Sorta What I have Been Thinkin'

[LaFireEducator]

If they can't do it, sorry and thank you for applying. It's not difficult. It's not anymore labor intensive than normal, mandated, training. When a fire department is dispatched to a scene, it is because they are believed capable of alleviating the situation. When the fire department shows up, members (commonly referred to as firefighters) are expected to be informed and skilled enough to mitigate the situation. Frequency of occurrence, number of tools available, and fear of losing members is no excuse. We don't draft. Don't need to, are barely set up to do it. But once a year we practice it. We've never, in the long history of the department, needed to draft but we still practice it. Why? Because we are expected to know what to do and how to do it. You see nothing wrong in living under your rock, pretending you'll always know what calls you have but one day you'll realize something:

We all disagree with each other on a myriad of topics but nothing can make EVERYONE agree like when you open your mouth and we state the infinite ways as signs you have no clue what you're doing. Please, keep spouting your excuses. It only motivates me more to get better so no one associates me as a firefighter from the same state you continue to poison with your stupidity.

And we disagree on what a firefighter is, and that the expectations will likely never be universal from one community to another, especially when the communities are significantly different.

Have a great day.

[FireMedic049]

And I have no issues with optional haz-mat training. None. Nada. No issues. Never said that for most departments it's a damn good idea.

But I do have issues when it's added as another requirement for FFI testing.

Again, how a department trains should be the decision of the department. I guess I'm just old-fashioned that way. By adding it as a requirement for FFI , the state has simply added another block of time and another test (probably the toughest certification test, by the way) that volunteers have to hurdle over to test for FFI.

I'm not going to debate the merits of the class as obviously you feel it's more applicable in a rural setting than I do, but bottom line, requiring it before one can test out for FFI has had the effect of basically stopping a group of folks from pursueing FFI.

If your folks are having that much trouble passing the Hazmat Ops training, then it's no wonder you are so opposed to certifications. Hazmat Ops training (at least in PA) is not all that complicated.

[FireMedic049]

In a perfect world with unlimited resources, I have no issues with it.

Bulls#@t!!!!

I recently asked you if the funding was taken completely out of the equation, would you still be opposed to certification. You continued to express opposition!

So yes, given a perfect world I would love to have a volunteer station full of FFI/FFIIs that can all go interior. But I know in many places that won't be the case.

It's pretty achievable in a not so perfect world. I know it won't be the case in a lot of places too, but it'll be that way more due to your line of thinking and apathy than because the personnel are not capable of achieving certification.

[FireMedic049]

And we disagree on what a firefighter is, and that the expectations will likely never be universal from one community to another, especially when the communities are significantly different.

Have a great day.

In overall terms of services expected of the fire department and firefighters, you would be correct that there will never be a truly universal complete set of expectations of each and every FD and FF. However, I think you will find that some expectations that are universal like timely/adequate response, competency, the ability to put out their fire and rescue people trapped by the fire (even if that means going inside to do it).

[GTRider245]

Let's see here...

Who mandates requirements to get a driver's license? The state.

Who regulates EMT/Medic certifications? The state.

Who regulates firefighter certifications? Local podunk VFD.

Yeah, that won't work.

[LaFireEducator]

If your folks are having that much trouble passing the Hazmat Ops training, then it's no wonder you are so opposed to certifications. Hazmat Ops training (at least in PA) is not all that complicated.

Statewide, Haz-Mat Operations has the lowest pass rate of all the certification tests. Here, it is a very difficult test.

[LaFireEducator]

Bulls#@t!!!!

I recently asked you if the funding was taken completely out of the equation, would you still be opposed to certification. You continued to express opposition!

And the reason why was in smaller communties with a limited manpower pool to draw from, it will effect the size of the department and the ability to operate on the fireground.

It's pretty achievable in a not so perfect world. I know it won't be the case in a lot of places too, but it'll be that way more due to your line of thinking and apathy than because the personnel are not capable of achieving certification.

I don't think it has very much to do with my line of thinking. I think it has to do with the realities of the manpower pool in small communities and the time they have to committ to that level of training.

[LaFireEducator]

In overall terms of services expected of the fire department and firefighters, you would be correct that there will never be a truly universal complete set of expectations of each and every FD and FF. However, I think you will find that some expectations that are universal like timely/adequate response, competency, the ability to put out their fire and rescue people trapped by the fire (even if that means going inside to do it).

This seems like this is one of those discussions that will apparently never have a conclusion.

I have stated that in many of these small communities the citizens are very well aware of the limited abilities of the fire department due to response times, manpower and funding. Even though you live 1200 miles from here or likely never have visited some of the areas in which I have served in the northeast, you continue to disagree. If you wish to keep making this blanket statement, fine, but it's simply not correct.

[tajm611]

Statewide, Haz-Mat Operations has the lowest pass rate of all the certification tests. Here, it is a very difficult test.

It has the highest failure rate because it's one of the only pulled from a state test bank, written, and created under state standards. It covers everything from how to read msds sheets, to reading the erg, to mass decon and WMD scenarios. Lsu goves the same hazmat test to the recruits, 25-35 at a time and only a week to learn it, along with a normal class load. I only know 1 person to fail. More failed first responder than hazmat. It's not difficult at all, it's just. It as simple as satin "meh, we know enough. What we know will suffice". When multichem blew here, everyone on scene were trained to the same standard and the operation went flawless. Enjoy being left out when real departments need real help.

[LaFireEducator]

It has the highest failure rate because it's one of the only pulled from a state test bank, written, and created under state standards. It covers everything from how to read msds sheets, to reading the erg, to mass decon and WMD scenarios. Lsu goves the same hazmat test to the recruits, 25-35 at a time and only a week to learn it, along with a normal class load. I only know 1 person to fail. More failed first responder than hazmat. It's not difficult at all, it's just. It as simple as satin "meh, we know enough. What we know will suffice". When multichem blew here, everyone on scene were trained to the same standard and the operation went flawless. Enjoy being left out when real departments need real help.

Fefine real. If that means the city departments, that's more than fine with me. I don't have anything against them, I just prefer not to work with them.

At my point in my career, going mutual aid infrequently is a very good thing.

And I know of more than one good firefighter who was aiming for FFI, but gave up on it because of they were getting hung up Operations. Would be a much better situation if Operations was not made a requirement for FFI testing.

[RFDACM02]

At my point in my career, going mutual aid infrequently is a very good thing.

Given this thread, your generally attitude and the above statement, a Win-Win would be for you to quit the FD. You could do less than ever and the community would likely be better served with one less person trying to ensure they legally get less of a response when they call 911.

I don't mean to be mean but JHC! All you do is complain about how hard it is to keep up with mandates and make up excuses and tales as to why standards should be relaxed and the public's expectations of volunteers lowered.Likely the only thing we can agree on is that as finances are lowered expectations will have to be.

[LaFireEducator]

Given this thread, your generally attitude and the above statement, a Win-Win would be for you to quit the FD. You could do less than ever and the community would likely be better served with one less person trying to ensure they legally get less of a response when they call 911.

I don't mean to be mean but JHC! All you do is complain about how hard it is to keep up with mandates and make up excuses and tales as to why standards should be relaxed and the public's expectations of volunteers lowered.Likely the only thing we can agree on is that as finances are lowered expectations will have to be.

Got a bunch of young kids eager to fight fire that need experience, so it's far better to send them as fires in our district are way down even from 5 years ago.

After 33 years, if there are younger folks that want to run to fires, I'll let them have at it.

That certainly doesn't mean that I put any less effort into my training or into any training I'm delivering, but yes, if there are others that need the experience to do the job, it simply makes sense for me to step back and let them do it, unless the situation requires I step in for whatever reason.

And where I have said that standards should be lowered?

I have advocated for designing an optional certification program to increase the professionalism of exterior-only personnel, which are quite common in rural VFDs, and not increasing existing standards. especially associatted with volunteer personnel, but nowhere have i advocated for lower standards.

[FireMedic049]

Statewide, Haz-Mat Operations has the lowest pass rate of all the certification tests. Here, it is a very difficult test.

Is the test really that difficult or are the people struggling with it just not putting in the necessary effort?

BTW, what exactly is that pass rate? How does it compare to the rest of the certifications available?

[LaFireEducator]

Is the test really that difficult or are the people struggling with it just not putting in the necessary effort?

BTW, what exactly is that pass rate? How does it compare to the rest of the certifications available?

Last I knew the pass rate was about 50%. From what I understand, the pass rate has dropped since it has become a requirement to test for FFI, but it has always had the lowest pass rate of any of the certification tests.

I don't have the pass rate on other tests. Tajm may be able to provide that information.

I know of several folks that have taken it 2-3 times, and still have not passed it.

I'll be honest, I think there are some folks that simply are not putting in the effort even though every instructor that I know stresses at the begginning of the class that it requires significant effort and study to pass. That being said, the questions that are selected do tend to be fairly technical and the test is terminology heavy, so there is another element that simply, IMO, has a problem with that level of technical material. You can see it in some tof their eyes when you start talking about the scientific terminolgy in class.

As I said, there are some that simply have given up on FFI because of the problems they have had with Operations.

[FireMedic049]

This seems like this is one of those discussions that will apparently never have a conclusion.

I have stated that in many of these small communities the citizens are very well aware of the limited abilities of the fire department due to response times, manpower and funding. Even though you live 1200 miles from here or likely never have visited some of the areas in which I have served in the northeast, you continue to disagree. If you wish to keep making this blanket statement, fine, but it's simply not correct.

I know you have stated it and it very well may be true, but I think even knowing they don't have a "big city" fire department, they would expect you to be able to save their loved ones trapped in a fire. That often requires going inside to do it.

[FyredUp]

Got a bunch of young kids eager to fight fire that need experience, so it's far better to send them as fires in our district are way down even from 5 years ago.

After 33 years, if there are younger folks that want to run to fires, I'll let them have at it.

That certainly doesn't mean that I put any less effort into my training or into any training I'm delivering, but yes, if there are others that need the experience to do the job, it simply makes sense for me to step back and let them do it, unless the situation requires I step in for whatever reason.

And where I have said that standards should be lowered?

I have advocated for designing an optional certification program to increase the professionalism of exterior-only personnel, which are quite common in rural VFDs, and not increasing existing standards. especially associatted with volunteer personnel, but nowhere have i advocated for lower standards.

If I ever get to the point where I see going to fires as not that important I hope I have the common sense to step down and get out of the way. Fighting fire and saving lives is, after all, why fire departments exist in the first place.

Okay, hopefully you will get it this time:
1) Your exterior firefighter standard, while creating a standard where one does not exist now, is in fact a lessening of the current FF1.
2) Because you wish to make it optional it is as worthless as tits on a boar. It has no teeth and does not improve the performance or skill set of anyone that chooses not to take the course and be certified.
3) Basically it does nothing to improve the goold old boy foundation saver rural fire departments.
4) So once again your bluster and BS have proven you actually are working harder to keep those FDs down than you are to bring them up.
5) You are correct in one thing and one thing only in your posting. You haven't advocated for lower standards, you are in fact advocating for ZERO enforceable standards. Essentially you are advocating for absolutely NOTHING at all. Brilliant, you could be a republican presidential candidate!

[tajm611]

Test are very easy. I wouldn't say I'm any smarter than an average person but I've never had a problem reading the book and challenging the test. I called an adjunct for the recruit academy. Said in the 5 years he's been teaching, 3 classes a year, average class of 20- 30.... Conservative guess of 300 students, he's seen 10 fail. Also 30+ failed the mile run, and a few from general grade average being below the allowable threshold.

My volunteer has 20 volunteer-only guys get ff1 on first try with good grades. When the new chief said all new hires needed it after a certain time on or they couldn't fight fire, they took it seriously.

The highest fail rate is on driver ops. This is huge margin. In a class of 30, average was 5-8 passing. Was it hard? Maybe. But it wasn't mandatory to pass. Most guys figured they weren't making driver soon, they could make a 0 and still get their badge, and plenty just didn't care. Most fail. Don't enforce it as mandatory and the general populous wont care. They take the same view lafire takes to elevating standards. He won't care to try until the metaphorical gun is to his head.

[LaFireEducator]

Test are very easy. I wouldn't say I'm any smarter than an average person but I've never had a problem reading the book and challenging the test. I called an adjunct for the recruit academy. Said in the 5 years he's been teaching, 3 classes a year, average class of 20- 30.... Conservative guess of 300 students, he's seen 10 fail. Also 30+ failed the mile run, and a few from general grade average being below the allowable threshold.

My volunteer has 20 volunteer-only guys get ff1 on first try with good grades. When the new chief said all new hires needed it after a certain time on or they couldn't fight fire, they took it seriously.

The highest fail rate is on driver ops. This is huge margin. In a class of 30, average was 5-8 passing. Was it hard? Maybe. But it wasn't mandatory to pass. Most guys figured they weren't making driver soon, they could make a 0 and still get their badge, and plenty just didn't care. Most fail. Don't enforce it as mandatory and the general populous wont care. They take the same view lafire takes to elevating standards. He won't care to try until the metaphorical gun is to his head.

Obviously the percentage regarding Operations is better in the academy than in the field. I would suspect that it's because there is a badge on the line in the academy, but I admit that's just an educated guess.

As i said, I have seen guys who were fairly smart take it 2 or 3 times before they pass. I know Driver/Operator is difficult (though not as bad as it was now that there are a limited number of calculation questions) and probably had a high fail rate, but didn't realize it was that high.

I think FFI isn't quite as hard as it used to be though I noticed what seemed to be a set of new -format type when I took Inspector II a couple of months ago. I don't know if they are planning on changing the format in a similiar way for the other certification tests.

Fully agree that if it's not mandatory, there is a limited interest, however on my combo department FFI does mean incentive pay for the volunteers that work the day and relief shifts, as well as elevated status in terms of being selected for advanced classes and out-of-town training and conferences, so there is a reason to get it.

[LaFireEducator]

I know you have stated it and it very well may be true, but I think even knowing they don't have a "big city" fire department, they would expect you to be able to save their loved ones trapped in a fire. That often requires going inside to do it.

I think a lot depends on the community.

I know of places where there simply isn't that expectation and they seem to accept that. I'm sure even in the communities where there is an overall sense that the department's abilities are limited there are residents that do feel that the department should be able to make a save.

Yes it does, and in some places there is a good possibility that may not happen.

[LaFireEducator]

If I ever get to the point where I see going to fires as not that important I hope I have the common sense to step down and get out of the way. Fighting fire and saving lives is, after all, why fire departments exist in the first place.

Okay, hopefully you will get it this time:
1) Your exterior firefighter standard, while creating a standard where one does not exist now, is in fact a lessening of the current FF1.
2) Because you wish to make it optional it is as worthless as tits on a boar. It has no teeth and does not improve the performance or skill set of anyone that chooses not to take the course and be certified.
3) Basically it does nothing to improve the goold old boy foundation saver rural fire departments.
4) So once again your bluster and BS have proven you actually are working harder to keep those FDs down than you are to bring them up.
5) You are correct in one thing and one thing only in your posting. You haven't advocated for lower standards, you are in fact advocating for ZERO enforceable standards. Essentially you are advocating for absolutely NOTHING at all. Brilliant, you could be a republican presidential candidate!

All true. Well, at least true in your mind.

And if you want to nominate me, I accept.

I guess we don't have much to debate anymore. Have a nice night.