Move Ups?

[SWFD94]

My department/county just went to a version of the box alarm system (I say "version" because it is customized to our area). Included in this is move-ups, or change of quarters. My departments policy (and my own opinion also) is that all change of quarters are done on a code 1 (no light/siren) basis! I firmly agree with this and think it is real stupid for a department to go blaring red lights and sirens out of their station and pull into another station with their red lights and sirens on!!! Think of how (1) this is going to confuse motorists, and (2) the liability that a department will face if they get in an accident, get to court, and the lawyers find out they were simply going to sit in another station and hope for an alarm. Unfortunately some departments in my county in Illinois do not see it this way because they run reds on change-of-quarters.

My question is...what does everyone else think of this? Does your department run reds or not on a change of quarters? If so, why? If not, why not? Anyone had any bad experiences regarding this?

I am not trying to start a heated debate, just want to find out what other departments feelings are on this subject.

[ramseycl]

I agree lights and sirens are not needed when they are just moving up for stnad by. All the agencies that I deal with do not allow apparatus to run code 3 from station to station

[ADSNWFLD]

Both departments that I'm on run Cold to change of quarters.

[apatrol]

I have never heard of an emergency response for a back-in...

[911WACKER]

cold response for station fills- although some people think different, its a liability issue!!

[raricciuti]

See previous posts at:

http://www.firehouse.com/forums2/sho...threadid=34099

[TheWeave]

The code 3 move up has been a contraversy for some time. Although it does increase the danger to the FD and the public, there are times when it is required. Here in Southern California, the code 3 move up is mostly used during the Brush Fire Season. Brush fires here burn rapidly and usually require a lot of resources. We can drain 1 to 2 battalions (7 to 25) engine companies within a matter of 5-10 minutes to respond to a fire that is threatening homes and other structures. When this happens, the battalion(s) is basically empty (except for some ladder trucks and a few paramedic units). Most of the departments have identified "critical coverage" stations where a code 3 move up may be required to get an engine there rapidly. As we all know, we are in the business to save lives and help people in need, but we must be near them to help in a timely manner. If the response time is 20 + minutes, how much help are we??? I understand that in a rural area (we have thenm too) there may be some normally extended response times, but in a crowded city, the public expects short ETA's and it is our duty to deliver. Many departments plan to have a 5 minute or less ETA. That does not always happen, but we can sure try to be as close as possible. So on a political note; although a code 3 move up does endanger the public and the FD by having another vehicle on the road going code 3, the political and public back lash of not having an engine company in the area to respond to a fire or medical aid is worse. It comes down to the theory of risk Vs. gain...as it all does. The best way to lessen the danger, is a good driver training program to keep your apparatus operators safe and aware and practice good skills when behind the wheel (at all times).

TheWeave.

[Box2565]

I know that Chicago use to make change of quarters as an emergency response (they may still do this, I don't know). Like several of the folks that have posted here, I beleive that this is a unwise practice. The potential for a traffic accident is obviously increased and I would think that the lawyers would have a field day when they found out that the response was to cover a vacant fire station.

[A/C 102]

My county has just recently started to do station move-ups for larger incidents. Even though these occasions are rare, the response is ALWAYS code-1 (cold). The only time an apparatus will upgrade the response is when a call gets dispatched for the district they are going to cover. I, personally, have been responding for mutual aid to a neighboring district running hot and was then asked to repond to their station instead for coverage. Right at that moment, the lights and sirens were shut off, and the remainder of the response was cold, especially since my crew was looking forward to a job!! So far, no problems, no accidents, and no angry or confused public....works for me!!!!

[mwg911man]

I agree 100% with the policy that units that are assigned to "fill/move up/cover" respond non emergency. There is no life and death emergency and no need to put the personnel and apparatus at risk as well as the public. Citizens are confused as it is when we respond to actual emergencies and don't know what actions to take when they hear and/or see red lights and sirens. Safety of our personnel should be our number 1 concern. Let's use some common sense and keep everyone safe.

[NJFFSA16]

I agree with responding silent. Imagine the embarassment, not to mention the lawsuits resulting from an accident happening while you are responding "lights and siren" to a station fill assignment. The insurance companies will have a field day with the department.

[Adze39]

YEARS ago, we used to run hot for station coverage.

Now, we run silent when we are moving to another station. It is a good decision that reduced unnecessary risks.

There are still some yahoos who say that whenever the rig goes down the street it should be lights and sirens. Fortunately they are few and far between.

[SFDchief]

We do not go lights or sirens to backfill stations either. There is simply no need for it.

In the past few months we have been trying to pursuade the powers that be to limit the use of reds on a variety of other responses. Example: Auto alarm with call back. No need to respond lights and sirens to confirm a false alarm. CO alarm with out symptoms, certain public assistance calls (pumpouts).

Unfortunately we've met alot of resisance from our lawyers.

[rcrompm46]

Non-Emergency for moveups is the only way to go. Very seldom
is it going to be life or death in this situation.

[RES13CUE]

In my Area we are dispatched to what we call Cover Assignments. Basically the same thing just diffrent terms. Anyway my company doesn't run "Hot" to Cover-Ups - There isn't a need for it. There is no Emergency at the Empty Quarters we're going to cover. Hell, Alot of times we get to the station we're covering and can't even get in. All the Doors are Down and the Side Doors are locked --- Usually takes an officer from that department or a police officer or who ever to come by and let us in. Now when we cover a station who is out on an incident and we happen to get called in to it as a special call or whatever than the regular response rule applies --- Emergency Lights and Siren and of Course ....Safety on the road.

[mark440]

Fill-in, Cover, Move-ups, whatever you call them, should be responded to non-emergent, unless you are responding on an emergency call in the new district.
We don't run code to the grocery store, why would we to cover for someone else?
Does that mean if you go to thier station to cover while they hold a social, do you respond there lights and siren also?

*Mark

[Smoke_N_Flames]

I understand our county will be going to automatic move-ups in the near future. Any structure fire already brings at least 3 departments just do to staffing and water problems (or the lack of water). An entire side of the county can be left uncovered in a matter of minutes. So, good ICS that releases units no longer needed onscene and auto move-ups are a needed thing for us. And I agree with most everyone on this one...NO LIGHTS OR SIRENS!!! To play with the lights and siren, it needs to be an actual emergency.