Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 22 of 32 FirstFirst ... 1219202122232425 ... LastLast
Results 421 to 440 of 622
Like Tree379Likes

Thread: Lt. Ray hits another home run!

  1. #421
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,391

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    It would be better for your citizens than what you base them on now.

    Which is ensuring that potential victims become human briquets.
    As have stated earlier ... and many other times .... due to the size of the district it is highly likely that anyone that does not self-extricate will die.

    And it wouldn't matter what fire department is responding ... fire growth and response time are pretty much factors that don't vary.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.


  2. #422
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    9,986

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    As have stated earlier ... and many other times .... due to the size of the district it is highly likely that anyone that does not self-extricate will die.
    Which is why your citizens would be better off with a six year old boy or an Australian dog.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  3. #423
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,680

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    You're right.

    Once a member volunteers, he should give up all other interests.
    'Just when I think you have said the stupidest thing ever you just keep on talking." Hank Hill

    Nice attempt at yet another idiotic diversion. You know very well that wasn't what he meant. Frankly, if you and your fellow vfd members can't see the difference between going hunting or fishing as planned, or going to a house fire, it speaks volumes about how depserately pathetic your vfd members truly are.
    “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

    This place gets weirder and weirder every day...

  4. #424
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,391

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    'Just when I think you have said the stupidest thing ever you just keep on talking." Hank Hill

    Nice attempt at yet another idiotic diversion. You know very well that wasn't what he meant. Frankly, if you and your fellow vfd members can't see the difference between going hunting or fishing as planned, or going to a house fire, it speaks volumes about how depserately pathetic your vfd members truly are.

    So you would expect them to respond to a long-term incident such as a building fire on an hour or so before a planned hunting or fishing trip ?

    I don't do either, but to expect that is, IMO unrealistic.

    There is a limit to what we can expect of volunteer personnel. The VFD is a part of their lives, not the focal point of their lives.
    Last edited by LaFireEducator; 07-05-2013 at 04:40 PM.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  5. #425
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,391

    Default

    So you would expect them to respond to a long-term incident such as a building fire on an hour or so before a planned hunting or fishing trip ?

    I don't do either, but to expect that is, IMO unrealistic.

    There is a limit to what we can expect of volunteer personnel. The VFD is a part of their lives, not the focal point of their lives.

    The fact is that if a member works a 60, or even 50 hour work week that leaves him a 3-4 hours after work and 2 weekend days, which should be committed to family, home and likely hobbies.

    I believe that one night a week is realistic. Two nights a week periodically may be acceptable. More than that is unreasonable. More than that starts to infringe on their lives too deeply.
    Last edited by LaFireEducator; 07-05-2013 at 05:56 PM.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  6. #426
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    36

    Default

    So you would expect them to respond to a long-term incident such as a building fire on an hour or so before a planned hunting or fishing trip ?
    (LA's response)I don't do either, but to expect that is, IMO unrealistic.

    There is a limit to what we can expect of volunteer personnel. The VFD is a part of their lives, not the focal point of their lives.

    The fact is that if a member works a 60, or even 50 hour work week that leaves him a 3-4 hours after work and 2 weekend days, which should be committed to family, home and likely hobbies.

    I believe that one night a week is realistic. Two nights a week periodically may be acceptable. More than that is unreasonable. More than that starts to infringe on their lives too deeply.

    There...fixed the quote for ya...for Pete's sake, learn how to use the Quote function!!!

  7. #427
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    9,986

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    So you would expect them to respond to a long-term incident such as a building fire on an hour or so before a planned hunting or fishing trip ?

    I don't do either, but to expect that is, IMO unrealistic.

    There is a limit to what we can expect of volunteer personnel. The VFD is a part of their lives, not the focal point of their lives.
    Which is exactly why your citizens would be better off with a six year old boy or Australian dog.
    Chenzo likes this.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  8. #428
    Forum Member conrad427's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Just south of Canada
    Posts
    530

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    So you would expect them to respond to a long-term incident such as a building fire on an hour or so before a planned hunting or fishing trip ?

    I don't do either, but to expect that is, IMO unrealistic.
    Uh, yeah I would expect them to be at the incident. I am going to be there so why cant they?
    Why are the people who work three to four hundred hours a week and never in town even on the dept.?
    We ran our asses off last year and some of the people could not even make five runs in the year but EVERYONE wants a say in dept. matters, or should I say everyone wants a t shirt. We told them they needed to respond more and they threw a fit, one even said that they had a puppy at home and could not go on fire calls.
    My God, what other job could you volunteer for and never show up for and still get a flippin t shirt?
    I doubt you could volunteer to clean the church every other week without ever showing up and still be on Santa's nice list. But to volunteer to save lives and mitigate dangerous situations and never show up..... and that is okay? Because it is just a hobby?
    If nothing is expected of people they will not perform.
    The fire service is about service to our fellow man.
    There is a trust that must not be broken and we are the keepers of that trust.
    Captain Dave LeBlanc

  9. #429
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    9,986

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by conrad427 View Post
    We ran our asses off last year and some of the people could not even make five runs in the year but EVERYONE wants a say in dept. matters, or should I say everyone wants a t shirt.
    I worked at a combo station where one of the "volunteers" would show up with his son. I asked him what he planned to do if required to respond. He stated that he couldn't since that would mean his son would be at the station alone. I asked if he was "signing in" to get paid for responding. He was doing exactly that. He would also show up right at the 10m mark that was the deadline for determining a response that would get paid.

    LAFE's comments about the commitment (or lack thereof) of his fellow members don't surprise me in the least.

    But they all had t-shirts so they could tell the chicks in bars they were firefighters.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  10. #430
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    2,944

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    There is a significant difference between the training obligations of full-time EMPLOYEES of a department who are paid to train and VOLUNTEERS who are not.
    Yes, there can be, however there's a large number of career firefighters (primarily in small departments) that don't get paid to train (off-duty wise), yet still manage to do so. There's also a lot of volunteers that manage to find the necessary time to train despite their jobs, family and other interests.

    Reasonable requirements? Yes. I have no issues with that.
    The only reason you have no issue with that is that you think "reasonable requirements" means more than no training at all.

    But to expect the same level of training, even at simply the firefighting level, as paid members, which seems to be your expectations? Not reasonable.
    As you've been told before, more than once, there isn't an expectation for volunteers to possess the same "level of training" as paid firefighters. The expectation is for anyone calling themselves "firefighter" to possess a "level of training" that provides them the ability to actually do "the job".

    Your problem, or at least one of them, is that you think we are saying that your members should have the same "volume" of training as a paid firefighter, as in the number of classes and hours spent on training. We aren't saying that and probably because we know that for the most part, that isn't a reasonable expectation for the majority of the volunteer fire service. However, to think that whatever minimal time a member can "spare" for training as being adequate is at least an equally unreasonable expectation.

    Something we have consistently stated is that both segments should possess the same minimum, entry level certification in order to be a firefighter. That would likely be the same "level of training" between paid and volunteer that we might be talking about.

  11. #431
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    2,944

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    For some reason you seem to want to make your views and philosophies the standard by which we should all be aiming for.

    No, but there should be a realization by those with adequate resources that those with lesser resources can accomplish much less, and take much less risk, on the fireground.
    That realization is already there. You just can't see and/or understand that.

    Part of the problem is that we aren't necessarily talking the same language. Case in point, your statement quoted above:

    You are absolutely correct that less resources means that you can't do as much, or at least not as efficiently, as if you had more resources. What constitutes a "resource"? From a fire service perspective, resources would typically be apparatus, equipment and personnel. Let's look at what you typically describe when you talk about not having "adequate resources" for interior operations from that perspective. You have the apparatus, I assume it has the equipment on it and you have personnel (3-4 of what you call firefighters). So, you essentially have adequate "resources" to conduct a fire attack since 3-4 FFs engine companies successfully initiate fire attack on a daily basis across this nation. The obvious problem to most people would be that in your situation, you don't have the "right" "resources".

    This is exactly the situation that you've repeatedly chosen to not acknowledge as being an "issue" when discussing the merits of using "exterior" firefighters and drivers.

    I work in a department with an on-duty response of 5-7 FFs and backup in the 10-15 minutes time frame. The large city FD nearby typically has at least 22 FFs on the initial response, depending on the occupancy type. I think we qualify for the "less resources" category.

    They don't expect us to be able to accomplish as much as they can initially. We know we can't accomplish as much as they can initially or at least not as "safely", so we don't try to, but we don't use that as an excuse to not do our job. We prioritize the tasks with safety in mind and get to work while additional resources are on the way. We tend to be pretty successful with this approach and have very few injuries of any significance each year.

    What does all this mean since we are both responding initially with apparatus, equipment and a small number of people called firefighters, yet experience different results once on scene? As stated above, the obvious problem is that you don't have the "right" resources for the job at hand and that's why they are not "adequate".

    So, it isn't so much that we need to realize that less resources means less ability and less risk taking as it is the need for you to realize (or at least acknowledge) that the quality of the firefighters on hand has far more of a impact on the overall safety, ability to do "the job" and the outcome of an incident than the quantity of "firefighters" that are on hand.


    When the members, or some of the members, stop disparaging rural VFD s that can't do the job to thier high and mighty standards, i will be happy to leave.
    Right, because expecting an organization calling itself a Fire Department to be able to perform a victim search/rescue supported by interior fire attack is an oh so "high and mighty" standard.



    BTW, you've probably made more disparaging comments about rural VFDs (trying to defend them) than the rest of us combined.
    Chenzo likes this.

  12. #432
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,680

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    So you would expect them to respond to a long-term incident such as a building fire on an hour or so before a planned hunting or fishing trip ?

    If you have to ask then surely you have no clue. There is a HUGE difference between going hunting or fishing and going on a vacation that means flying somewhere with all kinds of reservations and such. I have cancelled, delayed, and rescheduled plans on occasion to go to a fire in either of my communities.

    I don't do either, but to expect that is, IMO unrealistic.

    What difference does it make in your vfd's case? The truth is your AMA does all the heavy listing anyways.

    There is a limit to what we can expect of volunteer personnel. The VFD is a part of their lives, not the focal point of their lives.

    If they are committed enough to be "inconvenienced" by fires or other emergencies on occasion then I would question what they are even doing as a member of the fire department. But apparently by your description someone can be a member of your vfd and not come to training or calls and remain a "valuable" member because of some skill set they possess but never use as a firefighter.

    The fact is that if a member works a 60, or even 50 hour work week that leaves him a 3-4 hours after work and 2 weekend days, which should be committed to family, home and likely hobbies.

    Oh Boo Hoo Hoo, while still working as a career firefighter I was working a 56 hour average work week, and then adding up to 19 hours a week teaching for the tech college, as wel as other occassional side jobs. So cry me a river with the working so much excuse. I managed to find family time, as well as be active enough in both of my POC FDs to have been named training officer and recently Lieutenant as well in one of them. If you believe as you say that any time off from work should be dedicated to family then those members are worthless deadwood and should be removed from the FD. If they have no time to train or respond then why keep them on the roster?

    Maybe your completely casual attitude about committment and dedication are the reason you have such horrible repsonses to incident and to membership drives. "Sure we are looking for members. Committment nd time requirements? Don't worry about that, you have a job and a family. Here's your T-shirt." Again I point to that small rural VFD that I recently visited. With $1500 a year they train, are aggressive, and have far less issues with getting members and people to respond than you $160K a year, multiple station, vfd does.


    I believe that one night a week is realistic. Two nights a week periodically may be acceptable. More than that is unreasonable. More than that starts to infringe on their lives too deeply.

    Unfortunately firefighting is not like playing in a softball league. You don't have scheduled emergency calls on Tuesday night at 7:05 pm. They occur at all hours of the day or night any day of the week. If you are home or otherwise available you should be responding. My belief always was there were only a few reasons why I wouldn't be responding: 1) Home alone with my kids when they were too little to be alone or they were sick, 2) I am sick or injured, 3) I had to take my wife for cancer treatment, 4) After 2 am on days I had to go to work at my career FD. Funny thing is I am always in the top 5 or 10 for responses to my #1 POC FD, and in the top half on my #2 POC FD. How do I do it? Apparently by your standards I shouldn't be able to, but I do. Simply, it is called committment and dedication.
    After reading this post it is no wonder that with this attitude you have horrible training and response numbers.
    conrad427 likes this.
    “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

    This place gets weirder and weirder every day...

  13. #433
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    634

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    So you would expect them to respond to a long-term incident such as a building fire on an hour or so before a planned hunting or fishing trip ?

    I don't do either, but to expect that is, IMO unrealistic.

    There is a limit to what we can expect of volunteer personnel. The VFD is a part of their lives, not the focal point of their lives.

    The fact is that if a member works a 60, or even 50 hour work week that leaves him a 3-4 hours after work and 2 weekend days, which should be committed to family, home and likely hobbies.

    I believe that one night a week is realistic. Two nights a week periodically may be acceptable. More than that is unreasonable. More than that starts to infringe on their lives too deeply.
    And I don't think there's anything too unreasonable about that...we do the same: once weekly training (75% participation required) and 1 Saturday a month. What IS unreasonable is the fact that you are using this as an excuse as to why your department is so severely sub-par.

    I would venture a guess that not many departments require much more than the above (at least, I don't hear of any volly/POC departments that require 5 day week training). But goddamn they are still able to get the job done!

  14. #434
    Forum Member conrad427's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Just south of Canada
    Posts
    530

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    After reading this post it is no wonder that with this attitude you have horrible training and response numbers.
    Unfortunately firefighting is not like playing in a softball league. You don't have scheduled emergency calls on Tuesday night at 7:05 pm. They occur at all hours of the day or night any day of the week. If you are home or otherwise available you should be responding. My belief always was there were only a few reasons why I wouldn't be responding: 1) Home alone with my kids when they were too little to be alone or they were sick, 2) I am sick or injured, 3) I had to take my wife for cancer treatment, 4) After 2 am on days I had to go to work at my career FD. Funny thing is I am always in the top 5 or 10 for responses to my #1 POC FD, and in the top half on my #2 POC FD. How do I do it? Apparently by your standards I shouldn't be able to, but I do. Simply, it is called commitment and dedication.
    (originally posted by FyredUp)



    BING-FREAKING-O!!!!!!

    I hope I did that right Chief Gonzo
    The fire service is about service to our fellow man.
    There is a trust that must not be broken and we are the keepers of that trust.
    Captain Dave LeBlanc

  15. #435
    Let's talk fire trucks! BoxAlarm187's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    3,164

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    So you would expect them to respond to a long-term incident such as a building fire on an hour or so before a planned hunting or fishing trip ?
    Simply, yes.

    If it's a simple hunting or fishing trip, they can take one next weekend. Yes, I understand that if they'd made previous monetary obligations for hotels the like, that does put it into another category, but otherwise, they need to make themselves available to respond to the incident.

    The person who's having a bad day because their home is on fire has an expectation that the fire department will respond quickly with the right number of adequately trained personnel. They don't want to her that Jim and Bubba were REALLY looking forward to going out and deerslaying (just like they did the weekend before and will do the weekend after), so they just couldn't come to the fire. No excuse that you provide that property owner as to why you showed up late with a handful of untrained personnel makes you and your department's apathetic attitude towards firefighting acceptable.

    There is a limit to what we can expect of volunteer personnel. The VFD is a part of their lives, not the focal point of their lives.
    This is the Pygmalion effect - when you set low expectations for an individual, that's exactly what you'll get from them. However, set high standards and give them the power, tools, and encouragment for them to meet those goals, and you will see the employee meet those high standards and become a far more valuable member of your team.

    Moving on, I have a serious question: you've stated that you don't have enough personnel, and rely on AMA for fires. You also state that due to the geography, most house fires are likely well involved will little-to-no chance for survival. You state that getting a grab would be highly unlikely in your area. You state that many (most?) of your guys have never made an interior attack. If these are the facts, why is there still a fire department in the area?

    It seems as though you could provide the parrish law enforcement agency fire apparatus, give them Firefighter I & II with some ancillary training, and they could respond the to the few fires you have. Firefighting could be their secondary duty as they focus primairly on law enforcement duties. This would be in-line with the current level of protection being provided to the citizens in the area, and the volunteers would no longer have to worry about injuries, or missed time from work (or a fishing trip). Oh, and as for MVA's? Have the paid EMS service staff a rescue truck in case there is a need for extrication.

    Don't like that idea? Let the blue-collar, good-with-mechanical-ability folks from the public works department serve as firefighters. I bet they'd jump at the chance.
    Last edited by BoxAlarm187; 07-06-2013 at 09:10 PM.
    fotowun likes this.
    Career Fire Captain
    Volunteer Chief Officer


    Never taking for granted that I'm privileged enough to have the greatest job in the world!

  16. #436
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    1,894

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BoxAlarm187 View Post
    Simply, yes.

    If it's a simple hunting or fishing trip, they can take one next weekend. Yes, I understand that if they'd made previous monetary obligations for hotels the like, that does put it into another category, but otherwise, they need to make themselves available to respond to the incident.

    The person who's having a bad day because their home is on fire has an expectation that the fire department will respond quickly with the right number of adequately trained personnel. They don't want to her that Jim and Bubba were REALLY looking forward to going out and deerslaying (just like they did the weekend before and will do the weekend after), so they just couldn't come to the fire. No excuse that you provide that property owner as to why you showed up late with a handful of untrained personnel makes you and your department's apathetic attitude towards firefighting acceptable.

    Very serious question: you've stated that you don't have enough personnel, and rely on AMA for fires. You also state that due to the geography, most house fires are likely well involved will little-to-no chance for survival. You state that getting a grab would be highly unlikely in your area. You state that many (most?) of your guys have never made an interior attack. If these are the facts, why is there still a fire department in the area?

    It seems as though you could provide the parrish law enforcement agency fire apparatus, give them Firefighter I & II with some ancillary training, and they could respond the to the few fires you have. Firefighting could be their secondary duty as they focus primairly on law enforcement duties. This would be in-line with the current level of protection being provided to the citizens in the area, and the volunteers would no longer have to worry about injuries, or missed time from work (or a fishing trip). Oh, and as for MVA's? Have the paid EMS service staff a rescue truck in case there is a need for extrication.

    Don't like that idea? Let the blue-collar, good-with-mechanical-ability folks from the public works department serve as firefighters. I bet they'd jump at the chance.



    This is the Pygmalion effect - when you set low expectations for an individual, that's exactly what you'll get from them. However, set high standards and give them the power, tools, and encouragment for them to meet those goals, and you will see the employee meet those high standards and become a far more valuable member of your team.
    but then he would lose his tee shirt
    ?

  17. #437
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BoxAlarm187 View Post
    Simply, yes.

    If it's a simple hunting or fishing trip, they can take one next weekend. Yes, I understand that if they'd made previous monetary obligations for hotels the like, that does put it into another category, but otherwise, they need to make themselves available to respond to the incident.

    The person who's having a bad day because their home is on fire has an expectation that the fire department will respond quickly with the right number of adequately trained personnel. They don't want to her that Jim and Bubba were REALLY looking forward to going out and deerslaying (just like they did the weekend before and will do the weekend after), so they just couldn't come to the fire. No excuse that you provide that property owner as to why you showed up late with a handful of untrained personnel makes you and your department's apathetic attitude towards firefighting acceptable.

    This is the Pygmalion effect - when you set low expectations for an individual, that's exactly what you'll get from them. However, set high standards and give them the power, tools, and encouragment for them to meet those goals, and you will see the employee meet those high standards and become a far more valuable member of your team.

    Moving on, I have a serious question: you've stated that you don't have enough personnel, and rely on AMA for fires. You also state that due to the geography, most house fires are likely well involved will little-to-no chance for survival. You state that getting a grab would be highly unlikely in your area. You state that many (most?) of your guys have never made an interior attack. If these are the facts, why is there still a fire department in the area?

    It seems as though you could provide the parrish law enforcement agency fire apparatus, give them Firefighter I & II with some ancillary training, and they could respond the to the few fires you have. Firefighting could be their secondary duty as they focus primairly on law enforcement duties. This would be in-line with the current level of protection being provided to the citizens in the area, and the volunteers would no longer have to worry about injuries, or missed time from work (or a fishing trip). Oh, and as for MVA's? Have the paid EMS service staff a rescue truck in case there is a need for extrication.

    Don't like that idea? Let the blue-collar, good-with-mechanical-ability folks from the public works department serve as firefighters. I bet they'd jump at the chance.
    Are you, a career fire Captain, actually endorsing the takeover of firefighting function by law enforcement or public works personnel?

    That is SO CLEARLY not the answer.

    Please tell us you were just trying to make a point.

  18. #438
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,391

    Default

    Part of the problem is that we aren't necessarily talking the same language. Case in point, your statement quoted above:

    You are absolutely correct that less resources means that you can't do as much, or at least not as efficiently, as if you had more resources. What constitutes a "resource"? From a fire service perspective, resources would typically be apparatus, equipment and personnel. Let's look at what you typically describe when you talk about not having "adequate resources" for interior operations from that perspective. You have the apparatus, I assume it has the equipment on it and you have personnel (3-4 of what you call firefighters). So, you essentially have adequate "resources" to conduct a fire attack since 3-4 FFs engine companies successfully initiate fire attack on a daily basis across this nation. The obvious problem to most people would be that in your situation, you don't have the "right" "resources".

    No disagreement.

    Though I will debate that even 4 fully trained members - 3 when you remove the pump operator - is adequate for safe interior attack in many situations.


    This is exactly the situation that you've repeatedly chosen to not acknowledge as being an "issue" when discussing the merits of using "exterior" firefighters and drivers.

    I have stated many times that we may not have enough interior members.

    The support and drivers - exterior members - have no affect on the number of interior members available, so they really have zero relevance in this discussion.


    I work in a department with an on-duty response of 5-7 FFs and backup in the 10-15 minutes time frame. The large city FD nearby typically has at least 22 FFs on the initial response, depending on the occupancy type. I think we qualify for the "less resources" category.

    They don't expect us to be able to accomplish as much as they can initially. We know we can't accomplish as much as they can initially or at least not as "safely", so we don't try to, but we don't use that as an excuse to not do our job.

    That's not an excuse. that's understanding that you simply may not be able to operate aggressivly, and yes, accept the loss of lives or the structure because the resources are inadequate.

    Accepting defeat is certainly a part of our job.


    We prioritize the tasks with safety in mind and get to work while additional resources are on the way. We tend to be pretty successful with this approach and have very few injuries of any significance each year.

    What does all this mean since we are both responding initially with apparatus, equipment and a small number of people called firefighters, yet experience different results once on scene? As stated above, the obvious problem is that you don't have the "right" resources for the job at hand and that's why they are not "adequate".

    Which I have admitted too.

    So, it isn't so much that we need to realize that less resources means less ability and less risk taking as it is the need for you to realize (or at least acknowledge) that the quality of the firefighters on hand has far more of a impact on the overall safety, ability to do "the job" and the outcome of an incident than the quantity of "firefighters" that are on hand.

    ... And how many times have I stated that part of the issue is training and experience.



    Right, because expecting an organization calling itself a Fire Department to be able to perform a victim search/rescue supported by interior fire attack is an oh so "high and mighty" standard.

    It depends on how you wish to define the expectations of a fire department.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  19. #439
    Let's talk fire trucks! BoxAlarm187's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    3,164

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by captnjak View Post
    Are you, a career fire Captain, actually endorsing the takeover of firefighting function by law enforcement or public works personnel?

    That is SO CLEARLY not the answer.

    Please tell us you were just trying to make a point.
    Yes and no.

    LAFE has told us in the past that there is no support, nor money, for career firefighters in his parrish. There seems to be no issue with paying law enforcement, however.

    LAFE always worries about his members getting hurt (therefore taking a grossly conservative approach to firefighting).

    LAFE says that his citizens are very happy with the services provided - so they clearly don't have an expectation that they'll get prompt, adequate service from trained fire service personnel.

    If that's the case, give current parrish employees some hoses and let them squirt water from the outside, much like the existing "fire department" is doing now. Volunteers don't have to worry about injuries, the citizens don't see a reduction in service, and forcing the volunteers to give more than 4 hours a week to the department (gasp! slavedrivers!) is a thing of the past. Everyone wins!

    (For the record, no, I've never, ever supported the Public Safety Officer model of public safety, nor will I ever).
    Career Fire Captain
    Volunteer Chief Officer


    Never taking for granted that I'm privileged enough to have the greatest job in the world!

  20. #440
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,391

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BoxAlarm187 View Post
    Simply, yes.

    If it's a simple hunting or fishing trip, they can take one next weekend. Yes, I understand that if they'd made previous monetary obligations for hotels the like, that does put it into another category, but otherwise, they need to make themselves available to respond to the incident.

    The person who's having a bad day because their home is on fire has an expectation that the fire department will respond quickly with the right number of adequately trained personnel. They don't want to her that Jim and Bubba were REALLY looking forward to going out and deerslaying (just like they did the weekend before and will do the weekend after), so they just couldn't come to the fire. No excuse that you provide that property owner as to why you showed up late with a handful of untrained personnel makes you and your department's apathetic attitude towards firefighting acceptable.



    This is the Pygmalion effect - when you set low expectations for an individual, that's exactly what you'll get from them. However, set high standards and give them the power, tools, and encouragment for them to meet those goals, and you will see the employee meet those high standards and become a far more valuable member of your team.

    I'll bring that up.

    Moving on, I have a serious question: you've stated that you don't have enough personnel, and rely on AMA for fires. You also state that due to the geography, most house fires are likely well involved will little-to-no chance for survival. You state that getting a grab would be highly unlikely in your area. You state that many (most?) of your guys have never made an interior attack. If these are the facts, why is there still a fire department in the area?

    In most cases, the fire department makes very little difference. Not denying that.However there are times that we do, though the exception and not the rule.


    It seems as though you could provide the parrish law enforcement agency fire apparatus, give them Firefighter I & II with some ancillary training, and they could respond the to the few fires you have. Firefighting could be their secondary duty as they focus primairly on law enforcement duties.

    Typical staffing is 4 deputies for the entire parish at night and a couple of more during the day. Not enough resources for them to fight fires as well.


    This would be in-line with the current level of protection being provided to the citizens in the area, and the volunteers would no longer have to worry about injuries, or missed time from work (or a fishing trip). Oh, and as for MVA's? Have the paid EMS service staff a rescue truck in case there is a need for extrication.

    EMS is delivered by 2 private services. I highly doubt that they would want to do that unless there was significant money in it.

    By the way, that's not an issue as the neighboring city runs extrication for the entire southern half of the parish (6 departments).


    Don't like that idea? Let the blue-collar, good-with-mechanical-ability folks from the public works department serve as firefighters. I bet they'd jump at the chance.
    Not really. Also a very, very small staff - Less than 5 I believe.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. The Quint hits the UK
    By SteveDude in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-13-2005, 04:37 PM
  2. I know this isn't a firefighter but it still hits home
    By Itsmy6 in forum Line of Duty: In Memory Of
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-06-2005, 01:02 AM
  3. LODD Hits Home
    By scfirewife41 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-01-2005, 09:20 AM
  4. Lutan1 hits the big 30!
    By NJFFSA16 in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 11-12-2002, 02:34 PM
  5. When fire hits home
    By ADSNWFLD in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 08-30-2001, 10:28 AM

Posting Permissions

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