dinosaurs as piece by piece their share of the pie was consumed by the needs of the career component. One of the reasons I have been so staunch in my view of the Montgomery Cty system is that from the outset they incorporated the operational parameters of their integration and the means to achieve them for both "sides". Maybe more importantly they have also provided legal avenues for conflict resolution for each "side"..conflicts that no matter how well organized or integrated, any combination system will face. Such is not the case here now, nor has it been for many "integrated" or better yet "absorbed" VFDs, with the end result being the extinction of volunteering and any benefit that may have provided the community. I am not opposed to a unified department, nor are many of my volunteer colleagues. But until such time as the "other side" accepts that we are partners and treats us as such, there is just no moving forward....nor quite frankly should there be.

Just a couple of questions:

Why is it that it must be the volunteers in general and Belltown in particular who take that first step as the "bigger person"?

and

By what right is it that Stamford's career FFs are entltled to the position of dictating to Belltown what is "best" for our community?

Cogs

Edited December 7, 2011 by FFPCogs

[Geppetto 31]

Battles Within A Brotherhood

Full-time firefighters and volunteer firefighters are divided on Mayor Pavia's fire service plan, but it is not the first time there has been disharmony between Stamford's firefighters.

Jamal Powell

Stamford Patch

12/7/11

http://stamford.patch.com/articles/battles-within-a-brotherhood