Last week I went to lunch with some co-workers (non-FFs) and the discussion rolled around to my involvement with the FD. One of the guys said "well, you must have guys that just join the department for the drinking". This recalled to mind another comment by someone, some years back, who swore that ALL volunteer FFs drank at the station and "those who say they don't are lying".


In my department you might find a 6-pack or two if you look in every nook and cranny, but we really don't touch the stuff on drill night or after calls, or meetings. There just isn't stuff to touch. In the late 80s we had the converted soda machine that dispensed several brands of beer but we got rid of it because the Jr. FFs were becoming interested in the stuff.

So - what is your department policy or practice regarding alcohol in the firehouse?

NOTE: 10/16/09: I started this thread over two years ago to gather input from other volunteer firefighters on FFN as it was then. The new theme is, what steps can we take to make America's fire houses 100% dry?

Views: 2609

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

We are a volunteer fire district in NY. As such the firehouse is a municipal building and subject to the same rules as any other municipal building. No drinking. We do however have a club house where the guys acan get together after drills, meetings and calls to relax and have a couple.

The official policy on responding is zero tolerance. However, that rule gets routinely broken. I'm not talking about drunks responding but the person who has one or two with dinner. Heck, drinking two beers is no worse than taken 6 or 7 Advil.
Our fire house was the same way. This was way before i got on the dept. When i got on the dept. there was no to be any alcohol at the Fire dept, on calles, or at any of the events. Now even if you just get cough out drinking and drivein. you will have to take a 6 month leave from the dept. the first time. The reason for that is becaues we had a fire fighter and a best firend killed in a truck wreak. he was drinking that night and though he could drive. That was his last drive. I think that was the hardest thing for this dept and I to deal with. For me he was my best friend.

There is some people who thinks that we may be to hard on the alcohol deal. I don't. as you can see people don't look at one person one the fire dept. they look at the whole dept. even if your out with your family your still not just a person. if you mess up the public thinks that the dept messed up. I'm not saying that you can't go out and have a good time but use your head. If you do go out to a few bars don't have anything that shows that your on X Fire Dept. don't carry your fire raido or what ever your Dept uses. It's just like the fire grounds. you go there alive. You come home alive. We are the ones who go's out and pulles the drunks from the cars and trucks. We don't want to be the ones that has to be pulled from them. thanks. Dusty Baize
Many years ago; the firefighters were known for drinking at the station and in public at festivals and other public events. As social acceptance changed towards this issue; my fire department drew up policies and even amended our Constitution and By-laws towards prohibiting drinking and responding under the influence. The "unwritten" part of a general policy is that no open containers, whether it be in bottles or cans, could be brought into the station while the potential for a citizen to enter the station was probable. Though, if a member wanted to drink alcohol, that it could be done so in any container that was not obviously marked as an alcohol product.

I have seen one of our Assistant Chief's respond in the Assistant Chief's unit and enter a scene smelling of alcohol. This was reported to the Chief and one of the local police officers and they just had him leave the scene. I have made it a point to the Chiefs and the membership of the potential for liability by knowingly allowing a member to do this. The response to me was that I did not know what I was talking about until a State Trooper and a lawyer was asked about it while they were conducting a training class for the membership. As it turned out; I was right. I knew that I was because not only am I a vetern firefighter myself; but a police officer as well, who has trained in SFST (Stadardized Field Sobriety Tests) and arrested plenty of intoxicated drivers.

My thoughts about drinking alcohol at the station and then responding to calls is that it's hypocritical to respond to a accident involving an intoxicated driver while you are intoxicated yourself. Not only is a firemen endangering himself; but everyone else that he has come into contact with. What's the point of community service and helping others that are in need; when you are a danger to yourself and others?

Would you knowingly ride with or even enter a hazordous scene with someone that has been drinking or under the influence of a mind altering substance? I hope not!
Well, I must say that after I read all of the replies; that this is a wide spread issue in the fire service.
24 hours off for a sip of an alcoholic beverage seems more than a bit excessive. It takes an adult approximately two hours to metabolize a standard drink, defined as 12 ounces of beer, 5 ounces of wine, or 1.5 ounces of 80-proof distilled spirits, all of which contain the same amount of alcohol.

So basically if one takes Communion, they shouldn't respond to any calls until mid-morning on Monday? I'm in no way condoning Responding under the Influence (RUI), but if a 200 pound male has a 12 ounce beer with dinner at 1800, he will have completely metabolized it from his system by 2000.

In studies, a Fasting Adult Male subject will reach a Blood Alcohol Concentration of .018% after a single standard drink and .047% after two standard drinks. The level at which impairment begins is .05% and some jurisdictions are starting to lower the legal driving limit to .05%. While I do believe Firefighters should be held to a higher standard than the general public, I think 24-hours for a sip is out-of-proportion!

Here's the Greeman's two cents on the subject:

For Professional (paid) firefighters there should be a zero alcohol policy. No consumption for 8 hours prior to a shift. Same thing for Volunteer departments whose members work scheduled shifts.

For Volunteers who don't work scheduled shifts, I think a standard of .02% is safe and reasonable for everyone. It is well below the level at which impairment begins and recognizes that Volunteers do not know if they are going to be paged. In many, if not most, volunteer departments Firefighters might only get a couple pages a month, and in some rural areas they may go a month or longer without a call. Do we expect them to abstain from having ANY alcohol everyday of the year because there's a slim chance that TODAY might be the day? I think this is unreasonable.

A BAC limit of .02% allows an adult to consume about one standard drink every two hours and remain under the limit to respond.

So if Eddie the Volunteer FF is working in his backyard, and has a beer with his lunch at 1230 and the Tones drop at 1500 he will be perfectly capable of responding to the call because his BAC would be approximately ZERO after two hours. In some communities, if Eddie doesn't respond to the 1500 call, there may not be enough responders to handle the call at all and the victim may die while waiting for the fire department in the next town to respond. There are places in Georgia, New Hampshire and elsewhere where if you're waiting for the Engine form the next town to get to you, you're waiting twenty-minutes or more. Some towns only have 20 members in the Fire Department and they may live up to twenty miles form the fire station.

In these rural departments it would be irresponsible for a department to prohibit a trained firefighter who isn't intoxicated from responding to a call because he's had one or two standards drinks over an evening. What are you going to do, let Mr. Johnson's house burn down because half the department had a beer with dinner and it's now 2300 and there's smoke showing from rafters of his house? Are you not going to respond to the car that hit a moose at 0200 because you had an Irish coffee at 1900?

Let's keep it in perspective.
I agree with the statistics nad I know them well enough to testify in court as a expert witness. The problem when the smell of alcohol is present on one person's breathe; then they are considered to be under the influence. I know that a lot of people can tolerate alcohol and function very well after drinking. The issue comes up when they simply "smell" like it. The public does not care nor does any media faction for that matter. We are all public servants whether or not we are paid or volunteers and it doesn't matter to them why we do what we do, take precious time away from our families to go out and assist those in need. It only takes one person in the public (citizen) or media to cry out that they "smelled" alcohol on a fireman's breathe and that means he was "drunk". Those statements may not be entirely true; but it's the perception that has been made that will cast a dark cloud over a department and cause it to become a "glass house" to the public.

I also understand the distance issues for mutual aid response by the other neighboring departments and the time constraints involved.

You're right, let's keep it in perspective. Are we willing to risk our lives to help people in need or are we willing to throw are lives away and orphan our families or members of another family for the sake of "I've only had one or two" ?

I'll go ahead and add in for the sake of this; that I drink alcohol ...i.e.... beer and liqour ..... as well. I just know that I'm a responsible drinker that will cast no doubt on my abilities at all.
I guess it comes down to Risk Assessment and Risk Managment.

What carries greater risk to a municipality, or Fire Department, a Volunteer who had a drink but is well under the Legal Limit to Drive and operate machinery repsonding and saving lives and property, or not having enough personel to respond, or to adequately respond and letting somone die, or letting someone's home burn to the ground due to a controlable fire?

The answer is Zero Tolerance for anyone who knows they will be working, such as professional departments and scheduled Volunteers. I am refering to un-scheduled Volunteers who remain under the legal BAC level to drive or operate machinery. Anyone who "smells of alcohol" would have to have more than .02% in their system.
Thanks for the perspective Greenman. You make some really salient points viz. staffing versus abstinence versus BAC. Like you I see no problem with responsible use of ETOH by Emergency responders. Most of us have a drink occasionally, and most of us are responsible about it. It is clear that alcohol is a societal issue that will not go away. It is condoned by society at large, and is completely socially acceptable. As a result, there is no stigma attached to it, as opposed to many other mood altering chemicals. Thus the american public is in a way holding up a double standard if they expect that Emergency responders will be temperate and not drink at all. On the other hand, I don't think this double standard applies to fire stations that keep ETOH in the fridge for personnel to consume on property.

There is no reason or excuse for a fire station to keep any form of beer, wine or liquor on their premises, none. It establishes an environment that creates potential liabilities all over the place. Since I don't know of any fire department that is not in some way dependent on a city, county or state for its existence, it seems reasonable to me that such government entities should decline to fund, staff or train departments whose stations are not dry. I think any risk management office would agree with me.

Conversely, If Eddie the volunteer firefighter has his 1800 dinner beer and goes out at 1930 on a call, it must be Eddie the Volunteer's choice. My point is that as long as drinking is a socially condoned activity, then we must be self governing and err on the side of caution when deciding whether to head for the station. The liability questions are too great these days.

So can we all agree that ETOH in the Firehouse is not acceptable? Can we further agree that whatever governmental entitiy enables our existence should pull our funding if we decide to keep ETOH in the firehouse? Lastly, can we agree that we must be self governing and conservative in the extreme when balancing our social drinking with our responsibilites as volunteers?
Absolutely ZERO TOLERANCE, guys we are supposed to be professionals, even those of us who are volunteer. Our apparatus is a rolling billboard, and how well does that look knowing that the engineer of that apparatus just left the bar before the run? Even having it on property is not allowed. It should still be considered a place of work, paid or volunteer. How many of us can drink at work, unless you work at a club or bar, probably none of us. If you drink, DO NOT GO ON A CALL. Just think about what most news stations would do if they found out about something like that. They would go to town with it. It is bad enough when firefighters in Ohio were just suspended last week for looking at porn at the station. Let alone drinking at the station or showing up with alcohol on your breath. I stand behind my departments ZERO TOLERANCE.
Joel,

Very well said. Firehouses should be dry, and anyone who knows they will be working should abstain prior to working. This would include training, meetings and scheduled shifts.

You also make a good point in that government, at any level, should not be in the business of providing alcoholic beverages to its employees.

As for being self-governing, in my experience 99% of all adults, especially public servants are self-governing. For the 1% who are not, peers, officers and departments need to be proactive and not only stop them from responding to calls when they are legally Under the Influence, but refer members who may have a drinking problem to help, such as AA, or the department mental health agency.

What does it say about a department who simply dismisses a member for showing-up drunk without helping that member find help for the problem? Some might not be ready for help, and you can lead a horse to water.... but if a member does overcome the problem, sobers-up and reforms his life, why wouldn't we accept him back into the firehouse - a dry firehouse - and welcome him back as a member of the team.

We call ourselves a brotherhood, but in all of the posts I read on here, I didn't see any mention of a department, or volunteer company having a program for helping Firefighters/EMS, even family members overcome alcohol dependency. All I saw was pejorative phrases such as "zero tolerance" and "permanent dismissal." The impression that gives me is that some of us feel like we're in a Super-Hero club and when a member shows a nick in his armor we simply tell him not to come back.

Like you said, Joel, alcohol use is accepted within our society, and it seems that the double-standard for Firefighters is held by many of our brethren.

Keep firehouses dry. Individuals need to abstain when they know they will be working, and drink responsibly at other times. We need to take care of our brothers and sisters when they have a problem and not just throw them out.
we can't have the stuff
On my volunteer fire department no alcohol is allowed/visible on station property. Our board of officers recently changed our by laws stating that if you have drank ANY amount of alochol, even one beer, you are not permitted to respond to a run for 12 hours after your last drink. This is a very strict rule yet still is very important in protecting our community and fellow firefighers. I think that all fire departments should adopt the same type of plan for their firefighters and community safety.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Find Members Fast


Or Name, Dept, Keyword
Invite Your Friends
Not a Member? Join Now

© 2024   Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.   Powered by

Badges  |  Contact Firefighter Nation  |  Terms of Service