Daytime staffing

[FyredUp]

Nice personal attack.

I am going to leave it at that.

have a nice day.

And your calling people MERCENARIES is all well and good because you said it. THAT, YOU HYPOCRITE started the personal attacks. So take your sanctimonious, holier than thou, attitude and shove it.

I am having a nice day pointing out what an absolutely ludicrous example of "I got mine, screw them" type of person you are.

We all get it, you are a self loather, you hate people getting paid to be firefighters and yet you get paid to be a firefighter. the battle within yourself must rage on and on. No probably not, because hypocrites can always justify there stance that something is evil unless it benefits them and only them.

[Miller337]

And your calling people MERCENARIES is all well and good because you said it. THAT, YOU HYPOCRITE started the personal attacks. So take your sanctimonious, holier than thou, attitude and shove it.

I am having a nice day pointing out what an absolutely ludicrous example of "I got mine, screw them" type of person you are.

We all get it, you are a self loather, you hate people getting paid to be firefighters and yet you get paid to be a firefighter. the battle within yourself must rage on and on. No probably not, because hypocrites can always justify there stance that something is evil unless it benefits them and only them.

It may possibly be the bloodsucking mercenary in me but that is gutbusting funny and true.
Oh also alittle aside, went on a bit of a road trip the other day and packed nearly 50 lbs of stuff along with my regular go bag in case I encountered any accidents or other emergency situations rather than drive on by like some would if they weren't on the clock.

[tree68]

.. hence the requirement that they apply as and respond as volunteer personnel when not working one of our part-time shifts.

You do realize that your requirement is completely illegal.

You might want to check out the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Or ask the folks in Maryland, who got nailed big time for it. In their case, it was found that because the fire departments are county-wide organizations, their paid personnel who lived and volunteered in another part of the county were indeed volunteering for the same people who were paying their wages.

They don't do that there any more.

[FyredUp]

You do realize that your requirement is completely illegal.

You might want to check out the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Or ask the folks in Maryland, who got nailed big time for it. In their case, it was found that because the fire departments are county-wide organizations, their paid personnel who lived and volunteered in another part of the county were indeed volunteering for the same people who were paying their wages.

They don't do that there any more.

He doesn't care because the law firm of Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe that represents Bossier Parish told them it isn't illegal.

[LaFireEducator]

You suggested that a volunteer department pay folks from adjoining areas that have never displayed an interest in volunteering for them. Yup, mercinaries. Now, if they agree to respond as a volunteer as part of that VOLUNTEER fire department when not on the clock, as a condition of employment, fine. No problem. But IMO, if they wish to work part-time for a volunteer department I damn well fully expect them to volunteer with that agency.

You may not like that, but that is how I feel.

As far as "I have mine, screw them" you couldn't be any farther off-base.

Yes, I do believe that the best delivery model for firefighting in non-urban areas is volunteer. Not career. Not POC, but non-compensated volunteer. It allows for true community-based and communit- delivered fire protection at the absolute lowest possible cost for the taxpayer. It's services being delivered by folks living in the community for the community. In most small towns this model is utilized successfully every single day.

I realize there are times that POC departments must be used, especially in busier small-community departments, and yes, there are advantages such as higher level of accountability in reagrds to training, appearence and run requirements. The obvious disadvantage is the cost and the draining of resources that could be spent on other areas of the operations. While not the ideal model, it certainly is a far superior model to career personnel from a budgetary standpoint. I have served on two POC departments during my career.

The final model is the partially or fully career FDs. I fully realize that there are a need in some communities for career staff, however, that being said, I fully support making every possible effort to retain a 100% volunteer department in a situation where a volunteer organization is having response issues and is contemplating adding career staff.

This isn't about preventing others from being hired as firefighters, but that being said, it is not the job of the fire service to emply folks. It is the job of the fire service to deliver services at the lowest possible cost. if a VFD can increase response through far lower cost incentives to retain or recruit volunteers, as compared to going the much higher cost route of hiring staff, they have a responsibility to the taxpayers to choose the lower cost option.In addition, there are significant changes to the dynamics of a volunteer department when some career staff are added that can have significant impacts on the level of volunteer membership and involvement that can lead to the need to hire additional career staff, where it may not have otherwise needed, significantly increasing the cost of fire protection to the taxpayer. I have seen those organizational and cultural changes and seen the impacts, and it's not cheap to the taxpayers.

And yes, AMA and recriprical response agreements can redue the need for hiring staff, which in theened, is better for the community, in many cases, than assuming payroll expenses.

There is no battle within me. The department feels that they needed somebody in my position to deliver public eduation as well as handle pre-planning, training and admin roles that the Deputy Chief was handling. I have no issues with our career staff orther than i feel that the addition of asecond shift firefighter was not warrented, but instead 1 or two of the three positions hired could have been assigned to day shift, rather than 24-hour shifts, and the remainder of the funding identified for those positions could have been used to support the volunteers. The simple fact is we have plenty of volunteers and the community did not need all three hired positions. if you consider that "I have mine" fine, however, I see it as simply not spending money on payroll that truly was not needed, due to our volunteer base and response. Again, it's not the role of the fire department to generate jobs if there are other alternatives to providing services.

By the way, we have seen the impacts of adding asecond shift member. there has been a significant decrease in volunteer response to overnight EMS calls as in the majority of the cases, that manpower is no longer needed. That, in a volunteer department where activity is critical to keeping the membership involved, is a very, very bad thing and may end up having some long-term concequences.

[FyredUp]

You suggested that a volunteer department pay folks from adjoining areas that have never displayed an interest in volunteering for them. Yup, mercinaries. Now, if they agree to respond as a volunteer as part of that VOLUNTEER fire department when not on the clock, as a condition of employment, fine. No problem. But IMO, if they wish to work part-time for a volunteer department I damn well fully expect them to volunteer with that agency.

If your FD doedsn't have adequate staffing and your are HIRING people to work to cover shifts they are employees and under absolutely NO OBLIGATION to volunteer back. In fact it is illegal. It is going to bite you in the butt some day.

You can expect ice tea in hell, doesn't mean you will get it.

You may not like that, but that is how I feel.

And you can feel all you want, it doesn't make you right, or your actions legal.

As far as "I have mine, screw them" you couldn't be any farther off-base.

I am EXACTLY, 100%, right on target. You hate the idea of paying anyone, but you have no problem with taking pay for a job you have said repeatedly could be handled by volunteers. So tell me Bobby, how do you justify your position other than "I have mine, screw them."

Yes, I do believe that the best delivery model for firefighting in non-urban areas is volunteer. Not career. Not POC, but non-compensated volunteer. It allows for true community-based and communit- delivered fire protection at the absolute lowest possible cost for the taxpayer. It's services being delivered by folks living in the community for the community. In most small towns this model is utilized successfully every single day.

Nonsense, the best model for fire protection for rural areas is the one that supplies enough staffing to actually have a functional fire department. IF there are enough volunteers/POC FFs to provide fire protection 24/7/365 then vollies are fine. If not then a combo FD with full-time or part-time paid firefighters may be necessary to ensure adequate staffing. Let me be clear here, enough volunteers isn't 2 or 3 to get the truck out the door while calling every other volly department in the county to get enough guys to actually deliever an effective fire attack, water supply, forcible entry, ventilation, and search and rescue.

Your definition of success is far different from mine, and frankly from much of the fire service. You define success in those rural areas in getting a truck out the door, having exterior firefighters, and claiming the community knows that there isn't really much you can do except water down the remains. That isn't success in my area, that is called a lost structure.

I realize there are times that POC departments must be used, especially in busier small-community departments, and yes, there are advantages such as higher level of accountability in reagrds to training, appearence and run requirements. The obvious disadvantage is the cost and the draining of resources that could be spent on other areas of the operations. While not the ideal model, it certainly is a far superior model to career personnel from a budgetary standpoint. I have served on two POC departments during my career.

I can see where paid fire suppression personnel, that do inspections, and pub ed (like my career FD does), as well as fire suppression and EMS, would be far more beneficial than paying a pub ed person while having inadequate line fire personnel.

The final model is the partially or fully career FDs. I fully realize that there are a need in some communities for career staff, however, that being said, I fully support making every possible effort to retain a 100% volunteer department in a situation where a volunteer organization is having response issues and is contemplating adding career staff.

How do you maintain your position on this topic and keep your job? You have said repeatedly your job could be done, and in fact was done by volunteers prior to your being hired.

This isn't about preventing others from being hired as firefighters, but that being said, it is not the job of the fire service to emply folks. It is the job of the fire service to deliver services at the lowest possible cost. if a VFD can increase response through far lower cost incentives to retain or recruit volunteers, as compared to going the much higher cost route of hiring staff, they have a responsibility to the taxpayers to choose the lower cost option.In addition, there are significant changes to the dynamics of a volunteer department when some career staff are added that can have significant impacts on the level of volunteer membership and involvement that can lead to the need to hire additional career staff, where it may not have otherwise needed, significantly increasing the cost of fire protection to the taxpayer. I have seen those organizational and cultural changes and seen the impacts, and it's not cheap to the taxpayers.

You keep posting this nonsense about impact like it is gospel everywhere. I know of several combo departments that have STRONG, FULL rosters of either volunteers or POC FFs. By your statements that would not be possible.

I am not opposed to vollies or paid on calls. What I am opposed to is your incessant rantings about the evil of paid firefighters while you supposedly are one yourself.

And yes, AMA and recriprical response agreements can redue the need for hiring staff, which in theened, is better for the community, in many cases, than assuming payroll expenses.

By continually stripping other communities with the same staffing problems of their few active firefighters. Brilliant plan.

There is no battle within me. The department feels that they needed somebody in my position to deliver public eduation as well as handle pre-planning, training and admin roles that the Deputy Chief was handling. I have no issues with our career staff orther than i feel that the addition of asecond shift firefighter was not warrented, but instead 1 or two of the three positions hired could have been assigned to day shift, rather than 24-hour shifts, and the remainder of the funding identified for those positions could have been used to support the volunteers. The simple fact is we have plenty of volunteers and the community did not need all three hired positions. if you consider that "I have mine" fine, however, I see it as simply not spending money on payroll that truly was not needed, due to our volunteer base and response. Again, it's not the role of the fire department to generate jobs if there are other alternatives to providing services.

You are exactly what I said. if you are so opposed to paying people resign and go back to doing it for free. You have said repeatedly you made more working for the scabulance service anyways.

By the way, we have seen the impacts of adding asecond shift member. there has been a significant decrease in volunteer response to overnight EMS calls as in the majority of the cases, that manpower is no longer needed. That, in a volunteer department where activity is critical to keeping the membership involved, is a very, very bad thing and may end up having some long-term concequences.

Hell man, have you polled the vollies to see if they have a problem with that? There is an easy solution to this "Problem" anyway. Set a time frame, say 5 minutes for vollies to respond, if they have a crew then they take the ambo and the paid crew remains in quarters, if no crew shows up the paid guys take the call. WOW!! That took me a whole 30 seconds to come up with. The box, think outside of it once in your life Bobby.

Your hatred for paying firefighters is obvious, just as obvious is your hypocrisy.

[LaFireEducator]

If your FD doedsn't have adequate staffing and your are HIRING people to work to cover shifts they are employees and under absolutely NO OBLIGATION to volunteer back. In fact it is illegal. It is going to bite you in the butt some day.

You can expect ice tea in hell, doesn't mean you will get it.

I don't beleive that part-time employees are covered by that.

You may not like that, but that is how I feel.

And you can feel all you want, it doesn't make you right, or your actions legal.

Again, we feel otherwise.



I am EXACTLY, 100%, right on target. You hate the idea of paying anyone, but you have no problem with taking pay for a job you have said repeatedly could be handled by volunteers. So tell me Bobby, how do you justify your position other than "I have mine, screw them."

Let me try this again .. very slow. Prior to me moving down here, nobody did public education except fo a hit or miss presentation now and then. I started a limited program on my days off from my full-time gig. The department wanted the program expanded, as well as the fact that they wanted to relieve the Deputy Chief of some training, preplanning and admin functions so that he had more time for other tasks.

Yes, a volunteer could have done some of the program I currently do, other than myself, if there was somebody else interested. But not the other tasks.

I guess by your logic every career firefighter should support the hiring of more career firefighters? There are simply places where other options or alternatives will work better, or just as well, and will be far cheaper than hiring career staff. Career staff is not THE answer, but it is the most expensive answer.

I have no problem in saying that even though I am paid, I support solving response and manpower problems in volunteer departments with recruiting, incentivizing and better utilizing volunteer resources before taking the costly, and in slow departments, non-cost efficant step of moving towards career personnel. Being paid or not should not have an effect on that opinion.

I support hiring career staff in high volume departments. I do not support hiring career staff in situations where they are not the best solution to the problem.


Nonsense, the best model for fire protection for rural areas is the one that supplies enough staffing to actually have a functional fire department. IF there are enough volunteers/POC FFs to provide fire protection 24/7/365 then vollies are fine. If not then a combo FD with full-time or part-time paid firefighters may be necessary to ensure adequate staffing. Let me be clear here, enough volunteers isn't 2 or 3 to get the truck out the door while calling every other volly department in the county to get enough guys to actually deliever an effective fire attack, water supply, forcible entry, ventilation, and search and rescue.

Your definition of success is far different from mine, and frankly from much of the fire service. You define success in those rural areas in getting a truck out the door, having exterior firefighters, and claiming the community knows that there isn't really much you can do except water down the remains. That isn't success in my area, that is called a lost structure.

So at what cost are you willing to provide that? Bottom line is that for a department that may run 2 or 3 structure fires per year, plus the assorted vehicle and brush fires, a crew of JUST 4 per shift, as an example, at 50K per firefighter (600K) is a woefully cost efficant answer for those 2 or 3 building fires. You want 8 people plus a few volunteers, that's $1.2M.

Yes, in a perfect world, we would all have the resources we wanted but that is simply not a fiscally responsible, or in many places, fiscally possible answer.

In a lot of places your defination of success is not reality.


I can see where paid fire suppression personnel, that do inspections, and pub ed (like my career FD does), as well as fire suppression and EMS, would be far more beneficial than paying a pub ed person while having inadequate line fire personnel.

Funny thing is we have far from inadequate line personnel. We average 10-12 volunteers in addition to our 4 career postions and one part-time slot on the weekdays for structure fires, as well as major brush fires and MVAsand over 20 volunteers at night in addition to the 2 shift positions for structure fires. In fact, during the day we often handle incidents with just volunteer manpower so that the full-time staff can continue to handle admin, maintanence, testing and janitoral functions. So we don't have a staffing issue. We are lucky enough to afford daytime manpower to support our volunteers, but there are many, many departments in thios area that simply don't, and never will, have that option.

Again, the department identified an training, admin and pub ed need and hired me. Your attempts at insults are getting old.



How do you maintain your position on this topic and keep your job? You have said repeatedly your job could be done, and in fact was done by volunteers prior to your being hired.

As I sated above, my job was not done by volunteers prior to my arrival. In fact, there was very, very little pub ed done prior to my arrival. When I arrived, I began doing pubed as a volunteer on a limited basis around my full-time work. The department wanted an expanded program, as well as somebody to handle identified training, preplanning and admin needs, so they hired me.

It's really not very complicated.

You keep posting this nonsense about impact like it is gospel everywhere. I know of several combo departments that have STRONG, FULL rosters of either volunteers or POC FFs. By your statements that would not be possible.

I never said that it happened in all cases, but I know of at least on department in the same county as my previous VFD in VT where the volunteers were driven out by the career staff (and are now basically eliminated) and I understand there is another department that recently hired FT staff where that is beginning to happen, and I know of SEVERAL departments in this area where that is also the case.

Yes, adding career people changes the dynamic and those FT members can develop a culture where volunteers are no longer welcome and viewed as essential parts of the department.

I am not opposed to vollies or paid on calls. What I am opposed to is your incessant rantings about the evil of paid firefighters while you supposedly are one yourself.

Never said that they were evil. They are expensive. In slower departments, unless there is a significant amount of non-fire tasks assigned to them, they are a financially inefficiant way to deliver fire protection. And they can have significant negative effects on the dynamics of a department that slill uses volunteer staffing. Does that make themn evil? No. But there are downsides and career members are not the best or most cost efficant answer in many volunteer departments looking to solve staffing issues.


By continually stripping other communities with the same staffing problems of their few active firefighters. Brilliant plan.

Define continually.

Funny thing is my previous VFD was part of AMA system where even during the daytime, we were able to keep a 2-3 firefighter crew in town while delivering an AMA assigment out of town. And every other department was able to do the same.

The simple fact is that "continually" may be 5 or 6 times a week, if not less. If you wish to define continually that way, have at it.


You are exactly what I said. if you are so opposed to paying people resign and go back to doing it for free. You have said repeatedly you made more working for the scabulance service anyways.

And where did I state that I was opposed to paying people?

I am opposed to paying personnel in VFDs if other methods to enhance operations have not been attempted, or AMA is not being utilized.

I am opposed to hiring members if it will drain resources from other areas of the operation.

Career members have thier place in some districts and some departments. In other places, it's not the answer and frankly never will be.


Hell man, have you polled the vollies to see if they have a problem with that? There is an easy solution to this "Problem" anyway. Set a time frame, say 5 minutes for vollies to respond, if they have a crew then they take the ambo and the paid crew remains in quarters, if no crew shows up the paid guys take the call. WOW!! That took me a whole 30 seconds to come up with. The box, think outside of it once in your life Bobby.

That's not a bad idea.

And yes, several of the volunteers do miss going on EMS runs, but they got tired of getting up and responding when the 4 folks on shift (2 fire/2 parish EMS) can handle it 95% of the time.

[FyredUp]

If your FD doedsn't have adequate staffing and your are HIRING people to work to cover shifts they are employees and under absolutely NO OBLIGATION to volunteer back. In fact it is illegal. It is going to bite you in the butt some day.

You can expect ice tea in hell, doesn't mean you will get it.

I don't beleive that part-time employees are covered by that.

I believe you are wrong.

You may not like that, but that is how I feel.

And you can feel all you want, it doesn't make you right, or your actions legal.

Again, we feel otherwise.

And you are still wrong.



I am EXACTLY, 100%, right on target. You hate the idea of paying anyone, but you have no problem with taking pay for a job you have said repeatedly could be handled by volunteers. So tell me Bobby, how do you justify your position other than "I have mine, screw them."

Let me try this again .. very slow. Prior to me moving down here, nobody did public education except fo a hit or miss presentation now and then. I started a limited program on my days off from my full-time gig. The department wanted the program expanded, as well as the fact that they wanted to relieve the Deputy Chief of some training, preplanning and admin functions so that he had more time for other tasks.

Yes, a volunteer could have done some of the program I currently do, other than myself, if there was somebody else interested. But not the other tasks.

YOU have repeatedly said your job could be done by the vollies. YOU SAID THAT NOT ME.

I guess by your logic every career firefighter should support the hiring of more career firefighters? There are simply places where other options or alternatives will work better, or just as well, and will be far cheaper than hiring career staff. Career staff is not THE answer, but it is the most expensive answer.

Tell me where I said that career staff is always the answer? You are the one name calling people that have come in to work to cover your station, your community, and basically your a s s.

I have no problem in saying that even though I am paid, I support solving response and manpower problems in volunteer departments with recruiting, incentivizing and better utilizing volunteer resources before taking the costly, and in slow departments, non-cost efficant step of moving towards career personnel. Being paid or not should not have an effect on that opinion.

AND if that worked in your department you wouldn't need to hire part-timers now would you? Do you see how ridiculous you sound? You talk about how to solve a problem you can't even solve in your own FD.

I support hiring career staff in high volume departments. I do not support hiring career staff in situations where they are not the best solution to the problem.

The best solution is the one that puts adequate staffing on scene quickly enough to make an actual positive difference for those needing assistance.



Nonsense, the best model for fire protection for rural areas is the one that supplies enough staffing to actually have a functional fire department. IF there are enough volunteers/POC FFs to provide fire protection 24/7/365 then vollies are fine. If not then a combo FD with full-time or part-time paid firefighters may be necessary to ensure adequate staffing. Let me be clear here, enough volunteers isn't 2 or 3 to get the truck out the door while calling every other volly department in the county to get enough guys to actually deliever an effective fire attack, water supply, forcible entry, ventilation, and search and rescue.

Your definition of success is far different from mine, and frankly from much of the fire service. You define success in those rural areas in getting a truck out the door, having exterior firefighters, and claiming the community knows that there isn't really much you can do except water down the remains. That isn't success in my area, that is called a lost structure.

So at what cost are you willing to provide that? Bottom line is that for a department that may run 2 or 3 structure fires per year, plus the assorted vehicle and brush fires, a crew of JUST 4 per shift, as an example, at 50K per firefighter (600K) is a woefully cost efficant answer for those 2 or 3 building fires. You want 8 people plus a few volunteers, that's $1.2M.

Pssst, the word is efficient. I never said hire full timers in that situation. But if you don't have enough vollies to cover and offering part-time paid positions to cover those times is a viable option. Your opposition to paying that and instead having not enough people show up under the guise of having a fire department shows how ridiculous and blatant your hypocrisy really is.

Yes, in a perfect world, we would all have the resources we wanted but that is simply not a fiscally responsible, or in many places, fiscally possible answer.

But huge fire losses and deaths are acceptable to you? Got it.

In a lot of places your defination of success is not reality.


I can see where paid fire suppression personnel, that do inspections, and pub ed (like my career FD does), as well as fire suppression and EMS, would be far more beneficial than paying a pub ed person while having inadequate line fire personnel.

Funny thing is we have far from inadequate line personnel. We average 10-12 volunteers in addition to our 4 career postions and one part-time slot on the weekdays for structure fires, as well as major brush fires and MVAsand over 20 volunteers at night in addition to the 2 shift positions for structure fires. In fact, during the day we often handle incidents with just volunteer manpower so that the full-time staff can continue to handle admin, maintanence, testing and janitoral functions. So we don't have a staffing issue. We are lucky enough to afford daytime manpower to support our volunteers, but there are many, many departments in thios area that simply don't, and never will, have that option.

If staffing isn't an issue why are you hiring your hated "Mercenaries?"

Again, the department identified an training, admin and pub ed need and hired me. Your attempts at insults are getting old.

No insults, just pointing out your hypocrisy.




How do you maintain your position on this topic and keep your job? You have said repeatedly your job could be done, and in fact was done by volunteers prior to your being hired.

As I sated above, my job was not done by volunteers prior to my arrival. In fact, there was very, very little pub ed done prior to my arrival. When I arrived, I began doing pubed as a volunteer on a limited basis around my full-time work. The department wanted an expanded program, as well as somebody to handle identified training, preplanning and admin needs, so they hired me.

It's really not very complicated.

If you say so.


You keep posting this nonsense about impact like it is gospel everywhere. I know of several combo departments that have STRONG, FULL rosters of either volunteers or POC FFs. By your statements that would not be possible.

I never said that it happened in all cases, but I know of at least on department in the same county as my previous VFD in VT where the volunteers were driven out by the career staff (and are now basically eliminated) and I understand there is another department that recently hired FT staff where that is beginning to happen, and I know of SEVERAL departments in this area where that is also the case.

That can ONLY happen if there is weak lesadership that allows it to happen.

Yes, adding career people changes the dynamic and those FT members can develop a culture where volunteers are no longer welcome and viewed as essential parts of the department.

I am not opposed to vollies or paid on calls. What I am opposed to is your incessant rantings about the evil of paid firefighters while you supposedly are one yourself.

Never said that they were evil. They are expensive. In slower departments, unless there is a significant amount of non-fire tasks assigned to them, they are a financially inefficiant way to deliver fire protection. And they can have significant negative effects on the dynamics of a department that slill uses volunteer staffing. Does that make themn evil? No. But there are downsides and career members are not the best or most cost efficant answer in many volunteer departments looking to solve staffing issues.

And tell me the advantage of your idea of a volunteer fire department that shows up inadequately staffed, exterior "certified" only, and waters down smoldering remains?



By continually stripping other communities with the same staffing problems of their few active firefighters. Brilliant plan.

Define continually.

Anytime you call them...

Funny thing is my previous VFD was part of AMA system where even during the daytime, we were able to keep a 2-3 firefighter crew in town while delivering an AMA assigment out of town. And every other department was able to do the same.

The simple fact is that "continually" may be 5 or 6 times a week, if not less. If you wish to define continually that way, have at it.

Continually means that any time you call them they have the same issue as you, inadequate staffing. The number per day, week, month, or year, is irrelevant.



You are exactly what I said. if you are so opposed to paying people resign and go back to doing it for free. You have said repeatedly you made more working for the scabulance service anyways.

And where did I state that I was opposed to paying people?

I am opposed to paying personnel in VFDs if other methods to enhance operations have not been attempted, or AMA is not being utilized.

I am opposed to hiring members if it will drain resources from other areas of the operation.

Career members have thier place in some districts and some departments. In other places, it's not the answer and frankly never will be.

You are muddying your own waters. You are turning it into a volly/career battle, when the original battle involved your derogatory comments about part-time paid people filling in for your inadequate staffing.



Hell man, have you polled the vollies to see if they have a problem with that? There is an easy solution to this "Problem" anyway. Set a time frame, say 5 minutes for vollies to respond, if they have a crew then they take the ambo and the paid crew remains in quarters, if no crew shows up the paid guys take the call. WOW!! That took me a whole 30 seconds to come up with. The box, think outside of it once in your life Bobby.

That's not a bad idea.

And yes, several of the volunteers do miss going on EMS runs, but they got tired of getting up and responding when the 4 folks on shift (2 fire/2 parish EMS) can handle it 95% of the time.

Of course it is not a bad idea. If you look for solutions instead of ways to attack and berate part of your staff it is amazing how easily they can appear.

Maybe if you would put away your prejudice and look at everyone as an asset, including the part-timers, some of those issues you fret over would go away.

[LaFireEducator]

Maybe if you would put away your prejudice and look at everyone as an asset, including the part-timers, some of those issues you fret over would go away.

The part-time day position was designed not to provide response coverage, but to provide an additional paid hand for the daily janitorial, maintenance, admin, pre-planning and testing, among other functions that need to be done without having to inconvenience the volunteers.

As I have previously stated, we have enough volunteer daytime response that in many cases, routine EMS and fire calls can actually be handled either wholly or partially by the volunteer from home response, leaving the paid staff to continue on with their assigned daily tasks.

And yes, my public education could be handled by a volunteer or volunteers, if we had one, or more that were interested, and had the right training for the task. Unfortunately we don't, and really never have, so the department decided to hire me to fill that role on a consistent basis. In a perfect world, hiring me would not have been deemed necessary, but in the eyes of the department it was, not only to fill the pubed role but to fill other daily admin and training roles. And frankly why I was hired is actually none of your business.

[FyredUp]

The part-time day position was designed not to provide response coverage, but to provide an additional paid hand for the daily janitorial, maintenance, admin, pre-planning and testing, among other functions that need to be done without having to inconvenience the volunteers.

As I have previously stated, we have enough volunteer daytime response that in many cases, routine EMS and fire calls can actually be handled either wholly or partially by the volunteer from home response, leaving the paid staff to continue on with their assigned daily tasks.

And yes, my public education could be handled by a volunteer or volunteers, if we had one, or more that were interested, and had the right training for the task. Unfortunately we don't, and really never have, so the department decided to hire me to fill that role on a consistent basis. In a perfect world, hiring me would not have been deemed necessary, but in the eyes of the department it was, not only to fill the pubed role but to fill other daily admin and training roles. And frankly why I was hired is actually none of your business.

So you want your part-time janitors and maintenance men to volunteer back to the department when they are there working and getting paid during a time period when you DON'T have enough people to accomplish what needs to be done. Gotcha.

And frankly why I was hired is actually none of your business.

The only thing that could have made this better is if you had ended it with Nah Ner Nah Ner. Actually, since you are a public employee, anyone, including myself, could inquire of your fire department about your position, the minimum requirements for that position, the hiring process, and why the position was created in the first place. Its all public information, or it is supposed to be. Including your wages and benefits.

You really need to relax, you start a ****ing contest by calling part-time firefighters mercenaries and then cry foul when I fired back at your hypocrisy. Now you pull the "None of your business" crap. Nice try...but actually all it did was make me laugh at your desperation.