FDMV RESCUES

[hudson144 150]

Members of group #2 FDMV were faced with tough conditions on 7/10 with hight heat, 2- 2 1/2 wood frame private dwellings well involved with fire. The fire located at 35 south 8th ave certainly put the members to work. Rescues made via ground ladders, heavy smoke with the victims ready to jump along with limited manpower causing 9 members to go out with various injuries all minor. Mutal aid covered the city for almost 8 hrs as limited crews overhauled the fire scene.

[sfrd18 360]

Great work to the brothers and sisters of the FDMV. It ain't easy going to jobs in this heat.

One question, why the limited manpower?

Also, is Mt. Vernon's Rescue staffed, or is it cross-staffed like New Ro's.

[hudson144 150]

Limited manpower- 2 man engine companys, 3 man truck companys- then as members went out for various injuries it sounds like an issue with call back of off duty members! Same story different fire!!! 1st due assignment usually has 13 firefighters,3-4 officers then the working Deputy Chief. If its a fire the Deputy will call the remaining Engine (2guys) remaining Truck (3 guys) (if it is not out of service). Then mutual aid will be called.

[ny10570 745]

With NFPA being the industry standard, has anyone tried suing any dept under 1710 to compel proper staffing? Seems like an injury as a result of decreased staffing would be a good starting point.

[Anesti 329]

Limited manpower- 2 man engine companys, 3 man truck companys- then as members went out for various injuries it sounds like an issue with call back of off duty members! Same story different fire!!! 1st due assignment usually has 13 firefighters,3-4 officers then the working Deputy Chief. If its a fire the Deputy will call the remaining Engine (2guys) remaining Truck (3 guys) (if it is not out of service). Then mutual aid will be called.

Is it really that bad in MT Vernon?? Anyway SFRD18, the rescue is manned full time, on the rare occasion it is taken out of service to man the 3rd truck to reduce mutual aid.

[sfrd18 360]

Is it really that bad in MT Vernon?? Anyway SFRD18, the rescue is manned full time, on the rare occasion it is taken out of service to man the 3rd truck to reduce mutual aid.

So, the 3rd Truck Co. in the Vern is normally OOS? Which one? FDMV Ladder 2?

[Anesti 329]

Thats what i heard from a Mt Vernon FF, but i decided not to get into a deep conversation about it.

[firefighter-70 27]

So, the 3rd Truck Co. in the Vern is normally OOS? Which one? FDMV Ladder 2?

No, the Rescue goes OOS first, followed by L-3 if the manpower drops. The Commissioner is saving the city dollars while placing the citizens and Fire Fighters at extreme risk. MVPD OT is wide open, they order officers on OT every day. 10 Fire Fighters go down with injuries and only 2 fire fighter were ordered to the scene. The commissioner was heard saying he'll just close down fire houses to avoid paying OT. High temps played a huge role at this fire. The fire had a head start, the first arriving engine and truck companies with the battalion made 2 saves with no time, no time to spare. The houses were 3 1/2 feet apart with a fence running between that 3.5 feet. Great ground ladder placement saved the day for the trapped victims which had to be lead down the ladders.

[INIT915 1,119]

With NFPA being the industry standard, has anyone tried suing any dept under 1710 to compel proper staffing? Seems like an injury as a result of decreased staffing would be a good starting point.

Industry standard is typically not a cause for action. Rather, collective bargaining agreements are the proper avenue, at which point a PERB or similar complaint can be made, or if need be an Article 78 hearing.

If CBA's don't dictate staffing, there is no such thing as "minimum" in the legal sense. Rather, the "minimum" is whatever the city says it is.

[efdcapt115 1,511]

Industry standard is typically not a cause for action. Rather, collective bargaining agreements are the proper avenue, at which point a PERB or similar complaint can be made, or if need be an Article 78 hearing.

If CBA's don't dictate staffing, there is no such thing as "minimum" in the legal sense. Rather, the "minimum" is whatever the city says it is.

Would you mind explaining how an Article 78 hearing would be an appropriate avenue to pursue a "staffing issue"?

I think most of us understand that if a CBA contains no minimum staffing clause, the employees have no power to pursue staffing issues.

However, if a disaster were to occur, such as a loss of life within the "protected" population, or the death of employees that the municipality has an implied duty to adequately protect due to the past practice of providing said protection to the populace and employing personnel to provide that protection, the liability would fall squarely upon that municipality would it not?

Therefore reducing staffing to "substandard levels" as defined by the industry standard NFPA 1710 of what "safe staffing" should be is the game of Russian Roulette that a municipality plays when they take rigs out of service and reduce manpower, thereby dropping below even what their ISO rating is based upon, which would be another avenue of legal pursuit in the event of catastrophe.

Of course the municipality is gambling that event won't occur. However they frequently do.

If I was a fire commander in charge of employees safety in said municipality, and was dictated to that my staffing was going below the ISO rating of where it should be, was going below the implied level of protection that past practice from municipality has formed my judgments as to what the employees under my command are safely capable of performing reasonably, I'd have to adjust the game plan as to what my subordinates could subsequently do for THEIR safety.

Unfortunately the ultimate losers are the potentially dead citizens who went to bed thinking their city was providing them a safety net in the event of emergency.

Just my opinion Officer.

[hudson144 150]

As I approach my 24 yr anniversary with FDMV I honestly feel that manning will be the same issue well after I retire, fire Chiefs/union leaders in the past and present know that we are well understaffed. Politics as usual here. Does the dept reduce the apparatus from 4 engines,3 trucks, Res 1(in and out of service) down to 2 engines,1 truck and man the rigs with 3 or 4 firefighters and an officer to properly man the rigs? Last year I was individually assigned to eng 4 on the west side and many times we ran with 3 firefighters and an officer. What a difference 1 additional member made on that rig. Because of staffing during peak vacation time it was reduced to a 2 man eng co. and it was the same old story. Great department with politicians ruling the helm!

[INIT915 1,119]

Would you mind explaining how an Article 78 hearing would be an appropriate avenue to pursue a "staffing issue"?

　

　

You (or more appropriately your bargaining unit) can pursue an Article 78 Proceeding to file for Certiorari if you believe you have a valid minimum staffing case, but you failed to obtain relief at the administrative level.

　

　

I think most of us understand that if a CBA contains no minimum staffing clause, the employees have no power to pursue staffing issues.

　

　

Correct, that's what I said originally.

　

　

However, if a disaster were to occur, such as a loss of life within the "protected" population, or the death of employees that the municipality has an implied duty to adequately protect due to the past practice of providing said protection to the populace and employing personnel to provide that protection, the liability would fall squarely upon that municipality would it not?

　

　

As has been addressed in previous threads, in which I have provide relevant case law and citations which you can search, generally not.

　

　

If I was a fire commander in charge of employees safety in said municipality, and was dictated to that my staffing was going below the ISO rating of where it should be, was going below the implied level of protection that past practice from municipality has formed my judgments as to what the employees under my command are safely capable of performing reasonably, I'd have to adjust the game plan as to what my subordinates could subsequently do for THEIR safety.

　

　

You using common sense and I agree with you. That however, is independent of having a cause of action to file suit seeking civil relief.

　

　

Just my opinion Officer.

　

　

And the above is my opinion, but also supported by case law and legal precedent. I might not agree with it, but it is what we must abide by legally.

[efdcapt115 1,511]

Thank you for your reply INIT915.

[efdcapt115 1,511]

As I approach my 24 yr anniversary with FDMV I honestly feel that manning will be the same issue well after I retire, fire Chiefs/union leaders in the past and present know that we are well understaffed. Politics as usual here. Does the dept reduce the apparatus from 4 engines,3 trucks, Res 1(in and out of service) down to 2 engines,1 truck and man the rigs with 3 or 4 firefighters and an officer to properly man the rigs? Last year I was individually assigned to eng 4 on the west side and many times we ran with 3 firefighters and an officer. What a difference 1 additional member made on that rig. Because of staffing during peak vacation time it was reduced to a 2 man eng co. and it was the same old story. Great department with politicians ruling the helm!

I mentioned ISO ratings in my prior post. Reducing the number of apparatus to more effectively utilize existing manpower makes great sense, but might be hampered by the ISO.

Maybe you could obtain a copy of the consultant's report Eastchester had done, where they actually did reduce the number of rigs to increase the staffing on those they left in service.

Also Chief Dunn's study of how the removal of the FIFTH man of an engine company significantly reduces the effectiveness of that company, is widely available.

[sfrd18 360]

As I approach my 24 yr anniversary with FDMV I honestly feel that manning will be the same issue well after I retire, fire Chiefs/union leaders in the past and present know that we are well understaffed. Politics as usual here. Does the dept reduce the apparatus from 4 engines,3 trucks, Res 1(in and out of service) down to 2 engines,1 truck and man the rigs with 3 or 4 firefighters and an officer to properly man the rigs? Last year I was individually assigned to eng 4 on the west side and many times we ran with 3 firefighters and an officer. What a difference 1 additional member made on that rig. Because of staffing during peak vacation time it was reduced to a 2 man eng co. and it was the same old story. Great department with politicians ruling the helm!

It's amazing that politicians still don't get the importance of fire department staffing. Not to divert off topic too much, but in Greenwich, CT for example, they operate a combination paid/volunteer fire department out of 8 Fire Stations. 1 of those 8 is Banksville FD in New York(they cover the northern reaches of Greenwich), and another one of those 8 is all volunteer(Round Hill FD). The remaining 6 are combination paid/volunteer. The paid FD operates 6 Engines and 1 Truck, and cross-staff a Rescue when needed with about 100 paid FF's. However, 4 of those 6 Engines are staffed around the clock by 2 personnel. The Truck is staffed with 3 personnel. Anyhow, the paid FD covers the entire town(almost 50 square miles with 60,000 people!) and respond to around 4,000 calls a year(no EMS). The volunteers mann 6 Engines, 2 Ladders, and numerous special units and also cover the town in their respected districts. I'm not sure though if the volunteers jump on the paid rigs on calls, or if they ride out on their own rigs.

Quick question though regarding FDMV: are all 5 Engines in service normally? Also, do the Rescue and Ladder 3 both run out of Engine 5's quarters?

[FirNaTine 370]

I mentioned ISO ratings in my prior post. Reducing the number of apparatus to more effectively utilize existing manpower makes great sense, but might be hampered by the ISO.

Maybe you could obtain a copy of the consultant's report Eastchester had done, where they actually did reduce the number of rigs to increase the staffing on those they left in service.

Also Chief Dunn's study of how the removal of the FIFTH man of an engine company significantly reduces the effectiveness of that company, is widely available.

Was never a big fan of that concept Capt. IMO it does have its drawbacks. Less rigs means more M/A abuse for even the smallest of Jobs and what happens when the 1st and 2nd due engines or even the Ladders for that matter are commited to a block and you need a 3rd due Eng. or even a 3rd Ladder Co. to locate at some more advantageous place. Ive seen 4 man rigs where one of the guys was totally useless anyway and it was like having a 3 man rig nonetheless. It all depends on the individuals assigned to the Company and how aggressive they even are.

[61MACKBR1 222]

As an individual who is not a professional firefighter, but rather a professional in the fire safety equipment industry, it is mind-boggling that a municipality, like the City of Mount Vernon, continues to play games with the safety, protection and life-saving efforts of its citizens and the property within the city. Back in the 1960's and early 1970's, the staffing levels and number of pieces of fire apparatus were at, in my "non-professional" opinion, proper levels (Engine 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, & 6, Truck 1, 2, 3, & 4, Rescue 1, and FDMV Ambulance 1). Now, and for several recent years, the staffing and manning levels within the city have continually been questioned. Even recently, staffing and apparatus levels in the City of Yonkers have been questioned by politicians and union leaders. Looking back at the City of Yonkers, back in the 1960's, YFD was running 13 Engine Companies, 7 Truck/Ladder Companies and 1 Rescue Company. Now, YFD is running at 11 Engine Companies, 6 Ladder Companies, and 1 Rescue, with city leaders wanting to cut the current number by even more.

Some people (Professional and Non-Professional) here on EMTBravo.net, have commented on how the possibility of having a Consolidated County Fire Service (even if it was just those Career Only Departments), within the County of Westchester, might help in assisting in ensuring municipalities, such as the City of Mount Vernon, have proper and adequate coverage. Some have mentioned that, by doing this, could save tax payer dollars, as well.

It appears as if "Politics" is playing a role in both the current status within the City of Mount Vernon, as well as ability to move the idea of the consolidation of fire services throughout the county, from a "Concept/Study" position, to a position of making it a "Reality"

Lives and Property continue to be placed in serious jeopardy, while people haggle over political non-sense.

It just makes one think about the days back in the 1960's, when an issue such as this, was not even an after-thought. HMMM??

[ny10570 745]

Industry standard is typically not a cause for action. Rather, collective bargaining agreements are the proper avenue, at which point a PERB or similar complaint can be made, or if need be an Article 78 hearing.

If CBA's don't dictate staffing, there is no such thing as "minimum" in the legal sense. Rather, the "minimum" is whatever the city says it is.

True, the standard alone isn't enough. However a member's injury that could have been prevented with proper staffing would be cause.

[hudson144 150]

When it comes to reality, the last thing that politicians worry about is its citizens and its workforce, in this case the Fire Dept!!!

[PCFD ENG58 1,085]

10-26 active now in the Vern, is that a job ? just went to a 2nd !

Edited July 13, 2012 by PCFD ENG58

[61MACKBR1 222]

"Mutual Aid" is becoming more the "NORM" rather than the "EXCEPTION" (I see that Yonkers FD still continues to refuse to be the 1st Called Mutual Aid for Mount Vernon, just to cover stations [i guess unless they are needed to actually assist in fighting the fire]

[Bnechis 3,961]

"Mutual Aid" is becoming more the "NORM" rather than the "EXCEPTION" (I see that Yonkers FD still continues to refuse to be the 1st Called Mutual Aid for Mount Vernon, just to cover stations [i guess unless they are needed to actually assist in fighting the fire]

Each chief fills out a card for the order of Mutual aid his dept will recieve. No where on the form is a slot to refuse anything other than specific apparatus that can not go mutual aid.

So MVFD did not list YFD as 1st.

[FirNaTine 370]

Just for the record when it comes down to who goes on M/A people don't realize how much of Personalities, Politics and Policies comes into play these days.

[learndabasics 13]

As I approach my 24 yr anniversary with FDMV I honestly feel that manning will be the same issue well after I retire, fire Chiefs/union leaders in the past and present know that we are well understaffed. Politics as usual here. Does the dept reduce the apparatus from 4 engines,3 trucks, Res 1(in and out of service) down to 2 engines,1 truck and man the rigs with 3 or 4 firefighters and an officer to properly man the rigs? Last year I was individually assigned to eng 4 on the west side and many times we ran with 3 firefighters and an officer. What a difference 1 additional member made on that rig. Because of staffing during peak vacation time it was reduced to a 2 man eng co. and it was the same old story. Great department with politicians ruling the helm!

Congrats on your 24 years of service.

Not too familiar with Mt Vernon FD.

Engines & Trucks staffed with 2 FF's - is the Chauffeur included in the 2? Meaning you actually only have 1 FF to perform all the duties required of an assigned Eng or Truck Co? If this is the case I can only hope the Mt Vernon brothers adjust their tactics to ensure they remain safe and get home to their families at the end of their shift because it's obvious the Politicians could care less about you and your loved ones.

Please Stay Safe.

Edited July 13, 2012 by learndabasics

[61MACKBR1 222]

Each chief fills out a card for the order of Mutual aid his dept will recieve. No where on the form is a slot to refuse anything other than specific apparatus that can not go mutual aid.

So MVFD did not list YFD as 1st.

Each chief fills out a card for the order of Mutual aid his dept will recieve. No where on the form is a slot to refuse anything other than specific apparatus that can not go mutual aid.

So MVFD did not list YFD as 1st.

BARRY - I believe that we all know that Yonkers (years ago) has told Mount Vernon NOT to place Yonkers on their Mutual Aid list as Yonkers would not come to "the Vern" just to sit in a Fire House and cover, because of Mount Vernon's recent history of staffing and manpower issues (This has been commented on by many people from within YFD on EMTBravo.net for years). This is nothing new

[sfrd18 360]

I believe a 10-26, as PCFD ENG58 mentioned, is either a W/F or an All-Hands.

[efdcapt115 1,511]

BARRY - I believe that we all know that Yonkers (years ago) has told Mount Vernon NOT to place Yonkers on their Mutual Aid list as Yonkers would not come to "the Vern" just to sit in a Fire House and cover, because of Mount Vernon's recent history of staffing and manpower issues (This has been commented on by many people from within YFD on EMTBravo.net for years). This is nothing new

And you know what? Yonkers was right then and they're right now. Mutual aid has been taken advantage of for years, and Yonkers, because they actually do thing RIGHT, have the proper staffing that other municipalities who have been pussyfooting around and playing games with manpower forever, was taken advantage of. Good for them for doing what they should; be responsible for and available to help the people of the city that pay their salaries.

The only way these problems are ever going to get fixed is for the powers that be to open their eyes, dust off the consolidation study that the firefighters themselves came up with as a solution to address the shortcomings in the system as it exists now, and has existed for too long.

Arguing about mutual aid is old.

[61MACKBR1 222]

COULD NOT HAVE SAID IT ANY BETTER CHIEF !!!

And you know what? Yonkers was right then and they're right now. Mutual aid has been taken advantage of for years, and Yonkers, because they actually do thing RIGHT, have the proper staffing that other municipalities who have been pussyfooting around and playing games with manpower forever, was taken advantage of. Good for them for doing what they should; be responsible for and available to help the people of the city that pay their salaries.

The only way these problems are ever going to get fixed is for the powers that be to open their eyes, dust off the consolidation study that the firefighters themselves came up with as a solution to address the shortcomings in the system as it exists now, and has existed for too long.

Arguing about mutual aid is old.

And you know what? Yonkers was right then and they're right now. Mutual aid has been taken advantage of for years, and Yonkers, because they actually do thing RIGHT, have the proper staffing that other municipalities who have been pussyfooting around and playing games with manpower forever, was taken advantage of. Good for them for doing what they should; be responsible for and available to help the people of the city that pay their salaries.

The only way these problems are ever going to get fixed is for the powers that be to open their eyes, dust off the consolidation study that the firefighters themselves came up with as a solution to address the shortcomings in the system as it exists now, and has existed for too long.

Arguing about mutual aid is old.

[efdcapt115 1,511]

Thanks for the promotion Mack.

Edited July 13, 2012 by efdcapt115

[PCFD ENG58 1,085]

Well said efdchief115 and good luck in your new title !