The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
Kentucky Firefighter Punished For Refusing Third Consecutive Shift
GABRIEL ROXAS
WKYT
Reprinted with Permission
WINCHESTER, Ky. (WKYT) - Doing more with less is an expectation put on workers across nearly every industry these days, but a Winchester firefighter says when it comes to emergencies, his department has gone too far.
WKYT Update:
Winchester Mayor Ed Burtner tells NEWSFIRST the hearing concluded around 11:30pm with the city commission deciding to place letters of reprimand in Raymond Patrick's city employee file after finding him guilty of violating the following two rules: 1) Violation of or refusal to obey an official order, policy, procedure, or regulation; 2) Insubordination or disrespect to a supervisor or failure to cooperate with a supervisor. The mayor says Patrick will not face a loss of income or suspension of duties.
Related
Firefighter faces punishment for refusing third consecutive 24-hour...
Back in October there was a stretch when the Winchester Fire Department responded to five fires in four days. Firefighter and paramedic Raymond Patrick thought one of those fires would be the end of 48 hours on duty, but as he prepared to go home at the end of his shift, his boss ordered him to start all over again. "If you're not rested and feel that you're up to the job, and you're in there in a structure fire fighting fire, your crew members depend on you," Patrick said, "and if you fail, then they fail."
That's why Patrick says he told his superiors he wouldn't last 72 hours straight. The 8-year veteran of the department and newly elected union president says because Winchester is understaffed, many firefighters have had to work back to back 24-hour shifts even though the standard schedule is 24-hours on, 48-hours off. "The 24-48-hour schedule was developed to give you two days away from it, so those toxins have time to clean out of your system," Patrick said.
Patrick's refusal led to a hearing before the Winchester City Commission. "What we are here about is as the mayor read in the charges, the question of whether or not Mr. Patrick violated the rules of the personnel code," Winchester City Attorney Bill Dykeman said at the hearing Tuesday night.
But Patrick says the bigger issue is the effect the department's mandatory overtime policy has on public safety when firefighters and especially paramedics are forced to work without sufficient rest. "It's not about me. It's about the department," Patrick said.
The city will decide how to discipline Patrick, but he hopes the next decisions will be about a change in policies.
That city commission hearing began at 5:30pm and was still in session late Tuesday night.
WKYT
Reprinted with Permission
WINCHESTER, Ky. (WKYT) - Doing more with less is an expectation put on workers across nearly every industry these days, but a Winchester firefighter says when it comes to emergencies, his department has gone too far.
WKYT Update:
Winchester Mayor Ed Burtner tells NEWSFIRST the hearing concluded around 11:30pm with the city commission deciding to place letters of reprimand in Raymond Patrick's city employee file after finding him guilty of violating the following two rules: 1) Violation of or refusal to obey an official order, policy, procedure, or regulation; 2) Insubordination or disrespect to a supervisor or failure to cooperate with a supervisor. The mayor says Patrick will not face a loss of income or suspension of duties.
Related
Firefighter faces punishment for refusing third consecutive 24-hour...
Back in October there was a stretch when the Winchester Fire Department responded to five fires in four days. Firefighter and paramedic Raymond Patrick thought one of those fires would be the end of 48 hours on duty, but as he prepared to go home at the end of his shift, his boss ordered him to start all over again. "If you're not rested and feel that you're up to the job, and you're in there in a structure fire fighting fire, your crew members depend on you," Patrick said, "and if you fail, then they fail."
That's why Patrick says he told his superiors he wouldn't last 72 hours straight. The 8-year veteran of the department and newly elected union president says because Winchester is understaffed, many firefighters have had to work back to back 24-hour shifts even though the standard schedule is 24-hours on, 48-hours off. "The 24-48-hour schedule was developed to give you two days away from it, so those toxins have time to clean out of your system," Patrick said.
Patrick's refusal led to a hearing before the Winchester City Commission. "What we are here about is as the mayor read in the charges, the question of whether or not Mr. Patrick violated the rules of the personnel code," Winchester City Attorney Bill Dykeman said at the hearing Tuesday night.
But Patrick says the bigger issue is the effect the department's mandatory overtime policy has on public safety when firefighters and especially paramedics are forced to work without sufficient rest. "It's not about me. It's about the department," Patrick said.
The city will decide how to discipline Patrick, but he hopes the next decisions will be about a change in policies.
That city commission hearing began at 5:30pm and was still in session late Tuesday night.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Tinkerbell on
-
Fact of the matter is this: Many of us can and HAVE worked 72 hours. But firefighting isn't like standing in front of a machine in a machine shop for 72 hours. Let's not be so freakin' "heroic" that we b.s. each other into thinking it is a three-shift "on your feet" gig. THAT said, let's neither dismiss the amount of fires per/day. This may have been included one or two particularily DRAINING fires. There's a difference between surround-and-drown on a single-wide and, say, a large CHURCH. We DON'T know all the details. Would YOU, as a Captain, ORDER this guy into duty after he complained of fatigue ON THE RECORD?? I sure as heck wouldn't. Was he looking forward to a play date and then needed for shift this particular day? Had he routinely worked these shifts before? Was sleep available? All questions we don't know... but he had his day before the mayor and he was given a reprimand... SO... either he failed to make his case and the evidence was stacked against him..... OR..... that whole department needs a shakedown. It DOES make a good case to have a volunteer attachment from which to draw an "on-call paid" firefighter from. Be careful about whining TOO much... because there ARE people capable and willing to do these shifts, and probably for less. I know of plenty of South American miners who would think this firefighter's job AND shift is cake. When we panty-waist our way down to an 8 hour shift, we WILL be replaced... just sayin.
-
Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on
-
Sounds like many more issues at hand here. I will say I do agree with the idea that the issue needs to be addressed. OT is a cost SAVINGS despite many communities using OT as a cost which needs to be curbed. It is cheaper to pay OT than it is to hire more personnel and icur benefits and wages, etc. Problem is OT should be for short term shortages, not the answer to long term situations.
Now, as a sworn public safety official, there is and can be mandatory order ins, thing is there should be a way to do this without impacting worker safety. What I'm questioning here is how the OT is set up, really there should be no reason that OT has to consist of a full shift. The way OT is done here is by seniority and split into 12 hour shifts. There have been times that the youngest FF could get ordered in, but most times there are those who will take the OT. Ordering in for a full 24 can be taxing on personnel and I can understand the issues being addressed by this individual.
-
-
It seems to me that the mandiroty OT rule is fine when guys WANT it. They love the money on their next paycheck. Then when they don`t, it`s bitch whine and complain
Regular OT is one thing, mandatory OT is another. Regular OT would be an opportunity for basically anyone able to take the OT can, they are asked if they want to work, but can turn it down if they don't want to work. Mandatory is when the spot needs to be filled and a person is ordered in.
The reason mandatory OT can be taxing is that is does start to impede one's personal life. If you have kids, it can be a pain to try and find someone to take care of them, plans for the off day need to be cancelled and so forth. Basically there are times where consistently working because of mandatory OT can be very taxing and can start to be a detriment to both personal life and morale. Mandatory OT is fine now and then, but in this case, it sounds like mandatory OT is occurring way too much.
OT is killing FD budgets. Is it because OT has been abused? By command and or line FF`s?
It does depend on what is causing the OT, but for the most part OT is more cost effective than hiring. Elected officials love to tout the high cost of OT as a budget reason, but they really don't want to implement the solution to OT cost, which is hiring. It costs more to hire, train, outfit, and provide wages and benefits to a new person, rather than just paying OT to an existing person.
Did the FD single out this FF because he`s a new union officer? Sure looks like it to me.
It would be my guess, but really, it sounds as though the issue needs to be addressed, wouldn't you think? If anything, look at splitting up the OT, but this may be a very contentious issue with the membership and the deaf ears are being turned.....now the issue needs to be addressed. That is after all the role of the union, to look out for the workers here.
OT is nice to have now and then, but one should not have to rely on OT to make a living, but off time is also important for family and personal health too and mandating too much from workers can seriously impact morale and safety. So while OT should not be a dependant need to make a living, OT should also not be a solution to manage long term shortages.
-
Permalink Reply by Devin Keber on
-
Ok i am not attacking becasue you made some good points BUT... I can honestly say in my current assignment with my engine company even when I do get to "sleep" it is not a good refreshing sleep. So being on duty for 24 and then being forced for another 24 can be hard. With that being said I would also like to know how many runs he takes. just because you fight one fire in a 24 hour shift doesn't mean you didn't have plenty of time to relax and recoupe.
Also how can a line firefighter take advangtage of over time? Now I do not dissagree with the statement you made about OT killing departments budgets. In Charleston FD we are "commited" (and i say that lightly) to keeping 4 men per truck and the city is paying ALOT of money for this. Lets be honest how long will it last?
-
Permalink Reply by Michael on
-
Patrick my fellow Union brother, it sure would be a shame if you might fall asleep and hit another city vehicle or a city building due to lack of sleep. ( Wink Wink) I hope you can read the drug lables and not give the wrong medication due to lack of sleep and not being able to funciton. I bet the mayor doesnt get pulled from his family for three days for ot. Well hang intheir bro we will prevail.
-
Permalink Reply by Matt Tipper on
-
Not enough info guys.
A lot of these posts are like a choose your own adventure book. It definitely SEEMS like there is more to this story ( why had he worked 2 shifts etc etc). Maybe we have someone from this department or in the know that can fill us in, without taking sides.
-
Permalink Reply by Raymond Patrick on
-
Hello all. I am the firefighter in question here, and there seems to be much dismay about my situation, so let me give you the background on what's going on. The news wire didn't quite represent my side thoroughly. I am cross-trained as a firefighter/paramedic. I have served this department for 8 years. I have letters of recognition from one of my lieutenants, and our medical director. I have always had positive evaluations with no other disciplinary actions in my past. I also serve as the director of the EMS, 911 Dispatch Center, and 911 Mapping office in a neighboring county (and no, I don't enforce mandatory overtime on my EMS crews). I am regularly assigned to an ambulance of a department that has 3- 24/7 ALS units, and we average 6,000 EMS calls per year and approximately 600 fire calls per year that most of which are EMS assist calls. We work a 24/48 schedule. Our actual structure fire volume is less than one per month until the suspected arsonist began his dirty work. Since around the first of September we have lost 5 paramedics, and two EMT's. That equates to half of one shift as far as number of personnel, but that is almost two shifts worth of paramedics as we strive to have 3 paramedics per shift. Prior to becoming Union president, I served as the Secretary/Treasurer for several years, and was interim Vice-President for a couple of months. Our previous union president, although a good guy, made every attempt at avoiding dealing with problems with the city rather than try to work out the issues. We (the union) currently have the city tied up in court with a lawsuit regarding overtime back pay that they owe us. This ruling was upheld by the Kentucky Court of Appeals two years ago, and they continue to refuse to pay us. This incident occured on October 16th. Prior to this incident, I had worked 12 hours of voluntary overtime during the second half of a shift on the Sunday prior. That night we had a structure fire, and I was up all night. So I slept all day on Monday, and was out sick Tuesday/Wednesday with a stomach virus. I reported for duty at my scheduled time on Thursday to repay a trade day. This trade day was scheduled in May.....when staffing was up to par and I had no way to predict that we would be short staffed so severely at this point. Regardless of whether it was a trade day or overtime, I am still on duty. It is an "unwritten rule" that we cannot sleep during normal business hours. I completed that duty day with 24 hours of being awake, making EMS calls, and another major structure fire. I returned to my station at shift change to begin my regular shift. I made every attempt to get some rest, but due to the call volume and other department activities, I was unable to any rest during my second duty day. Finally, at about 0100 on Saturday morning, I was able to make it to bed. However, I wasn't able to go to sleep until around 0230. At this point, I had been on duty for about 44.5 hours without ANY rest; 46.5 hours continually awake. I wasn't advised that I was facing a mandatory 24 hours shift until about ten minutes before I was scheduled to be relieved of duty. That is when I advised the battalion chief that I was too tired to continue, and that I felt that I was unsafe to continue. The B.C. denied that I said that, however to my advantage, one other firefighter sleeping in the cubicle next to mine, overheard that part of the conversation and confirmed my statements. I refused to work due to the fact that I did not feel I could safely perform my duties as I felt that I was a danger to my patients, my co-workers, and the public in general. We do not have the right to collectively bargain in Kentucky, as we are currently a third class city by state regulations. Only first class cities and urban county governments are guaranteed the right to collectively bargain here. However, by our job description by the city code is 24 on and 48 off with the occassional overtime shift. We have been using mandatory overtime for over two years, and to the best of my knowledge no one prior to this incident has ever been FORCED to work 72 consecutive hours; especially without having adequate rest. That being said, here is the other part of the story: the chief was advised that afternoon of what I had done. We talked about it on my next shift back on duty two days after the incident occurred, and he said he would "look into the matter". Also on this day, I filed a complaint against one of the battallion chiefs for inappropriate conduct for his actions on an incident that preceeded my refusal. A week later, I filed a second complaint against another battallion chief for inappropriate conduct for his actions relating to this matter. Disciplinary action was not sought until 3 weeks after the incident took place. During this three weeks, I had filed two complaints against two different battallion chiefs, I was elected union president, and I filed a complaint against the chief with the city manager because he failed to respond to my first complaints within 10 days as required by city policy. Only after I filed my complaint with the city manager did the chief finally seek to file charges against me. In the history of this fire department, there has NEVER been a time that it has taken the chief to wait 3 weeks to file disciplinary actions against any employee. Also, it is common practice at this department to suspend the employee until his disciplinary hearing is held. I was NOT suspended. In fact, I was hit for another mandatory day the day AFTER I was served with my charges, and I continued to work as much voluntary overtime that I wanted. I requested this disciplinary hearing because the chief offered a one day suspension without pay. I refused to agree with this action as I felt I made an appropriate decision to not commit an unsafe act. No different than any firefighter refusing to enter a structure that is collapsing. So, you tell me........was this really about me being insubordinate, or does this issue really point to something else?
-
Permalink Reply by Bill Bell on
-
There is a safety issue having individuals work longer than 48 straight hours. Either the University of Washington or University of Oregon did a study a couple of years ago on the affect of sleep deprivation on first responders, specifically firefighters and EMS workers. Even though we would like to think we can work for a long period we do need rest away from the station.
Hopefully you, as Union President and the Fire Administration for the department, can sit down and work out a policy limiting duty to 48 hours plus 1 hour for the safety of not only the firefighters working but the citizens you serve. The one hour is to allow the department to find a replacement if in your case the mandatory OT assignment can be filled with someone who might be off duty or if you're on a call already.
In every case there are a number of variables (number of calls handled the prior shift, some dept members able to work longer than others, what apparatus you might have been on, etc.) but the fact is there needs to be some limit. Good luck, there is documentation out there for you to use on sleep deprivation of first responders.
-
-
Raymond,
How is the OT established for you guys? Is the duty day broken down for OT, or is the full day required if ordered in? Is OT granted by seniority and offered to other members first? How long has the dept/city been relying on mandatory OT? Are other members also routinely being ordered in?
Here, when there is OT, the OT is broken down by 12 hours. The OT is offered by seniority and then by OT accumulated. Meaning the senior members in the rank are offered OT first, when they take an OT they go to the bottom of the list. I'm one that has jumped on the OT opportunities offered to me and am one of the few FF's with the most OT. So when there is OT, i am one of the last people to be offered it.
As mentioned, we break OT down into 12 hour blocks, so when there is OT, one can take the AM or PM...(PM's fill up faster) so if a FF takes the PM, they are placed on the bottom of the call in list. The AM is then offered to the next senior FF and so on. The only time one would get a 24 hour OT is if they took one shift and there was nobody else who wanted the other shift and they would be offered it for 24. If they then refused, the youngest person in rank may get ordered in for the 12.
If one is ordered in, it is a rarity they would be working a full 24 hour shift.
As for the issue about being insubordinate, no, I believe that it does become a safety issue. I see others saying you should just say you are sick, etc, but I disagree to that point. Saying you are sick should get you out of the day, but then can open up an issue regarding sick time abuse etc. It can also be ordered you go to the doctor and if nothing is medically wrong, then it is tough to fight a sick time abuse moniker.
I agree with making the statement. You know what your limitations are and being sleep deprived can have negative effects on those working with you and those you are responding to. It appears as though this issue needs to be addressed and now it should be.
I will say that I oppose having a defined work schedule and length of work. I see some comments pushing about time off and so forth, thing is that can also backfire on duty trades etc. We have people that do work for several days on end and I know one guy did an 8 day stretch, between trades and his regular duty. A 72 for us does happen now and then, but most will shy away from asking someone to work a 72. If you do have a good trade policy, that is something that could suffer if pushing a time off issue.
For us, it is common to work 48 with trades etc, and sometimes OT does come around on the end of one, but a mandated 24 shouldn't be done. If anything only a 12 hour OT should be mandated, with the other 12 going to someone else.
-
Permalink Reply by Anthony on
-
i agree there is 2 sides to a story, my question is was he the only one orderd for the ot? and if so then why? the other thing that comes to mind is there usually is someone who wants it willingly, why not find that person? a person who wants the shift is going to do a better job then someone who is forced. I dono mabe there wasnt anyone who wanted it. personally I wouldnt be "happy" about it but id do it because that's what it took, but thats just me. i would like to find out more about this as well. because it just doesnt add up to me. how many people would turn down a tripple shift in the fire service? most of us are all about the job so if he was turning down the shift mabe he had a good reason..
-
-
Just wondering if you read his reply at all? The person in the article responded on this thread already.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
