The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
Retirement: Where did the early age retirement firefighter come from?
I have been trying to find out where the early age retirement for firefighters came from, what was the bases for it, what created its evolution into todays early age retirement? Was it medical issues, was it the ability to do the job, what drove retirrment in this direction. Our department has been trying to to find these answers to this and other related issues. Let me know. Don Zimmerman
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Gregory Borg on
-
Don,
Please contact Ricky Walsh, the IAFF 7th District V-P. I am sure you already know him, he works on your neighboring department, the Richland Fire Department. He can answer your questions in detail. In the mean time the other writers that have answered are right on the money. Mostly, early death after retirement during the 50's, 60's and 70's. The retirement age for punlicly employed FF in Washington is 53, early retirement would be 52 or younger.
-
Permalink Reply by Keith Tyson on
-
The current "definitive" study is done by the University of Cincinnati!
Firefighters Face Increased Risk for Certain Cancers
CINCINNATI—University of Cincinnati (UC) environmental health researchers have determined that firefighters are significantly more likely to develop four different types of cancer than workers in other fields.
Their findings suggest that the protective equipment firefighters have used in the past didn’t do a good job in protecting them against cancercausing agents they encounter in their profession, the researchers say.
The researchers found, for example, that firefighters are twice as likely to develop testicular cancer and have significantly higher rates of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and prostate cancer than non-firefighters. The researchers also confirmed previous findings that firefighters are at greater risk for multiple myeloma.
Grace LeMasters, PhD, Ash Genaidy, PhD, and James Lockey, MD, report these findings in the November edition of the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. The UC-led research is the largest comprehensive study to date investigating cancer risk associated with working as a firefighter.
“We believe there’s a direct correlation between the chemical exposures firefighters experience on the job and their increased risk for cancer,” says LeMasters, professor of epidemiology and biostatistics at UC. Firefighters are exposed to many compounds designated as carcinogens by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)— including benzene, diesel engine exhaust, chloroform, soot, styrene and formaldehyde, LeMasters explains. These substances can be
inhaled or absorbed through the skin and occur both at the scene of a fire and in the firehouse, where idling diesel fire trucks produce diesel exhaust.
“Firefighters work in an inherently dangerous occupation on a daily basis,” LeMasters adds. “As public servants, they need—and deserve— additional protective measures that will ensure they aren’t at an increased cancer risk.”
The UC-led team analyzed information on 110,000 firefighters, most of them full-time, white male workers, from 32 previously published scientific studies to determine the comprehensive health effects and correlating cancer risks of their profession.
Risk for 20 different cancers was classified into three categories—probable, possible or not likely—patterned after the IARC’s riskassessment model.
UC epidemiologists found that half the studied cancers—including testicular, prostate, skin, brain, rectum, stomach and colon cancer, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, multiple myeloma and malignant melanoma—were associated with firefighting to varying levels of increased risk.
“There’s a critical and immediate need for additional protective equipment to help firefighters avoid inhalation and skin exposures to known and suspected occupational carcinogens,” says Lockey, professor of environmental health and pulmonary medicine at UC. “In addition,
firefighters should meticulously wash their entire body to remove soot and other residues from fires to avoid skin exposure.”
The research was supported in part by a grant from the Ohio Bureau of Workers Compensation. Study collaborators include UC’s Paul Succop, PhD, James Deddens, PhD and Kari Dunning, PhD, as well as Tarek
-
Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on
-
Nice job with the numbers Keith.
There has been talk about raising the FF age here from 53 to 55, but in the end those who make such policy typically only care about the dollars and never about the people. It is bad enough the public servant is viewed as the root cause for all the economic woes and many people drink up such propaganda so readily, that they don't even care to be educated.
-
Permalink Reply by Don Zimmerman on
-
Well, I would like to thank everyone for the info for the past couple of yrs in trying to determine where FF early retirement comes from. Conclusion: Most of the early retirements for munciplity departments are politically negotiated decisions made by unions at city, county, state, & federal levels. I was never able to determine what the real reasons for early retirement other than this (I know it doesn't sound right) but seems to be true. I did find one (1) city department that had a white paper which did explained why they retired FFs age 57. They explained in the paper the costs of older FFs and young FFs when injuried and the cost of living and negotiated salaries over the length of time (career) of an individual. They were the only government agency that actually had some reasoning behind it all. Thanks a bunch
-
-
Don,
I can't tell you why it came to be, but I will give you some numbers from Miami-Dade Fire Rescue, that may explain why we SHOULD retire by age 55, (now age 60 in Florida, thanks to our Gov. Scott.)
Based upon our current statistics of the 222 deaths on our department, for we which have currently identified and confirmed the cause of death and age of the member:
1) 82 members NEVER EVEN MADE IT TO THEIR RETIREMENT. (37% of the deaths)
a) Of those, 20% died of cardiac reasons, 16% died of cancer, Self-inflicted was tied with MVAs as the third leading cause of death.
2) 47 members died WITHIN 10 years of retirement, (21% additional)
a) 29 (60%) died of cancer,
b) 8 (17%) died of cardiac,
c) 5 (11%) from self-inflicted,
d) 4 from other causes,
e) 1 from CVA
3) Consequently, a TOTAL of 58% of our members didn’t even make it to their 10th year of retirement, if they even got to retirement at all!
4) Additionally, 68% of our members don’t make it to age 70!
As a side note, our Cancer rates, as per our insurance company, are 310% higher than non-firefighters!
I am just over 59, retired at 57, having worked 34 years as a firefighter/medic and I can tell you that the calls were taking their toll on me. I have talked to many of our retirees and can assure you that 55 is about right for the busiest front line personnel, if you are upper management, then I can see going longer. As was pointed out, this is a “young person’s” job!
Don’t know if that helps out or not, but it’s those kinds of numbers which indicate to me why we should retire at age 55. And I won’t even get into the pension issues!!
-
Permalink Reply by 55 TRUCK on
-
We can retire after 20yrs Our pension doesn't max till 32yrs. We have no
min retirement age. We have had guys close to and at 70yrs of age still on
on the back step. Don't think for a second that they arn't able to do the job.
They work a guy half there age into the ground and make it look easy.
The job does take it's toll on you. Physically, mentally. A early retitement is
well earned yet many stay well past 20 or even 3oyrs,why?
Love of the job.
-
Permalink Reply by lutan1 on
-
I agree the SCBA and PPE innovation have really cut the death in injury rate down and that will likely continue, but now a new twist is added with fitness testing. It is beginning to force people out that in the past stayied until 62, now they are out with no options other than what they have right now.
Am I misreading your response Don? Are you suggesting that if they've been found unfit for task, you'd be OK with them staying anyway, instead of the retirement?
-
Permalink Reply by George Parker on
-
Gryphonoilfields & logistics (UK) is currently recruiting workers willing to travel abroad for jobs.List of work opportunities includes many support roles such as Welders, Fire figther ,Heavy Trucking jobs,Para-medics,Crane operators ,HSE officers, logistics support and power generation support.Project plan is 2011-2015.
For more details send in your resume/CV via email: jobs-gryphonoil@live.co.uk
-
-
Don, That is the only reason for "early retirements", it is cheaper to pay a new guy that an old experiened guy. There are no real "early retirements" in Washington because you cannot retire until you are 53, you municipality cannot change that. But they can provide an incentive for people to go after they are 53. We have over 60 members out of 300 that are over 53. No one is retireing, so the union negotiated a medical incentive for the retiree taht has encouraged some to go. The paln has saved the city millions and paid for the medical for the retiree and the wife, they come out ahead, everyone wins, taxpayer, FF and city.
-
Permalink Reply by Mike Ward on
-
Don:
Your observation:
"Most of the early retirements for munciplity departments are politically negotiated decisions made by unions at city, county, state, & federal levels."
IS the real reason for setting some type of defined benefit retirement calculation based on age and time in service.
Here is one "real" reason why:
If I retire FF Smyth at age 55 (with 25 years of service) I will not be required to pay for his cancer therapy that will probably show up in his 60's.
A study examining the cause of deaths for LAFD members, Los Angeles public workers and insurance company workers with a large office in the city.
The rate of cancer related deaths for LAFD members was significantly higher than the public work employees - both work outside in the city.
The rate of cancer related deaths for LAFD members was outrageously higher than the insurance office workers who were working in the 1930's - 1950's in probably unairconditioned workspaces.
There were three or five cancer experiences that were unique to LAFD members that were not found in other occupations.
A research document supporting cancer presumption clauses in some worker compensation regulations.
Think it came from this report:
Lewis SS, Bierman HR, Faith MR (1983): Cancer mortality among Los Angeles city firefighters. Institute for Cancer and Blood Research. Report presented to Los Angeles Fire Department
(unpublished manuscript).
Institute may be/have been a private non-profit institute based in Beverly Hills. You can find phone number if you google the name.
Other reports:
Mortality of a Municipal-Worker Cohort:
IV. Fire Fighters
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajim.4700110608/pdf
Excellent occupational medicine references
http://www.emich.edu/cerns/downloads/papers/FireStaff/Unsorted/JOB%...
-
-
Budget tidbit.
When I used to do the operations division budget for a large county department I learned that our worker compensation assessment was highest for firefighters.
Meaning that the state worker compensation board, using actuarial science and claim experience, identified firefighters as expensive employees.
Long term (chronic) and expensive care for:
Cancer
Cardiovascular (heart and stroke)
Musculoskeletal (back and joints)
The best funded research is for cancer, and firefighters have unique experiences with occupational carcinogens.
Consider these references:
A Select Annotated Bibliography Used for Firefighter Cancer Research
http://www.cpf.org/go/cpf/?LinkServID=6D524CA3-1CC4-C201-3E968C0E88...
1994 report to the Commonwealth of Virginia on increased mortality and cancer rates of firefighters
http://leg2.state.va.us/dls/h&sdocs.nsf/By+Year/HD881994/$file/HD88_1994.pdf
USFA and NIOSH Initiate Study of Cancer among Firefighters
http://www.usfa.dhs.gov/media/press/2010releases/042110.shtm
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
