VFD Officer criteria and selection

[FFPCogs 863]

I also favor requirements where classes like Officer 1 & 2 meet the requirements but are not the only way to meet them, a couple of examples that bring this to mind are:

A class like that HazMat 1 that was mentioned. IF you have a rule that mentions it by title and the class is discontinued or changed then you may have a goal that can not be reached. If there is a newer class that meets the requirements then it should absolutely be allowed to meet the requirements.

There are college level classes being offered in CT that are identical to classes like Instructor 1 or Officer 1 but do not have those titles. The state even recognizes the right to challenge an exam based on those classes. Why can't they be used to meet an internal department standard?

I know a past Assistant Chief from a neighboring department, who owned or managed businesses for all his adult life. He felt taking Fire Officer 1 was unnecessary for him, as he was already a supervisor and manager and already worked with budgets and human resources. Right or wrong, agree or disagree, he did have a point. If he could document relevant training, why not let it meet these requirements?

How about all these seminars that we love to host or go to. Many are put on by well known and well respected lecturers in the fire service. Most dwell on strategy and tactics for specific types of calls or buildings. These often contain more relevant information than all the textbooks you can stack up. These should definitely be allowed to meet requirements.

Certification is the step I offered, because it is a releatively standard means to address one aspect of officer criteria in any selection process, time in any given department is another, whch takes into account experience. As was stated originally any criteria would have to be regularly updated to meet the necessities of the day. Any discontinued or other classes that don't meet the need can be dropped or subsitutions found. And I do agree with Alan that ALL factors need to be considered. As was also stated by some, each department will need to develop the standards that best suit their needs. As a "standardizer" though I personally would like to see them be as uniform as possible.

Cogs

[AFS1970 504]

Perhaps a way to standardize such requirements but still allow a touch of home rule would be to make them modular by function provided. A single engine department that does not do extrication or haz mat, might not need more than a basic level in those areas, so have some additional criteria for the specialties, that can be added on as needed. That way an officer does not need to be an EMT if the department does not do EMS, but he needs to be familiar with how EMS works. The core subject would of course be the same for everyone, with the specialties either addign more hours or being able to replace some electives out of the basic areas.

[Remember585 815]

Everyone is in such a hurry to send people off to classes but these people know nothing abou their own Department! Years ago, most members were taken in and shown the ropes by the senior men in their firehouse. They would tell them the rules, then they would give them the unwritten rules of how things went. This helped them respect the way things go in their department, and helped them become better TEAM PLAYERS in their departments.

Now, you send someone off to the training center for, say, Firefighter I. This newbie knows virtually nothing about the fire service, knows little about the equipment they will be wearing, knows close to nothing about actual firefighting startegies and tactics, but yet they come back to the FD telling everyone how things should be done because "That's what my Instructor said."

I know of guys and gals not just in my Department but all around the lower Hudson Valley that say the same thing - there is no more team concept! It's all about the ideas drilled into their heads at their classes of how things "should be" and "on my job we do it this way" modes of teaching. Before you have a chance to mold a good firefighter and maybe a future officer, they've become brainwashed that everything has to be done the way their Instructor tells them because that's how he does it at his job or back at his FD.

We all need to provide in house training on how the department operates, what is expected from each member and each officer and go over your SOPs with them BEFORE SENDING THEM TO CLASS! This is also true for Officers or wannabe officers. So often I run into someone who just completed IFO or FO 1 and they think they are qualified to lead, but still haven't put in their time nor have they even caught some work.

Officer training is a must, I am not disagreeing, but we need to train our members FIRST and make it an ongoing process. What AFD does every day isn't the same as BFD and so on. Junior level officers should have basic FF training, AVET, HMFRO, TCO and other classes like this. As they move up the ranks, send them to the IFO and FO 1, FO 2 courses. If they're going to be the junior officer that is at the bottom of the chain of command, then make sure they are good firefighters, good team players and have a good "what's best for the Department" mentality. Don't elect or appoint them simply because they took Fire Officer classes.

The other thing that drives me nuts is when I see someone that I know is fairly new, inexperienced and has yet to prove their worth wearing a white shield or different colored helmet that says Lieutenant or Captain. What are we, the damn vollies, doing? What ever happened to electing, picking, choosing or appointing people that can lead because they have the experience, knowledge and know how to do it? It makes me sad for the future of the volunteer fire service that as much as we pound our chests and brag that we are doing the best we can, we aren't doing so when it comes to officer selection.

Sorry for the rant.

[AFS1970 504]

I wholeheartedly agree with an internal class before sending people into a Firefighter 1 class (even if you are running your own FF1). This helps with several things.

First, it gives the new member a basis in their own local department. Second, it lets them see if this is really something they want to do. Third, it lets the department see if they are committed to taking a class before expending money and effort.

While I think there is a place in FD training for both types of classes, certifications always win because they have become the industry standard. That and they are usually taught by outsiders and we have a tendency to place more stock in what someone from outside (regardless of where outside they come from) thinks than someone from inside our own department.

In reality, knowing all about the construction of 10 different kinds of rope is useless if you don't know where the rope is on the rig, and what the applications of the different types of rope on that rig are. Knowing all you can about your own equipment is far more important than knowing how someone else's equipment works.

We just finished an internal class that was entirely based on our own operations, equipment and history. We had a mix of FF1 and pre-FF1 in the class which made it somewhat of a challenge. The end result for the post FF1 was a final exam which lets them off of probation if they pass. This exam was updated this year, but usually gets an update about every five years or so.

I realize that that is not officer level training, but it is an internal class. In theory there could be a similar class offered at a higher level.

Edited November 11, 2008 by BFD182

[FFPCogs 863]

Believe it or not I too believe that internal or department specific training is a must prior to any outside training to ground newer members and ascertain their commitment level. Each department will always have "their" way of doing things, as well they should within reason. In a region or City where there is constant interaction between departments though, it is in EVERYONE's best interest to standardize operations as much as is possible. Using the same criteria and selection process is a step in that direction. As is the cooperative effort in pursuing that process. No one or at least not me is calling for a loss of autonomy by any individual department, but as was pointed out above certification is now the "industry" standard, and a standard by which we are all judged career and volunteer alike.

Cogs

[Guest]

Everyone is in such a hurry to send people off to classes but these people know nothing abou their own Department! Years ago, most members were taken in and shown the ropes by the senior men in their firehouse. They would tell them the rules, then they would give them the unwritten rules of how things went. This helped them respect the way things go in their department, and helped them become better TEAM PLAYERS in their departments.

Now, you send someone off to the training center for, say, Firefighter I. This newbie knows virtually nothing about the fire service, knows little about the equipment they will be wearing, knows close to nothing about actual firefighting startegies and tactics, but yet they come back to the FD telling everyone how things should be done because "That's what my Instructor said."

I know of guys and gals not just in my Department but all around the lower Hudson Valley that say the same thing - there is no more team concept! It's all about the ideas drilled into their heads at their classes of how things "should be" and "on my job we do it this way" modes of teaching. Before you have a chance to mold a good firefighter and maybe a future officer, they've become brainwashed that everything has to be done the way their Instructor tells them because that's how he does it at his job or back at his FD.

We all need to provide in house training on how the department operates, what is expected from each member and each officer and go over your SOPs with them BEFORE SENDING THEM TO CLASS! This is also true for Officers or wannabe officers. So often I run into someone who just completed IFO or FO 1 and they think they are qualified to lead, but still haven't put in their time nor have they even caught some work.

Officer training is a must, I am not disagreeing, but we need to train our members FIRST and make it an ongoing process. What AFD does every day isn't the same as BFD and so on. Junior level officers should have basic FF training, AVET, HMFRO, TCO and other classes like this. As they move up the ranks, send them to the IFO and FO 1, FO 2 courses. If they're going to be the junior officer that is at the bottom of the chain of command, then make sure they are good firefighters, good team players and have a good "what's best for the Department" mentality. Don't elect or appoint them simply because they took Fire Officer classes.

The other thing that drives me nuts is when I see someone that I know is fairly new, inexperienced and has yet to prove their worth wearing a white shield or different colored helmet that says Lieutenant or Captain. What are we, the damn vollies, doing? What ever happened to electing, picking, choosing or appointing people that can lead because they have the experience, knowledge and know how to do it? It makes me sad for the future of the volunteer fire service that as much as we pound our chests and brag that we are doing the best we can, we aren't doing so when it comes to officer selection.

Sorry for the rant.

No need for apology, this was a great post.

+1