Volunteer Chiefs Cars and Personal Use

[Guest Smoke Showing]

With today's economy driving up taxes is there a fuel usage on the volunteer chiefs cars? I ask this because everyday i drive down the Hutch i see a Hastings Chief car down in the Pelham / Mt Vernon area. Im going to assume that Chief is going to his real job and not doing Hastings Fire related stuff everyday. So the real question is who is paying for his fuel to go to work? is it him or is it the Hastings tax payer? I know someone will say that Career Chiefs take there cars home and who pays there fuel BUT that Career Chiefs job is with a Fire Department and not some company 20 miles away from their respected district. If the Career Chief is needed at a call he responds not all Volunteer Cheifs can respond from there actual jobs and then you have a Department car in a different town not being unitized correct? If it is the actual Chief paying his own gas that is fine but i would assume the department or Village would ask for his fuel recipts to show him traveling to work is not on the taxpayer buck. EVERYONE ELSE HAS TO FEND FOR THEMSELVES TO GET TO WORK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Just a thought you dont have to agree and you may all get your panties in a bunch but oh well!!!!!!!!

Edited April 24, 2009 by Smoke Showing

[MJP399 4]

if concerned about a single group as stated why don't you go to the town meeting and express your concerns, and I am sure that the questions could be answered or the town will look into it themselves.

Edited April 24, 2009 by MJP399

[ajsbear 11]

I believe this has been discussed to death several times.

[helicopper 1,050]

I believe this has been discussed to death several times.

It has been discussed, I don't know if I'd call it to death, but someone wants to start the discussion again and given the economy, it is not unreasonable to discuss and think about costs associated with emergency services.

Links to some of the prior discussions:

http://www.emtbravo.net/index.php?showtopic=9118&hl=

http://www.emtbravo.net/index.php?showtopic=22265&hl=

http://www.emtbravo.net/index.php?showtopic=24043&hl=

[ex-commish 490]

Im going to assume that Chief is going to his real job and not doing Hastings Fire related stuff everyday.

Rather than assume why not pick up the phone and ask the chief?

[FirNaTine 370]

Whether it's a Volunteer Chief using a Department vehicle for personal use or a Career FF. using the same type of vehicle for transportation back and forth to the Station in which he works, which at times has been close to 40 miles away, it's just plain wrong and should not be allowed. There should be more control by the powers to be over this issue and strict guideliness put into play, if they're not there already. Anyone who abuses his privilege should be removed from the position. Not too long ago, an Aide to the MT.Vernon Mayor's Office was involved in an accident on a Sunday afternoon while making an illegal U turn with a City vehicle. Enough is enough already!

[MJP399 4]

someone wants to start the discussion again and given the economy, it is not unreasonable to discuss and think about costs associated with emergency services.

How about the free use of MTA by city emergency services than as well, since it is an inquiry about economics in this troubling time.

However, with the MTA raise subway and all other cost to the public do you think it is still fair? I know they are also providing a service to the public and helps with a visible presence on the trains.

The hastings car I am sure would help an any situation whether in the jurisdiction or not if they see something while driving in an official vehicle. Maybe that is a benefit to the public as the more emergency vehicle on the road, may make for safer public.

Edited April 24, 2009 by MJP399

[citystation1848 15]

Don't stir the pot Mr. Smoke Showing

[demps121 39]

Don't stir the pot Mr. Smoke Showing

City Station why is it stiring the pot? The guy asked a question, you make it sound as if there is something wrong with these vehicles out of district for personal use, maybe there is, maybe there is not, one person gave an answer about an additional vehicle on the road to report an incident, some may say true some may say false.

Edited April 24, 2009 by demps121

[Guest]

Regardless of affiliation or situation, unless that member is available to respond whenever they are in that vehicle, they shouldn't be in a taxpayer-funded vehicle. And even then, unless that vehicle is gonna get a lot of use, not some small department that runs just a few hundred calls a year, there is no real need for that vehicle. Plenty of departments don't have chiefs cars, and I don't see their personal vehicles falling apart from overuse or picking quarters up from the ground to pay for gas. Just what I think.

[Guest]

I heard a while back, and I don't know if this is still true, but East Fishkill FD Chief's get free fuel for their personal vehicles as a perk. Can someone from EFFD confirm and elaborate, or deny that?

[MJP399 4]

If there any any complaints about it, you should voice your concerns at a town hall meeting, or a village council meeting. Also records are made public, and people can see where there money and town money is spent for either volunteer and paid departments. If I were to have a dispute about a claim or if I were to see funds misused i would voice my opinion in a professional manner at a given meeting.

So I kinda feel that it is stirring the pot or what have you as this does not really need to be mentioned nor is anyone really going to learn from it. If it were needed to be voiced do it at a meeting. I just don't see any justification other than to get a response out of the question in the opening post.

Edited April 24, 2009 by MJP399

[191SH 4]

Don't stir the pot Mr. Smoke Showing

it's a valid question , we all have the same goals one way or the other when our lives are put on the line and we would protect each other with our lives , but as tax payers where property taxes rise and every activity is being cut and we have to question what our government is spending on even if the question is unpopular.

[cman473 56]

Well lets turn the question in the reverse direction....What about the Volunteer Chiefs who use their personal vehicle for fire district related business and calls and receive no fuel compensation or "perk" as some of you put it. Keep in mind there are some insurance companies that WILL not cover personal vehicles if they are being used as emergency vehicles. I am not talking about people that have chiefs vehicles already, but people that currently use their personal vehicles for response. Keep in mind the tax payer does not pay for that vehicle. Don't think for a second that just because they are doing district business in a personal vehicle that they will be covered under a district wide insurance policy id something goes wrong.

With that being said... Keep Safe and use your vehicles wisely.

[Stewie 1]

How about it is allowed by the village...If the village board knows about it, why is it wrong? For all the time they put in and do for the village that is what they get.

[Stewie 1]

And by the way, that said Chief has stopped for three accidents on his way either to or from work to help out in the last week.

[x129K 1,393]

Well lets turn the question in the reverse direction....What about the Volunteer Chiefs who use their personal vehicle for fire district related business and calls and receive no fuel compensation or "perk" as some of you put it. Keep in mind there are some insurance companies that WILL not cover personal vehicles if they are being used as emergency vehicles. I am not talking about people that have chiefs vehicles already, but people that currently use their personal vehicles for response. Keep in mind the tax payer does not pay for that vehicle. Don't think for a second that just because they are doing district business in a personal vehicle that they will be covered under a district wide insurance policy id something goes wrong.

With that being said... Keep Safe and use your vehicles wisely.

If it is that much of an issue, dont run red lights/siren and drive code 3.

[x134 46]

Well lets turn the question in the reverse direction....What about the Volunteer Chiefs who use their personal vehicle for fire district related business and calls and receive no fuel compensation or "perk" as some of you put it. Keep in mind there are some insurance companies that WILL not cover personal vehicles if they are being used as emergency vehicles. I am not talking about people that have chiefs vehicles already, but people that currently use their personal vehicles for response. Keep in mind the tax payer does not pay for that vehicle. Don't think for a second that just because they are doing district business in a personal vehicle that they will be covered under a district wide insurance policy id something goes wrong.

With that being said... Keep Safe and use your vehicles wisely.

Sour grapes?

[gamewell45 258]

With today's economy driving up taxes is there a fuel usage on the volunteer chiefs cars? I ask this because everyday i drive down the Hutch i see a Hastings Chief car down in the Pelham / Mt Vernon area. Im going to assume that Chief is going to his real job and not doing Hastings Fire related stuff everyday. So the real question is who is paying for his fuel to go to work? is it him or is it the Hastings tax payer? I know someone will say that Career Chiefs take there cars home and who pays there fuel BUT that Career Chiefs job is with a Fire Department and not some company 20 miles away from their respected district. If the Career Chief is needed at a call he responds not all Volunteer Cheifs can respond from there actual jobs and then you have a Department car in a different town not being unitized correct? If it is the actual Chief paying his own gas that is fine but i would assume the department or Village would ask for his fuel recipts to show him traveling to work is not on the taxpayer buck. EVERYONE ELSE HAS TO FEND FOR THEMSELVES TO GET TO WORK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Just a thought you dont have to agree and you may all get your panties in a bunch but oh well!!!!!!!!

Smoke, you make an awful lot of assumptions; how do you know he was going to work? Perhaps he was going to a seminar or other legally authorized Fire District business; but lets say for the sake of the debate that he was going to work; i'm sure the fire district has policy on when and how the chiefs use district vehicles. Furthermore, the chiefs need to have access to their district vehicles because unlike paid counterparts, they are not dedicated to staying at the fire station awaiting for the alarms to come in; it would be foolish if they were not allowed to take their vehicles say, to the adjoining town when on non-department business and an alarm came in and they were forced to take their personal vehicles back to the fire station or their residence to pick up the chiefs car and then respond. It would hamper their response time.

Of course the argument could be made that they just drive their personal vehicles to the scene of the alarm, but unlike 40 years ago when most of them carried their turn out gear and a portable in their personal vehicles; nowadays most chiefs cars carry a full command center, turn out gear, books for hazmat, pre-fireplans, at least one fire extingusher, plus SCBA and other gear and equipment that might be needed. To ask a fire chief to squeeze all of that into his personal vehicle (which could also be the family car) is just being unreasonable.

I think each district does what works best for it. If you see what you consider to be abuses in your fire district; then file a complaint with the proper authorities; if its involving another jurisdiction; its not your concern and don't lose sleep over it.

[x635 4,066]

This isn't a simple issue in Westchester County. There are so many underlying issues with command structure and hometown rule that affect this siutation. For example, the six incorporated villages within the Town Of Greenburgh (Ardsley, Elmsford, Dobbs Ferry, Hastings, Irvington and Tarrytown) have a combined 18 Chiefs vehicles.

With all the equipment lugged around by the IC, a vehicle is needed, often a sturdy SUV. In the volunteer system, you don't know which Chief is available and which is not, and sometimes they split up to take different calls.

The Ford Escape and other fuel efficient, enviromentally friendly vehicles should be looked at, as well as a duty vehicle rotation. For instance, the one chief who will be around takes the primary IC vehicle for the day, and the other Chiefs who will be out of town can take the Ford Escapes.

Take Austin FD, for example:

These Chiefs do put in a lot of their own time to running these departments, and I think they do deserve a vehicle because they shouldn't be expected to use their personal vehicle for departmental purposes, for which they can be called on anytime. It raises their insurance rates, and put uneccasary wear and tear on their own vehicle. And last I checked, most volunteer Chiefs are blue collar workers. It shouldn't be abused, however, and the amount of departmental vehicles and the types of vehicles and how they are assigned should be studied to improve for the future. As for the Chief taking the car to work, I'm sure most departments have a limit, and I'm sure if there was an incident large enough that the Chief would respond back. Also, it makes no sense for a Chief to keep having to switch between his department vehicle and POV.

Please do not mistake what I said however, I am totally against Chief's using their department cars as "commuter cars".

[nycemt728 49]

Assuming commutes, (based on seeing the same car parked in the same spot every day) I would much rather see a chief be allowed a small stipend for fuel and a department issued visor ligtbar or decklight. If your concerned about marking, include a magnet as well. The chiefs car should remain at the station, but more importantly in the district; I really don't think the amount of times a chief responds from his work (more than just one or two towns away), stops for an accident on the way home, and anything else that can be thought up as a reason for an officer to have a official vehicle so far from home cannot justify the extra mileage, fuel and wear on the vehicle.

[FDNYDCHI 38]

Not to stir the pot some more but, just a few observations I have seen and wanted to share them.

Every weekday I take the 630 train into the city from Tarrytown, and I see a Fire Chiefs Car from "_____ Fire department" in rockland county parked in one of the 2 non resident lots and takes the same train as me.

I think its pretty crazy this Chief is working in the city and the chiefs car is parked in westchester. IF all you are using it for is a station car let it stay in the village and use your personal car.

Another thing out Queens and a few in manhattan are Volunteer Chiefs car's outside of city firehouses from Volunteer FD's in Long Island and so forth.

:angry:

Edited April 24, 2009 by FDNYDCHI

[FD36 4]

What ever happened to the time where there weren't chiefs vehicles for all of the chiefs? They used their personal vehicles and maybe recieved some sort of compensation for their gas and lights and sirens. There weren't 3 brand new suv's with lights and radios everywhere. Why did that work for so many years? And now municipalities are raising taxes, cutting budgets including fire/ems and police, just read the news papers. I have seen plenty of personal vehicles with red lights, any many with no markings, at fire scenes. Alot of dept's don't give their members anything for responding to calls with personal vehicles, it is "part of the job" of being in an emergency services department, a personal choice and maybe a small sacrifice. Going back to old practices in regards to the vehicle issue might not be a bad idea.

[Guest EFFP411]

I heard a while back, and I don't know if this is still true, but East Fishkill FD Chief's get free fuel for their personal vehicles as a perk. Can someone from EFFD confirm and elaborate, or deny that?

I do believe the only one who still gets fuel for his personal vehicle is the fire investigation chief (39-93), who does not have a chief's car and uses his own personal vehicle. He also responds from work ALOT, to medical calls, AFA's, etc. right out of IBM, so he puts it to good use. The allowance is rather small too if memory serves me. At one point the rescue chief was allowed to get fuel for his POV, but that was before he had his district vehicle. Even the Company Chiefs are limited to a small amount of fuel from the district, the rest is paid for out of pocket. The reasoning for this is each of the Company Chief's cars are owned by the individual company, not the fire district. The only ones that belong to the district are 39-1, 39-2, and 39-8's vehicles. Each individual company also has its own rules for where and when the chief's vehicles can be used and how far they are allowed to go. I know Station 4's chief's car was bought and paid for from company funds, accumulated from in-house fund raisers, steak roast,etc. and the chief is allowed to travel up to 14 miles from the district line. I do believe company 1's current chief turns his vehicle over to the captain whe he goes to work. Car 1 leaves his vehicle at home when he goes to work, Car 2 works in town and has the freedom to respond to calls while at work MOST DAYS. if any of the District cheif's go away for a few days, they will most likely turn their vehicle over to the F.I. Chief to give his poor POV a rest for the period. IDK if any other departments work this way, but I would be inclined to investigate it the next time you think a chief is a little far from home with his "car".

Edited April 25, 2009 by EFFP411

[Guest EFFP411]

you are a VOLUNTEER!!!

you are offering your time to help not for perks. Insurance companies should not cover YOUR car responding to a Emergency call. WHY? Your not driving an Emergency vehicle!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Your blue light does not count!

Last time I checked, Chiefs dont use blue lights, and could probably care less if they were given ANY perks with their job. Those Chiefs who do decide to put red lights and a siren in their personal vehicle most likely pay a higher insurance rate for it, or have to change providers so they not risk being dropped, and as long as the vehicle has the proper amount of warning coverage, it IS CONSIDERED an emergency vehicle. We all know that blue lights do not count, nobody was talking about joe shmoe FF with the blue kojak light on his roof...

Edited April 25, 2009 by EFFP411

[Guest EFFP411]

prove they pay higher rates!

I have, Before the company bought a USED vehicle from a neighboring dept., Station 3's Chief had to remove all the red lights from his POV because the insurance provider he had at the time threatened to drop him as a customer for it. And when he finally changed providers, the rate was significantly increased when they were informed the vehicle was equipped with red lights.

Edited April 25, 2009 by EFFP411

[xfirefighter484x 234]

Let this be the one and only warning. If ANYONE starts to bash another person or organization, their posts will be deleted, and they will be banned.

Also, DO NOT let this end up a Career vs/ Volly Bash fest, or the same rules apply as above.

[GoDucks23 6]

Actually they do pay higher rates. Its not a whole lot but its enough. My cousin is an assistant chief for his department and uses his personal vehicle as his chiefs car with teh lights and sirens provided by the FD. If the car is registered properly it not only needs a new york state inspection it also needs the same inspection that an ambulance, fly car, fire eng. etc.. needs to make sure that it is safe and meets all emergency vehicle dot regs. I am not sure what the exact name of that inspections is. However if it is not done properly and you dont get that inspection and dont tell your insurance company what you are using your vehicle for there can be alot of trouble if something happens. You can be dropped and not covered by your insurance compay since you did not tell them the extra (possible ) hazards that you face when responding code to an alarm. Also you can be sued as well as the department if the insurance company does not cover the damages and injuries due to you not telling them and haveing the proper inspection. Now I know his department does repay for milage incurred while being used in department functions. He needs to keep track of milage best as possible when going to alarms, drill locations, etc... andthen at the end of the year they pay for that milage. Some companies choose to have them use personal vehicles for chiefs and deal with the standards required by DOT. Others choose to give their chiefs vehicles to make sure everything is up to proper standards at all times and all equipment a chief needs is there at all times. I dont personally have a problem with either or where a chief takes his vehicle as long as some shows up to help me if god forbid I should ever need.

Dont forget someone my get voted in as cheif due to their knowlegde and outstanding abilities but they may drive a toyota prius. You want to tell me how he is going to fit all his gear, med bags, IC boards, books, lights and sirens. Understand its not all needed to get the job done, but it would be a great asset to be able to have that stuff with you when you needed it.

Just my two cents which really dont mean much since I am not a member anywhere. But its what I see and what I think.

[markmets415 524]

We have no chief vehicles, as Asst. Chief (Car 3) I receive no perks nor do I expect to. The District Chief and Deputy Chief (both district positions) summit mileage logs and are paid based on the current mileage rate allowed under NYS.

I do not pay anything more for insurance through my carrier than I did without lights/siren.

[x129K 1,393]

Mark - does your carrier know you have installed emergency warning lights and a siren?