1. #1
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    735

    Default Philadelphia may face more cuts

    After the closing of 5 Engines and 2 Ladders on January 5th, the mayor then requested department heads to give projections for another 10,20 and 30% cut. It was released today what that exactly means for the fire department.

    10%
    163 positions
    3 engines
    2 ladder
    3 medic units

    20%
    395 positions
    9 engines
    5 ladders
    8 medic units

    30%
    627 positions
    15 engines
    8 ladders
    13 medic units

    Wish us luck. God help us.
    Just another one of the 99%ers looking up.

  2. #2
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,802

    Default

    wow. I hope you guys make it through with the least possible cuts, for your sake and Philly's sake.

  3. #3
    Forum Member
    DeputyChiefGonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Somewhere between genius and insanity!
    Posts
    13,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PFDTruck18 View Post
    After the closing of 5 Engines and 2 Ladders on January 5th, the mayor then requested department heads to give projections for another 10,20 and 30% cut. It was released today what that exactly means for the fire department.

    10%
    163 positions
    3 engines
    2 ladder
    3 medic units

    20%
    395 positions
    9 engines
    5 ladders
    8 medic units

    30%
    627 positions
    15 engines
    8 ladders
    13 medic units

    Wish us luck. God help us.
    Of course, Mayor McNutjob and his puppet will come out and say that FD ops and safety will not be affected...
    ‎"The education of a firefighter and the continued education of a firefighter is what makes "real" firefighters. Continuous skill development is the core of progressive firefighting. We learn by doing and doing it again and again, both on the training ground and the fireground."
    Lt. Ray McCormack, FDNY

  4. #4
    Forum Member
    BKDRAFT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Bay Area, California
    Posts
    1,146

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PFDTruck18 View Post
    After the closing of 5 Engines and 2 Ladders on January 5th, the mayor then requested department heads to give projections for another 10,20 and 30% cut. It was released today what that exactly means for the fire department.

    10%
    163 positions
    3 engines
    2 ladder
    3 medic units

    20%
    395 positions
    9 engines
    5 ladders
    8 medic units

    30%
    627 positions
    15 engines
    8 ladders
    13 medic units

    Wish us luck. God help us.

    Good luck brother. Let us know if any of us out here on the west coast could help.

  5. #5
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Dickey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    5,111

    Default

    Uff Da!

    That's some significant cuts.

    I hope the City has cut everywhere else too like at City Hall & Parks & Rec.
    I also hope it will be the least amount of cuts with the least amount of impact.

    Good luck brothers and sisters.
    Jason Knecht
    Assistant Chief
    Altoona Fire Dept.
    Altoona, WI

    IACOJ - Director of Cheese and Whine
    http://www.cheddarvision.tv/
    EAT CHEESE OR DIE!!

  6. #6
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Upstate NY
    Posts
    487

    Default A real slap in the face

    I heard on Fox news this morning that the Mayor is asking 20 Mill(?) for infrastructure improvements to the city zoo out of the spendulus package. Mayor states that 200 jobs would be created and water consumption by the zoo would be cut by a third. What a crock o sh&t
    "Never share a foxhole with anyone braver than yourself."

  7. #7
    MembersZone Subscriber
    voyager9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Southern NJ
    Posts
    2,007

    Default

    I'm surprised they're cutting medic units given the fact that the news has been railing the city for the response time for medics over the last few years.

    Either way, good luck guys.
    So you call this your free country
    Tell me why it costs so much to live
    -3dd

  8. #8
    Forum Member
    FWDbuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Pee-Ayy!
    Posts
    7,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dickey View Post
    Uff Da!

    That's some significant cuts.

    I hope the City has cut everywhere else too like at City Hall & Parks & Rec.
    I also hope it will be the least amount of cuts with the least amount of impact.

    Good luck brothers and sisters.
    "Nutter the Cutter" has slashed everyone's budgets.....11 librairies, 53 out of 63 public pools, etc etc etc etc.....Yet he has the largest "Mayoral Staff" of any mayor in history. And when he is questioned on it by the media, he gets ****ed off and ducks the questions.
    "Loyalty Above all Else. Except Honor."

  9. #9
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    735

    Default

    Well, actually, the city lost in court and were required to keep the libraries open. Oddly enough, we lost in court and the city closed companies. Gotta love the political hack judges we got around here.

    Sounds liks we are also losing our chief aides, so much for fireground communications.
    Just another one of the 99%ers looking up.

  10. #10
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    635

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PFDTruck18 View Post
    Well, actually, the city lost in court and were required to keep the libraries open. Oddly enough, we lost in court and the city closed companies. Gotta love the political hack judges we got around here.

    Sounds liks we are also losing our chief aides, so much for fireground communications.
    This may come over as a bit harsh, but I'd rather lose chief's aides than companies/line firefighters. Chicago has had no chiefs aides for years and they still do a decent job of running a dept
    Last edited by ATFDFF; 02-12-2009 at 07:16 PM. Reason: 'cause i cant spell

  11. #11
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,372

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ATFDFF View Post
    This may come over as a bit harsh, but I'd rather lose chief's aides than companies/line firefighters. Chicago has had no chiefs aides for years and they still do a decent job of running a dept
    You aren't coming across as "harsh"...you are coming accross as ignorant.

    If you look at the original post in this thread, you will see that the city is facing the loss of far more than just the aide. They are facing the loss of companies and firefighters in addition to the aides.

    Just because you think Chicago "still does a decent job of running a department" without the aides, are you suggesting that other cities that have aides should just give them up willingly without a fight?

    Just remember...if it isn't YOUR city today...that doesn't mean it won't be tomorrow.

  12. #12
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Canuck Expat May be anywhere
    Posts
    2,906

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jakesdad View Post
    You aren't coming across as "harsh"...you are coming accross as ignorant.

    If you look at the original post in this thread, you will see that the city is facing the loss of far more than just the aide. They are facing the loss of companies and firefighters in addition to the aides.

    Just because you think Chicago "still does a decent job of running a department" without the aides, are you suggesting that other cities that have aides should just give them up willingly without a fight?

    Just remember...if it isn't YOUR city today...that doesn't mean it won't be tomorrow.
    I don't think he is coming across as ignorant at all. His statement was that he felt that first line firefighters and companies may well be more important than chiefs aides is something that I think most would agree on. Can you offer some validation of why you would disagree with that statement?

  13. #13
    MembersZone Subscriber
    JohnVBFD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Norfolk, Va
    Posts
    1,479

    Default

    I think if they had spent more time installing car seats and smoke detectors instead of those pesky annoying fires, they wouldn't be in this boat in the first place.
    Co 11
    Virginia Beach FD

    Amateurs practice until they get it right; professionals practice until they cannot get it wrong. Which one are you?

    'The fire went out and nobody got hurt' is a poor excuse for a fireground critique.

  14. #14
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,372

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BryanLoader View Post
    I don't think he is coming across as ignorant at all. His statement was that he felt that first line firefighters and companies may well be more important than chiefs aides is something that I think most would agree on. Can you offer some validation of why you would disagree with that statement?
    Then he should of said that.

    What he DID say was that Chicago hasn't had aides for years and "still do a decent job".

    Philadelphia is facing is the loss of companies, firefighters and chiefs aides who happen to be in most cities...FIREFIGHTERS.

    When a fellow firefighter comes on here and posts about the drastic cuts potentially being made to his department, I would think that other fellow firefighters wouldn't follow it up with tongue and cheek statements complete with smiley faces about how well other cities do WITHOUT certain things.

    Can you "offer some validation" as to why is should make a bit of difference what Chicago operates with as it relates to the current situation in Philadelphia?

  15. #15
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Canuck Expat May be anywhere
    Posts
    2,906

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jakesdad View Post
    Then he should of said that.

    What he DID say was that Chicago hasn't had aides for years and "still do a decent job".

    Philadelphia is facing is the loss of companies, firefighters and chiefs aides who happen to be in most cities...FIREFIGHTERS.

    When a fellow firefighter comes on here and posts about the drastic cuts potentially being made to his department, I would think that other fellow firefighters wouldn't follow it up with tongue and cheek statements complete with smiley faces about how well other cities do WITHOUT certain things.

    Can you "offer some validation" as to why is should make a bit of difference what Chicago operates with as it relates to the current situation in Philadelphia?
    Well I read it as he stated that he felt front line firefighters and companies were more important in his opinion than chiefs aides. I can't really judge that sine in 120 years we have never had a chiefs aide and there are still a few buildings standing. Maybe in Philadelphia chiefs aides fill a far more important position. I've noticed you seem to have a lot of comments on how other fire depts and personnel operate in various areas of the country.

  16. #16
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,372

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BryanLoader View Post
    Well I read it as he stated that he felt front line firefighters and companies were more important in his opinion than chiefs aides. I can't really judge that sine in 120 years we have never had a chiefs aide and there are still a few buildings standing. Maybe in Philadelphia chiefs aides fill a far more important position. I've noticed you seem to have a lot of comments on how other fire depts and personnel operate in various areas of the country.


    I am merely pointing out that the aides in many cities fill an important role and the loss of any facet of a fire department should not be taken lightly. If you want to debate that point, go right ahead.

    But since you are making the exact same comment that ATFDFF has made regarding how well your department seems to perform without them, I can clearly see your stance on this issue and why you think it is OK for another city to lose them. And on that...we will just have to disagree.

    Again, just because it isn't your city losing something today doesn't mean it won't be tomorrow.

    If we can't stick together as firefighters against cuts to our departments, then how on earth would we think that anyone OUTSIDE the fire service would stand by us?

    So continue to boast about how well you do without chiefs aides to someone who states they are losing them. Continue to watch as the fire service is cut to bare bones. Have a laugh while you are at it to. Pay no attention to the civilians and firefighters that get hurt by these cuts.

    After all, you still "have a few buildings that are standing"....right?

  17. #17
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Canuck Expat May be anywhere
    Posts
    2,906

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jakesdad View Post
    I am merely pointing out that the aides in many cities fill an important role and the loss of any facet of a fire department should not be taken lightly. If you want to debate that point, go right ahead.

    But since you are making the exact same comment that ATFDFF has made regarding how well your department seems to perform without them, I can clearly see your stance on this issue and why you think it is OK for another city to lose them. And on that...we will just have to disagree.

    Again, just because it isn't your city losing something today doesn't mean it won't be tomorrow.

    If we can't stick together as firefighters against cuts to our departments, then how on earth would we think that anyone OUTSIDE the fire service would stand by us?

    So continue to boast about how well you do without chiefs aides to someone who states they are losing them. Continue to watch as the fire service is cut to bare bones. Have a laugh while you are at it to. Pay no attention to the civilians and firefighters that get hurt by these cuts.

    After all, you still "have a few buildings that are standing"....right?
    If you actually think that virtually every fire dept is not going to face cuts in the future, I think you have lost touch with reality. The question that everyone needs to address is what is the least harmful. As I said, we've never had chiefs aides and so I can't comment on how important they are to your dept. Thats a decision that should only concern you. It seems that Chicago removed that position, possibly in order to keep other positions they deemed more important. IMHO, theres going to be alot more serious cuts coming everywhere and instead of decrying city administrations which isn't going to help anything, maybe more people can work together to try and deliver a standard of fire protection that is possible safely and efficiently. It is not going to be perfect, but then it never was

  18. #18
    the 4-1-4
    Jasper 45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    ...A great place, on a Great Lake
    Posts
    2,784

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BryanLoader View Post
    Can you offer some validation of why you would disagree with that statement?
    One word, safety. I can't speak for Philly, but we did have battalion chief aides up until 1993, and our firefighting deputy chief had an aide until 2007.
    these guys were hand picked for the position, and they generally were very respected firefighters with tremendous reputations in the job.

    These guys would serve as the forward eyes and ears for the on scene chief. It provided a working man's perspective to operations, as the aide would generally be up near the hand lines, or they would be on the opposite side of the incident watching things.

    Truthfully, we had more people keeping an eye on our backs 15-20 years ago. What one chief was able to do then, now requires two, or more at the same kind of incident. We are also now operating for longer periods of time without chiefs to command, which means that a line position must now be taken off of firefighting to act as an incident commander until a white hat gets there.

    We, meaning my city, have now replaced eight extra eyes city-wide, in the form of aides, to a single incident-safety-officer, who responds city-wide. Often times we have multiple incidents working at the same time, which means that some incidents have no safety-officer designated.

    Philly is in a dire straight. These cuts will cost firefighters their lives, that is sad for us, and criminal for the city. In my opinion, all cuts are harmful because they all add up. They also result in putting a chain of events into motion that injures and kill guys, because jobs on a fireground are not getting done, like they used to.

  19. #19
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Canuck Expat May be anywhere
    Posts
    2,906

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jasper45 View Post
    One word, safety. I can't speak for Philly, but we did have battalion chief aides up until 1993, and our firefighting deputy chief had an aide until 2007.
    these guys were hand picked for the position, and they generally were very respected firefighters with tremendous reputations in the job.

    These guys would serve as the forward eyes and ears for the on scene chief. It provided a working man's perspective to operations, as the aide would generally be up near the hand lines, or they would be on the opposite side of the incident watching things.

    Truthfully, we had more people keeping an eye on our backs 15-20 years ago. What one chief was able to do then, now requires two, or more at the same kind of incident. We are also now operating for longer periods of time without chiefs to command, which means that a line position must now be taken off of firefighting to act as an incident commander until a white hat gets there.

    We, meaning my city, have now replaced eight extra eyes city-wide, in the form of aides, to a single incident-safety-officer, who responds city-wide. Often times we have multiple incidents working at the same time, which means that some incidents have no safety-officer designated.

    Philly is in a dire straight. These cuts will cost firefighters their lives, that is sad for us, and criminal for the city. In my opinion, all cuts are harmful because they all add up. They also result in putting a chain of events into motion that injures and kill guys, because jobs on a fireground are not getting done, like they used to.
    I agree with you Jasper that all cuts are harmful, but the question remains, how can we avoid them. I believe it was you who talked about a major campaign your dept ( Milwaukee?) conducted to raise the profile and awareness of the fire service and their needs. If I remember correctly, you said you felt it would not be long lasting due to the fact that so much of what FD do is out of the general public eye, other than those immediately affected and the 30 second soundbite on the news. As cities tax base keeps eroding, there is going to be less and less pie to go around, and no matter how we feel, libraries, public works, parks and rec as well asothers are still going to be sharing in an increasingly smaller budget. Quite frankly, I don't have an answer other than the fire service them selves are going to have to take care of their own better. Its going to be less interior attack, or less agressive attacks, officers not committing people as hard as they might wish, and quite frankly, probably losing some situations that we might have won a few years previous. IMHO, its a very sad but possibly not preventable situation.

  20. #20
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    18

    Default hey

    hey man i run in a little town outside of philadelphia and im sorry to hear that man. i hope he makes the least cuts and u guys make it threw....so how many positions did that take away?

  21. #21
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,372

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BryanLoader View Post
    If you actually think that virtually every fire dept is not going to face cuts in the future, I think you have lost touch with reality. The question that everyone needs to address is what is the least harmful. As I said, we've never had chiefs aides and so I can't comment on how important they are to your dept. Thats a decision that should only concern you. It seems that Chicago removed that position, possibly in order to keep other positions they deemed more important. IMHO, theres going to be alot more serious cuts coming everywhere and instead of decrying city administrations which isn't going to help anything, maybe more people can work together to try and deliver a standard of fire protection that is possible safely and efficiently. It is not going to be perfect, but then it never was
    I have been saying for as long as I have posted on here that departments will face cuts...and drastic ones at that.

    But that does not mean we should give up ANYTHING willingly. And it certainly does not mean we should say to ourselves that if one particular fire department (ie Chicago) does without something that we ALL should do without it.

    By your own admission, you do not have aides and you are unfamiliar with exactly how important they are to a department that uses them. So kindly refrain from your sarcasm about how many buildings you "still have standing" without the use of aides. It is completely irrelevant to what we are discussing.

    I am not decrying city officials. I am stating a fact...and that fact is that cuts to the fire service will have a ripple effect on all of us, both as firefighters and as civilians. At work and at home.

    Too often we speak about fires and the effects of less firefighters as being only a fire service problem. But in reality it isn't. We all have families and loved ones who are all protected by some fire department. Think of those people next time you have cavalier thoughts about doing less at a fire, or writing off civilians and buildings because the city took away some companies. I would find that an unacceptable excuse if my family were simply left to perish, as I am sure most of you would too.

    You speak about working together. Perhaps you should follow your own advice and when a fellow firefighter posts on here about how his city is looking to make cuts you won't find it necessary to make statments such as..."we don't have that.. and we do just fine".

    BMA.
    Last edited by jakesdad; 02-14-2009 at 06:42 PM.

  22. #22
    Forum Member
    bharer75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    West Coast Pride!
    Posts
    352

    Default

    this is BS... in a few months the mayor will bitch and moan about staffing and response times, houses are gunna burn.

    of course they invest in the zoo, more income there and tourists. its all politics.

    it wont be the FD's fault when his house is burned down because of response times, then again he'll just buy a new one with tax money.

  23. #23
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Canuck Expat May be anywhere
    Posts
    2,906

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jakesdad View Post
    I have been saying for as long as I have posted on here that departments will face cuts...and drastic ones at that.

    But that does not mean we should give up ANYTHING willingly. And it certainly does not mean we should say to ourselves that if one particular fire department (ie Chicago) does without something that we ALL should do without it.

    By your own admission, you do not have aides and you are unfamiliar with exactly how important they are to a department that uses them. So kindly refrain from your sarcasm about how many buildings you "still have standing" without the use of aides. It is completely irrelevant to what we are discussing.

    I am not decrying city officials. I am stating a fact...and that fact is that cuts to the fire service will have a ripple effect on all of us, both as firefighters and as civilians. At work and at home.

    Too often we speak about fires and the effects of less firefighters as being only a fire service problem. But in reality it isn't. We all have families and loved ones who are all protected by some fire department. Think of those people next time you have cavalier thoughts about doing less at a fire, or writing off civilians and buildings because the city took away some companies. I would find that an unacceptable excuse if my family were simply left to perish, as I am sure most of you would too.

    You speak about working together. Perhaps you should follow your own advice and when a fellow firefighter posts on here about how his city is looking to make cuts you won't find it necessary to make statments such as..."we don't have that.. and we do just fine".

    BMA.
    Actually Jakesdad, if you look and read my initial post on this, the only criticism I had was your calling someone ignorant because of his statement that he felt front line firefighters might be more important than chiefs aides. No we all shouldn't accept every cut willingly, but maybe we can have our memberships, unions, associations try to work with some city administrations to do the cuts where they will have the least affect on FF and the publics safety. I realise than in some cities it probably isn't possible, but I think that in quite a few, there are reasonably good relations between employees and the administration. Some areas may make or accept cuts that wouldn't work in another. Just an example, New York is curtailing a lot of overtime. Just the fact that they are paying out that much overtime would suggest that management isn't properly addressing manning issues in areas that are not front line. I wonder if their IAD gets overtime?

  24. #24
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,372

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BryanLoader View Post
    Actually Jakesdad, if you look and read my initial post on this, the only criticism I had was your calling someone ignorant because of his statement that he felt front line firefighters might be more important than chiefs aides. No we all shouldn't accept every cut willingly, but maybe we can have our memberships, unions, associations try to work with some city administrations to do the cuts where they will have the least affect on FF and the publics safety. I realise than in some cities it probably isn't possible, but I think that in quite a few, there are reasonably good relations between employees and the administration. Some areas may make or accept cuts that wouldn't work in another. Just an example, New York is curtailing a lot of overtime. Just the fact that they are paying out that much overtime would suggest that management isn't properly addressing manning issues in areas that are not front line. I wonder if their IAD gets overtime?
    The ignorance wasn't in thinking that line firefighters are possibly more important than chiefs aides.

    The ignorance was in thinking that if "Chicago" can do without them, then other places should do the same.

    That IS ignorance.

  25. #25
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    735

    Default

    The loss of the aides was in addition to the other cuts posted. Not instead of other cuts. Of course all this is just a proposal and we wont have a clear understanding until the next budget address on March 19th.

    My fear is that currently the aides serve as fireground communications monitoring both the fireground tac channel and the fire dispatch channel. The aide relays info back and forth between the dispatcher and the chief. As it is currently set up, when a member activates their emergency button and declares a mayday that information is relayed back to the fireground via the dispatcher to the chiefs aide. The chief aide notifies the chief and action is taken. It is a secondary means of course hoping the chief heard the mayday broadcast on the tac channel in the first place. Its a built in safety. Currently we have 2 sets of ears listenting to fireground communications. 1 of which(the aide) lisentings exclusively with no other tasks. With the removal of the aides we would be down to 1(the dispatcher) and a big fat 0 that listen exclusively. Im not sure how they expect the chief to monitor both radios and effectively run the fireground. It puts members in even more danger. Add the already closed companies to the proposal and a drastic decrease to our safety and the publics safety is apparent.

    Forget what politicians tell you. THIS ALL ABOUT SAFETY!!!

    Lets see what this stimulus bill does for us. I have a feeling it does zip.
    Just another one of the 99%ers looking up.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Tax cuts cut
    By Firemedic 61 in forum Florida
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-26-2007, 10:47 AM
  2. Orlando--Fire and police Agencies Face Cuts
    By captstanm1 in forum Florida
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-13-2003, 09:05 AM
  3. 11,000 Job cuts!!!!!!!...
    By Sub16Green in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-28-2002, 04:33 PM
  4. IACOJ "face to face"!
    By DeputyChiefGonzo in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 08-03-2002, 10:27 AM
  5. Eye/Face Injuries Bourke Eyeshields -vs- Full Face Shields
    By colwell in forum Emergency Services Administration
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-14-2002, 02:28 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register