Florida--New Training Requirements Prompt Some Volunteers to Arm for Battle w/State

[GeorgeWendtCFI]

I'm done with him. Time to move on.

A 240 hour course will produce a significantly better, and more confident, firefighter. It has to become second nature, so that when all hell breaks loose, nobody (whether they be proby or veteran) vapor locks on the fireground.

He shoots...HE SCORES!

Are you kidding? FF1 is all about repetition.

Think about drivers ed. How many times do you drive around the parking lot before you go on the road? How many times do you parallel park? Close to a million! All basic education is based on repetition (do you remember your times tables? Why? Because you practiced them and recited them thousands of times).

The only way to be proficient at a manual task is to do it over and over again. That is a great point Firegod.

[Almarante51]

Originally posted by ChiefReason
Oh, and I'll throw in that we run on $54,000 a year in taxes and two fundraisers.

Oh yeah, we operate on $16,000 a year. Go figure, it's just a little more than what it costs for workman's comp.

Originally posted by ChiefReason
You have proven my point that FEMA is ****ing away money on departments that have no desire to take their departments to the next level. They just want a new parade piece. Departments like mine are penalized because we are not destitute for equipment or manpower.

No, I was able to demonstrate need, and a financial need at that. Maybe you need to re-read the FEMA guidelines. And, if you would like a copy of my narrative, I would be glad to email it to you.

Originally posted by LadyCapn
The Fire Service is typically reactive. Normally nothing will happen unless an event or series of events has occurred to expose some glaring inadequacy or god forbid an LODD occurrs. I don't know why Florida has come out with this at this specific time, but I can assure you it is in response to something.........be it multiple incidents or an insurance carrier who has said....."This is unacceptable".

There are several reasons from what I understand as being the forces behind this move. One reason, is that in Florida, most OTJ accidents happen to Volunteers (60% of them.) But, I bet if you look to see how many volunteers are on scene, as compared to Career, you might find out thatthe main reason for this swing in accidents is because most people on scene ARE volunteers.

Also, this push was iniciated by departments themselves, trying to get more money by forcing departments to have to hire instead of depending upon volunteers. But, not all departments are Paid/Vol...


Andrew

[BCmdepas3280]

I have been reading this thread with some great interest and have laughed my *** off at the back and forth, with that being said I have a couple of observations.

1. This country needs to set a national standard that all fire departments follow as a basic guideline..Big or Small..Paid or Volly
there is to much that can go wrong on the fire ground not to have everyone at the same level.

2. There can and should be a time guideline has to how the training must be attained..example: All members musts have their certifcation wthin 18 months

3. The volunteer services need to get there act together when it comes to training and stop crying about how many hours it takes .

4. Turk you need to lighten up you come across has a snot nose kid when you post things like WTF....and george you could lighten up also.

Being and paid guy this training thread is not an issue with me because we train just about every day I work.

[GeorgeWendtCFI]

Originally posted by Ltmdepas3280
I have been reading this thread with some great interest and have laughed my *** off at the back and forth, with that being said I have a couple of observations.

1. This country needs to set a national standard that all fire departments follow as a basic guideline..Big or Small..Paid or Volly
there is to much that can go wrong on the fire ground not to have everyone at the same level.

2. There can and should be a time guideline has to how the training must be attained..example: All members musts have their certifcation wthin 18 months

3. The volunteer services need to get there act together when it comes to training and stop crying about how many hours it takes .

4. Turk you need to lighten up you come across has a snot nose kid when you post things like WTF....and george you could lighten up also.

Being and paid guy this training thread is not an issue with me because we train just about every I work.

1. Whenever there is an issue such as this, a seemingly simple answer to the problem would be to throw the federal government at it. If you impose a national standard, that means that you have to have a federal agency to regulate it. Is that what you really want? The USFA is not set up as a regulatory agency. You would end up creating a huge bureaucracy that would end up making matters worse. There is no national agency regulating police training and minimum requirements. The training demands are similar. The states do an adequate job. Stop and think how bad the federal government would screw up the fire service.

2. Good point.

3. This is the crux of the matter, except it probably should the fire service in general. The reason that industries such as education law enforcement gets as much as they do is because their people are generally in agreement on what needs to be done. If you put 100 fire fighters in a room, you couldn't get a consensus as to whether the lights were on or off, no less a national training standard.

4. No, I can't.

[MIKEYLIKESIT]

Well this certainly has become quite the hornets nest. I might have been slightly off with my facts, but I ASSUMED since our Mutual Aid Division (21 Departments, paid,combo and volunteer)requires ALL structural Firefighters to be minimum of FF2,it was State mandated. Thanks Chief R. for the info. Having said that, if the standards were lowered in my area, would I truly be able to trust mutual aid firefighters that were not trained to FF2 level? I am not an offficer, but I AM a certified Fire Officer I with a provsional F.O. II on the horizon. Do you honestly think that I should have to take orders from a guy that gets voted into office as a Lt. or Capt. that dosent even have a Firefighter 2 certificate? George knows I have butted heads with him on more then one occasion. I agree with him 100 % on this one. I wont mention any names, because I wouldnt want to be accused of "bashing" anyone but Turk you really came out swinging. Then you wonder why it starts to get ugly. I will stand by my thought that if you make a commitment to your community, you have to do so fully. If that means taking a year to get trained, so be it. You are still doing more for your citizens then the average Joe. I only want to make sure that the guy/gal I am crawling down a hallway with has the knowledge and practical training to do so.

[Almarante51]

Originally posted by ChiefReason
Almarante: you call yourself a "newbie on a small rural FD" in your profile, so I assume that the senior citizens that you referred to in your post are the people that you protect. So, did you mean that they (your senior citizens) don't deserve the best efforts of their fire department, which includes training to a competent level? I give you the same "Hmmmmmmmmmmm" that you gave me.
And I stand by any comment made about FEMA ****ing away our tax money on some departments. I won't apologize to ANYONE for that. I have seen the 12th round come and go and it sickens me that departments that are rolling in tax base got their money while others still fight with small budgets and little community support. We are not one of them, but I sympathize with them and support the idea that our fire departments should be a local issue. End of rant.
So, if you want to come in here and debate, please do. If you want to shoot off a volley, expect return fire. If it gets too ugly, the "referees" will step in.
This ends the lesson.
TC & SS.

Those citizens are the same citizens who started the department I am serving. Sure, the district I serve deserves all I can give. Currently, I am supporting the department in a more administrative role, i.e. filing for grants, requesting aid from outside sources so we actually have gear that will keep us safe in the event we have to respond. Also, the FEMA grant was for a truck that would actually run and survive the trip to the scene. We are one of those "rural" departments you are talking about. In fact, most of the community has the attitude that we dont need to be there at all. They would rather see their house burn down and collect insurance money than to see us roll up and put their 100 year old house out.

I agree that we all need training. I don't think there is a one of us in this entire discussion that has said otherwise. What un-nerves me to no end about this law being formulated is that unless the state makes consideration for small departments like ours, then we will end up closing our doors because there are not enough "young" folks in our district that are even interested in volunteering. And now with the new training requirements, those "young" volunteers that I need so desperately to join, will need to be trained.

What is the best way to train? Well, from my own experience you give a brief training to familiarize the student with the concepts regarding a particular course. Then, you go for the more detailed hands on training, which for all departments is your regular training days. Any certification should show that you are not only familiar with the concepts of the course, but that you KNOW how to apply them safely. But so far, I only see a FFI or any other course as a means to familiarize the student with concepts they might not already know about. With that in mind, then what means are available to teach a course, and does the course have to be XXX amount of hours? When you go to a college to take classes, you can take clep exams to eliminate classes you already have knowledge of. Why can't Firefighters do the same thing? If you are already trained, or have been participating in "In house" training for a year or so, why can't you just go take the exam? All the exam proves is that you have knowledge of skills required, it is up to your experience to determine how well, or not so well you will perform in a live situation. And the tasks that you are assigned will be determined by the acting superior on scene anyway. So, why all the controls on the exact requirements for FFI certification?

So far, I see that no Chief in his right mind would put a firefighter with a FFI certification that has had no experience into a burning building. In reality, what difference does it make HOW the recruit got his training to enable him to pass his FFI exam? ISn't that the purpose of the exam is to prove that he has a general knowledge of the exam components? Once a Firefighter has a certification, does anyone ever ask him what course he took to attain it? In order to participate with any structured department, he has to attend regular training anyway, and no one would let him have any serious responsibilities on scene because he has no experience. So I stand on my initial issue that I have brought up to the Florida State Fire Marshal...


Why is the 160 hour course speficially required, along with the Exam????




Andrew

[Almarante51]

Originally posted by GeorgeWendtCFI
Think about drivers ed. How many times do you drive around the parking lot before you go on the road? How many times do you parallel park? Close to a million! All basic education is based on repetition (do you remember your times tables? Why? Because you practiced them and recited them thousands of times).

The only way to be proficient at a manual task is to do it over and over again. That is a great point Firegod.

When I took driver's ed, most of my time was watching the other students perform the same tasks I was supposed to learn. In reality, I learned from watching their mistakes, and their triumphs. But according to the new Florida Law, non-certified Firefighters are not even allowed on scene, which is the best place to LEARN. Sure, you should be FFI or better certified before entering a structure, but why prevent them from participating in a limited manner on scene?

Isnt regular station training just like driver's ed?


I agree with the repetition. Besides, it keeps you up to date, and also it keeps your mind focused on what to do in that event. It becomes second nature. The sole purpose of the initial course is to "introduce" you to all of the concepts and ideas. The ongoing training at your station will be what your new inductees will learn from, not the X# hours of class they attended.

The point I am trying to drive home is that it doesnt matter how you learn the initial concept of FFI. Whether it be learned from reading a book, watching a series of DVD's, from attending a college course, or from participating in ongoing departmental training exercises.


The real reason for ongoing training is as I said before, so that the training becomes second nature, and during an intense moment, you dont second guess yourself. That is why you would trust someone with 5,10 or 15+ years of experience. Not because they have knowledge of what a half-hitch knot is, how to roll up hose, or how to apply a straight stream to the seat of a fire; But because you KNOW beyond a shadow of a doubt that they will perform the correct actions in any given environment flawlessly without blinking an eye.


I may be a newbie, but Im no idiot.



Andrew

[ChiefReason]

Let's see if I can sum this up with an impersonal reply.

You need training standards to measure compliance. You need compliance to measure competency. You need competency to measure effectiveness. You need effectiveness to measure efficiency. You need efficiency to measure success.

Spoken like a true administrator, eh? Does it always come down to dollars? In the end, yes. The emotional issues such as injury, death and mayhem are real issues that must be addressed, but the financial impacts of those occurrences are also real and despite the bad taste of this dose of reality, it cannot be ignored or legislated, for that matter.

This whole can of worms can be summed up in one sentence, really;
"Florida-message received; send funding, the instructors and the timetable to phase in compliance."
Simple in concept; complex in design!
And for the record, nobody called anybody an "idiot". There is honor, even in "newbies". Jeez!
Who's ready for some pie?
TC & SS.

[fftrainer]

Here in NJ we are required to attend a 120 hour training course to be "qualified". We do not have FF1 and FF2; it has been combined into one course that constitutes the 120 hours of training.

Not sure about Turks area of the state not offering FF1 as referenced above but I just got this year's course catalog for my academy in the mail and I did some math on the duration of FF1 in my neck NJ and with a required hazmat weekend the course totals 130 hours (114 for FF1 and 16 for Hazmat) and this is FF1 only, not the combined 1 and 2 mentioned above. FF2 is a seperate class at another 60 hours.

Now I realize that there are differences in training requirements around the country, but apparently within my own state as well!?!

Having a national standard for certification is not a half bad idea since the last time I checked there IS a national standard for fires and that is that they burn hot and and they burn fast regardless of who you are or where you are, so why not have a national standard of tactics to protect yourself. Heck if in developing a national standard we add tricks of the trade from around the country and some FF 2000 miles from me has an easier/safer way of doing a particular task, then I am all for adding it to my bag of tricks because you never know which one you will need at 02:30 when the dwelling fire alarm gets banged out!

Oh yeah and the thing that will **** me off the most about this FL argument is that the same guys spending all this time drafting petitions, making phone calls and arguing are the same guys who complain that they don't have enough time to adhere to a stricter standard.
Stay Safe!

[Duffman]

Let me address some of your points

I agree that we all need training.

You seem agree with the need for training if you can decide the makeup of said training, but do not want to accept a pre-determined standard.

So, why all the controls on the exact requirements for FFI certification?

The are called standards. Why are you adverse to meeting a standard? Stop for a minute and think about the tasks your firefighters may be asked to perform. Doesn't the public deserve firefighters that can meet a certain standard?

Why is the 160 hour course speficially required, along with the Exam????

To prove your people can actually perform the tasks not just pass a written test.

Do you have any state certified instructors on your department? If so you could probably do the course in house, incorporate it with your drills.

This is not your grandfathers fire service. Times have changed. The bar has been raised. If you want to volunteer then be prepared to meet the standard. It is insulting to use the argument that "our people won't make time to be certified so we will have to close our doors". Threatening the safety of your residents as an excuse to avoid meeting the requirements set forth by the state? How about enhancing the service they receive by stepping up and getting the training.

I agree you have to be given ample time to meet the standard, but dammit, meet the standard.

[LtTurk]

Ok, no more arguing, it got out of hand so we’ll stop it now.

I posted these thoughts earlier and I don't recall hearing any direct opinions on the ideas. Do you think this has any merit? Do you think these ideas may be feasible to fully certify a prospective member?

There are 4 weekends in a month. That would give you 8 eight hour training days a month or 64 hours available for training. 64 training hours multiplied by 4 training areas would equal 256 hours of total training.

To further clarify using jaybirds training topics as an example:
Can we break down the topics?

Maybe FF1 68 hours or 1 month (2 months if every other weekend) would clear the member for exterior operations and include:
Administration
Fire Theory
Ladders
Knots
ICS/IMS
Hose, Nozzles and appliances
Extinguishers

Maybe FF2 68 hours or 1 month (2 months if every other weekend) would clear the member for interior operations and include:
SCBA
Building construction
Ventilation
Fire attack

Maybe FF3 68 hours or 1 month (2 months if every other weekend) would clear the member for advanced operations and include:
F.G. S.A.R.
FAST/RIT team
Forcible Entry
Advanced water supply

Maybe a FF4 with more advanced topics and another 68 hours
Advanced S.A.R.
Advanced SCBA
ICS 200
Advanced Tactics

Would something along these lines work in your opinions? I think it would provide the repetition that everyone is looking for since you'll always be touching on previous classes as you progress to the advance classes. It would provide the necessary amount or training hours that everyone is looking for. It would make the training slightly easier on the member sine it is broken up and can be worked around busy schedules. It would get newer members involved sooner in areas that they have been trained in (exterior ops, etc.) which would make them feel like part of the team sooner. Wouldn’t have to be this exact breakdown but something similar if it would work and help the members handle the time involved.

[fftrainer]

Turk in my quick read of your suggested curriculum it's not a bad idea. The one thing I do like in your separation of 1 and 2 is that in my dept. we have a membership option called "Support Member" these are guys that shuttle/fill cylinders at scenes, help carry ladders, get equipment from the apparatus. Basically another set of hands on the exterior of a fire. Having your FF1 curriculum would help this type of person immensely -- at least that's my self gratifying opinion

[hwoods]

Your worst fears are realized! I'm back. Just when I thought it was safe to take a few days off, this one came along. OK. I have one Very, Very, Big Problem with what I have seen here. I have been a Firefighter/EMT/Officer/EverythingElse since October 4, 1958. My current training file lists 2,660 hours of training, formal classes only, no "Monday night Drills" included. I currently hold Nat. Pro Board Fire Officer IV and Instructor III Certificates, along with a ton of others. I AM A VOLUNTEER. I agree that EVERYONE needs to be trained to the best possible level.I absolutely DO NOT AGREE that the individual or the VFD should pay a single penny. There are two big differences in Maryland and Florida: 1.Training in Maryland is provided by the State (MFRI) or the large urban counties, and is paid for by those agencies. No individual or FD shells out a penny for anything. 2. There is no State requirement for training. Minimum requirements are set by the individual counties based on what is needed to suit local conditions, BUT, all training is designed and certified to meet National Pro Board Standards. In our county you need 36 hours to be able to stand OUTSIDE a burning building, 90 hours more to go in. Do I have a problem with what is happening in Florida? Damn right I do. Do I have an idea on how to fix it? Yup! Many years ago, we flooded the state capitol with apparatus and people, and just about shut the town down completely. We got national attention, and we got what we wanted from the legislature. My advice to Florida's Volunteers - GO GET 'EM. Stay Safe....

[ChiefReason]

Woodsy:
Where in the HELL have you been? I had just about written you off.
Now, assume the position. Some people want to say "welcome back".
I think we all have an opinion on "unfunded mandates"?
The chair recognizes Dalmation90!!!

[GeorgeWendtCFI]

When I took driver's ed, most of my time was watching the other students perform the same tasks I was supposed to learn. In reality, I learned from watching their mistakes, and their triumphs. But according to the new Florida Law, non-certified Firefighters are not even allowed on scene, which is the best place to LEARN. Sure, you should be FFI or better certified before entering a structure, but why prevent them from participating in a limited manner on scene?

Isnt regular station training just like driver's ed?

That is the equivalent of the classroom. You still had to spend a considerable amount of time behind the wheel before you knew how to drive.

The 68 hour curriculum blocks have two deficiencies:

1. There is not enough time to adequately teach each subject.

2. There are blocks in your FFIII curriculum which really need to be mastered to function at a FFI level.

What you are doing is creating minimally trained FF who are not capable of preforming all the tasks they should be able to. I understand your points, but the reality is that most VFDs do not have the luxury of having enough people to let people be premanent outside FF. I would reluctantly agree that an Academy could split the FFI curriculum up into three blocks that could be completed in, as someone suggested, an 18 month window. But, IMHO, 68 hours for a FFI cert. is not enbough (It is also not in compliance with NJ State Regs.).

[LtTurk]

Could one of the instructor types please breakdown my above idea into the hours currently spent on each subject? I'm interested to see how close or far off the mark the idea is.

George, how would you suggest better organizing the idea?

It is just an idea, please feel free to expand upon as you see fit.

[ChiefReason]

I'm sensing some real progress here.
Instructors; don't you take lunch breaks and check your mail?
Come on; this discussion is moving again.
Turk has some valid points. He's asking for your thoughts.
Ohio; Jaybird; give us the goods.

[Almarante51]

Originally posted by ChiefReason
Let's see if I can sum this up with an impersonal reply.

You need training standards to measure compliance. You need compliance to measure competency. You need competency to measure effectiveness. You need effectiveness to measure efficiency. You need efficiency to measure success.

The exam is for the compliance. After the initial exam, only the department heads determine compliance. Ongoing training only ensures compliance.

But I agree with training. But why does it have to be X# of hours? This is no different than the Quality Assurance team at NASA. You can't inspect quality into your work, you can only assure it. The exam only assures you that the person who took the exam knows the exam content.

Somehow, I get the feeling I am talking myself in circles here.


We need to make the training more accessible. The source of training doesnt matter, buy yes, the training content does matter. IN the end, you want someone who understands the concept of fighting fire, and the exam is supposed to assure you that the person who took the exam understands those concepts. If the exam doesnt assure that, then something is wrong with the exam, and the certification is worthless. Which, listening to all of your posts here so far, that is what I get, the training and the exam dont mean squat, other than now the department doesnt have to train you on the BASICS. Right?

Originally posted by Duffman
The are called standards. Why are you adverse to meeting a standard? Stop for a minute and think about the tasks your firefighters may be asked to perform. Doesn't the public deserve firefighters that can meet a certain standard?

Ok, my argument is simple. The "Standard" does not need to include a requirement for 160 hours of specific training. The reason for this argument is simple. The exam insures the student LEARNED the required items from study, period. What difference does it make whether it was from 40 hours of training or 160? If you pass the exam, great. No one here seems to be able to prove why any amount of "courses" are required if you can pass the exam. Besides, the state recognizes you as a able bodied Firefighter if you pass the exam. My point is, if you are not able or ready to fight fires if you can pass the exam, then the exam is flawed, end of discussion. Fix the exam, make it match the requirements for the training. Make the exam weed out the people who are not fully qualified. Post after post points to this fact, but yet no one brings the issue up.

Originally posted by Duffman
Do you have any state certified instructors on your department? If so you could probably do the course in house, incorporate it with your drills.

Ummm, two years ago the department was in such disaray, the commisioners were going to vote to disband, interestingly enough, that was the first meeting I attended. It was also my first meeting as a member. So no, we don't have in house trainers. We are lucky to have a chief who is actually FFI certified!

Originally posted by Duffman
I agree you have to be given ample time to meet the standard, but dammit, meet the standard.

I repeat my previous point, fro ma different perspective. Consider this. I can pay $100 per exam, and take six different exams. After having passed said exams, I will be considered a Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer. This certification affords me high prestige, as well as high paying jobs. Did I have to take hours upon hours of training? Nope. Fire Fighting is another Career in this big world of ours, only it has many more perils than a desk job, and it requires alot of precision, and errors can cost you your life. Passing said Microsoft exams is not easy, thus the reason why MCSE certified people come at a cost.

I say again, if the exam does not weed out those who are not able, then something needs to change, and 160, 240, 360+ hours of training before the exam will not help. The exam should be a competency test, not a knowledge test.

The "standard" puts too much emphasis on the training, and actually dis-credits the exam itself. IN essence, the exam only proves one thing, that the student "retained" enough information to pass the exam. That is a sad way to grade your students.



Andrew

[Bones42]

The source of training doesnt matter, buy yes, the training content does matter

Almarante, I disagree, the source matters very much. If the trainer is untrained, but been around along time doing things the wrong way, they will train all the newer people the wrong way.

Also, in NJ, you can take the FFI written test, it does not certify you as a FFI. Written test is only part of it. Practical, hands on testing is also required. I have seen many Book Smart-Good test takers pass the written with %100 and fail the hands on miserably.

And lastly, on a personal note, I have hired and fired many MCSE's that can pass the written tests but don't know squat in the real world. It's a shame that certification has become so meaningless.

[Almarante51]

Originally posted by Bones42
Also, in NJ, you can take the FFI written test, it does not certify you as a FFI. Written test is only part of it. Practical, hands on testing is also required. I have seen many Book Smart-Good test takers pass the written with %100 and fail the hands on miserably.

And lastly, on a personal note, I have hired and fired many MCSE's that can pass the written tests but don't know squat in the real world. It's a shame that certification has become so meaningless.

You prove my point. The exam itself should be the written, and the physical protion of the certification. In order for me to pass my CPR test, I actually had to pass a written, and a physical CPR test on a dummy. Why can't the state certification mean exactly what it means? I can honestly say I am certified in CPR, but even after 160 hours of class and taking a written exam, I honestly dont feel that I could say I was a certified FF, nopt according to what all these other veterans are saying about certification. I could say I had a working knowledge of FF, but not real world practical knowledge.

I know I keep saying that the hours and training needs to be reduced and or broken down, and my last statement contradicts what I am saying. Seriously, what I would consider to be certified, is a more rigorous exam. If that is just not possible, then reduce the requirements for the exam, and increase the requirements for training, and reduce the expiration for the certification. Currently, your FFI certification expires after three years of not being active in a department's calls or training (or so I have been told.) Reduce that 3 years down to, say, six months to a year, with XX amount of training hours logged.

Let's be realistic. Either make the certification match the meaning of the law, or change the law itself. According to the law as it is currently being re-written, 160 hours of class and a passing grade on the exam makes you able to go into a burning building. But reading the posts here, the veterans say no way. If that isnt the case, then something IS wrong, and no amount of in class training will improve it.

We all know exactly what is missing here, it is called EXPERIENCE. On-going training at the station will only give you so much experience. Where you get your true experience is at the live fires themseleves. Volunteers need to have enough (not overkill) training in order to be functional on/in the firegound, and enough training to stay safe.


Andrew