Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Station10Capt106 on December 26, 2009 at 9:37pm

"a Jack of all trades and master of none"

I've noticed the same thing. When things go south who does the public call? The fire department. When there is an accident who do they call? The fire department. When there is a natural disaster who do they call? The fire department. When there is a haz-mat incident who do they call? The fire department. When there is an injury who do they call? The fire department. When there is CO detector going off who do they call? The fire department. When there is a cat in the tree who do they call? The fire department . . . well, you all get my drift.

With the complexities of incidents and responses increasing how can the fire department expect to be totaly confident and proficient in all? Training requirements keep increasing and new technology either makes it easier or harder but either way requires even more training to keep up on it.

I don't think we can realistically limit what we respond to, when the public needs help they call the fire department regardless. What we can do is realize what our limitations are. Keep safety in the forefront of all our decisions. If there is an incident that we know we can not handle then we better get on the radio and start reaching out and calling in someone who can help.

We need to rely on our training and do what we have always done best, improvise and adapt as the situation dictates.

John

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Smoke Eater on December 26, 2009 at 9:58pm

Hey Station10Capt106, I was just wondering who people call when they have a problem? LOL, just kidding. I do feel like we are only operating safe-ishly. With new technologies and now the real threat of terrorism, can we really be prepared for anything that's thrown at us? Of course we all train hard and try to be the best we can be, the public, and our lives, depend on it. I've only been doing this for 14 yrs now and have already seen many, many changes to it. We used to have specialized teams for hazmat, now we are a major part of that team. Our guys are required to be operations certified. Some have even gone on to become Hazmat Techs.

When I first started, we had car wrecks with little dangers. Now, with the introduction of the smart car, a simple accident can become a huge headache if one of these cars catches on fire.

Meth labs have evolved in the past few years. We never had to deal with that danger when I started. The scary thing about these is the fact that it may look like a well kept house with a small fire when you arrive, then out of the blue it just explodes taking out half of our team. Along with that also comes the "new" way to commit suicide in your vehicle. If not prepared for this, you could inadvertantly become a victim yourself.

I guess it doesn't matter how much we train, we will never be completely prepared for what is thrown at us. We are, and always will be, a jack of all trades and master of none.

TCSS everyone!!!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on December 27, 2009 at 12:42am

So I think we operate kinda SAFE-ISH because we want to be safe while operating in the environment thrusted upon us but many have expressed that they wish they had spent more time being better prepared in that "basic" or "speciality" fundamental

While I agree with the others here, being jacks of all trades, there is also a balance which can be achieved, it does come down to personal responsibility and initiative though. What I mean is that while such stuff like terrorism, WMDs, and stuff are thrust upon us (being a requirement for funding in most cases) do we really have to be experts in mitigating such things or is awareness enough?

You mention stuff like swift water, trench, collapse, rope rescue and so forth, is this something we all have to be proficient in or is a seperate team able to handle things? See for us we have a HAZMAT team and USAR team and members are the ones to respond, but on the front lines we have some knowledge to mitigate an incident until the "experts" arrive. Is it really necessary for everyone to be an expert in all such fields? To me, I don't think so, awareness is fine, but it also takes initiative to review material.

Now for the part of personal initiative and responsibility is for people to take advantage of the times where we do get most of our calls. How many have gone on EMS runs only to have a couple guys coming in, or the officer always having the clipboard etc? Instead of doing the basic pt assessment stuff they are either sitting in the rig or letting the medics handle the call, but when refresher comes around ets, they are the ones saying they need more training. Same thing for some basic fireground stuff. I mean really, is it that much to take 10 minutes or so to practice throwing a ladder? Does it take hours to do some basic radio comms? Driver training....have a FF drive while going for groceries or inspections. Being a volunteer isn't much more different, it doesn't take much to throw ladders etc before the main drill topic.

While it may have been "well trained on less things" there is also a balance which needs to be achieved today. While there were fewer responsibilities or even training (how many HAZMAT incidents weren't properly handled, just lucky) in the past, there was also more downtime and such. I have heard of crews that would play cards all day etc, do the cursory drive past inspection and so forth, in the end the good ol days, probably not that good. The world of today and the calls we do has changed and I don't foresee any regression in the types of responses. It comes down to a balance and initiative to train on some of the more "mundane" or expected everyday type of stuff to stay proficient, especially if the focus is placed on the new "buzz" training like USAR, HAZMAT, WMD, etc.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by djc 0106 on December 27, 2009 at 3:24am

well put. you are hitting the nail on the head. it seems somewhere the "basics" were put to the side. what is done on the fireground every day almost seems second fiddle to the more technical side of the house. mind you, im not taking a stab at anyone. (i am on both sides of this fence as most of us are) we need the technical training in todays world, BUT we also need to equally train on what we do every day. have a great holiday season to all

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on December 27, 2009 at 11:17am

The answer is to start the new people with the basics - Firefighter II and EMT-Basic are good places to start for career departments. Once the new folks get those, then everyone should have basic/operations-level qualifications on hazmat and technical rescue - enough to function as directed by personnel with more training and experinece. That will take around 3 years in most places.

At that point, a career ladder that includes driver/operator, paramedic, or advanced-level USAR or hazmat qualifications can come into play, but not all at once. If you have groups that have the basics, but specialize in one advanced area (paramedic vs. USAR vs. hazmat) you can have a pretty capable all-hazards department that includes specialists at some of the more difficult disciplines.

If you're a small department or a volly one that doesn't have the manpower or training/education time to do the above available, there's always mutual aid, regional specialist teams, or funding a small, core special unit like ALS intercept, heavy rescue, etc.

The alternative is intentionally not having the capability and advertising your department's limitations, as well as your capabilities to your elected officials, neighboring departments, and community. That is a painful choice, but honesty is the best policy, including honesty about our own limitations.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jeff Cole on December 27, 2009 at 11:32am

In many ways 'we', the fire service, put ourselve's in this position. For some reason, we have been in the position to somehow try to justify our very jobs, at least in many politicians minds. Think about it. Those of us who have been around for the 60's, the 70's, and into the 80's,...the so-called 'war years' were rather busy with fire extinguishment. There was a alot of noise (rightfully so) about improved fire prevention, investigation, and building codes to stop the insanity. And it worked, to a large degree.

Then, once we started to see a noticible decline in actual working fire incidents, the two, three jobs in a day for some shifts, or a week in smaller departments, the emphasis shifted towards the increasing demand for better EMS provisions, improved training and response times. Well, it was perceived that those firemen aint doing much anymore. Layoffs and downsizing and various propositionsthis and that effected fire company staffing. Soooo, more and more we went into the EMS business. Logical in many ways for many departments, and not so logical in others. The efficiency experts thought it was a wonderful way to get more productivity out of the firefighters.

And it worked in alot of places. Except that when those working jobs DID come in, too many times, especially in smaller departments, the company strength was at half, with the others on an EMS run.
Building construction and materials changed, and the firefighting hazards increased, requiring more gpm's per person, and a whole different set of rules. We learned survival techniques, and RIC and stuff we never had before. And we found we need even more on the fireground now, but...we have less! And a large part of the training budgets went to EMS for recert's, CEU's, and advanced training.

Now, in the meantime some intelligent fire service leaders pushed for training standards and mandates to parallel EMS, but it was highly resisted by some factions of the fire service. Training for the 'basics', the fireground, in which we have fewer and fewer people showing up in those first critical minutes became less and less a priority.
By the way...ever see the move to downsize the law enforcement profession when crime is shown to drop? Of course not! Maintain what you have to keep it down, and increase the rolls to get it down even further. Ad I don't disagree with that either.

Anyways, back to the issues. In larger department, they have enough staffing to offer specialty, diverse training to seperate companies for such things as swift water, open water/ocean rescue, high-angle, haz-mat...etc. Depending on the geographical conditions, smaller departments also require such services, but have far fewer staffing resources to cover it. Many areas resort to County-wide response programs, but in some places, becouse of distances and response times, that just isn't possible if want anything other than a recovery response.

So we diversify even more. Learn, train, learn, train, and try to stay current on all of it. And STILL the bean counters say it isn't enough, or it is too expensive, there are too many of us. We may use those skills once a year...maybe even not at all. And they wil use that to justify gutting our staffing. While we may respond to a number of extreme incidents, that cover every one of these catagories, we STILL hear people say "when was the last fire?"

Yes, we have marketed our business as the everything service, the one's to call when you can't fix it, or help yourself. WE know what training we need, how often, how extensive, and how expensive it is, if we are to help people survive the messes they get themselves into. Yet we will be put on the chopping block again and again. And we even become our own worse enemy since we have failed miserably at unity in one voice. We resist standards and mandates, mostly for selfish reasons. We have few physical fitness and minimum skills standards simply becouse many of us know that we cannot perform to those levels, and will have to become bystanders behind the yellow tape. Yet we are forced to carry members who are so skills and fitness challenged for the reasons that they are all we can get. That doesn't really make any sense.

I don't think many of us want to refuse the call for help when it comes in. But we have to know OUR individual, and department's limitations. And it is our responsibility to make that clear to our local government. Without the funding for membership/employee's, equipment, and training, we CANNOT provide all the services that the public requires, those specialized rescue capabilities that they see on tv, and think that every department is capable in. Not without their support.

So, I am saying that we put ourselev's into this position all too often. It's up to the customer to decide what he/she needs, and what they are willing to pay for.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on December 27, 2009 at 11:42am

I disagree that EMS isn't logical for some departments.

Our #1 priority is life safety, and that is what EMS is about.
The best EMS systems are those who approach 50% in CPR save rates for viable patients.
The two common denominators for those systems - regardless of whether the EMS transport is provided by the FD or by another agency - is that rapid CPR and rapid delivery of the first shock with an AED are the two things that dramatically improve survival.

In a place that has 3 or 4 cardiac arrests per week, improving the save rate to 45 or 50%, means that two lives per week will be saved. That's over 100 additional lives saved per year.
That is substantial, even in a very large city. It's the equivalent of saving an additional two transit buses of patients every year. That will sell to any rational city/county council on the planet.

From there, it's a short step to "EMS training and capability saves citizen's lives, and fire training and capability saves firefighter's lives and the community's economy."

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rusty Mancini on December 27, 2009 at 8:17pm

Your right FETC, there are times when I set up training, I say to myself we need to keep a mix on the training. The little guy on my right shoulder says basics, and the little guy on my left shoulder says specialty on the more complex.

Lately the little guy on the left has dominated with the specialty, and I keep telling myself we need to get back to the basics. We cannot leave the basics to the wayside! We also can not forget about the newer members that need this training. I'm guilty of this, and my goal this year is to try and implement as much basic training as I can.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jeff Cole on December 27, 2009 at 8:56pm

That seems to say that every department is in the same situation, with same resources, needs, and circumstances. There is simply no way any of us could say we have enough information about every community to make such a blanket statement. And that is only part of what appears to be the question that FETC is asking. It goes well beyond EMS. While I do agree that providing EMS IS logical in many communities, mine included, clearly it is evident that is not in others by the very existence of private, or 3rd service providers.

Given the goals and scenarios you give with a goal of 50% 'saves', ...admirable to say the least. But that get's into not only CPR and Defib rapidly, but also ALS intervention as well, which in some places isn't possible. I am not going to argue the concept though. It does make sense given that our goal IS to save lives.

In staying in the context of the original post' question, many of us are approaching over -load in some areas, while other skills are pushed to the back. The training of new hires' for example. While they are trained to a basic level prior to, and upon hire, the next couple of years the training get's far more technical as they are expected to master all those specialty skills. Include on shift training and extra duty training, and the yearly mandates and recerts that ARE necessary, there may leave little time for those basic skills reinforcement on basic firefighting evolutions.

Extrication principles change with constant new vehicle technology. Haz Mat updates, technical rescue, and rope training requires constant refresher, especially for those who rarely actually use it. It goes on and on. Smaller departments have no choice. When the need is there, those working that shift ARE the one's working the initial response. Yet even after all those rare, specialty incident responses, and the daily routine of alarms, 'smells and bells', vehicle collisions, EMS, service calls, elevators, spills...one that working job comes in it brings back that feeling of where we started, and now we have to get our act together, use our skills to stay alive, and help others survive while we all battle the hostile enviornment.

If your not running fires frequently, and many of us are not, and we have less staffing becouse the rest of the on-duty crew is at the hospital, or wherever, well, our job of life and property conservation is the same as it always was as far as the principle goes. And the people will expect us to do what they think we should be able to do. They may know the community paid a half million dollars for the tower ladder, and maybe even a new fleet over the past few years. But if there are not enough firefighters stepping out of those cabs, all that real estate is worthless to them. And as for us, we will just keep trying to work harder and harder, trying to do the job of twice the amount of firefighters then we actually have...becouse that is what it takes to do the job.

Many of us can be at the cardiac emergency within 4 minutes. We may roll the engine with ambulance, and throw everybody at the job, and it will likely go as it should...smooth, and quick. Hopefully there will be at least one on the company that is ALS certified, and equiped to make the best use of that response time, immediate defib, and effective CPR.

But few of us will have enough staff to cover the required tactical positions to begin a safe, effective fire attack, effect a rescue, and confine the fire and subsequently reduce the property damage.

We CANNOT do it all, all the time, and deliver the desired results.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tiger Schmittendorf on December 27, 2009 at 9:23pm

FETC - I addressed this very issue in an article I wrote some years ago titled: "A New Pyramid Scheme for your Volunteer Fire Department." While the focus of the article was on the volunteer fire service, many of the ideas transcend career and volunteer departments. Here's a few excerpts that show we share the same concerns:

1. When we firefighters take on a job – being the over-achievers we are – we typically jump in with both feet. Unfortunately, we’ve jumped with both feet into so many jobs that we often spread ourselves too thin. We end up being fair or poor at a lot of things instead of being good at few.

2. I’m a firm believer of truly getting into a business – or getting the hell out. However you choose to address a particular task – do it completely. Do it right or don’t do it at all. There's no room for half-a**ed in what we do.

3. My department allows our individual volunteers to specialize, to be good at a few things instead of poor at a lot of things. We’ve opened our membership to offer the ultimate in flexibility. It's a solution that works for us.

4. Look at the services you provide to your community. Which are mandated and which are enhanced or “plus” services you’ve tacked on over the years simply because you recognized and fulfilled a need – not because you were asked to.

Which are essential – and which can better be served by another town (fire or other) department better suited to deliver that service? If your manpower situation warrants it, face the hard facts and cut back to delivering only those services for which your municipality contracts and pays for.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

While some of these are easier said than done, there are certainly opportunities for change within all of us, and the departments and communities we serve.

The other factor we have to consider with our "wearing too many hats" dilemma, is the human capacity to learn, store and reliably reproduce information and perform actions in a timely, effective and efficient manner under the most strenuous of conditions.

I half jokingly say that my memory is receding with my hairline (Notice that I wear a hat in my profile photo). Well, so is my retention. I'm a chronic sufferer of "If I don't use it -- I lose it," as I'm sure many others are.

I call it "mental span of control." Rare is the person who can truly be a master of all. My observation has been that organizations that rely so heavily on these "masters" have too many of their eggs in one basket. Too often that one person retires and so does all of their "trade secrets."

Creating specialists allows for a concentrated effort, typically a better product or service, and allows these specialists to perform safely at the top of their game -- not just safe-ishly as you suggest.

I think your concerns are right on the mark and the time has come for the fire service to decide whether they want to fish or cut bait. If we're going to take on all of these additional tasks and responsibilities, we have to stand up for ourselves to say that we will only do it the right way: Safely and with adequate quantity, quality, training and experience of our staff.

Stay safe. Train often.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on December 27, 2009 at 10:22pm

Jeff, once again, even where the EMS transport component is not provided by the fire department, there is usually an expectation that fire will provide 1st responder services, particularly for cardiac arrest and other life threat calls. If we don't get there quickly, start CPR, and get the patient defibrillated with an AED, it doesn't matter who runs the ambulances.

EMS isn't just ambulances.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Art "ChiefReason" Goodrich on December 28, 2009 at 1:42pm

I have to agree with Tiger.
It is in a firefighter's nature to do it if asked to do it.
When was the last time you told the person on the other end of the call, "sorry, we don't do that"?
And then, we have our buddies in government expanding our roles, but WE get to pay for it.
Even if we would come up with a hard/fast list of services, we would break from them if presented with the challenge.
When you have a public calling you for everything from a low battery in a smoke alarm to a cat in the tree, there isn't much left to the imagination.
If we are going to be jakes of all trades, then we need to master them all. It keeps us safe and the lawyers off our tookus.
Go hard or go home.

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page