Rye Brook FD?

[E58RET 24]

Thebiggest problem with the Fire service in both PC and RB is that the respective Village boards believe that if you have a FD emergency and a big red fire truck shows up with either PCFD orRBFD on the door there collective butts are covered ,saying "we responded" . Not knocking any Volunteer response but it can get awful lonely waiting for a 2nd due engine when you have a working fire on arrival.

[Guest alsfirefighter]

Really so how do we operate that thier our several problems. Because I havent noticed any and I'm from this department. See what it comes down to is that people love to start s*** when it's not neccesary this topic was originally started asking about operations so how did it come to RBFD dosent need to exist is that neccesary to say..... Matter of fact does that have anything to do with operations no it dosent. And to M ave if you dont have anything but negative things to say to people or insult them cause of thier writing keep it to yourself. Everyone else enjoy your weekend and stay safe

Look at any operation and you can find "problems" or areas of improvement period. I always worry about home base first..and then my profession 2nd as we all represent each other. That's just a fact of life. If you or anyone else doesn't notice any...your not looking or don't know what to look for. Your training should be based off those issues but big and small to make operations more efficient, safer and professional.

As far as the if you don't have anything but negative things to say....and I saw no insults....enough already. If you want nothing but positives and want to keep eating cake go to the kids section of a book store. Things happens, things occur and things are occurring that are not efficient, nice, dangerous, ridiculous etc. You can not read them if if makes you upset. I say discuss them and tackle them head on..until we get over this stigma about insulting, badmouthing, monday morning quarterbacking..the fire service is going to have a lot of problems. And not for nothing you did invite anyone with your first sentence to point things out as they see them. I don't operate in Portchester so its not my battle but I could point out several that would blanket just about every department in this county....but as I said...I fight that battle on my own front.

Chuck...nice post but no one was attacking anyone nor saying you aren't or never were providing good service to your area. All departments have their issues. Its not personal...remember that. If it is..then the person posting should be or be able to say to anyone's face what they post. period.

[Harley 6]

M Ave you bring up points I have been stating for a long time now. It is a real lousy feeling hoping your 750 gallons of tank water gets the job done before you run out. Things do need to get better and improve with the times. Lets hope things start to shape up for both departments. Working by yourself on a first due apparatus is nonsense and has to change.

[gamewell45 258]

Working by yourself on a first due apparatus is nonsense and has to change.

The old rule of thumb: "You do the possible, the impossible will just have to wait".

[Guest alsfirefighter]

Working by yourself on a first due apparatus is nonsense and has to change.

Exactly..but how else would you maintain "control", and be careful you're making far too much sense and after all isn't anyone on a apparatus alone a "driver?" LMAO.

[Harley 6]

You got it we are until you are there by yourself with a situation that you took an oath of office to complete.

[E58RET 24]

As I stated earlier every thing is fine until you are on scene with either smoke or fire showing at an occupied dwelling and your nextdue Engine/truck is responding from the nearest community and you are alone???This happens in PC and RBFD's As previosly stated,and no knock on the vollunteer part of the response,but again its awfully lonely when you are faced with a situation like this and thenearest help is ???

[efdcapt115 1,511]

While the Consolidation Study languishes somewhere, Rye Brook and Port Chester were not included in it anyway.

The case against one firefighter apparatus staffing was addressed on my job some years ago. We had five engines, two trucks, and a heavy rescue, all with the original staffing from the 1920's; one firefighter per rig. The volunteer response had declined for various reasons, particularly during daytime working hours. The system, as it was designed; career firefighters responding with the apparatus, and volunteers responding in their POVs no longer worked.

The department (and I know I've explained this a few times before, but I think it's appropriate to mention it again here) commissioned a consultant, who did address the unacceptable fact of firefighters alone on rigs.

The resulting report became a template that the department did follow through on. The resulting changes reduced the total number of apparatus, and eliminated a dispatcher position, but the end product was literally the beginning of the end of solo staffed rigs.

The department now runs with two firefighters per rig. It is far from adequate, it is far from ideal, but it is 100 percent better than it was. This is simple math, one firefighter plus one firefighter=100 percent increase in staffing.

If problems exist in RBFD/PCFD (and one firefighter per rig staffing IS a problem irregardless of how passionately some department members would defend the system) I would humbly recommend Rye Brook and Port Chester consider funding a consultant's report. They can be done for a reasonable cost, they bring in an outside professional opinion, who not only takes into consideration the abilities of the municipalities involved to fund the end product, but more importantly for firefighters, they can offer a better option than the existing system. I say better, certainly not best, because if this was the case, our consultant's report would have resulted in at least three firefighters and an officer per rig. But because a consultant will take into account the municipality's ability and willingness to fund improvements, they stay neutral in the discussion, and are not dismissed by the taxpayers as one-sided.

Along with hundreds of other Westchester career firefighters, led by Rye firefighter Bruce Kerr (Rest in Peace Brother) I walked the picket lines up in Rye Brook when they were going the Rural Metro route, a route that ultimately failed as we all knew it would. The resulting creation of a Rye Brook Fire Department staffed with career firefighters was a small step toward the solution that ultimately the two communities need to address. They still need each other, they should get together and fund a study, and the communities will need an intensive public education effort, to build the needed support for the politicians to have the will to act on the behalf of their constituents safety. Politicians also have a moral obligation to address the safety needs of their public employees.

The message is simple; no more one man fire trucks. Getting there isn't nearly as simple, but it can be and has been done.

[Bnechis 3,961]

If problems exist in RBFD/PCFD (and one firefighter per rig staffing IS a problem irregardless of how passionately some department members would defend the system) I would humbly recommend Rye Brook and Port Chester consider funding a consultant's report. They can be done for a reasonable cost, they bring in an outside professional opinion, who not only takes into consideration the abilities of the municipalities involved to fund the end product, but more importantly for firefighters, they can offer a better option than the existing system. I say better, certainly not best, because if this was the case, our consultant's report would have resulted in at least three firefighters and an officer per rig. But because a consultant will take into account the municipality's ability and willingness to fund improvements, they stay neutral in the discussion, and are not dismissed by the taxpayers as one-sided.

Along with hundreds of other Westchester career firefighters, led by Rye firefighter Bruce Kerr (Rest in Peace Brother) I walked the picket lines up in Rye Brook when they were going the Rural Metro route, a route that ultimately failed as we all knew it would. The resulting creation of a Rye Brook Fire Department staffed with career firefighters was a small step toward the solution that ultimately the two communities need to address. They still need each other, they should get together and fund a study, and the communities will need an intensive public education effort, to build the needed support for the politicians to have the will to act on the behalf of their constituents safety. Politicians also have a moral obligation to address the safety needs of their public employees.

The message is simple; no more one man fire trucks. Getting there isn't nearly as simple, but it can be and has been done.

George, I agree that there should never be 1 or even 2 man rigs and PCFD & RBFD need to work together, The size of the 2 communities makes it highly unlikely that they will ever increase the manning (infact I understand that PCFD has many openings as they have not replaced retiring members).

Lets look at this area of the county. PCFD: 1 career member on some rigs, RBFD: 2 (but coverage drops to 1 at night with PCFD), City of Rye: 1 career member per rig, Harrison: 1 career member per rig and Purchase is all volunteer, but a few years ago they were considering paid "housemen" to get the rigs out. It is much more likely that a department of that size would be better able have sufficient staffing, a better volunteer response and the costs will be much more managable.

[efdcapt115 1,511]

No I.A. on this, but to further emphasize the need for some sort of action in this neck of the woods, I heard this morning E-58 out on an I-95 ramp with a fully involved garbage truck fire, with a chief on scene. Is that one firefighter and a chief? Where is E-59? Where is anybody else? How many firefighters responded?

E-58 with a booster tank of water and a chief I guess to man the nozzle?

What if this was an apartment building?

I hope these two Brothers contained the garbage truck fire, and neither suffered an injury.

I heard the chief called for Rye for mutual aid. Was that to cover the city or to assist at the scene?

If this isn't a clear illustration that something needs to be addressed up there, tell me what is.

Edit: I understand there is a lot more information regarding this incident, so everybody take it easy, don't get freaked out, just help us out with the information if you can. Thanks.

Edited October 31, 2011 by efdcapt115

[Harley 6]

E 58 on location this morning with one man on the rig. 2393 on location as incident command. Per radio transmission heard E-63 signed on about 28 minutes after intial dispatch.

[StOpGoBlUE 11]

Once again talking without knowing the facts.. the fire was well into rye and they were on scene as well.

Port Chester engine 61 was on scene as well with engine 58 and 63 was put on stby in case more water was needed .. cause there was no hydrants near by.. it was a cab fire on the garbage truck that a memeber of the pcfd was driveing at the time..

[MELILLO719 30]

is this turning into a Career vs Volly issue again

Edited October 31, 2011 by MELILLO719

[efdcapt115 1,511]

Once again talking without knowing the facts.. the fire was well into rye and they were on scene as well.

Port Chester engine 61 was on scene as well with engine 58 and 63 was put on stby in case more water was needed .. cause there was no hydrants near by.. it was a cab fire on the garbage truck that a memeber of the pcfd was driveing at the time..

Thanks for adding information, as I had posted there was a lot more to this call than certainly I posted about, and was hoping someone could add to the facts.

But what's up with the comment "once again talking without knowing the facts"?

[StOpGoBlUE 11]

That was not towards you... I find this whole argument on here ridecolous because it happens all over the place just not here.. you can't change the facts that the village boards care more about themselves then the people that need fire, police and ems protection.. and dont want hire needed manpower.. it works out well up here as to people say we have problems in pcfd point them Out. I would love to know being an officer of the department .I support both departments a hundred percent. We have a great working relationship whether they have none or one guy on.. I would.goto back anyday...

[Bnechis 3,961]

is this turning into a Career vs Volly issue again

No it is not.

The issue is do you have enough responders to cover calls and meet the minimum standards. PCFD, RFD, and HFD's staffing has always been some career ff's (to drive) and a majority of the response being volunteers. RBFD is in a similar situation, because its relying on PCFD to respond with enough personnel. If enough volunteers are showing up, then no issue, if not, you are putting the career member, the public and the few volunteers who are onscene at extreme risk.

How few Firefighters can you get away with? What is the minimum number that should be on every response?

[efdcapt115 1,511]

That was not towards you... I find this whole argument on here ridecolous because it happens all over the place just not here.. you can't change the facts that the village boards care more about themselves then the people that need fire, police and ems protection.. and dont want hire needed manpower.. it works out well up here as to people say we have problems in pcfd point them Out. I would love to know being an officer of the department .I support both departments a hundred percent. We have a great working relationship whether they have none or one guy on.. I would.goto back anyday...

Thanks again for the reply Charlie. But I honestly don't see this as an argument, rather just a discussion. BNechis's response above is a good one, that gets to the root of the topic.

I've added what I could in suggesting bringing in a consultant, because that fresh set of eyes on operations many times is very helpful for people like the village board members you mentioned.

Having run solo on engines, trucks and a rescue earlier in my career, I know what that feels like to a firefighter (career or volunteer). It's overwhelming, stressful, dangerous. If there is a way to address not having that happen in Rye Brook, Port Chester, and the other places the Captain mentioned, it's worth exploring the options. A consultant could give the elected officials some options to consider maybe they hadn't heard before or thought of themselves, and maybe act upon.

I mean this sincerely when I say no firefighter, career or volunteer should have to run solo on a rig anymore in 2011, and there are ways to figure out how to solve that issue.

[Bnechis 3,961]

I find this whole argument on here ridecolous because it happens all over the place just not here.. you can't change the facts that the village boards care more about themselves then the people that need fire, police and ems protection.. and dont want hire needed manpower..

Yes it does happen all over, particularly in the Northeast. This is less of an issue in the south, west and midwest as the fire service is more often run regionally.

You are 100% correct about the political boards, but has the local departments ever told them and the public that they do not have the personnel (regularly or at specific times/days) to properly respond?

If the Fire Chief, Police Chief, EMS Chief and the Departments do not speak up, then they are simply enabling the politicians to skimp on providing for public safety.

[JohnnyOV 2]

How few Firefighters can you get away with? What is the minimum number that should be on every response?

For those who have never seen it before (either in class, or out on the streets....)

edit: this is just for arrival on the initial alarm... not for a full operation

Edited October 31, 2011 by JohnnyOV

[helicopper 1,050]

is this turning into a Career vs Volly issue again

This is NOT a career vs volunteer issue and nobody is trying to steer it that way. The issue is adequate staffing (staffing is blind to pay status) in the fire service and everyone is discussing the problems objectively and without prejudice or malice toward either side. Some extremely experienced mermbers are posting very thoughtful replies to a situation that is not at all unique to Rye Brook or Port Chester and we can all learn from the discussion.

[Harley 6]

This has nothing to do with a paid/vs volunteer issue. It is an issue of firefighter saftey on both sides. These departments have been operating the status quoe for years. It is dangerous and gets greater every day. Overcrowding in these communities are greater than ever, causing instant death traps. A typical 1 or 2 family from the exterior may have 6 curtain walls dividing rooms to make room for five families on each floor. Running a career engine or volunteer by yourself in a typical situation is rediculous let alone in these situations. EFD capt and Bnechis are spot on. Until the new Engine 58 the career firefighters on E-58 and E59 were relying on grabing the booster line and extinguishing fires because of the issue of 1 man working, against everything we are trained, but did what they had too with what they had. No more booster line, but no additional manpower.

[voltage1256 42]

As a Rye Brook resident I'd like to add my opinion. I've had 3 incidents in my home. One was a save by PCFD and RBFD on what could have been a structure fire, and the other 2 were unknown type odors. Each time PCFD and RBFD promptly responded and was at my house within minutes. I can't fully attest to the first one as I wasn't home but my mom tells me you guys did a great job. The other two I was home for and I can personally say that the response of apparatus and man power was there. One was a day time call where we received Ladder 30, Rescue 40, Engine 61, 64, and I believe 59 along with the chiefs. The second one was a night time call past the 7pm transfer where Ladder 31, Engine 59, Engine 63, Engine 64, Rescue 40 showed up again with a chief, again with an above decent amount of manpower. I think it'd be a little drastic to say RBFD, and PD need to be abolished. EMS, well... they are PC-R-RB so there wasn't a real point in saying to get rid of them either. Is it fair to say RBFD is under staffed? Yes. But with the little knowledge I have on the Village of Rye Brook side of politics, I think it's fair to say it's a political issue on how the $ is spent as compared to an emergency services issue. It would be nice to see a properly staffed house on King St. But PC does a great job handling what they were given.

Keep it up & Be safe

[ems-buff 81]

Once again, members are reminded to stay on point, and on topic. The posting of "rumors" that an engine responded, when people on scene confirmed it did, or questioning someones ability to lead fellow emergency service providers, to taking things personally, needs to stop.... We as staff members are trying to be objective, but if members dont calm down and "QTIP". The topic will be locked.

Let me make this clear.. This is a learning site, there are issues in every department, not just the ones mention here. This topic where there are issues of who responds and manpower come into play. These are real issues, but "cheap shots" at these departments, will not be tolerated. Also stop this paid versus volly crap. Every time a good discussion comes around, someone always brings it up. We all live in a combo department county (westchester) wiether fire, or ems.. Grow up and look at post objectively. If not, then dont read it, but this has to stop...

Other then that, to the members who have been contributing constructively. I thank you.

Happy Halloween, and stay safe..

ems-buff

moderator

[MELILLO719 30]

As a Rye Brook resident I'd like to add my opinion. I've had 3 incidents in my home. One was a save by PCFD and RBFD on what could have been a structure fire, and the other 2 were unknown type odors. Each time PCFD and RBFD promptly responded and was at my house within minutes. I can't fully attest to the first one as I wasn't home but my mom tells me you guys did a great job. The other two I was home for and I can personally say that the response of apparatus and man power was there. One was a day time call where we received Ladder 30, Rescue 40, Engine 61, 64, and I believe 59 along with the chiefs. The second one was a night time call past the 7pm transfer where Ladder 31, Engine 59, Engine 63, Engine 64, Rescue 40 showed up again with a chief, again with an above decent amount of manpower. I think it'd be a little drastic to say RBFD, and PD need to be abolished. EMS, well... they are PC-R-RB so there wasn't a real point in saying to get rid of them either. Is it fair to say RBFD is under staffed? Yes. But with the little knowledge I have on the Village of Rye Brook side of politics, I think it's fair to say it's a political issue on how the $ is spent as compared to an emergency services issue. It would be nice to see a properly staffed house on King St. But PC does a great job handling what they were given.

Keep it up & Be safe

Couldnt Agree more

[helicopper 1,050]

A few points...

1. Nobody has suggested abolishing anything. Several people have suggested that area residents would be served better by a department with a different organization, tax base, and staffing. There has been no agency bashing.

2. Members should discuss the issue and not "attack" or criticize each other for having different styles of communicating or perspectives. If necessary, agree to disagree but don't jab each other. Several inappropriate posts have been removed by the staff.

3. Emergency service organizations are inanimate objects and do not need to be "defended". They're not your little sister and their feelings won't get hurt. Since nobody is bashing an agency there's no need to take this discussion personally or respond in defense of it. Let's stick the issues and continue having an interesting and informative discussion about fire service staffing issues and potential solutions.

4. If you have an issue with a post in this or any other thread, please use the REPORT button at the bottom of the post window to report it and the staff will address it. Do not respond to the offending post; let the staff handle it.

To those that have already been adhering to the above, thank you. Please return to your regularly scheduled discussion.

[efdcapt115 1,511]

Just doing a little brainstorming. Starting at the core basics, we have two career firefighters working 7am-7pm-7days in Rye Brook, and they respond together on one rig. From what I've been able to gather re-reading this thread, there are two career firefighters staffing two engines in Port Chester.

One small part of an improvement could involve teaming up the two Port Chester firefighters onto one rig, and doing an automatic aid agreement with Rye Brook whereby both departments respond to both communities.

Two rigs, with two firefighters on each, immediately responding to all fire calls in both communities. Initial career response of four firefighters on two engines. It would be helpful if one of the rigs was a Quint, so the four firefighters once assembled have ladder operations available.

Wouldn't it be helpful to Rye Brook's political leadership to be able to commit to two firefighters, 24/7 staffing, if they received the same in an automatic-aid agreement with Port Chester?

What both communities would be receiving with such an agreement would be guaranteed career staffing of four firefighters for the cost of two per community. The career firefighters get a staffing agreement. It's a bargain deal for both communities that might make the Rye Brook administration open their purse to staff 24/7, and make Port Chester fill both slots, and not have to separate their career firefighters any longer; knowing they get two more 24/7 from Rye Brook.

The volunteer component of Port Chester obviously plays a critical role; providing Incident Commanders, officers, and firefighters. Why not simply concentrate on building that component into two companies; an engine and truck, and these two units also respond with a minimum of two firefighters (more is obviously better), but two ff's get the rigs rolling.

Now with three engines and a truck, you've got eight firefighters responding. Add the Chiefs, and your initial response is 9-10.

ISO is not my purview, but I'm sure BNechis could expand on how to work with that issue.

Just some thoughts on how to get a consistent around the clock response. Yes it would cost money to staff two positions 24/7 for both communities, but the key to making this attractive is the auto-aid component that is a two way street. You end up seeing Rye Brooks rig in Port Chester as often as the other way around, and both administrations feel like they are getting "a deal."

Rye Brook and Port Chester members, feel free to educate me as to what I'm missing with my ideas, what is already being done, etc. Thank you.

[Bnechis 3,961]

For those who have never seen it before (either in class, or out on the streets....)

edit: this is just for arrival on the initial alarm... not for a full operation

1st Thanks for the IAFF 1710 Drawing.

As you noted: its just for the initial response.

The moment you call this a "working fire" the standard requires at least 2 more FF's to compleat the IRIC and make it a FAST and a safety officer.

Not included: personnel for rural water supply

Also note: the standard is based on a 2,000 sq. ft home without a basement. Larger or with a basement requires more. That means most homes in Westchester need more.

[babhits16 28]

Wow, this is not what I expected, haha. Anyway, this shouldn't be a volly vs. career issue or department vs. department. If I were a Rye Brook resident, actually for anybody in the metro reason this goes for. All I want is a a fully staffed crew at my house, in under 5 minutes. If you can accomplish this with volunteers, great! If you need career guys or a combination of the two, that's fine with me. If I get a dual department response I wouldn't care. I just want able bodied firefighters to be at house fast, and get the fire out efficiently.

[TL2L31 8]

[quoThanls for your first hand opinion on this matter. te name=voltage1256' timestamp='1320091234' post='249682]

As a Rye Brook resident I'd like to add my opinion. I've had 3 incidents in my home. One was a save by PCFD and RBFD on what could have been a structure fire, and the other 2 were unknown type odors. Each time PCFD and RBFD promptly responded and was at my house within minutes. I can't fully attest to the first one as I wasn't home but my mom tells me you guys did a great job. The other two I was home for and I can personally say that the response of apparatus and man power was there. One was a day time call where we received Ladder 30, Rescue 40, Engine 61, 64, and I believe 59 along with the chiefs. The second one was a night time call past the 7pm transfer where Ladder 31, Engine 59, Engine 63, Engine 64, Rescue 40 showed up again with a chief, again with an above decent amount of manpower. I think it'd be a little drastic to say RBFD, and PD need to be abolished. EMS, well... they are PC-R-RB so there wasn't a real point in saying to get rid of them either. Is it fair to say RBFD is under staffed? Yes. But with the little knowledge I have on the Village of Rye Brook side of politics, I think it's fair to say it's a political issue on how the $ is spent as compared to an emergency services issue. It would be nice to see a properly staffed house on King St. But PC does a great job handling what they were given.

Keep it up & Be safe

[efdcapt115 1,511]

Wow, this is not what I expected, haha. Anyway, this shouldn't be a volly vs. career issue or department vs. department. If I were a Rye Brook resident, actually for anybody in the metro reason this goes for. All I want is a a fully staffed crew at my house, in under 5 minutes. If you can accomplish this with volunteers, great! If you need career guys or a combination of the two, that's fine with me. If I get a dual department response I wouldn't care. I just want able bodied firefighters to be at house fast, and get the fire out efficiently.

The primary reason I voiced an opinion in this thread is because the conditions that the career firefighters face, alone or with one other in both departments, can be extremely dangerous to their health and safety. It never ceases to amaze me that so many people nowadays will use the terms "consolidation and regionalization" as politically correct terminology. Yet, try and talk specifics, offer ideas, and the conversation dies.

This has never been a thread about career vs. volunteer in my eyes. It's a thread to advocate for safer working conditions for my Brother firefighters, and that is an issue I will never be silent about.

I understand what you want, and I hope everyone who reads this thread understands what career firefighters who raised an opinion here want; safer conditions for our Brother firefighters. It is that simple.