Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on January 13, 2012 at 9:21am

I can see the point and understand the context, but the difference between CPR, EMT, Paramedic and that of firefighter is the standards. What I mean is that with medical license there is required material that must be covered during a licensure period and that is a standard that remains consistent throughout the state. CPR is also another standard that remains "relatively" consistent. (There is some differences between American Heart and say Red Cross, etc)

The other aspect is both a medical license and CPR also incur a financial cost to keep current.

 

Now when it comes to FF, the issue is that there really is no consistency, each dept can set up how they operate, whereas with a medical license or CPR, the curriculum should be pretty standard. Which means if I have need for an ambulance out of my state, pretty much the EMTs are going to operate by much the same way as we do. However, fire wise could be quite different. For instance when you take FF 1 and you are doing ladder work, well by the book, it should be 2 people to raise and extend a 24 ft extension ladder. However, there are many depts that teach and operate to have a single FF be able to put up and extend the same ladder alone.

 

The issue I would have is who thus becomes the certifying agency? As mentioned with the medical license and CPR, there IS a financial pricetag associated with it as well as set standards. So now if looking to recertify as FF, first who is charged with the review and issue of license? Is this now a new govt division etc to now deal with this? Is this something more for the tech colleges to ensure...more revenue? Who's standards do you go by? As mentioned, the book says one thing but depts operate differently. If looking to recertify for FF, how far do you keep going? Recertify for fire officer, inspector, driver operator?

 

I understand the context of recertifying, but I believe this is something up to individual depts and there is no need for some extra oversight. As it is, depts are supposed to conduct and maintain training records and there is supposed to be regular training, but it doesn't always happen. Most larger depts have training divisions and maintain and ensure training records are kept current and if there is a LODD or significant injury, the first thing looked at is training records.

 

To me, I disagree with an established recertification system, there are just too many variables between depts. I adamently would disagree with some form of license to maintain the job because there already is enough budget challenges and if looking to have the individual FF maintain such a license....well say goodbye to the volunteer fire service.

 

I DO agree with an individual dept ensuring that their own personnel are kept current and that the personnel can perform the tasks. This can be done as a training drill and officers and or training division personnel can assure the FFs are doing things right. Personally I would say make it a regular type of training where you can LEARN as well as offer insight as opposed to fearing ramifications if something isn't done right. There already is measures in place to ensure training is maintained and basics worked on, and it should be up to an individual dept to ensure the personnel are proficient as opposed to some formalized evaluation and recertification process.

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sparky3317 on January 13, 2012 at 10:08am

John,  (lets see if I can cover all your points here)

1st:  I do agree with you partially.  Every department does operate differently no matter if they are your mutual aid towns or in another part of the country.  But that should make no difference when it comes to the re-certification.

With most states they already require you to have your firefighter certification to get on a department and that is a set of standards, by the book, test.  Why not just have the firefighters retest on this system. 

And also I believe if you have any type of certification there should be a re-certification test.  Whether it be one year, two years, five years something.  We do not all get the chance to do everything our job involves on a regular basis even with training. 

In some departments they get to cut up a car once a year for training and they get one car from the junk yard and the 30 or 40 guys on the department may get what one or two cuts on that vehicle or one set uses the spreaders and one set uses the cutters.  I mean really the training some people get just is not enough. 

2nd: And as for the EMS operations.  Every department operates by the same standards and in their own manner.  You may take a blood pressure with a bp cuff someone else uses a monitor or takes it by palpation.  You may check lung sounds in 4 spots others may do 6.  But when it comes to re-certification time you all follow the same book and protocols.

3rd: When it comes to finances, it comes out of my pocket if I want to take the Massachusetts EMT-Basic test again.  But in some areas they pay for others they do not.  It changes state to state, department to department.  

If you think that charging the firefighter to re-certify will cause the volunteer fire service to go out of business then I think you need to take another look at how things around the country are run and how many volunteer EMT-basic, medics and other EMS providers still have to pay their own way and they are still in business and have jobs as volunteers.  They are going to be around for a long time to come, another charge for certification is not going to get rid of close to 70% of the fire service. 

4th: And you are right it should be held to the department but in a lot of departments trainings are getting cut back due to budget cuts and these standards are not being upheld. 

5th:  A certifying agency?  Really its called a State or County fire academy.  The ones who initially certify firefighters to work on the job. 

6th:  The oversight.  I think there would be more oversight from departments than from a test, more people are worried about making sure they keep friends sometimes then paying attention to what they are suppose to be doing.  Not saying its in every department but it does happen.

I think I covered all the concerns you had, but if I did miss something please let me know. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Moose on January 13, 2012 at 11:50am

Read some of my blogs on my profile page brother...I have been making noise about this for years now but every time I bring it up, people jump all over me saying its a rediculous idea...Its probably because they are lazy and do not want to have to re-cert but I feel its necessary too, keeps us up-to-date on new techniques and practices.

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sparky3317 on January 13, 2012 at 11:57am

Definitely will take a look brother.  Glad to hear there is other people out there that feel the same way

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by FETC on January 13, 2012 at 2:52pm

Two words:  unfunded mandate.

 

The other thing is John is correct. State to state the curriculum and requirements vary immensely.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on January 13, 2012 at 2:52pm

With most states they already require you to have your firefighter certification to get on a department and that is a set of standards, by the book, test.  Why not just have the firefighters retest on this system.

 

Yet at the same time, there are many depts that do their own academy and testing as well as what is taught at the tech college level. That is the point, to what standards do you go by? Just like th eground ladder example, if a fire academy teaches the book way and the dept teaches a single person raise, then if incorporating a standards, you are saying one is right and one is wrong. Whereas the reality is it is a different way and technique.

 

And also I believe if you have any type of certification there should be a re-certification test.  Whether it be one year, two years, five years something.  We do not all get the chance to do everything our job involves on a regular basis even with training

 

Well lots of people have a driver's license. How often are they recertifying  and taking a road test?

The fact remains there are training standards already and it is up to an individual dept to ensure that training is done. Many do accomplish this already. There may not be actual "recertification" but training hours already set up each year to meet the requirments.

 

In some departments they get to cut up a car once a year for training and they get one car from the junk yard and the 30 or 40 guys on the department may get what one or two cuts on that vehicle or one set uses the spreaders and one set uses the cutters.  I mean really the training some people get just is not enough.

 

Whereas in others they spend plenty of time on extrication. I can't speak for everywhere, but working in the areas I have, there wasn't an issue with getting junk cars to train on. Most junkyards would donate a car, but sometimes it means going beyond the same training area to do the training.

 

Yet on the same token, extrication training doesn't need to have vehicles to tear up. Operating and handling the tools can be easily accomplished and familiarized with. You can take anyone's vehicle to train on the cut points etc and techniques without cutting apart the vehicle. No doubt that this shouldn't be the way to go about such training, but can also be something trained on despite the one care for 40  or so FFs (which is poor logistical planning). Besides some of the most dangers we face with Hybrids, airbags etc are not typically used for extrication training and many depts train by other means to learn about them.

 

2nd: And as for the EMS operations.  Every department operates by the same standards and in their own manner.  You may take a blood pressure with a bp cuff someone else uses a monitor or takes it by palpation.  You may check lung sounds in 4 spots others may do 6.  But when it comes to re-certification time you all follow the same book and protocols

 

Not really the same thing. Checking B/P or lung sounds is really not much of a difference if done by machine or checking 4 spots etc. The point is the standards are basically the same thing. Look at CPR...as a recertification the standard was 5:1 for 2 person rescue many years ago, subsequently changed to 15:2 years ago. The standard for today is compressions of 100/minute. Despite studies years ago showing compressions of 100/minute had a better outcome, there still is not the change for some certifying agencies that still hold onto the 15:2 standard.

 

Such changes did not come about by a dept looking for a new way to do the job, but by numerous studies and grants to some depts to conduct the study etc. Whereas, there are many different ways to do the same thing in the fire service. The book teaches to use several people on a 1 3/4" line, yet many depts can have one person do the same thing. You have new techniques and tools by many people out in the service already, creating standards can also hinder progress. Heck, let's just take a look at NIMS.....a push for a national standard.....use of plain language.....how many depts still use 10 codes?? Several......nomenclature for rigs......care to guess how many depts still refer to a tender as a tanker? Point is despite a national standard, there is still numerous varieties by dept. 

3rd: When it comes to finances, it comes out of my pocket if I want to take the Massachusetts EMT-Basic test again.  But in some areas they pay for others they do not.  It changes state to state, department to department.

 

Look beyond what you just said. Are you required to hold an EMT license as part of your job? Many places you are required, some you are not. In order to maintain a license requires bi-annual recertification. For an EMT in WI, the certifying test is the National Registry, one only needs to pass it once and one doesn't have to maintain their registry unless either A) they want to, or B) they are required to by the employer.

 

Now many people have let their National Registry lapse and yet are still licensed as EMTs and paramedics within the state. This is because the state requires 36 continuing ed hours bi-annually for EMT-B and 48 hours for paramedic. Part of that license is to have a current CPR card and ACLS card for medic. Since the dept requires everyone be at least an EMT-B, then time is to be made available or training provided by the dept. Such costs are reduced for us because we have certified trainers who go through classes, butthere is also an agreement worked out with the tech college too. Nothing is free. Now as for the National Registry, if I let mine lapse and say I move to another National registry state and want to be a paramedic there, I would have to retake the test and incur the costs on my own....but if I'm required to maintain that through an employer, then they need to supply either time off to maintain it or provide training.

If you think that charging the firefighter to re-certify will cause the volunteer fire service to go out of business then I think you need to take another look at how things around the country are run and how many volunteer EMT-basic, medics and other EMS providers still have to pay their own way and they are still in business and have jobs as volunteers.  They are going to be around for a long time to come, another charge for certification is not going to get rid of close to 70% of the fire service.

 

Many depts already pick up the costs for EMT or medic because it benefits the dept to provide that service and EMS typically generates revenue. Fire training does not. If requiring FFs to be responsible for their own license then where is the financial incentive to do so? Why volunteer when it costs money to do so? While a nurse, plumber, electrician, doctor recertifies their license, there is a finacial incentive to do so...their job. Bit of a difference when you are a volunteer.

 

4th: And you are right it should be held to the department but in a lot of departments trainings are getting cut back due to budget cuts and these standards are not being upheld.

 

And there is lies another problem, budgets themselves. We already see the disparity of bieng able to do physicals for all members, or afford PPE, etc along with other budget shortages. So why would you think mandating a license and recert for basic FF tasks will be cost effective? Where does that money come from.....if requiring the individual to shoulder the load, I revert back to my comments with vollies.

 

 

I'm not really against the concept, but this can and should be done by individual depts as opposed to some recertifying agency. I'm playing Devil's Advocate, because I don't think the bigger picture is being viewed when it comes to such requests. Much of the challenges faced on the fireground do less with the initial certification and subsequently recertification than learning and improving. Recertification tend to create automatrons as opposed to people thinking and training and thus improving. It is one thing to just go through the motions to recertify and another to open up and encourage learning.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sparky3317 on January 13, 2012 at 3:44pm

1st statement:   Creating a standard does not mean one is right and one is wrong.  In the Mass academy they teach you both a one and two person ladder through. 

Also I am not saying create this whole new thing.  Most states and also individual academies already have a standard in place that you need to pass when you are in the academy so why not just use that standard for the firefighters that use that academy.  For instance Boston firefighters get held to a Boston standard, PG County Firefighters get held to a PG County standard and Walpole MA firefighters get held to the MA Fire Academy Standards.  There does not need to be this whole new group or agency as you call in they are already in place.

2nd statement:  I actually believe after so many years you should have to retest for your drivers license.

 

3rd statement:  I can open and close a set of spreaders and cutters and hold them in my arms all day long it does not mean I know how to cut up a car.  Everything we do in the fire service depends on hands on training.  We can look, stare and read all we want but until you cut open a car, pull a line, take a BP or put oxygen on someone you do not know that you can do it practically. 

4th:  It does not have to be a national standard I never said that.  It can go state to state and department by department in some cases when they have their own academy as stated previously

5th:  Yes I am required to keep to keep my job, if I lost my ticket I could not work as an EMT anywhere in the state.  It is a state requirement to get a job not just keep a job it. 

6th:If your a volunteer and the lack of a finacial incestive to stay certified keeps you from becoming a volunteer or leaving the job your in the wrong field.

7th:  Ive be re-certifying for my CPR for about 10 years now and I still study on my own and keep up with the new and improved techniques and news that come with it.  Just because you have to re-certify does not mean you are going to become a robot.

Whats the bigger picture?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on January 13, 2012 at 6:03pm

The bigger picture quite simply any recertification going beyond an individual dept is calling for more bureaucracy. Otherwise how else do you ensure the training standards are met?

 

If advocating for a recertification system how do you ensure personnel are keeping proficient without seeing increased costs and bureaucracy? When it comes to volunteer depts, we have seen enough discussions about recruitemt and retention, costs for physicals, costs for gear, etc, etc. While you say that... "If your a volunteer and the lack of a finacial incestive to stay certified keeps you from becoming a volunteer or leaving the job your in the wrong field."....hence the reason for my comments. Putting additional costs on depts or even individuals for some basic taks, doesn't really make financial sense.

 

Besides, you state that such recertifications should be in place because of the depts that don't really do as much or quality training. Yet at the same time, you are penalizing those depts that already do. Why should my dept, which already addresses such training standards are covered annually, incur additional costs for some form of licensure? If placed on the individual, why should I personally have to incur additional costs because we already train because some podunk, good ol boys, dept doesn't?

 

Another aspect is the differences in standards. While you are quoting MA, not all states are the same, nor dept standards. It sounds as though MA, has a state academy and even when I applied for Boston FD, noticed "successful completion of the state academy"....not the same here in WI. Here the tech colleges provide the firefighter curriculum and certification, other states it may be community colleges etc. Here in WI, the minimum standard to be a volunteer FF is ENTRY-LEVEL FF, which is below FF1 and 2 certs. Depts like mine ask for state FF1 and FF2 (or IFSAC), associate degree, paramedic. Larger depts like Madison and Milwaukee, require bare minimum (18, HS, DL) and train to their own requirements. Sure the FFs end up with state certs.

 

So in that aspect alone, you are looking at different levels of certification for doing the job, so if depts already operate differently, how do you effectively ensure a recertification system that doesn't incur costs?

 

Furthermore, let's look at what Ray was speaking about too. He mentions exterior, aggressive interior, flaking hose, etc. What is missing? How about staffing? How about size up? A dept with adequate staffing is going to operate differently than some podunk VFD where you get perhaps a small handful of people showing up. Operations are going to differ by those aspects alone....In fact this isn't even taught in the FF1 and FF2 curriculum, because staffing varies, whereas a city's own fire academy can focus on specific tasks because they do know the staffing that they get.

 

This is why I advocate for a dept based type of system rather than looking to some national, statewide, even countywide system. Only an individual dept can ensure that the members are trained properly and can ensure they can meet the requirements without incurring a licensure type of recertification system. Anything beyond an individual dept only will incur additional costs, creates bureaucracy, and penalizes those depts that already do enforce training standards. 

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion