The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
The Great Debate: Experience vs. Education
IAFC member Lt. Al Rufer discusses the great debate taking place in many firehouses across the country: do you promote the firefighter who is state certified and has 10 years of experience, or do you promote the firefighter who has their associate’s degree and five years of experience?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Pierre-Louis Lamballais on
-
Sorry, but I repeat my question : do you have an officier course in the USA?
For France, to be Lieutenant, it takes about 6 month of course after being in the fire service for about 10 years, and here, In Brasil, my wife take 3 years of course at the Academy to be Sub-Lieutenant. Then Captain and no she just finish 6 month of course to be Major (a rank between Capitain and Ltn-Colonel). And between Ltn-Colonel and Colonel they must do again 6 month of course.
And in the USA?
-
Permalink Reply by Todd on
-
The US is structured different because the fire service is handled at the local level instead of the national level.
-
-
In France the fire service is handled by what we call a "departement" which is a kind of very very small state (near to 100 "département" in France some with less than 300.000 inhabitants). But the course for FF (from basic FF to the higest rank) are the same over all the country and a FF can change of "département" without loosing his rank as the course is national.
In Belgium, as in the USA, fire service are handled at local level, but courses are made at a national level and (eg) a Lieutenant is a Lieutenant, neither the town.
What you are saying is that, in the USA, you don't have officier course? Am I right?
-
Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on
-
The U.S. has four levels of Officer Professional Qualificaiton classes and those do not count the additional four levels of Executive Fire Officer at the National Fire Academy and the university degrees available in Fire Administration, Fire Engineering, Fire Prevention Technology, and related subjects.
Fire Officer I is intended for company officers
Fire Officer II is intended for middle management (Battalion Chiefs)
Fire Officer III is intended for division heads (Assistant Chief, Division Chief)
Fire Officer IV is intended for the most senior management levels - Deputy Chief and Chief
The actual ranks vary somewhat based on local practice, so the officer training levels don't translate exactly in every local fire department.
-
-
In this case, I don't really understand the main question of the topic. If I've to promote someone, I promote the one who has the qualification according to the job to perform, and if two guys have the same level, I promote the older in the rank.
Or maybe, these level apply only for Professional Officier? Because when I talk about instruction of FF in France and Belgium, that's about professional, but also for "volunters".
Thanks for your answer
-
-
This is another of those "apples and oranges" comparisons.
If you have a well-educated, well-trained future office with very little real-world exsperience, then that officer may not have enough experience to actually keep all of his/her crew alive in some of the situations they face. Sometimes the experience is the best teacher.
On the other hand, if you have a firefighter who has a tremendous amount of real-word experience but no deeper understanding of the science behind what we do, emerging trends in building construction, and the many aspects of supervising, managing, and leading that dragging hose and throwing ladders may not do a good job of teaching, then just having esperience may not be a reliable indicator of who will make a good officer.
I'd prefer someone who has both experience and formal education as well as professional qualification certificates. Many U.S. fire departments are trending toward requiring baseline levels of all three prior to promotion.
A problem with this is that with better and better fire prevention and the resulting fewer fires, it may take 10 years to get the same experience as a new firefighter could have gotten in the same fire department even 20 years ago.
The main question is seeking a simple answer to a complex issue. Essentially, that question is seeking a variety of viewpoints, bu tno one is going to be able to give a simple, definitave answer because there are too many variables in the mix.
-
-
In this case, I don't see the need for the courses you list? If courses exist, it's easier to use them and use the result they give. That's the reason why they exist!
When on the fire scene a captain give order to a basic FF, the basic FF do what the captain tells him to do, and dont reply "Well honey, I'm older than you in the fire service". or in this case, it's a play ground, not a fire scene.
-
-
You're entitled to your opinion, but there are good reasons for the courses and that's why they exist.
The issue here is not "when on the fire scene" and an officer giving orders. The issue under discussion is what the qualifications should be for someone to earn the officer rank in the first place. Those qualifications are not just limited to the ability to give orders at a fire, thus the increasing emphasis on both professional qualifications and formal university education.
-
Permalink Reply by Mike Schlags (Captain Busy) Retd on
-
nice analogy Pierre-Louis... knowledge is power... an educated person provides direction for the less educated... no matter where you are, hopefully...
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
