It is still out there Professional vs Volunteer...and in Westchester

[FD7807 59]

5 minutes ago, FireMedic049 said:

Actually, the majority of the population is served by career or mostly career departments.   The majority of the country (land wise) is served by volunteer or mostly volunteer departments.  Volunteerism is declining and many all volunteer departments are now combination and many more probably should be.  

 

Love for the community is not exclusive to the volunteers, which for some reason is something people like you are unable to grasp.

 

What's your stance on volunteer grandstanding? 

Listen first off there is no room for grandstanding period. And my loathing of union grandstanding runs deeper then the fire service. That said you statement is off base simply because you are quoting a population based study. Of course when you factor in NYC Yonkers Buffalo etc of course. I am referring to towns villages etc especially in this area run volunteer only for fire. I cannot comment on EMS agencies as I do not belong to one.

[nfd2004 750]

15 minutes ago, x635 said:

Listen, personal attacks on each other on this thread need to stop now.  They're not a catalyst for a good discussion. Although what people say to each other is beyond my control, further type comments will be deleted.

 

 "x635", I understand. I would hope that everyone would understand that I was only trying to get some answers to a few questions I posted earlier. I hope I didn't make it appear that I was trying to throw a personnel attack. I only tried to give my explanation of the fact that "a hater I am not".

 

  I was successful in accomplishing one of my questions however, in relation to taking prior firefighter exams. I thank "FD7807" for his honesty. I know that has had some bearing on how sometimes people feel about union firefighters.  I know that from other similar situations.

 

  I was about to let my involvement with "FD7807" rest at this point anyway. I felt we had just about reached any conclusion regarding our feelings on this matter.

 

  With that said, I do appreciate the opportunity to express my views in following this very controversial issue. It is a subject that sometimes needs be adjusted to serve those who must depend on the fire service. It doesn't really matter who is right or who is wrong on here. What really matters is that all those people out there can depend on a fire service during their most desperate times. And every firefighter, both career or volunteer, has a serious role to uphold in doing that.   

[FireMedic049 597]

5 hours ago, FD7807 said:

Listen first off there is no room for grandstanding period. And my loathing of union grandstanding runs deeper then the fire service. That said you statement is off base simply because you are quoting a population based study. Of course when you factor in NYC Yonkers Buffalo etc of course. I am referring to towns villages etc especially in this area run volunteer only for fire. I cannot comment on EMS agencies as I do not belong to one.

Please forgive me for being "off base".  I didn't realize that you were only referring to small communities when you stated the "country as a whole".

[AFS1970 504]

One of the things that keeps this sort of tension alive and well is the perception that all volunteer firefighters are just sitting waiting to get that career firefighter's position. That is why so many of the public ask if you ever wanted to be a real firefighter and so many career firefighters ask what tests you have taken. If there is any deep down feeling being harbored it is pure amazement that not every volunteer firefighter wants to be a career firefighter.

 

Still despite this there is a great deal of brotherhood to be found in the fire service, even across the payroll lines. I have often suspected that that brotherhood has a limit, and that limit is when one side is required to support the other side. In the other thread it was asked why the volunteers in PCFD did not immediately stop responding to calls in support of their paid brothers. I would ask this, not that I expect an honest answer, but if the village council had voted to eliminate the volunteer fire department, how many of those 8 career firefighters would have walked out until the volunteers were brought back? See there are, no matter how hard we try to deny it, limits to our brotherhood.

 

My first post here detailed what I thought about the remarks being attributed to the PCFD chief. Yet we are forgetting that these remarks were not seen as bad enough to come forward immediately. They were good enough to hold on until the moment is right. Nobody's windows were actually broken, so no firefighters followed any illegal orders. From the video I watched there was nothing worded as an order anyway.

 

This thread, like many others before it, has shown the lack of fraternity. A thread was posted to show how bad relations were and we respond by making relations with each other worse.

 

BMA!

[FD7807 59]

1 hour ago, FireMedic049 said:

Please forgive me for being "off base".  I didn't realize that you were only referring to small communities when you stated the "country as a whole".

County as a wbole has a majority of volunrerr departments. Dont believe me but the facts are the facts. 58 fire departments in WC

[FireMedic049 597]

24 minutes ago, FD7807 said:

County as a wbole has a majority of volunrerr departments. Dont believe me but the facts are the facts. 58 fire departments in WC

So are we discussing the country or a specific county?  Your message seems inconsistent. 

[SECTMB 612]

I just want someone to show up. I don't care if they have a union card or not.  But, every municipality has an obligation to ensure that emergency requests are answered, quickly and competently.

If you can do it with a volunteer department, fine.  If you can't, adjust your budgets and tax mil rates accordingly.  

[FD7807 59]

This is pointless. As many have said there are those will hate volunteers just for existing. On the river we are cowboys. On land we are XXXL berr guzzling belly bumpers who ride parade wagons. To those who you firefighters out yhere who continue to do the right thing for the right reason regardless kf career or volunteer then God bless. To the volunteers who automatically disregard the opinions of a career guy simply because he is a career guy then you need help.. To the career guys who volunteer bash  regardless of the topic as evidenced by some in this thread then you too need help. Peace out EMT Bravo. 

[Bnechis 3,961]

2 hours ago, FD7807 said:

County as a wbole has a majority of volunrerr departments. Dont believe me but the facts are the facts. 58 fire departments in WC

Yes the majority of departments are volunteer.

 

5 are career or if they have volunteers, they no longer respond to calls.

9 are combination with the majority of responders being career ( in some cases the volunteers are exterior only and only have a handful left)

4 are combination with the majority of responders being volunteer.

and Port Chester.

 

So their are more volunteer departments. But what do they protect?

 

the population of Westchester County is 972,634

 

434,622 people live in communities with the 5 career depts. (approximately 45%).

 

177,397 people live in communities with the combination depts. with mostly career response (approximately 18%).

 

Thats 612,019 people (63%)

 

The communities with the majority being volunteer are hard to calculate as they include fire districts that do not have census data, but it is totaled at no more than 360,615. (37%).

 

 

 

[Dinosaur 844]

5 hours ago, FD7807 said:

County as a wbole has a majority of volunrerr departments. Dont believe me but the facts are the facts. 58 fire departments in WC

 

So the county has 58 departments.  We can debate the logic and necessity of that for days without ever resolving it.  Does it need 58?  Does the number of departments have some significance to fire growth?  I think not.

Population drives demand so dismissing population considerations is flawed reasoning.

 

 

[Bnechis 3,961]

4 minutes ago, Dinosaur said:

 

So the county has 58 departments.  We can debate the logic and necessity of that for days without ever resolving it.  Does it need 58?  Does the number of departments have some significance to fire growth?  I think not.

Population drives demand so dismissing population considerations is flawed reasoning.

 

 

Well the logic is, we need that many because we've always had that many. The problem is we need to call that many. I'm reminded of a room and content fire in the middle of the county about two years ago. A dozen departments responded.....for a simple room and content fire?  

[nfd2004 750]

13 hours ago, SECTMB said:

I just want someone to show up. I don't care if they have a union card or not.  But, every municipality has an obligation to ensure that emergency requests are answered, quickly and competently.

If you can do it with a volunteer department, fine.  If you can't, adjust your budgets and tax mil rates accordingly.  

 

  And HOPEFULLY you want someone to show up that you can trust your life with. Or the life of your family. You want someone who can go inside a burning building, working at peak capacity, who is willing to risk their own life to save yours. Someone to try and save your belongings as well. Some of those belongings of which can NEVER be replaced.

 

 Are you willing to accept a 67 year old guy like myself, dressed in a firefighters costume and riding a shiny big fire truck to show up and expect me to perform a job like that. Its dangerous enough for me to climb a ladder on a nice spring day to clean out the gutters on my house. Let alone climb a ladder covered with ice in the middle of some cold winter night. All while wearing 60-80 plus pounds of extra gear.

 

 Is there a difference between someone who attended a Firefighter I class or somebody who completed a fulltime, 14-16 week, fire recruit school training ? Of course there is. And anybody involved in the fire service, should realize that.

 

Just as an EMT can save lives the same as a doctor can, the EMT was NOT required to meet the same requirements as that doctor. Does a security guard have the same training as a police officer ? No, but in each one of these positions, there is a mutual respect for each other for similar duties. There is a mutual respect and an understanding between these groups. Yet they all represent some very different training and educational requirements. They depend on each other as well.

 

 One of my best friends is a retired U.S. Army Colonel. He was in charge of the entire Army operations during 9/11 in New York City.  He has not one, but TWO Masters Degrees. Today he is also a volunteer firefighter. He really enjoys being a volunteer firefighter in a combination career/volunteer fire department. He tells me all the time how he respects career firefighters. I just can't believe the respect this guy has for any career firefighters.

 

  He is a volunteer firefighter in one of the busiest firehouses in America. Even as a Retired career firefighter, "I just can't relate to everything he's done". His service to our country and his community goes way beyond what most of us have done. Yet he is the first one who would put career firefighters at the top of his list.

 

 He is familiar with the Westchester County area as he grew up in Brooklyn. However, I don't think he is aware of what has been going on in Port Chester or Garden City.

 

 The entire group of career firefighters in that firehouse have a huge amount of respect for this guy. He respects them too of course. I know because I've been to that firehouse myself, where both career and volunteer firefighters sat at the dinner table together, talking shop and having a few laughs.

 

 "IF ONLY WE COULD BE LIKE THAT" !!!!!!!

 

 

 

 

[Dinosaur 844]

3 hours ago, nfd2004 said:

 

 Is there a difference between someone who attended a Firefighter I class or somebody who completed a fulltime, 14-16 week, fire recruit school training ? Of course there is. And anybody involved in the fire service, should realize that.

 

Just as an EMT can save lives the same as a doctor can, the EMT was NOT required to meet the same requirements as that doctor. Does a security guard have the same training as a police officer ? No, but in each one of these positions, there is a mutual respect for each other for similar duties. There is a mutual respect and an understanding between these groups. Yet they all represent some very different training and educational requirements. They depend on each other as well.

 

 

Bad analogy.  The best analogy would be the volunteer EMT compared to the "career" "paid" EMT.  Both receive the same training and hold the same certification.  All security guards in NYS receive the same training and certification from NYS as do police officers but they are not the same.  That's unfortunately not the case with firefighter training in NYS!

 

 

[frost025 94]

This afternoon Port Chester local turned in 4000 signatures from village citizens, with help from their brother and sisters from locals throughout Westchester. This is 1000 over amount needed to force a referendum , so village taxpayers have their say to bring back the professionals.This shows that you can't pull suprises that effect public safety. So the village board can eat their words and the chiefs can have a good cry tonite. Job welll done.....

[fdalumnus 165]

7 minutes ago, frost025 said:

This afternoon Port Chester local turned in 4000 signatures from village citizens, with help from their brother and sisters from locals throughout Westchester. This is 1000 over amount needed to force a referendum , so village taxpayers have their say to bring back the professionals.This shows that you can't pull suprises that effect public safety. So the village board can eat their words and the chiefs can have a good cry tonite. Job welll done.....

 

LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE !!!!

 

[FFPCogs 863]

1 hour ago, fdalumnus said:

 

LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE !!!!

 

This is about the only post thus far that I agree with 100%. It's their homes, their tax dollars and their lives so let the people decide. And which ever way it goes that's the end of the matter, for the people will have spoken.

[FireMedic049 597]

5 hours ago, Dinosaur said:

 

Bad analogy.  The best analogy would be the volunteer EMT compared to the "career" "paid" EMT.  Both receive the same training and hold the same certification.  All security guards in NYS receive the same training and certification from NYS as do police officers but they are not the same.  That's unfortunately not the case with firefighter training in NYS!

 

 

I disagree that the best analogy would be volunteer compared to career EMT.  In fact, I don't think it's even a correct one for the point I think he was trying to make.  All EMTs receive the same minimum training, have the same scope of practice and hold the same certification regardless of being paid or volunteer.  A better comparison for the point would have been EMT vs Paramedic.  Both may work side by side on an ambulance and save lives, but one has a larger volume of training and larger skill set prior to stepping into that ambulance.  Both are important and contribute to the success of the team, but there is a distinct difference between the two and what they are able to contribute.

 

By comparison, the person who attends a full-time fire academy for initial training is going to possess a larger volume of training than the person who just attends a basic FF1 class.  Typically a career recruit academy includes more than just basic FF training and usually more hands on training.

 

Recruits for the large metro department in my area obtain certifications for FF1, FF2, BVR, Hazmat, Rope Rescue, EMT and a number of others before graduating and responding to their first call.  By contrast, a new member in many of the VFDs in the area can get on the truck without any formal training or certification.  Many require their members to attend the entry level training course (about 166 hours), which prepares one for the FF1 test, but doesn't not include testing for the certification.  They may not be required to achieve additional certification other than the federally mandated, minimal Hazmat training.

 

Both are considered "firefighters" and both are valuable to their departments.  Both may even work side by side routinely or on occasion.  Over time, the "gap" in training, certification, experience, ability, etc. between the two may disappear, but there is clearly a difference between the two at the start and I think that was at the heart of the point being made.

 

 

[nfd2004 750]

Telling both sides of the story gives the people the entire picture. Had it not been reported as it was, the full story would not have been known. On here we learned:

 

1) We learned how apparently three fire chiefs were the real reason these eight firefighters were eliminated and lost their jobs, as some here reported they knew nothing about it.

 

2) We learned how another village was paying one million dollars to Port Chester, basically covering the entire cost of those Port Chester firefighters.

 

3) We learned how one individual encouraged a group of firefighters to damage another firefighters home.

 

4) We learned how that group of 8 Port Chester firefighters may seek legal action through an attorney seeking damages on their behalf, which may actually cost the taxpayers more now.

 

 This went beyond the fact of a city that couldn't afford to pay for its firefighters. If and when this issue is finally resolved, the City of Port Chester will be known throughout the fire service as a city that allowed three of its fire chiefs to make some very poor decisions. It could be used for future training as "A Lesson to be Learned".

[FireMedic049 597]

8 minutes ago, nfd2004 said:

Telling both sides of the story gives the people the entire picture. Had it not been reported as it was, the full story would not have been known. On here we learned:

 

1) We learned how apparently three fire chiefs were the real reason these eight firefighters were eliminated and lost their jobs, as some here reported they knew nothing about it.

 

2) We learned how another village was paying one million dollars to Port Chester, basically covering the entire cost of those Port Chester firefighters.

 

3) We learned how one individual encouraged a group of firefighters to damage another firefighters home.

 

4) We learned how that group of 8 Port Chester firefighters may seek legal action through an attorney seeking damages on their behalf, which may actually cost the taxpayers more now.

 

 This went beyond the fact of a city that couldn't afford to pay for its firefighters. If and when this issue is finally resolved, the City of Port Chester will be known throughout the fire service as a city that allowed three of its fire chiefs to make some very poor decisions. It could be used for future training as "A Lesson to be Learned".

Yeah, but our municipal leaders and in some cases, fire chiefs, are not very good at heeding those lessons learned.

 

This type of stuff keeps happening over and over and for the most part, nobody pays a price for it expect the employee and the taxpayer.

[SOUSGT 357]

13 hours ago, nfd2004 said:

Telling both sides of the story gives the people the entire picture. Had it not been reported as it was, the full story would not have been known. On here we learned:

 

1) We learned how apparently three fire chiefs were the real reason these eight firefighters were eliminated and lost their jobs, as some here reported they knew nothing about it.

 

2) We learned how another village was paying one million dollars to Port Chester, basically covering the entire cost of those Port Chester firefighters.

 

3) We learned how one individual encouraged a group of firefighters to damage another firefighters home.

 

4) We learned how that group of 8 Port Chester firefighters may seek legal action through an attorney seeking damages on their behalf, which may actually cost the taxpayers more now.

 

 This went beyond the fact of a city that couldn't afford to pay for its firefighters. If and when this issue is finally resolved, the City of Port Chester will be known throughout the fire service as a city that allowed three of its fire chiefs to make some very poor decisions. It could be used for future training as "A Lesson to be Learned".

Not to nitpick but PortChester is a village within the Town of Rye, not a city. I bring this up only as a village has different requirements under the NYC constitution and the village board oversees the police and fire departments. Also the chief of the department lacks the legal authority to terminate anyone. The action to eliminate the 8 employee positions rests squarely on the village board. 

[AFS1970 504]

Actually between this and the other thread, we did not learn that 3 chiefs got together and hatched some nefarious plan to get rid of career firefighters. All that has been reported was that the village council voted to do this. There was some indication of a meeting with the Chiefs before this vote was taken but I doubt anyone who posts here was in that meeting.

 

What we did get was people immediately calling for the chiefs to be thrown out of office because they did not save the jobs. The problem with this line of reasoning is that politicians will do whatever they want, and no matter how loud a chief protests, they will generally not budge. It is the responsibility of a fire chief to run their fire departments and as any chief will tell you this is usually done with what you are given. Thus when the layoffs happened as much as it sucks there is still a fire department that needs to continue as best it can.

 

Layoffs are never a good option, but they do happen. If a major city suffered layoffs would you call for the career chief to be fired because he did not protect the manpower? I am not knowledgeable about the situation in PCFD prior to the council vote. I don't know who said what to who, who had a grudge against who, or who had what influence on the vote.

 

As for the public voting, this can be a double edged sword. The same public that wants more services from the government almost always wants to pay less taxes. One never knows just how the people will vote.

 

 

[nfd2004 750]

35 minutes ago, AFS1970 said:

Actually between this and the other thread, we did not learn that 3 chiefs got together and hatched some nefarious plan to get rid of career firefighters. All that has been reported was that the village council voted to do this. There was some indication of a meeting with the Chiefs before this vote was taken but I doubt anyone who posts here was in that meeting.

 

What we did get was people immediately calling for the chiefs to be thrown out of office because they did not save the jobs. The problem with this line of reasoning is that politicians will do whatever they want, and no matter how loud a chief protests, they will generally not budge. It is the responsibility of a fire chief to run their fire departments and as any chief will tell you this is usually done with what you are given. Thus when the layoffs happened as much as it sucks there is still a fire department that needs to continue as best it can.

 

Layoffs are never a good option, but they do happen. If a major city suffered layoffs would you call for the career chief to be fired because he did not protect the manpower? I am not knowledgeable about the situation in PCFD prior to the council vote. I don't know who said what to who, who had a grudge against who, or who had what influence on the vote.

 

As for the public voting, this can be a double edged sword. The same public that wants more services from the government almost always wants to pay less taxes. One never knows just how the people will vote.

 

 

 

 As I understand it, career firefighters are forced to be laid off by city fire chiefs due to budget issues.

 

 As I understand it here, the Village of Rye was paying one million dollars to contract to the village of Port Chester for their fire protection. Was it Port Chester or Rye that laid off these eight firefighters ? Does the responsibility fall on that local group of board members ? Why were those three chiefs removed from their positions if they did nothing wrong ? If Port Chester was having budget problems were there other employees laid off besides all eight of those firefighters ? Were other departments such as education, police etc advised to make similar serious cutbacks due to a budget issue ?

[Bnechis 3,961]

1 hour ago, AFS1970 said:

Actually between this and the other thread, we did not learn that 3 chiefs got together and hatched some nefarious plan to get rid of career firefighters. All that has been reported was that the village council voted to do this. There was some indication of a meeting with the Chiefs before this vote was taken but I doubt anyone who posts here was in that meeting.

 

What we did get was people immediately calling for the chiefs to be thrown out of office because they did not save the jobs. The problem with this line of reasoning is that politicians will do whatever they want, and no matter how loud a chief protests, they will generally not budge. It is the responsibility of a fire chief to run their fire departments and as any chief will tell you this is usually done with what you are given. Thus when the layoffs happened as much as it sucks there is still a fire department that needs to continue as best it can.

 

Layoffs are never a good option, but they do happen. If a major city suffered layoffs would you call for the career chief to be fired because he did not protect the manpower? I am not knowledgeable about the situation in PCFD prior to the council vote. I don't know who said what to who, who had a grudge against who, or who had what influence on the vote.

 

As for the public voting, this can be a double edged sword. The same public that wants more services from the government almost always wants to pay less taxes. One never knows just how the people will vote.

 

 

It's not that the Chiefs "Did not save the jobs". It's that when the mayor said: "before we proceed with the budget amendments, is the fire chief ok with these changes?" Once the chief said yes, they moved forward with the budget change. 

 

They never said the words: "layoffs, fire department, career firefighters, etc. so they had already planned this out, because they were afraid to even mention it in front of the public. We all understand that at times the chief has to live with what's been given to them. But to not complain at all? Not to fight for your department? Not to simply agree that this is completely acceptable. Particularly when their has been a running battle for years.

[Bnechis 3,961]

29 minutes ago, nfd2004 said:

 

 As I understand it, career firefighters are forced to be laid off by city fire chiefs due to budget issues.

 

 As I understand it here, the Village of Rye was paying one million dollars to contract to the village of Port Chester for their fire protection. Was it Port Chester or Rye that laid off these eight firefighters ? Does the responsibility fall on that local group of board members ? Why were those three chiefs removed from their positions if they did nothing wrong ? If Port Chester was having budget problems were there other employees laid off besides all eight of those firefighters ? Were other departments such as education, police etc advised to make similar serious cutbacks due to a budget issue ?

The claim was budget issues. But layoffs save between $600,000 (the amount the budget was reduced by) and $800,000 (the amount the mayor later claimed it would save) and the $900,000 that "Ryebrook contributes" which would no longer be accepted means that eliminating the career staff would cost more money than it saves.

 

PC did the layoffs 

fails on the Mayor and village board of Port Chester 

the Chiefs were not removed

no other municipal layoffs or cost reductions

 

[AFS1970 504]

The numbers certainly don't seem to add up to me. Saving 800K is an admirable goal, but if you are getting 1M to fund that 800K, it seems to me like you should have 200K left over. I am sure some of that may go for fuel and  apparatus maintenance so it is probably not all profit, but the numbers still do not add up. If I were a resident I would be more upset at the failure to 1) abide by the tax cap and 2) fail to waive the tax cap.

 

Now cutting 600K from a budget will leave only one option most of the time, that is to lay off staff. This is not because anyone wants to cut jobs, but in most departments payroll is the biggest piece of the pie and is the only place in the budget you can make such a large cut. As a chief, it would be great if you could stand up and object to any and all cuts made to your budget, in a way I think even if it has no effect it is almost a responsibility to do so. However all department heads know they will put in for X and get cut down to Y, that is just how budgets work. It can sometimes seem inevitable that you will be cut. In a public meeting nobody wants to be the one to stand up and cry out against the cuts, especially when the funding may not be possible because of other actions like the tax cap issue they apparently had.

 

So now it will go to a referendum. Assuming the people vote in favor of restoring the jobs, thus voting in a tax increase. Now how will the village respond? Will they be able to restore the funding with the cap in place? I do not know the laws involved, but do they ever get a second chance at the cap or do they have to wait for next year?

 

 

 

[frost025 94]

Learn the facts, the chiefs had a great deal in what happened. It wasn't the so called board. The chiefs of this dept. Are career firefighter haters.when a village board suggests that they are gonna cut the firefighter jobs, and the fire chiefs do not go out against eliminating the 1st due guaranted engine of their dept. , come on just think about it, It Stinks.... They all had a hand in this travesty.. But the only thing I can say is the career firefighters turned in  4300 signatures to the village to force a referendum , let the citizens decide and the board and the chiefs can shove it where the sun doesn't shine.....

[FFPCogs 863]

12 hours ago, frost025 said:

 But the only thing I can say is the career firefighters turned in  4300 signatures to the village to force a referendum , let the citizens decide and the board and the chiefs can shove it where the sun doesn't shine.....

While I have every confidence these men will get their jobs back, voters can be fickle and it may turn out that it won't be the Chief's having something shoved where the sun doesn't shine. Like all things fire...hope for the best, plan for the worst

Edited June 4, 2016 by FFPCogs

[nfd2004 750]

Monday night we will all be watching. 

 

Will these firefighters be hired back ?

 

Will the volunteer firefighters be working with or against those firefighters ?

 

Will there be any legal action taken by those eight career firefighters by their hired attorney ? 

 

Will that attorney request for back pay and benefits as well ?

 

Will those three Fire Chiefs and/or Board Members be there to defend the decision they made ?

 

Who made and how will the statements  to damage a firefighters home play out in this decision ?

 

I guess in just a matter of hours from now, we will all find out.

 

Personally I hope for a positive outcome for those eight firefighters. I also hope for a positive and improving relationship between career and volunteer firefighters in Port Chester, NY. 

[FFPCogs 863]

2 hours ago, nfd2004 said:

Personally I hope for a positive outcome for those eight firefighters. I also hope for a positive and improving relationship between career and volunteer firefighters in Port Chester, NY. 

I too share your hopes for a positive outcome for all involved Willy, but that hope is tempered by my own experiences regarding the overall career/volunteer relationship. Over my 36 years in the fire service I have witnessed that relationship deteriorate to a point where animosity is now the norm in just about every jurisdiction where the two jointly provide services. And worse still, with each new divisive word or deed said or done,  intentional or not, be it by politicians, volunteers or career members, that already severely damaged relationship takes another hit and sinks even lower into the morass. We should as firemen be standing side by side and not toe to toe, but alas it may be too late to ever pull out of the pit we've all dug ourselves into. Sadly and with a heavy heart I must admit that when looking at the overall career/volunteer picture, I see only increased tension down the road and the utter destruction of whatever semblance of brotherhood may still exist between the two "sides" of our fire service.

 

This is definitely one of those times I hope I'm proven wrong, for nothing would make me happier than to see a real resurgence of camaraderie and true brotherhood among us. 

[nfd2004 750]

5 hours ago, FFPCogs said:

I too share your hopes for a positive outcome for all involved Willy, but that hope is tempered by my own experiences regarding the overall career/volunteer relationship. Over my 36 years in the fire service I have witnessed that relationship deteriorate to a point where animosity is now the norm in just about every jurisdiction where the two jointly provide services. And worse still, with each new divisive word or deed said or done,  intentional or not, be it by politicians, volunteers or career members, that already severely damaged relationship takes another hit and sinks even lower into the morass. We should as firemen be standing side by side and not toe to toe, but alas it may be too late to ever pull out of the pit we've all dug ourselves into. Sadly and with a heavy heart I must admit that when looking at the overall career/volunteer picture, I see only increased tension down the road and the utter destruction of whatever semblance of brotherhood may still exist between the two "sides" of our fire service.

 

This is definitely one of those times I hope I'm proven wrong, for nothing would make me happier than to see a real resurgence of camaraderie and true brotherhood among us. 

 

 I don't forsee any over night miracles happening. But if these guys get their jobs back and they have a very good backing from the Port Chester Volunteer Firefighters, I would say things are headed in the right direction. If I were one of those eight firefighters, and I saw a decent crowd of volunteer firefighters supporting me, I think that would mean a lot. A Real Strong Brotherhood could develop from this negative blow to the Port Chester Fire Dept.

 

  Along with that both volunteer and career firefighters would see that "for every drop of rain that falls, a flower grows". I guess that's about the best way to put it. But without a doubt, a lot will be watching.

 

  I often travel along I-287 and I-95 to visit a few friends. Along my 100 plus mile trip I see hundreds of signs. But lately, the signs that say "Rye", "Port Chester" and "Harrison" have taken on new meaning. As it stands now, of a place with problems when it comes to its fire service. It sure would be nice if the next time I see those signs I could feel "there's a place so many other cities, towns or villages should follow their lead". I might even stop by and knock on the door to one of those firehouses to tell the guys what a great job you did.

 

  I very often show up knocking on the firehouse door, looking like one of those homeless guys. Asking you for some spare change. But have no fear, because "Willy D is here".