Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on September 29, 2014 at 12:06am

Wow, this just goes to show how dead it has been in here lately, such a contraversial topic and nobody has spoken up about it at all in over two days. When it showed up on FFN's FB page there were a few comments, but nothing on the forums.

 

On the flip side, such a topic can be tough to discuss on a public forum as well, given the ease to know who is posting. So one may be wary to post how their dept may operate in fear of retaliation for making statements that goes against the "company line". I would be amazed if there was a single chief officer who came on and admitted to lower recruitment standards.

 

So when it comes to "lowering" standards, I doubt you would find a single soul in agreement with it, but many who say it happens. The question becomes what were the standards in the first place? Is there an academy with benchmarks to meet? If not, are there really "standards"? What are the hiring standards to even meet the first step? Have they been compromised? What is the dept setup and community like?

 

I see this as a bit of gray area, because there may not be a definite answer, given the individual depts. If this questioning was just about the FDNY, I'm sure you would have a multitude of responses, but the reality is the question is posed in general. The question can be posed to career and volly depts alike, most likely career depts will say they have seen a lowering of standards, whereas vollies have seen an increase. For instance there are many career depts asking for nothing more than being 18, have a HS diploma/GED, and a driver's license. Those depts tend to have their own recruit academy and the standards placed are incorporated there. For many volly depts, they now have to have members meet basic certs and this means a greater committment and obligation from members in order just to volunteer, whereas in the past one just had to be breathing.

The other aspect is what were the standards to even get onto the job? Do they meet the requirements of the job and the community? Let's be honest, the majority of depts are NOT the FDNY and do not have many of the same challenges they face. For a dept like the FDNY to ask for some higher standards should be the norm, to have those standards chipped away at because of biased judgments from those who never do, nor have a simple idea of the job creates the issues we see here. Yet, on many other depts, those high standards asked for by the FDNY may not really apply for their jurisdiction.

 

So the question on standards further becomes as to what point do you wish to implement a "higher" standard? Do you want to do it on the front end, prior to getting a job, or on the back end and apply it to an academy? IMO, I think if you want to have a higher standard and not see articles like the New York Post, you ask for standards on the front end. Yeah this limits your applicant pool, but it also addresses standards and tends to get those who really want to be on the job, vs those who are just going through the motions.

 

The other question is "what are your primary standards?" Are they educational or are they physcal? Most would say a combination of both, and while true, the question is to extent. The New York Post article and reference to "standards" is mostly pointed to the physical aspect, about FFs not meeting times, reps, etc. You don't see too much talk about educational, so for a dept like the FDNY, much of this is physical, and for them, their dept revolves around being physical. For other dept's, the same standard may not be true. For smaller depts, education may be precedent, afterall decision making in the first few minutes dictates the next few hours.

 

 

What are your thoughts on lowering recruitment standards?

 

My personal thoughts, of mine and mine alone, is that no standard should be lowered to appease a judgement or some form of bias that one may see. Fire recruit tests are very basic (I've taken my fair share in many dept settings, small to large, combo to career) and I will say that I saw nothing biased in any tests. We are talking very basic tests asking basic math, science, and reading. Seriously, if you have trouble passing such tests, you have no reason to be a FF, IMO. In the realms of physical standards, again I see no reason to do so. To get on the job you may have to do the CPAT or other similar test, if you struggled, this should be a wake up to you to work on things. If one believes this is it, then you are mistaken.

 

 

Has it happened in your department?

 

I would think it is fair to say that I'm the minority when it comes to this. I have seen standards actually increase. The dept I work for asks for higher standards on the front end, in order to get the job. We are very educationally driven, we ask for applicants to have an Associates in Fire Science, EMT, and FFI and FFII. For a few years one had to also be a paramedic in order to apply. Yes, this diminished the applicant pool, but also enabled a fire academy geared to the dept and not turning green civilians into firefighters. Our academy is more a formality on how the dept does things and to gear recuits to the dept, there isn't a need to break them down and build them back up. From the physical standards the dept went from having their own physical agaility (not very FF specific) years ago, having that challenged in court and lost, to going many years with no physical agility, to going to CPATthe past several years. My dept is more education driven and geared to higher standards on the front end, and I only know of one recruit who didn't meet dept standards in the academy.

 

 

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion