Greenwich FD Staffing Changes

[LineCapt 134]

Quote

On Sept. 18 the Town of Greenwich suffered a tragic loss of one of its citizens in a fatal fire on Windsor Lane in Cos Cob. The first two fire engines arriving at the fire were the chronically understaffed Engine 2 of Cos Cob and Engine 5 of Old Greenwich. Each of these fire engines only brings two firefighters to the scene. The staffing of only two firefighters on a fire engine is dangerous for the public and for first responders.

 

http://www.greenwichtime.com/opinion/article/Firefighters-cite-unsafe-staffing-levels-10599449.php

[SECTMB 612]

DUH!!!!!!

[x635 4,066]

What always gets me about Greenwich is that they are one of the wealthiest communities in the entire nation. How they can not afford to properly staff an engine is beyond me.

[gamewell45 258]

14 hours ago, x635 said:

What always gets me about Greenwich is that they are one of the wealthiest communities in the entire nation. How they can not afford to properly staff an engine is beyond me.

They can afford it, just that they hate to spend their money unless absolutely necessary.   

[nfd2004 750]

On ‎11‎/‎8‎/‎2016 at 7:24 PM, LineCapt said:

 

http://www.greenwichtime.com/opinion/article/Firefighters-cite-unsafe-staffing-levels-10599449.php

 

This is repeated so many times over in America. Most taxpayers consider firefighters as just a burden on their tax dollars. That is UNTIL......... it's too late.

 

For many, they pay for education, police, public works, but by far paying for firefighters seems to be the biggest problem. Sometimes, these firefighters don't even get the support from other firefighters, right within their own communities. Such is the case where in my own community, so often other firefighters will try to push for the cutting of manning.

 

 People will say, "but firefighters aren't fighting enough fires to make that manning necessary". I say to that, we all are paying for our military and I'm glad when we're NOT fighting a war. Most of us also pay insurance premiums on our homes, cars or apartments. Yet, we don't use that insurance policy unless needed. 

 

 To the average taxpayer, a group of career firefighters is merely a burden on their pocketbook. But tonight if they are one of the unfortunate one's, they could very quickly change that attitude. They now call them THEIR HEROs. It happens quickly and without warning. It's happened before and it will happen again. Meantime firefighters are forced to take much more risk than is already required. But most took an oath to perform "the saving of lives and property". We are talking human lives and most firefighters will throw themselves into danger to do whatever is possible to get those human lives out of danger.

 

 To some, Firefighters are a Burden.

 To some, Firefighters are a Hero

 

[gamewell45 258]

2 hours ago, nfd2004 said:

 

This is repeated so many times over in America. Most taxpayers consider firefighters as just a burden on their tax dollars. That is UNTIL......... it's too late.

 

For many, they pay for education, police, public works, but by far paying for firefighters seems to be the biggest problem. Sometimes, these firefighters don't even get the support from other firefighters, right within their own communities. Such is the case where in my own community, so often other firefighters will try to push for the cutting of manning.

 

 People will say, "but firefighters aren't fighting enough fires to make that manning necessary". I say to that, we all are paying for our military and I'm glad when we're NOT fighting a war. Most of us also pay insurance premiums on our homes, cars or apartments. Yet, we don't use that insurance policy unless needed. 

 

 To the average taxpayer, a group of career firefighters is merely a burden on their pocketbook. But tonight if they are one of the unfortunate one's, they could very quickly change that attitude. They now call them THEIR HEROs. It happens quickly and without warning. It's happened before and it will happen again. Meantime firefighters are forced to take much more risk than is already required. But most took an oath to perform "the saving of lives and property". We are talking human lives and most firefighters will throw themselves into danger to do whatever is possible to get those human lives out of danger.

 

 To some, Firefighters are a Burden.

 To some, Firefighters are a Hero

 

As long as the public know that firefighters will throw themselves into danger to do whatever is possible to get those human lives out of danger, nothing is going to change their mindset.  For the firefighters they are caught between a rock and a hard place; many of us took an oath to help save lives and property and if we know someone's life is in danger all the rules of OSHA and NFPA generally go out the window as opposed to standing around waiting for the minimum requirement of firefighters arrive on the scene.  The best thing I think we can do is to educate the public as to the importance of proper staffing and ideally change their mindset.  Most likely it'll be an uphill battle but you have to start somewhere.

[x635 4,066]

From the Greenwich Professional Firefighters Facebook page:

Quote

 

Staffing Changes In The Greenwich Fire Department

 

On Monday November 28th, the Greenwich Fire Department will change how each firehouse is staffed by it’s career firefighters. This change will place 3 firefighters on all staffed fire engines in Town. While this is an improvement to our current staffing on fire engines that have 2 firefighters assigned to them, this cuts the staffing on our fire engines that have 4 assigned to them. All national standards recommend that 4 firefighters be assigned to fire engines and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration states that 4 firefighters have to be on scene of a fire before firefighters can enter a building and start to extinguish a fire and search for trapped occupants.

 

For the last 3 years the Greenwich Professional Firefighters Association has supported the First Selectman’s plan to increase the staffing on the 2 firefighter fire engines while maintaining the 4 firefighter engines. We have also supported the addition of a new fire station in the Northwest part of Town. We believe that cutting the staffing on the fire engines in Glenville, North Street and Central Greenwich increases the risk to residents as well as firefighters. The Greenwich Professional Firefighters Association is asking that all parties come together to increase the staffing of our dangerous 2 firefighter fire engines and maintain the properly staffed 4 firefighter fire engines.

 

For additional information, please contact the Greenwich Professional Firefighters at secretary@greenwichfire.org

 

[fdalumnus 165]

54 minutes ago, x635 said:

From the Greenwich Professional Firefighters Facebook page:

 

Sounds like a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul.

 

[x635 4,066]

Some more recent news:

 

Quote

GREENWICH — Concerns about Fire Department response times and capabilities in the north end of the community are continuing, as the department spells out the rationale for recent changes and promotes them as an overall benefit to public safety

 

http://www.greenwichtime.com/local/article/Debate-rages-over-Greenwich-Fire-Department-change-10801700.php?cmpid=fb-tablet

[LayTheLine 108]

This is a difficult situation that doesn't seem to have a clear-cut answer. Obviously the best answer would be to hire 24 additional firefighters to make-up the six 4-man engine companies. But apparently that can't be afforded. I do not know the financial situation of Greenwich, but if Greenwich can't staff 4-man engine companies, I'm surprised any similar size town/city can staff 3-man companies!! It is one of the richest towns in the country. Be that as it may, here are some points to consider:

 

1) The town is approximately 50 square miles with a population of 63,000 plus people.

 

2) How many volunteers are active, and how many are on the scene of a fire within 2 to 3 minutes of the first due engine? I would think you'd need an 90% rate of at least one certified volunteer showing up within 2 to 3 minutes of the engine on "reported structure fires."  It's not perfect, but it's something that should be tracked. Automatic Fire Alarms shouldn't be counted in this number, as many, many departments across the country send 2 or 3 firefighters to check on an AFA in a residential structure and maybe a second engine and a ladder for a high-life occupancy. Still, that's only 8 to 10 firefighters showing up for what is 95% of the time a false alarm, minor cooking incident, or an oil burner back-fire. Of course any 2nd source reporting anything like smoke or even an odor should be upgraded to a structural response.  With that being said, what do the numbers show? If a 4th certified volunteer shows up only 33% of the time within 2 to 3 minutes then you've got a problem. Bottom Line: Nothing can be perfect and the word reasonable should fit into the equation. In other words, you could have two houses struck by lightning just 3 blocks away, but you don't staff two 4-man engines in each station to cover that.

 

3) As for the current situation, I agree that six 3-man engine companies make more sense than having 2 and 4 man engines. I would think this would be easier to set-up SOP's for the department. Otherwise you could have different sets of procedures to train on - if a 2-man company shows up and fire is showing then A,B,C. If a 4-man engine shows up and fire is showing then D,E,F.  Consistency is the key and the less confusing the better. I wonder if the GFD training department has to train on two sets of fire attack depending on the manning? In addition, a 3 man crew can get a lot set up waiting for the 4th firefighter to arrive or the 2nd due engine to arrive. Stretching the line to the door, doing a 360 of the building, throwing a ladder for a secondary means of escape, ordering additional equipment, forcing the lock, darken down the fire from the outside to "reset" it (see SLICERS fire attack on You Tube). A lot can be done in those first 2 to 4 minutes.

 

4) If it is determined that a 4th firefighter (rather volunteer or the 2nd due engine) doesn't show up within 5 minutes more than 50% of the time, then a 4th person could be added to all 6 engines by hiring a total of 16 firefighters. How? The 16 additional would be spread out among the 4 groups (4 per group). This would cover 4 of the engines. Then take the 2 firefighters off the ladder to cover the other 2 engines; in essence, leaving the ladder company with a driver only. You would end up with 4 firefighters in 5 of the 6 manned stations and the new Headquarters (when finished) would have 6 on-duty (4 on Engine 1, 1 on Tower 1, the shift deputy).  What about the ladder? The ladder isn't going to be on the scene the majority of the time within the first 8 to 10 minutes town-wide, considering it covers everywhere. Send 4 engines and the ladder to reported structure fires. First engine is rescue/fire attack, second engine is water supply/back-up line, third engine is assigned to the ladder company (you now have a 5-man ladder company with an officer!) and the 4th engine would stand-by a block away and await for assignment by the shift commander.

 

Now, I will admit that none of my proposals are perfect, but I will restate there has to be some point of "reasonableness" and agreement when trying to come up with a solution. Accurate data must be gathered and then a proper plan could be put into effect, with the Training Department being able to teach and spread the program with the same information, town-wide.  Total minimum shift staffing would go from 22 to 26. I hope that wouldn't break the bank and the increase in better service would be unmeasurable.

Edited December 18, 2016 by LayTheLine