The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
Should a volunteer be forced into doing something they don't feel comfortable with?
My questions to anyone is this:
Should a volunteer member be forced into doing something that they don't feel comfortable with? What if they are being told that if they do not do this, they will no longer be a member of the department?
Here's what it going on (just to paint you the picture)...a member of the department who is medical only is now being told that if they do not do something, they will not be allowed to be a member anymore. This person gave up fighting "The Beast" a few years back due to an incident on a grass fire gone wrong. After that incident they gave up firefighting and pursued medical.
This person has been doing medical for 6 yrs now and there has never been an issue with that. Now, they are being told that they also have to become a firefighter again. Once again, if they do not follow this, they cannot be a member of the department. The issue cannot be taken to someone higher, i.e. county fire marshal, as he is the acting chief of the department during re-organization. The new S.O.G.'s for the county state that all members must be at least FF1 certified AND at least FR; preferably EMT-B.
The acting chief has been made aware of the circumstances as to why this person does not do firefighting anymore. He said he understands the reason, but that was as far as it went. Now, I'm not saying that an exception has to be made to accomidate for this, but if someone has the desire to help out their community as a medical responder, shouldn't that be taken into consideration? Shouldn't their loyalty in that part of the department be enough?
Yes, this person could leave the department, but it is the only other medical unit in the county that is run on a volunteer basis (2 other departments have medical units, but both are in the cities). The other county volunteer fire departments are just that, fire only.
In your opinion, what do you think that this member should say and/or do? Should they just walk away from something they love to do, or try to fight this battle and see where it goes? I would love to hear what you have to say to all of this. Any and all ideas/opinions would be greatly appreciated on this issue.
Laura
Should a volunteer member be forced into doing something that they don't feel comfortable with? What if they are being told that if they do not do this, they will no longer be a member of the department?
Here's what it going on (just to paint you the picture)...a member of the department who is medical only is now being told that if they do not do something, they will not be allowed to be a member anymore. This person gave up fighting "The Beast" a few years back due to an incident on a grass fire gone wrong. After that incident they gave up firefighting and pursued medical.
This person has been doing medical for 6 yrs now and there has never been an issue with that. Now, they are being told that they also have to become a firefighter again. Once again, if they do not follow this, they cannot be a member of the department. The issue cannot be taken to someone higher, i.e. county fire marshal, as he is the acting chief of the department during re-organization. The new S.O.G.'s for the county state that all members must be at least FF1 certified AND at least FR; preferably EMT-B.
The acting chief has been made aware of the circumstances as to why this person does not do firefighting anymore. He said he understands the reason, but that was as far as it went. Now, I'm not saying that an exception has to be made to accomidate for this, but if someone has the desire to help out their community as a medical responder, shouldn't that be taken into consideration? Shouldn't their loyalty in that part of the department be enough?
Yes, this person could leave the department, but it is the only other medical unit in the county that is run on a volunteer basis (2 other departments have medical units, but both are in the cities). The other county volunteer fire departments are just that, fire only.
In your opinion, what do you think that this member should say and/or do? Should they just walk away from something they love to do, or try to fight this battle and see where it goes? I would love to hear what you have to say to all of this. Any and all ideas/opinions would be greatly appreciated on this issue.
Laura
- Attachments:
-
-
Pictures 173.jpg, 3.4 MB
-
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Rescue601 on
-
I guess I fail to see the problem. If you have to get certified as a FF then so be it, but it doesn't mean you have to go interior. What about being an engineer? Also I find it hard to believe that a grass fire nearly killed anyone. Sure a working woods fire without proper gear and protection, but not a grass fire.
-
-
I am not sure where you see that there is a point for litigation. If the department says to be a member of the department you have to comply with these requirements and you chose not to then that is of your own accord. Additionally it is very difficult to sue a nonprofit organization especially one that is completely volunteer. The department isn't forcing the member to do anything.
-
Permalink Reply by Jim Holm on
-
Rescue601, you might want to do some research on fatal wildland fires, on August 4, 1949 in Mt. 13 smokejumpers died on Mann Gulch. Primary fuel type was waist high grass.
Five common denominators that contribute to accidents/incidents have been identified through studies of "tragedy fires."
•Most incidents happen on smaller fires or on isolated portions of larger fires.
•Most fires are innocent in appearance before unexpected shifts in wind direction and/or speed results in flare-ups or extreme fire behavior. In some cases, tragedies occur in the mopup stage.
•Flare-ups generally occur in deceptively light fuels, such as grass and light brush. Fires run uphill surprisingly fast in chimneys, saddles, gullies, and on steep slopes.
•Some suppression tools, such as helicopters or airtankers, can adversely affect fire behavior.
•The blasts of air from low-flying helicopters and airtankers have been known to cause flare-ups.
-
Permalink Reply by Mike Schlags (Captain Busy) Retd on
-
"but not a grass fire..."
Please read this link to provide yourself with more insight as to the inherent dangers of grass fires. It will change your perspective buddy. Here's an excerpt describing the aftermath of a "grass fire"... It's important to learn from history and share it if you know about it already... at least that's where I'm coming from.
Stay safe brother, CB
The Fatal Vandenberg Fire, 1977
"I explained what had happened to the burn victim and me, and then Dave filled me in on the current situation. Dave and Mark confirmed that the Base Fire Chief, the Assistant Fire Chief, and the Base Commander, had all been killed in the fire. The deaths occurred down where we were originally parked near Space Launch Complex (SLC)-5, just a little further up the road. They informed me that Battalion Chief Don Perry, Joe Lindaman, and some other Base 11 Firefighters had also been caught in the fire near our strike team. The Chiefs car became stuck in the sandy soil along side the road as they tried to get around some obstruction. It was too late to make a run for it, so they hunkered down in the vehicle while the fire roared over them. They breathed in the hot air that permeated the Chiefs sedan, but managed to survive. "They walked out themselves and we gave them oxygen from our breathing apparatus, then they were rushed to the Lompoc Hospital for treatment of their seared lungs," Dave ended, in a gasp of air." the full story...
-
-
I consider that a wildland fire and not a grass fire. I guess its more of a "definition" based question. I consider a grass fire when someones normally maintained grass is on fire. To me waist tall "grass" that is on fire is a brush fire.
-
-
There's always the side of me that wants to be warm and fuzzy, welcoming everyone to the firehouse, with expectations that they think and feel the same way that I do about the fire service. I wish this was always the case. The truth of the matter is that the firehouse and the job has no room for this type of attitude (in my opinion). As I have mentioned in prior posts, this job is not meant for everyone. Can a firefighter who experienced a nasty MCI tell their Captain that they can no longer respond to medical emergencies because it gives them disturbing flashbacks? We both know the answer. If you want to call yourself a firefighter, wear the uniform and badge, then there are certain inherent expectations.
So, you have to respect the wishes of the departments management. There are too many things not being mentioned here to provide insight that your Fire Chief may have. For someone to work for the fire department but yet, not want to work as a firefighter... somethings wrong here. This individual needs to seek a way to help people, but it does not sound like a spot reserved for someone to "multi-task" verses someone who is dictating the types of calls and work that they will do. If you look at this objectively, what you see is someone with special needs which is not conducive toward ensuring harmony in the firehouse. It's important to remember that you are not dealing with a democracy here, you are dealing with a military patterned organization where you either run with the big dogs or sleep on the porch. Tell your friend to get off the porch... ; )
TCSS, CB
-
-
There was fatality in Utah in 06-07 were a fire went across a mowed hay field, can't think of the name of the fire. (brain drain) Would you consider this a grass fire using your definition?
Not bashing or anything just asking.
This was on the Neola North Fire in 2007, just found it.
-
Permalink Reply by Joe Guthrie on
-
I agree with Andy. There are plenty of other jobs outside of the IDLH area that need to be done. The people in our department that don't wish to fight fire are trained in medical and pump ops. The guys that really want to fight the fires don't want to be on the pump panel to begin with or do outside jobs. They want to be interior with the nozzle. There is definately a place for everyone in the fire service. Think about it realistically. What is the highest percentage of your calls when you provide medical and fire service. MEDICAL. Hope this helps your chief.
-
Permalink Reply by Brad on
-
I always say if you don't feel comfortable doing it don't do it. if some one tells you do do something an you dont feel comfortale tell them an if they give you a bad time look at them ask them if they would do it. Second learn how to do it on the training grounds . Be Safe and if you don't feel comfortale doining it don' t do it.
-
Permalink Reply by Mike on
-
Wow lots of responses... First the matter at hand: If you are on a FIRE department you should be capable to perform in a fire fighting capacity. To some that means putting the wet stuff on the red stuff. To some, that may be engineer, safety, and even an EMS capability operating on the fire scene. In the end the Chief decides how many people he/she can have on the roster requiring designated hitters and still get the job done.
No fire is safe... grass... wildland. I have seen the manzanita burn on Vandenberg (worked with that great Fire Department from 95-97), I grew up in Missoula Montana where wildland fires are a seasonal reality, and now I live on the plains of Montana in the center of the state where grass fires are routine. None is worse than the other and all will KILL you dead.
Fire to me is not as much about fear as it is about respect. I show that respect by wearing my gear properly, following fireground rules, and not getting cocky. There are professional wildland fire fighters (Hot Shots, Smoke Jumpers) who can fight wildland/grass fires from the green. I will only attack with an anchor point from the black... knowing I may have to create my black.
My $.02...
-
Permalink Reply by Todd on
-
If the person in question has already been accepted as a member of the department on a medical only basis, even if it's under a previous administration, I don't see where the current administration of the department has a leg to stand on forcing them to take on additional duties.
Now if this were someone who was just applying to join, then yes, I see where the acting chief would be in the right because that would be the standard that was current when this person applied. However, since the person in question here was already on the department, and apparently this wasn't an issue until a change in the administration of the department. If there was nothing in the department's bylaws and/or SOP's prior to the change in administration then I could very well see where this person would have a plausible case for legal action.
I also disagree with forcing members to take on duties that they aren't comfortable in completing. It would be one thing if the administration asked this person just to complete the training if for no other reason than for federal grant purposes, but forcing them to engage in firefighting duties is asking for a disaster IMHO.
-
Permalink Reply by Dave on
-
i agree, if you dont feel comfortable going into burning buildings....DONT BE A FIREFIGHTER!! I do not buy the we have interior and exterior firefighters, not for one minute! I do not want to read how we career/vollie do the same job if this is how things go in some vollie depts. On my dept, we are all interior and when you cant do it or are afraid to do it....your time has come to leave!!!!
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
