Rye firefighters union calls for increased staff

[gamewell45 258]

The unfortunate truth behind not putting them all on a single engine is probably that they'd have to give up exclusivity when it comes to operating the rigs. It's a business decision, not a safety issue. It's sad, but you can't blame it on the union. In many combo departments, the moment exclusivity is given up, some idiot politician or anti-career volunteer will advocate cutting staffing levels to save money. Remember, we take pride in our job and love helping the community, but this is how we put food on the table and we can't jeopardize that. We all want to be safe, but we shouldn't have to risk our jobs to make a point. Not to mention that you'd still have the same amount of men showing up to an alarm as before the consolidation, not exactly what I'd call an increase in safety.

I would take safety over job security in a flash; the hell with exclusivity, no job is worth your life.

[RWC130 594]

To the City of Rye Volunteer and Career Firefighters

best of luck to ALL of you...

"Years of tradition unhampered by progress"

BE SAFE BROTHERS!

[turk182 37]

The unfortunate truth behind not putting them all on a single engine is probably that they'd have to give up exclusivity when it comes to operating the rigs. It's a business decision, not a safety issue. It's sad, but you can't blame it on the union. In many combo departments, the moment exclusivity is given up, some idiot politician or anti-career volunteer will advocate cutting staffing levels to save money. Remember, we take pride in our job and love helping the community, but this is how we put food on the table and we can't jeopardize that. We all want to be safe, but we shouldn't have to risk our jobs to make a point. Not to mention that you'd still have the same amount of men showing up to an alarm as before the consolidation, not exactly what I'd call an increase in safety.

We do not have exclusivity in Rye. We have tried talking this point but it falls on deaf ears. You should have been there when asked them to think about a quint, instead of a 2nd straight stick.

The real point of this letter was to point out how poorly the city is running its public safety. The PD has some big issues and have taken votes of no confidence in both the Police Commissoner and the City Manger. The letter was sent to back up our brothers in the PBA. I am not saying we don't need more manpower just that the paper took it in the direction they wanted to get the best headline. The study recommends doing alot of things that they do not even mention, some of the recomendations are a lot harsher then hiring 4 career firefighters.

[Raz 14]

I would take safety over job security in a flash; the hell with exclusivity, no job is worth your life.

That's easy to say when firefighting and EMS aren't your main sources of income. In today's downturned economy, "fighting for safety" shouldn't exclude financial safety for one's family. Would I like to see an extra guy on my rig? Sure. Should I have to choose between him being there and feeding my kids?

We do not have exclusivity in Rye. We have tried talking this point but it falls on deaf ears. You should have been there when asked them to think about a quint, instead of a 2nd straight stick.

Ah, I'm sorry to hear that. Exclusivity is one of those rare things that benefits both the city and the union. If that's the case, what's stopping you from consolidating (I'm assuming resistance from the volunteer companies, it's got to be one side or the other)? Not that that would solve your manpower issue.

The real point of this letter was to point out how poorly the city is running its public safety.

It's a shame that that point was lost on the media. Having a well run fire dept is much more important than simply having a larger one.

Edited June 26, 2008 by Raz

[Goose 188]

Saw this in the paper last night. I'm all for increasing staffing. But, i would much rather see a Town of Rye FD that folds the City of Rye and Villages of Rye Brook and Port Chester into one all suppression and prevention entity that would staff a career engine and truck w/ 4 ffs in each respective region, but thats a pipe dream.

Edited June 26, 2008 by Goose

[FD36 4]

It's always a shame when municipalities turn a blind eye on public safety.Granted it is a buisness to them,and a dollar and cents matter, but when tragedy strikes and lawyers look back on requests to increase public safety and nothing was done,then they are caught with their pants down.Only then will they realize that the money they could have spent on public safety doesn't add up to the amount they have to pay out in a lawsuit, because one of their employees wether volunteer or career is hurt or killed.Or how to explain to a family that their loved one's life wasen't worth spending more money on.

The way I see it is,it's not worth a life to be lost due to lack of funding for public safety, or lack of support from department heads hiding the truth about inadequate staffing levels.

[Goose 188]

The money is there, im pretty sure of it. In reality this is a decision the people should be making. Push for this to be taken to a referendum vote, i can almost guarantee that the people would approve appropriations to add additional staff, even it means a tax hike.

[spin_the_wheel 460]

On a general alarm how does the system work? The 4 paid guys are all driving a rig? 3 Engines and a Ladder? 2 Engines and 2 Ladders? If this is the case they must be depending on the Volunteers to respond and do the Firefighting while the paid staff opperate the rigs, or do they hand off the rig to a qualified Volunteer?

This is like the situation in Peekskill where its 6 guys all drivers of rigs. I think it would be better to hire maybe 1 or 2 more in Peekskill and combine the 8 on duty to man 1 Eng and 1 ladder and have the volnteers run the rest of the rigs. I have heard Peekskill has a strong Volunteer membership. I am in now way knocking a system what works for one does not for others, but I have always thought Port Chester should combine all the paid staff on one rig, as they have a strong Volunteer system as well to man the other rigs.

Edited June 26, 2008 by Ladder47

[joshlost818 6]

On a general alarm how does the system work? The 4 paid guys are all driving a rig? 3 Engines and a Ladder? 2 Engines and 2 Ladders? If this is the case they must be depending on the Volunteers to respond and do the Firefighting while the paid staff opperate the rigs, or do they hand off the rig to a qualified Volunteer?

This is like the situation in Peekskill where its 6 guys all drivers of rigs. I think it would be better to hire maybe 1 or 2 more in Peekskill and combine the 8 on duty to man 1 Eng and 1 ladder and have the volnteers run the rest of the rigs. I have heard Peekskill has a strong Volunteer membership. I am in now way knocking a system what works for one does not for others, but I have always thought Port Chester should combine all the paid staff on one rig, as they have a strong Volunteer system as well to man the other rigs.

On a general alarm if there are 4 firefighters working two hop on 191 due to that as the highway truck. One hops on Ladder 25 at headquarters. Then there is the one guy at milton who takes 192 out. That is the response for a general alarm.

As for Port Chester it is easier for them two have two paid rige becomes it cuts down on response time dramatically. Engine 59 gets stationed in Rye Brook after 7. If Port Chester were too run with only one paid engine, if there were a call in deep Rye Brook towards the top of king street it could take a good 7-8 minutes to respond. And with 59 in Rye Brook at least there is a unit on locatoin quick while waiting for more manpower to come. Hope it helps clarrify.

Edited June 26, 2008 by joshlost818

[spin_the_wheel 460]

Ok thanks for the Port Chester info I did not know they relocate an Engine. Is that staffed with 1 or 2 paid?

As for Rye, the Volunteers have to be doing the job at a working fire because 4 paid men who have to opperate at the least 2 rigs could never work a fire with only 2 remaining firefighters, why not put all the paid staff on 1 engine and have the volunteers run the rest?

[joshlost818 6]

Ok thanks for the Port Chester info I did not know they relocate an Engine. Is that staffed with 1 or 2 paid?

As for Rye, the Volunteers have to be doing the job at a working fire because 4 paid men who have to opperate at the least 2 rigs could never work a fire with only 2 remaining firefighters, why not put all the paid staff on 1 engine and have the volunteers run the rest?

I believe the engine that gets relocated to Rye Brook is staffed with one paid man and the Port Chester rig is staffed with two. I think someone can help clarify that if im wrong.

Volunteers are doing the job at fires except a call comes in sometimes and feel wait for it to be comfirmed and then go. At that point there arent enough firefighters on scene and mutual aid is called. Rye is also split up in two sections you could say. The north and south half of playland parkway. 191 gets one side of the parkway as first due and 192 gets the other half as first due. Rye wants a paid firefighter as first due as long as a lot of other departments like port chester where the paid engine is first due no matter where the location is. And the ladder is manned by a paid firefighter as it was. It is just the way Rye is set up that the need for three rigs is neccesary. At the same time volunteers re increasing. Driver training is going on and memebers are getting qualified on the apparatus but like said before they have to have taken the EVOC class and pump operator. Slowly but surely more volunteers are getting involved.

[gamewell45 258]

That's easy to say when firefighting and EMS aren't your main sources of income. In today's downturned economy, "fighting for safety" shouldn't exclude financial safety for one's family. Would I like to see an extra guy on my rig? Sure. Should I have to choose between him being there and feeding my kids?

You make a valid point, tho' i've never heard of jobs being cut due to a lack of exclusitivity. And yes, you shouldn't have to choose between safety and feeding your family. If the district won't staff properly, then i'd go with 4 on a truck, if nothing else for safety. The workers shouldn't necessarily jepordize their safety because of the inability/unwillingness to staff properly.

[Guest]

would rye still have this problem if NYS let some Volunters run red lights and a siren to a sceene or station.

[joshlost818 6]

would rye still have this problem if NYS let some Volunters run red lights and a siren to a sceene or station.

Yes. Its the turnout. If NYS said here you go that wouldnt change anything. Its like a rotation of who respondes. Some members cn only respond on weekends because they work during the week. Some people can respond after certain hours. The lights have nothing to do with it. In the meantime we still have to give credit to all who can respond cause they are appreciated when they show up.

[FD36 4]

On a general alarm how does the system work? The 4 paid guys are all driving a rig? 3 Engines and a Ladder? 2 Engines and 2 Ladders? If this is the case they must be depending on the Volunteers to respond and do the Firefighting while the paid staff opperate the rigs, or do they hand off the rig to a qualified Volunteer?

This is like the situation in Peekskill where its 6 guys all drivers of rigs. I think it would be better to hire maybe 1 or 2 more in Peekskill and combine the 8 on duty to man 1 Eng and 1 ladder and have the volnteers run the rest of the rigs. I have heard Peekskill has a strong Volunteer membership. I am in now way knocking a system what works for one does not for others, but I have always thought Port Chester should combine all the paid staff on one rig, as they have a strong Volunteer system as well to man the other rigs.

Unfortunately for Peekskill,staffing is inadequate on both the career and volunteer sides.Especially during the day time hours, there might only be 4 career and maybe a couple of volunteers.Out of the 5 career firefighters on shift only 4 respond on a full assignment,there is rarely 6 men on shift.The other issue there is the exclusivity right to the rigs.The days of there being a plethera of volunteer members are long gone.Recruiting new members seems to be a difficult task,probably because of the country's economic situation.Also the leadership there isn't helpful in trying to increase the number of career firefighters.Having one man rigs should be a thing of the past.It wouldn't make a big difference if all the career personnel were on the same rig, you would still not have enough manpower.If there was a need for another engine to respond and it wasen't manned by a career firefighter,it might not get there.You can't rely on what might show up,you have to guarantee what is going to show up.Try telling "joe tax payer" that you think people are gonna come.

[FD36 4]

would rye still have this problem if NYS let some Volunters run red lights and a siren to a sceene or station.

Could you imagine the liability that would open up a municipality to?

[Raz 14]

This is like the situation in Peekskill where its 6 guys all drivers of rigs. I think it would be better to hire maybe 1 or 2 more in Peekskill and combine the 8 on duty to man 1 Eng and 1 ladder and have the volnteers run the rest of the rigs. I have heard Peekskill has a strong Volunteer membership. I am in now way knocking a system what works for one does not for others, but I have always thought Port Chester should combine all the paid staff on one rig, as they have a strong Volunteer system as well to man the other rigs.

I don't know what standards you're using, but 40 interior rated volunteers isn't what I'd call a "strong volunteer membership", considering that Peekskill FD serves a population of roughly 25,000.

[FirNaTine 370]

Unfortunately for Peekskill,staffing is inadequate on both the career and volunteer sides.Especially during the day time hours, there might only be 4 career and maybe a couple of volunteers.Out of the 5 career firefighters on shift only 4 respond on a full assignment,there is rarely 6 men on shift.The other issue there is the exclusivity right to the rigs.The days of there being a plethera of volunteer members are long gone.Recruiting new members seems to be a difficult task,probably because of the country's economic situation.Also the leadership there isn't helpful in trying to increase the number of career firefighters.Having one man rigs should be a thing of the past.It wouldn't make a big difference if all the career personnel were on the same rig, you would still not have enough manpower.If there was a need for another engine to respond and it wasen't manned by a career firefighter,it might not get there.You can't rely on what might show up,you have to guarantee what is going to show up.Try telling "joe tax payer" that you think people are gonna come.

Never mind needing a 2nd Engine Co. what about the poor soul trapped at a 5th fl window waiting for the 1st due ladder that's delayed because 4 career guys showed up on the 1st due Engine and the Ladder Co. is still waiting for a chauffer to show up!

[Goose 188]

Create one large encompassing Dept that would oversee the career side of things and supply at least 1 career engine and 1 career ladder w/ 3-4 ffs to the two villages and the city of rye. Honestly, i look at my local budget and what do i see it being spent on? New toys. More and more new toys. Now, i have no problem having my tax dollars go to replacing old outdated apparatus but when i'm not seeing a uniform or what i feel is an appropriate response to emergencies i start to wonder if my tax dollars can't be better spent.

Just think about it for a second, If we had an FD that covered these three respective areas not only would you get an appropriate response on every alarm but if you have a working fire you have the potential for fully staffed mutual aid within minutes of any request.

In the mean time, hopefully Rye's leadership will smell the roses and include additional staffing for the fire department in any budge revisions or at least the 2009 budget.

Edited June 27, 2008 by Goose

[Bnechis 3,961]

I don't know what standards you're using, but 40 interior rated volunteers isn't what I'd call a "strong volunteer membership", considering that Peekskill FD serves a population of roughly 25,000.

In a 100% Volunteer Response, ISO reqires a minimum or 36 volunteers and an IC on every fire call.

If you have 4 career ff's responding, then ISO wants 24 volunteers and an IC to respond with the 4 career.

If Peekskill FD has 40 interior volunteers, is it likely that they can get 24 to every call?

[x242Steve 1]

In a 100% Volunteer Response, ISO reqires a minimum or 36 volunteers and an IC on every fire call.

If you have 4 career ff's responding, then ISO wants 24 volunteers and an IC to respond with the 4 career.

Is that in order to attain a specific "Class" level? Or for any and all Fire Depts, no matter what their rating?

Thanks.

[Bnechis 3,961]

Is that in order to attain a specific "Class" level? Or for any and all Fire Depts, no matter what their rating? Thanks.

Thats there minimum level (not including water supply personnel for those who do not have a municipal system...ie hydrants)

You get points for every ff that shows up, the more the better the rating.

[helicopper 1,050]

would rye still have this problem if NYS let some Volunters run red lights and a siren to a sceene or station.

Please, spare me the lights and siren nonsense. How about getting ALL FF trained as interior so there isn't a distinction between the "150 members" and the reality of only 40 that are interior qualified.

Running hot or cold to the scene or the station isn't the issue here. The issue is whether or not a community actually has enough qualified personnel to the job (note, I'm not saying career or volunteer)!

On an average weekday, I'd imagine that most volunteer departments will have a hard time getting 36 qualified firefighters to any call - how about we focus on that instead of what or how they drive to get there!

[FD36 4]

In a 100% Volunteer Response, ISO reqires a minimum or 36 volunteers and an IC on every fire call.

If you have 4 career ff's responding, then ISO wants 24 volunteers and an IC to respond with the 4 career.

If Peekskill FD has 40 interior volunteers, is it likely that they can get 24 to every call?

It is highly unlikely,damn near impossible.On occasion at a working structure fire there is a good turnout.

[FD36 4]

Never mind needing a 2nd Engine Co. what about the poor soul trapped at a 5th fl window waiting for the 1st due ladder that's delayed because 4 career guys showed up on the 1st due Engine and the Ladder Co. is still waiting for a chauffer to show up!

Exactyl!

[gamewell45 258]

Exactyl!

Are there any buildings in Rye over 3 stories tall? I'm not familiar with the area.

[rfdu39 89]

There are several apartment buildings that are taller than three stories.

[x635 4,066]

Are there any buildings in Rye over 3 stories tall? I'm not familiar with the area.

Rye's first due includes a tight downtown with buildings of various heights, a large high school, churches, and a number of other hazards that a truck company is needed for, such as Playland. Also, Rye has many large mansions in which a aerial ladder is needed for master stream access, ventilation, and/or rescue.

The also have a portion of the New Haven line of Metro North Commuter railroad running through, some of it elevated. Evacuation plans call for the use of ladder trucks.

I'm not sure how tall their tallest building is, but I am sure that that doesn't make any difference as to staffing.

[TL2L31 8]

Create one large encompassing Dept that would oversee the career side of things and supply at least 1 career engine and 1 career ladder w/ 3-4 ffs to the two villages and the city of rye. Honestly, i look at my local budget and what do i see it being spent on? New toys. More and more new toys. Now, i have no problem having my tax dollars go to replacing old outdated apparatus but when i'm not seeing a uniform or what i feel is an appropriate response to emergencies i start to wonder if my tax dollars can't be better spent.

Just think about it for a second, If we had an FD that covered these three respective areas not only would you get an appropriate response on every alarm but if you have a working fire you have the potential for fully staffed mutual aid within minutes of any request.

In the mean time, hopefully Rye's leadership will smell the roses and include additional staffing for the fire department in any budge revisions or at least the 2009 budget.

Goose, Port Chester is too strong a department to join in something like this. Maybe when the contract with Rye Brook expires, they might listen to this proposal.

[TL2L31 8]

Rye Brook and Rye could co exist since they are both small departments and share a small boundary