Par Staffing In Career Departments

[Guest CTV02]

In my department (career), we have par staffing. Meaning, our full staffing is 7, but we can go down to 5 with sick outs, vacations, etc.

My question is, does par staffing create a vunerability? Our department, like many others, is facing financial troubles after years of poorly controlled spending. I recently heard a Commisioner talking to another firefighter, asking that if we can go down to 5 with two members off and still operate, why can't we be at 5 all the time? Also, there department is still considered combination, so there are many volunteers on paper, but an active, assured volunteer contingent at a fire scene can never be guarenteed, since we have recently hired most of our volunteers. And if there is a mutual aid call, then we only have 3 firefighters left in district.

Are we doing our own selves in with our staffing procedures? If staffing is full at 7, then shouldn't that be all the time? Why do we accept it going down to 5? Should we let Commisioners pull wool over peoples eyes with a inaccurate volunteer roster that includes members who are deceased, and use that as an excuse towards staffing?

[cozmosis 0]

In my department (career), we have par staffing. Meaning, our full staffing is 7, but we can go down to 5 with sick outs, vacations, etc.

My question is, does par staffing create a vulnerability? Our department, like many others, is facing financial troubles after years of poorly controlled spending. I recently heard a Commisioner talking to another firefighter, asking that if we can go down to 5 with two members off and still operate, why can't we be at 5 all the time?

Any time a politician asks us why we can't get by with less, it should be reiterated how much more difficult -- and dangerous -- our job becomes with fewer people. Also, we can't always use the fire argument. Fires are down in a lot of places. When we tell folks that we need four people on an engine so we can have an IC, an engineer and a hose team... They remind us how many fires we run. When fighting for personnel, we must also argue for the other tasks we're responsible for -- EMS runs, Haz-Mat, extrications, etc.

Your friend should have asked the commissioner what will happen when you reduce the shift staffing to five people instead of seven and those folks use their sick leave and vacation time. Now you're either below five (unacceptable) or you have to fill the positions with employees from other shifts on overtime (which is a word that makes politicians dry heave even though it is sometimes cheaper than hiring extra employees). I'd be curious to see the commissioner's response.

[NWFDMedic 58]

Interesting points made by the second poster here and they are good ones. I thought it was interesting that I hard a commercial made by the president of the FDNY Uninformed Firefighter's Association the other day about the proposed closing of 20 fire stations, and the first thing mentioned in their sales pitch was first response to EMS, not fire. Of course, my question then becomes, why not hire more EMT's and medics instead?

Anyway, his point about OT is indeed a good one. Depending on your contract, it might also mean that firefighters picking up overtime will rack up more benefit or comp time, further increasing the problem of coverage. Combo departments are interesting because they could theoretically augment the "par" staff with volunteers but I would insist as a career guy, that the volunteers were maintained in-house like the career guys are.

You also have to make it clear what jobs don't get done when you are at "par" staff as opposed to optimal staff. This may not even be direct firefighting, but could include less training, maintenance, fire prevention, commercial inspections, etc.

Your question about mutual aid is a whole different topic. It is the command officer's responsibility to insure that your district is covered at all times (whether your primary guys are out mutual aid or even in district). If your 5 or 7 guys are committed and only 3 guys come to the station to cover, the command officer might better think about getting some mutual aid for coverage because it's already determined that a "minimum" response is 5 by district policy. If something else happens and they don't have those 5 guys to respond, lawyers will have a field day.

[FireMedic049 597]

In my department (career), we have par staffing. Meaning, our full staffing is 7, but we can go down to 5 with sick outs, vacations, etc.

My question is, does par staffing create a vunerability? Our department, like many others, is facing financial troubles after years of poorly controlled spending. I recently heard a Commisioner talking to another firefighter, asking that if we can go down to 5 with two members off and still operate, why can't we be at 5 all the time? Also, there department is still considered combination, so there are many volunteers on paper, but an active, assured volunteer contingent at a fire scene can never be guarenteed, since we have recently hired most of our volunteers. And if there is a mutual aid call, then we only have 3 firefighters left in district.

Are we doing our own selves in with our staffing procedures? If staffing is full at 7, then shouldn't that be all the time? Why do we accept it going down to 5? Should we let Commisioners pull wool over peoples eyes with a inaccurate volunteer roster that includes members who are deceased, and use that as an excuse towards staffing?

Considering the overall financial state of things these days, you're probably vulnerable just by being a public employee.

My department is similar in that we also have a minimum staffing of 5 and a max of 7, however we don't have a volunteer component and our minimum will be going to 6 at the start of the new year.

My recommendation would be to get prepared for the fight that very well may be coming your way. I would avoid referring to staffing of 7 as "full staffing" because in all reality, it really isn't "full" at only 7 on-duty. Since what the number 7 actually reflects is the maximum number of FFs allowed to be on-duty each day, I'd refer to it as such. I'd also document how working with 5 instead of 7 impacts your operations. Does it reduce the number of units you staff? Does it impact your ability to handle more than one "minor" call at the same time? What fireground tasks get delayed because you are missing 2 FFs?

To go along with the above to address the question of "why not 5 all the time?"..........Drive the point home that dropping down to 5 is a sacrifice on your part (the FD) in order to help your municipality out (financially) and not a matter of being able to do the same job with less people.

Since you are a combination department and it appears that your volunteer component's ranks may be being misrepresented, I'd recommend putting together some info regarding such. First, if you don't already know, find out who is listed on their roster. Then for each person, document their actual participation - how many calls they make, how much training they attend, what level of participation they are at (full duty, driver only, outside FF, etc.), what level of training they have and anything else you think would be helpful, like still being alive. This should give you the ability to counter any misrepresentation of their participation.

Good Luck.

[Bnechis 3,961]

In my department (career), we have par staffing. Meaning, our full staffing is 7, but we can go down to 5 with sick outs, vacations, etc.

Your terminology needs to change. Never use the term "full staffing". Stick with "minimum manning" and the big question is what is the proper number for "minimum manning"?

The head of ISO advised the Westchester Career Fire Chiefs that if 6 firefighters (2 in, 2 out, 1 IC & 1 MPO) did not respond on every fire call at a minimum, they would consider the dept to be an ISO 9. The have sent this to the NYS Dept of Insurance for approval.

Clearly they have not done a NFPA 1710 review, but have they even evaluated the number of personnel needed to perform basic functions?

Functions to look at:

1) Do they allow apparatus to be assigned only 1 member, and do you have an SOP that requires a spotter to back up?

2) Do you staff a tower ladder with less than 3 members. Most manufacturers reqire 1 on the turntable while 2 are in the bucket. The paperwork throws all liability on the dept. that fails to do this.

3) How many firefighters are needed to stretch a line, perform ventilation, do CPR, etc.?

I recently heard a Commisioner talking to another firefighter, asking that if we can go down to 5 with two members off and still operate, why can't we be at 5 all the time?

The commissioner is correct, if 5 is ok some of the time, then why not all of the time? In fact if the commissioners believe that 5 is the proper number, then ask them why they have been funding 7? Again what is the correct number for "minimum"?

Also, there department is still considered combination, so there are many volunteers on paper, but an active, assured volunteer contingent at a fire scene can never be guarenteed, since we have recently hired most of our volunteers. And if there is a mutual aid call, then we only have 3 firefighters left in district.

The ISO Improvement statement list the number of volunteers that they consider you have based on the number that respond to calls. Many combo depts. end up with only a few, even if they have 100's on the rolls.

Once a "minimum manning" level is established, backfilling should be established when you drop below the minimum.

[Bnechis 3,961]

we can't always use the fire argument. Fires are down in a lot of places. When we tell folks that we need four people on an engine so we can have an IC, an engineer and a hose team... They remind us how many fires we run.

Make sure the politicians and the public understand that if you can not meet 2in/2out (which includes 6 personnel) then it is illegal to enter a burning building to put the fire out.

It only takes 1 fire for this to become explosive.

[Bnechis 3,961]

I thought it was interesting that I hard a commercial made by the president of the FDNY Uninformed Firefighter's Association the other day about the proposed closing of 20 fire stations, and the first thing mentioned in their sales pitch was first response to EMS, not fire. Of course, my question then becomes, why not hire more EMT's and medics instead?

Because more EMT's & Paramedics can only do EMS and not Fire & 1st response.

[capt2102 64]

What the heck is "par" staffing?

[Lucifer 6]

What the heck is "par" staffing?

The right selection of members for a foursome to keep you at or under in a best ball format. Ha!

[FFEMT150 214]

The right selection of members for a foursome to keep you at or under in a best ball format. Ha!

HAHAHAHA!!!