Would Your Department Consider Changing It's Name?

[x635 4,066]

Does anyone feel that changing a department's name from "Fire Department" to "Fire-Rescue" to reflect the expanded role nowadays of the fire service??

[Bnechis 3,961]

Does anyone feel that changing a department's name from "Fire Department" to "Fire-Rescue" to reflect the expanded role nowadays of the fire service??

How about the "understaffed fire department" or "underfunded fire department" would also reflect the current fire service. Lets hear it for truth in advertising.

Do you call a ambulance a "rescue" because its staffed by firefighters? does that change what it is or what it does? Or is a Rescue a non-transport tool box?

[ajsbear 11]

How about Unappreciated Department?

[Skindependent 15]

I dont think changing a department's name would have any impact on how people view us. People have come to know the fire department for everything emergency (that you wouldnt call the cops for). The public is well aware that if you smell smoke, gas, see fire, crash your car, get your cat stuck in a tree, or if you are feeling ill, the fire department is the right place to call. I think the title fire department has itself evolved over the years to reflect this need, and the name change would be unnecessary.

Well, thats just my thought on it.

[FFPCogs 863]

Fire Department sums it up just fine. If it ain't broke don't fix it !

[Guest alsfirefighter]

In some cases I do think it can effect how the average person views you and what your overall responsibilities are. Even if its only a percentage of people, its better then 0. Not to mention that it does help within the confines of city hall. This is a thought I have brought up several times in meetings when in a specific capacity of my department. I do not generally like the "rescue" term. But often that is a geographical type terminology when it comes down to it. In the northeast Department of Fire & EMS tends to be more common and I think is the simplest. No mistaking why your also getting a fire truck when you called for an ambulance when you have that name. No more issues with "management" who have no EMS certification, little to no understanding of Public Health law or DOH policies, and an outdated mentality that one always has to be in the forefront of another. Its in the name and if you are going to do it, do it right and stop trying to conduct resource management by restriction.

Some times it is what's in a name. Particularly when you have some agency who have top notch firefighters and ems personnel and who take pride in the level of service they provide.

[ny10570 745]

Anytown F*!%ed Department

[NWFDMedic 58]

I have never shown up at the scene of a rescue call with my department and had the patient wonder why the fire department was there. The public knows that rescue is our job.

Now, from an EMS standpoint, I still don't understand why many large cities roll fire trucks to EMS calls or why EMS workers would want to be combined with a fire department. EMS is, and should be, a distinct third service. I can understand the purpose in rural/suburban areas but in a large city, I just don't see it. Could you imagine if NYC wanted to combine the FD and PD?

[ny10570 745]

PD and Fire are two very different fields yet in NYC PD has air and water rescue as well as vehicle extrication and tech rescue. People don't care who you are so long as you are there helping.

EMS and Fire make an excellent pairing. They are there purely to help others. There is none of the fear of punishment that come with PD. FD and EMS also share the same primary goal. The preservation of life. Fact is, if FD has to step in to help you, then you probably need EMS. EMS in a major city like NYC cannot be run efficiently unless it is run at or near capacity. To make up for this lack of down time you need units that are available to respond quickly to address any immediate life threats. This is a perfect opportunity for Fire to step in. When managed properly with either complete integration or through clearly defined rolls and separate work forces it can and does work. While FDNY EMS isn't there yet, if they can continue growing and maintain the integrity of their job titles you will eventually see who well it can work.

[FFPCogs 863]

EMS and Fire make an excellent pairing. They are there purely to help others. There is none of the fear of punishment that come with PD.

Have a friend who was a NY cop, tranferred to the F.D. Why?

"When I usd to drive down the street in my cruiser, peope used to spit and throw rocks at me. Now when I go down the street on the Engine, they smile and wave"

No offense to cops, just a little anecdote. My hats off to all of the "Finest", and thanks for what you do. Me I'd much rather go into a burning building...all the scumbags have usually already left.

Stay Safe

Cogs

[ny10570 745]

Never said cops aren't hated, but no one curses out the cops cutting them out of a car or doing CPR on a family member. Walking down the street is a whole other animal.

[Guest alsfirefighter]

I have never shown up at the scene of a rescue call with my department and had the patient wonder why the fire department was there. The public knows that rescue is our job.

Now, from an EMS standpoint, I still don't understand why many large cities roll fire trucks to EMS calls or why EMS workers would want to be combined with a fire department. EMS is, and should be, a distinct third service. I can understand the purpose in rural/suburban areas but in a large city, I just don't see it. Could you imagine if NYC wanted to combine the FD and PD?

Because in many large cities you will get a fire apparatus faster then a bus.

Also I do not agree that EMS should be 3rd party. I am a whole hearted supported of fire based EMS. Look at some of the best systems in the country and they are fire based. Better pay, better flexibility, often better equipment. Sure we can roll out the problem childs..but I don't play with that. Just as much as I can bring in 3rd party, private problems just the same. I surely would not want to do ems all day long and just that. I like to run..that is why I like being dual role. And please do not bring up one major metropolitan area that "merged" their 3rd party system into the FD. That is not fire based. That was a guise to rename the 3rd party.

The bottom line is..if you do it...do it right or don't do it at all!

[Future Fireman 4]

Because in many large cities you will get a fire apparatus faster then a bus.

Also I do not agree that EMS should be 3rd party. I am a whole hearted supported of fire based EMS. Look at some of the best systems in the country and they are fire based. Better pay, better flexibility, often better equipment. Sure we can roll out the problem childs..but I don't play with that. Just as much as I can bring in 3rd party, private problems just the same. I surely would not want to do ems all day long and just that. I like to run..that is why I like being dual role. And please do not bring up one major metropolitan area that "merged" their 3rd party system into the FD. That is not fire based. That was a guise to rename the 3rd party.

The bottom line is..if you do it...do it right or don't do it at all!

Actually, a 3rd party system, IF SET UP RIGHT, can be just as good.

Take Worcester MA for example:

Closest Fire Company and an available UMASS Paramedic Ambulance (rolls with 2 Paramedics). Medic Ambo signs on a third Ops channel that's used for single company calls (outside fires, medicals, etc) Fire Company can communicate DIRECTLY with the third party Ambulance, therefore updating the medics that are responding.

The 2 minor problems with this system:

Delayed communications between dispatch centers - Rarely does this ever happen, as there is a dedicated

FD/PD/EMS Inter-Op channel.

Backup Ambulances (AMR, Medstar, and other privates) don't have Inter-Op capabilities. Other Fire Departments that sometimes provide mutual aid with ambulances occaisonally do have Inter-Op capability, but I've never heard of anyone using it.

Mike

Edited December 7, 2008 by Future Fireman