Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
Closed Thread
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 102

Thread: This poor guy

  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    117

    Default

    firetrucker-
    When someone visits an internet site, the site that they visited gets logged into the history.....there is no way that the paramedic would have had to go to the sites to save them, because they were already recorded in the history from the first time the the guy visited it.
    Alisa Tappana, NREMT-B/CNA

    All the views, comments, etc expressed herein are mine and not those of my training program or my employer.

    "You can't make footprints in the sands of time if you're sitting on your butt. And who wants to make buttprints in the sands of time?"
    -Bob Mowad


  2. #22
    Temporarily/No Longer Active
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    The Big Apple - U.S.A.
    Posts
    29

    Question Hmmmm

    I wonder if LT Fellman and Paramedic Kordeci ever dated.

    Porn rules!

  3. #23
    Forum Member BucksEng91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Warminster, PA
    Posts
    576

    Default

    Originally posted by littlemissemtstudent
    Halligan, you are right, you ARE gonna get chewed for your comment. And I am going to be the first one to chew you out.

    Whether or not women should be members of Fire Departments should be based on our abilities, OK?

    The man knew that it was a ZERO-TOLERANCE policy, and zero-tolerance means just that-no tolerance, no matter what. Now, I can understand some circumstances, but with there being what was on the computer, this situation was no "accident." This was a blatant violation of a ZERO-TOLERANCE policy.

    As well, this man should be ASHAMED of what he has put his family through, espically his children.

    And don't blame the Paramedic-someone was going to find those files sooner or later.
    I agree that the guy willfully disregarded a directive. He should face disciplinary action. But firing? That seems a bit strong to me - I think it has more to do with catering to the tender sensibilities, if you know what I mean.

    What the medic did was just wrong, though. It's one thing to actually witness someone looking at porn, and become offended by the images yourself; it's an entirely different thing to see indications that somebody may have been looking at porn (those 'black hole' sites have been talked about already here), and actively take steps to nail him by saving the history records. Remember, Miz Kordecki didn't actually see the 'offensive' material itself. There was nothing injurious to her beyond her knowledge that the LT had broken a department policy. To me, that's a mutt. Whether it's a female or a male mutt doesn't matter. That's a friggin mutt. And I wouldn't want to work with her. Kind of hard to develop that teamwork thing when you have to constantly watch your own back...

    That said, the LT was dead wrong. He knew (and was expected to enforce) the policy as a company officer, and he willfully disregarded the directive. But he shouldn't lose his job.
    "Let's roll." - Todd Beamer, one of a group of American soldiers who handed the terrorists their first defeat.

    Joe Black

    The opinions expressed are mine and mine alone (but you can borrow them )and may not reflect those of any organization with which I am associated (but then again, they just may not be thinking clearly).

  4. #24
    Forum Member MIKEYLIKESIT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Division 24
    Posts
    4,360

    Default

    BOW WOW...for paramedic mutt...A day or two off..OK...Getting fired? I have seen much worse happen with much less discipline.

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    482

    Thumbs down

    The Lt. was wrong. He violated a policy and he has had previous disciplinary actions. What if the porno was child porn? Does he deserve a suspension or termination? The point is that we don't know what he was looking at. Dismissal to the lou. His decision, he pays for it.

  6. #26
    Forum Member MIKEYLIKESIT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Division 24
    Posts
    4,360

    Default

    Thats right BOX..We DONT know what he was looking at. So how can you say that he should be fired?

  7. #27
    Senior Member apatrol's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    165

    Default

    I think the firing is a little harsh. I would not be opposed to loss of rank and a written letter of termination waiting to be signed for two years following this incident (porn probation). Althought the sites he visited does make a difference to me anal.com is quote different than playboy.com

    Is it possible the lady was not spooping. Maybe she wanted to visit a site she had been too earlier in the day and found all these offensive (to some) url's... Guys how many of you would have a crap attack if you found gay porn or a bunch of url's with homosexually themed names(I wouldn't turn anybody in but I would be offended).

    The files may not have been intentionally saved. Your web browser caches images and the history. Both of these can and should be deleted when you are done browsing the internet.

    I dont surf porn at work but I do go to some health sites and research various things that I dont want everyone to know about. I simply clear the browser cache and history for the day and then give the computer to the next user.

    Anyway to make a long post simple. I think there is more to the story.... Stay Safe

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    117

    Default

    To MikeHunt:
    That comment was totally uncalled for.
    Alisa Tappana, NREMT-B/CNA

    All the views, comments, etc expressed herein are mine and not those of my training program or my employer.

    "You can't make footprints in the sands of time if you're sitting on your butt. And who wants to make buttprints in the sands of time?"
    -Bob Mowad

  9. #29
    Forum Member BucksEng91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Warminster, PA
    Posts
    576

    Default

    Originally posted by apatrol
    Is it possible the lady was not spooping. Maybe she wanted to visit a site she had been too earlier in the day and found all these offensive (to some) url's... Guys how many of you would have a crap attack if you found gay porn or a bunch of url's with homosexually themed names(I wouldn't turn anybody in but I would be offended).
    The point is not so much that she was "snooping". The point is that she saved the "History" files, brought them to someone's attention, and fingered the LT as the guy who was on the computer. That's a muttley thing to do, I don't care if the LT was looking at porn or not.

    If Kordecki's THAT offended by "offensive URLs" (not the actual pics or text, mind you, just the Internet-address URLs), then it sounds like she's working in the wrong place. The language that gets thrown around a firehouse can be, and often is, much worse than what you might see in a random X-rated URL.

    I suspect, and this of course is pure conjecture, that the lady had a problem with the LT, and saw an opportunity to burn him. I simply can't imagine a medic, with all of the horror, death, nudity, and raw side of life that they see on a daily basis, would actually be profoundly offended because she saw "www.upmybutt.com" or something to that effect in an IE browser history. It doesn't compute. It sounds more like she saw an opportunity, and took it.
    "Let's roll." - Todd Beamer, one of a group of American soldiers who handed the terrorists their first defeat.

    Joe Black

    The opinions expressed are mine and mine alone (but you can borrow them )and may not reflect those of any organization with which I am associated (but then again, they just may not be thinking clearly).

  10. #30
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Skowhegan, ME
    Posts
    24

    Default

    Little Miss EMT

    Who are you to say if something is uncalled for or not. This is a forum for all opinions. Go back to your liitle classroom. You don't have any capacity to declare a comment innapropriate or not especially when you have signatures that bash firefighters and then have to recant and apologise. Oh and if you don't know whaty recant means. It is what i did when i took back my women bashing statement. But listening to your babble might make me change my mind

  11. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    482

    Default

    He was looking at pornography and there are several types of pornographry. Irregardless of which type, he is wrong. My point was that he might be looking at child porn. Would you still defend him so?

  12. #32
    Forum Member BucksEng91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Warminster, PA
    Posts
    576

    Default

    Originally posted by theboxalarm
    He was looking at pornography and there are several types of pornographry. Irregardless of which type, he is wrong. My point was that he might be looking at child porn. Would you still defend him so?
    Might, could have, maybe...

    Who exactly is defending this guy, and why ask people to defend a hypothetical situation?

    I don't think anyone is really saying that the guy is completely blameless. But what the medic did was really low down. And since we're speculating and throwing around "mights" here, I think that the medic MIGHT have had something against the LT.
    "Let's roll." - Todd Beamer, one of a group of American soldiers who handed the terrorists their first defeat.

    Joe Black

    The opinions expressed are mine and mine alone (but you can borrow them )and may not reflect those of any organization with which I am associated (but then again, they just may not be thinking clearly).

  13. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    117

    Default

    Halligan125-

    If it's gonna makeyou happy, then I will retract what I said. I apologize for what I said, alright?
    Alisa Tappana, NREMT-B/CNA

    All the views, comments, etc expressed herein are mine and not those of my training program or my employer.

    "You can't make footprints in the sands of time if you're sitting on your butt. And who wants to make buttprints in the sands of time?"
    -Bob Mowad

  14. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    117

    Default

    Looking at the situation again, I believe that the FF shouls not be fired, but instead, at the most, be suspended for a little while and receive a demotion.

    And, the lady, she probably did want to set him up b/c you have to use a certain process to view the history and make any changes to it. Whether she had a gruge against him or not, I am not going to speculate. All I will say is that she is a snoop and probably did want to set him up.
    Alisa Tappana, NREMT-B/CNA

    All the views, comments, etc expressed herein are mine and not those of my training program or my employer.

    "You can't make footprints in the sands of time if you're sitting on your butt. And who wants to make buttprints in the sands of time?"
    -Bob Mowad

  15. #35
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Silver City, Oklahoma USA
    Posts
    985

    Default

    I have a problem with "zero tolerance" policies. They give people whose job should be making tough decisions an easy out.

    Regardless, the policy exists in this situation. Was the person in question looking at material that violated policy? If yes, then he should be diciplined. But did anyone actually SEE this alleged violation happen? More questions than answers here.

    I agree that past performance should be a factor in dicipline. I also don't really care if his behavior would have been acceptable in the station before the policy went into effect, because it just isn't a factor here. And anybody, male or female, that would make an effort (and she did) to have someone diciplined over an issue like this is no one I want to work with. I hope she's been working on that transfer paperwork...
    Bryan Beall
    Silver City, Oklahoma USA

  16. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    482

    Talking

    I don't think anyone is really saying that the guy is completely blameless. But what the medic did was really low down. And since we're speculating and throwing around "mights" here, I think that the medic MIGHT have had something against the LT.
    Bucks,

    I agree. Perhaps she has it in for him and she was able to get him. However, it was his fault alone that he broke that policy, no one else. As for the medic, I am not defending her methods. I would not want to work beside her. My last comment on this thread: "The Lt. was wrong and because of that he should be punished. The medic should move on to a different job. I should now be quite.

  17. #37
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    phoenix az
    Posts
    38

    Default

    Mike Hunt~
    You're a funny guy... and i like the name.
    try it you'll like it

  18. #38
    Temporarily/No Longer Active
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    The Big Apple - U.S.A.
    Posts
    29

    Default

    Silver City 4,

    Well said. Superior Officers should be trained and are paid to take care of personnel issues. In order for a policy to be fair, it must be followed. At one point or another a zero tolerance policy will not be enforced due to nepotism, friendships, or the fear of a lawsuit. My opinion is that a policy that gives the superior and or a committee of superiors the ability to review each case for what it really is, and hand out just punishments would be the best policy.

  19. #39
    Forum Member MIKEYLIKESIT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Division 24
    Posts
    4,360

    Default

    Bucks and I have butted heads on more then one occasion, but I am in complete agreement with him. Box, if you have been a firefighter for more then a few years,then you know a firehouse is not a monastery or a girl scout camp. If the Lt was looking at porn and got caught downloading stuff or meeting little boys online, thats one thing. We do not have enough info to end a 20 year career. Especially if there is some kind of personality conflict between him and the paramedic in question. How many times have you clicked on a link and gotten an unexpected eyeful? It happens. Zero tolerence is falling out of favor nationwide for the reasons stated in previous postings. I would hope that this guy catches a break and gets off(no pun intended ) with only a suspension.

  20. #40
    Forum Member DeputyChiefGonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Somewhere between genius and insanity!
    Posts
    13,582

    Default

    I was on the firehouse's internet computer a week ago and was scanning the "fairly new pumper woohoo!" thread. Someone posted a link to a site and called it "Woody's Family Photo album" or something like it. I clicked on it and lo and behold, it was smut city! When you try to exit one of those sites, it just leads you to another one, and so on.

    I could not remember my password at the time, so I could not post on the forums that putting that link up was a really stupid thing to do, as someone could get into some serious trouble over an accidental mouse click to what appears to be a humorous site really stupid thing to do, especially with "zero tolerance".

    In reference to the topic at hand...

    If the fire offcier in question was violating Department policy, he should be disciplined...starting with a warning.

    If the paramedic in question was snooping through private bunkroom areas, she should be disciplined...starting with a warning.
    ‎"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

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Posting Permissions

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