Deputy Chiefs Say 'No Confidence' in Boston Chief Steve Abraira
Created: May 15, 2013
All 13 deputy chiefs say Chief Steve Abraira never assumed command during the April 15 bombing at the Boston Marathon.
May 15--All 13 deputy chiefs in the Boston Fire Department have declared they have "no confidence" in Chief Steve Abraira, firing off an angry letter to the mayor saying the fire boss "failed" by balking at taking command at the deadly Boston Marathon bombing scene.
The letter, a copy of which was obtained by the Herald, blasts Abraira -- the department's highest-ranking uniformed officer -- as a "ghost fire chief" who "never announced his arrival on the radio or assumed any command authority" at the April 15 terror attack on Boylston Streeet.
"At a time when the City of Boston needed every first responder to take decisive action, Chief Abraira failed to get involved in operational decision-making or show any leadership," the letter, signed by each deputy chief, reads. "You can unequivocally consider this letter a vote of no confidence in Chief Abraira."
Dot Joyce, spokeswoman for Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino, Tuesday night said she had not seen the letter nor spoken to the mayor about it.
Abraira, who was handpicked for the $160,000-a-year job, said there was "no reason" for him to step in and assume command.
"Quite honestly, I thought everything was going very well with the deputies at the scene," Abraira said last night. "If you can strengthen command or if things are going badly then yes. But in this environment, it doesn't make sense, because you have senior deputies and they do this every day. That's what I want them to do. I want to let them do what they do every day."
Abraira, the former Dallas fire chief, said he is in "administration" and does not believe he should take command at incidents, except in extreme circumstances. Abraira, the city's first chief hired from outside the department, changed a long-standing policy last year that required the highest-ranking chief to take command at incident scenes. Abraira said he made the change to comply with "national standards."
"If it's necessary for me to assume command of our every day operation at incidents, then something's wrong," he said.
In addition to criticizing his handling of the marathon attack, the letter blasts Abraira for failing to take command at an electrical explosion and blackout in the Back Bay and a six-alarm blaze in East Boston. At the Eastie fire, the letter states that Abraira climbed onto a roof of an adjacent building "so that he could take a photograph of himself with the burning building in the background" for his "scrapbook."
"We feel that if something is not done to address this situation, that eventually there will be a price to pay," the letter states. "We do not want that price to be the life of a citizen of Boston or a member of the Boston Fire Dept."
Of the criticism, Abraira said: "People don't like change. I understand that resistance. But it's really a shame. All I can do is do the best I can for the citizens here and the firefighters. It's unfortunate we don't see eye to eye. But I am the chief of the department."
Copyright 2013 - Boston Herald
I fully understand where the Chief is coming from as more and more, the Fire Chief is functioning as an administrator and less and less as a fireground commander.
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 20 of 32
05-15-2013, 09:29 AM #1
- Join Date
- Apr 2004
- Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
Changing Role of the Urban Fire Chief?Train to fight the fires you fight.
05-15-2013, 09:39 AM #2
- Join Date
- Mar 2003
and im sure that makes you happy?
05-15-2013, 11:16 AM #3
Past Chiefs of Department were "hands on", responding to 3rd alarms and above.
You don't get to be a fire chief by making a career of "shuffling paper" or taking advantage of photo ops."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
05-15-2013, 12:07 PM #4
I am curious how much of the criticism stems from the actual performance of his duties and how much is due to his being an "outsider"? Most people complain about being too supervised.
05-15-2013, 12:24 PM #5"A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY
"Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse
05-15-2013, 12:55 PM #6
I am not paid, nor do I have any exposure to big city fire department policies. But when there is a consensus letter stating they have no confidence in their direct superior, there is a massive problem. I am not sure exactly how he states "national standards" on the highest ranking officer not taking charge. In all of my NIMS classes it was stated that the highest ranking should be briefed of the situation and when fully informed, take over.
Regardless, if there is unanimous support for your ousting, there needs to be an in depth review. And if the fire chief is merely an administrator, why is he given the rank of chief? Should it not then be head administrator?
05-15-2013, 01:59 PM #7
I saw this article last night, and think that there a lot more issues than simply the fact that the chief isn't taking command upon arrival.
First, as WVFD705 said, how much of this is resistance to having an outside chief? Bringing in an outside leader has proven unpopular in a lot of departments, and to try to prove a point, the chief's subordinates may not give the support he or she needs.
Second, is the issue of him taking a pic at the fire a big deal? Some will say yes, others will dismiss it as common practice in some departments now, especially with everyone having a camera phone. That's probably best for the members of the BFD to decide.
Finally, the greater issue - not taking command as multi-alarm fires and other emergency incidents. Admittedly, I know little about the daily operations of the BFD (aside from their unmatched ladder work), but in a department that size, why would it be necessary for the COD to arrive and assume command? When you look at a metro or urban department, the chief is typically an administrator and political liaison, not a fireground commander. I do understand that it's been common practice for the chief to assume command on 3rd alarm and greater fires, but is it really necessary if the Battalion, Division, or Deputy Chief is managing the incident well?
I'd love to hear from someone on the job there...Career Fire Captain
Volunteer Chief Officer
Never taking for granted that I'm privileged enough to have the greatest job in the world!
05-15-2013, 02:15 PM #8
In my experience in an urban setting, the big difference here is that all of his top deputy chiefs are expressing their lack of confidence in the Chief's ability. That's different, and should carry more weight, than a union taking a vote to express their displeasure with some of a Chief's decisions.
05-15-2013, 02:20 PM #9changed a long-standing policy last year that required the highest-ranking chief to take command at incident scenes.
That being said....having been a COD (although much much smaller department)...I can't imagine creating a policy where the COD would not want to take charge.....isn't that the purpose of being Chief?"This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?
05-15-2013, 03:04 PM #10
I also wonder what the qualifications are to be deputy chief. Doesn't it take the same qualifications to be deputy incident commander that it does to be incident commander? If that's the case, are the deputy chiefs qualified for the position if the chief leaves? If they are complaining about the incidents and the lack of a qualified leader, then it would seem that the department still must retain an outside chief because the deputy chiefs were not capable or qualified.
05-15-2013, 05:07 PM #11
Last edited by sfd1992; 05-15-2013 at 05:10 PM.
05-15-2013, 07:39 PM #12
- Join Date
- Mar 2003
05-15-2013, 09:13 PM #13
I would opine that in large departments like Boston, it's necessary to have an administrator at the top. There are people at that level managing multi-million dollar budgets.
For those that recall the Peter Principal - the core concept is that some people may be great in a given position, but when called upon to make the next step, are in over their heads. Ol' Joe may have been a great AC or DC, but may stink when it comes to the tasks involved in managing a large organization.
We don't have any indication of how he's performing as a manager.
That said - a symbolic appearance would probably have gone a long way. Even if he did "assume command," odds are his subordinates would have ended up running the incident anyhow.
It would be interesting to know what the feelings were about him before the marathon incident...Opinions my own. Standard disclaimers apply.
Everyone goes home. Safety begins with you.
05-15-2013, 09:22 PM #14
Our COD's mostly show up and observe, then leave when the fun is over. It's pretty seamless and the IC is free to run the fire the way he sees fit. Been doing it this way forever, so the story that was put up is not a new trend coming your way, it can be used at the discretion of the individual department.IAFF
05-15-2013, 10:10 PM #15
“The person who risks nothing, does nothing, has nothing, is nothing, and becomes nothing. He may avoid suffering and sorrow, but he simply cannot learn and feel and change and grow and love and live.” Leo F. Buscaglia
- Join Date
- Jul 1999
- Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
This place gets weirder and weirder every day...
05-15-2013, 11:01 PM #16
- Join Date
- Sep 2006
- Northeast Coast
Regardless of whether he takes command or not, if he's the Chief of Department, he is responsible. I suspect the deputies do not see him taking any responsibility for any shortcomings and of course ready to shine when things are rosey. Most officers I know below the rank of COD would rather have the COD be the liaison between the working personnel and the politicians, commissioners, and news and steer clear of operations.
05-16-2013, 09:31 AM #17
In my twenty years on the job our chief engineer has never assumed command of any fire or incident. They will make appearances, such as at the scene of a line-death or civilian fire death(s) or other significant incidents. With the exception of our current chief engineer, all were promoted thru the ranks of this department and had commanded many fires thru out their careers.
Past practice has always been that they let the line-officers/chiefs handle their incident. Our ICS system is now written to have car 1 respond in under specific circumstances and work as a field chief, due to the significant cuts we have taken.
Having said that, that is how we do business. That in no way is a reflection of anywhere or any place else. Boston is able to handle their business with no problem or questions. If their line chiefs have a criticism or concern, they should be listened to. Something la educator is not entitled to.
Last edited by Jasper 45; 05-16-2013 at 09:34 AM.
05-16-2013, 08:26 PM #18
- Join Date
- May 2013
I'm not familiar with the politics or previous policies in Boston FD. They have a Fire Commissioner. I assume he is the administrative guy. I believe the COD is a uniformed chief. It's a big enough department that he probably has assistants on his staff to assist him in daily duties. The bombing was a high profile mass casualty incident. If the COD wasn't going to take command for this, then they might as well leave the position unfilled. It's a leadership position and he did not lead. Taking command would not be an insult to the deputies or mean that they could not handle the incident. I don't blame the deputies for being disappointed.
05-17-2013, 10:11 AM #19
- Join Date
- Mar 2003
05-17-2013, 11:38 AM #20
If any urban size department doesn't have qualified members in the Deputy or Assistant Chiefs positions to be the Command in any large operation, then the COD needs to remove them from that position and get someone who can be in command. It is not necessary for the COD assume command of any incident.
The COD may show up at larger incidents, but it their Deputy who is running the incident. Remember, there are other sub command staff members, which are doing their job and reporting back to the Command Post, where the member who is running the incident is located.
I have seen back in the old days for me the COD arrive on seconds and take over the incident. Most of the time it kept on running smooth as before he arrive, other times it well to hell.Stay Safe and Well Out There....
Always remembering 9-11-2001 and 343+ Brothers
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
By firefighter7160 in forum Wildland FirefightingReplies: 137Last Post: 07-23-2010, 06:03 PM
By ABMedic in forum CanadaReplies: 6Last Post: 02-11-2004, 04:28 PM
By rangerjim93 in forum New YorkReplies: 0Last Post: 08-10-2003, 06:05 PM
By Ladder107 in forum Fire Explorer & Jr. FirefightingReplies: 6Last Post: 04-28-2001, 12:39 AM
By Sunflower_FD_21 in forum Chaplains/Critical Incident StressReplies: 8Last Post: 06-12-1999, 10:25 PM