The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
Dead Firefighter Walkin'- the Next LODD
I had just finished reading a depressing thought I found on facebook by Christopher Naum:
“There’s an awful lot of time, energy and resources being committed and directed towards fire service safety. Is anyone really listening? Does anyone really care?” Are we just running against the wind?
Almost immediately after reading that, I find out that a downstate Illinois fire protection district has a problem. Some of their firefighters do not have the proper qualifications for responding to and working a structure fire.
“I see there are firefighters with zero hours in training,” one trustee said. “Either you are a firefighter or you’re not.”
Most were the older guys, retired, and unable or unwilling to commit the time and energy needed to meet the requirements set forth by the state of Illinois.
According to the Illinois Fire Protection Act, firefighters are required to meet a minimum of 24 hours of training per year. I'm still trying to confirm that number.
I did some quick math. My 3rd grade daughter confirmed my calculations. That’s two hours a month. 30 minutes a week.
Tell me there aren’t firefighters out there that are donning equipment with which they are not completely familiar, advancing the wrong size line with the wrong nozzle into a ‘burning box’ just waiting to collapse, unable to recognize the deadly warning signs of a catastrophic fire event for which their equally untrained buddies will have to come in and effect a rescue they are ill-prepared to attempt potentially killing them all.
Please tell me this is a unique situation. TELL ME!
Recognizing the liability of untrained firefighters on the fireground, the trustees of this fire protection district are considering their chief’s proposal to form a second tier of membership- call it an auxiliary role.
Keep the guys active, but don’t put them into a position where they could hurt themselves or others. There are other things these guys could do in a support role.
Sounds like a great idea, right?
You’ve read this far, you earned your payoff:
After the news of the proposed change appeared on the FireRescue1 website, one lonely comment appeared. It’s so bizarre; I’m not quite able to accept that it wasn’t posted as a facetious remark. Here it is, by ‘tommy517’:
“I think it is unreal what law makers are trying to require volunteer firefighters training for responding to calls. I know they feel it is for firefighter safety they come up with some of the stuff, and anything to make it safer is better. However, someone who has done it for years should be given some credit for years of service. I’m a volunteer and I love it. There isn’t anything much better to me than running on fire and rescue calls. I took all the required classes I needed at the time. Now they are wanting to come up with new stuff all the time. When I started I was a student in high school. Now I have a family and work full time. Its hard to get all the “new” trainings that are out there. I wish I had the time to go and take all the new classes and find out what is new in the fire service. With a job and family now its hard to respond to calls sometimes let alone run here and there for classes. Really what has changed? We still gear up get on the truck and put the wet stuff on the red stuff…”
Like he said, “Really, what has changed?’”
Seriously, folks. How many line of duty injuries and worse do we have to endure before this kind of mindset changes?
Don't be the next LODD. Don't be a dead firefighter walking.
“There’s an awful lot of time, energy and resources being committed and directed towards fire service safety. Is anyone really listening? Does anyone really care?” Are we just running against the wind?
Almost immediately after reading that, I find out that a downstate Illinois fire protection district has a problem. Some of their firefighters do not have the proper qualifications for responding to and working a structure fire.
“I see there are firefighters with zero hours in training,” one trustee said. “Either you are a firefighter or you’re not.”
Most were the older guys, retired, and unable or unwilling to commit the time and energy needed to meet the requirements set forth by the state of Illinois.
According to the Illinois Fire Protection Act, firefighters are required to meet a minimum of 24 hours of training per year. I'm still trying to confirm that number.
I did some quick math. My 3rd grade daughter confirmed my calculations. That’s two hours a month. 30 minutes a week.
Tell me there aren’t firefighters out there that are donning equipment with which they are not completely familiar, advancing the wrong size line with the wrong nozzle into a ‘burning box’ just waiting to collapse, unable to recognize the deadly warning signs of a catastrophic fire event for which their equally untrained buddies will have to come in and effect a rescue they are ill-prepared to attempt potentially killing them all.
Please tell me this is a unique situation. TELL ME!
Recognizing the liability of untrained firefighters on the fireground, the trustees of this fire protection district are considering their chief’s proposal to form a second tier of membership- call it an auxiliary role.
Keep the guys active, but don’t put them into a position where they could hurt themselves or others. There are other things these guys could do in a support role.
Sounds like a great idea, right?
You’ve read this far, you earned your payoff:
After the news of the proposed change appeared on the FireRescue1 website, one lonely comment appeared. It’s so bizarre; I’m not quite able to accept that it wasn’t posted as a facetious remark. Here it is, by ‘tommy517’:
“I think it is unreal what law makers are trying to require volunteer firefighters training for responding to calls. I know they feel it is for firefighter safety they come up with some of the stuff, and anything to make it safer is better. However, someone who has done it for years should be given some credit for years of service. I’m a volunteer and I love it. There isn’t anything much better to me than running on fire and rescue calls. I took all the required classes I needed at the time. Now they are wanting to come up with new stuff all the time. When I started I was a student in high school. Now I have a family and work full time. Its hard to get all the “new” trainings that are out there. I wish I had the time to go and take all the new classes and find out what is new in the fire service. With a job and family now its hard to respond to calls sometimes let alone run here and there for classes. Really what has changed? We still gear up get on the truck and put the wet stuff on the red stuff…”
Like he said, “Really, what has changed?’”
Seriously, folks. How many line of duty injuries and worse do we have to endure before this kind of mindset changes?
Don't be the next LODD. Don't be a dead firefighter walking.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Jack/dt on
-
When someone, anyone, sees training as an unfair, impractical imposition on "volunteers" then you might as well prepare for your first/next LODD.
Where is it written that just because someone has been a volunteer for years that there is nothing new for them to learn? Have they really learned it all? Have they learned anything at all?
If the person writing the quoted comments came from a department that ran 1000+ fire calls every year and personally made a significant percentage of them then one could at least presume that their skill sets are up to date, maybe. But for the average VFD I'm betting that they run a lot less calls, see few if any fire calls on a yearly basis and the ones they do see are already fully gone. But what about the one that is still in the incipient stage?
Nothing worse than going in and finding out you are totally unprepared for the job. Or that your SCBA is not working or working properly. Or that you've made the wrong decision(s). Or you simply don't know WTF to do.
Training is, in my opinion, the one thing that most distinguishes the amateur from the professional. Professionals train to stay sharp, increase their skills, learn new techniques, methods, tactics and tools and understand that there is no such thing as too much training. It is the amateur that thinks that too much is too much.
But where does the problem lay? Can you really blame the individual firefighter? In my opinion, no. You have to place the blame where it belongs, squarely on the shoulders of the Chief of Department. If the person wearing the white hat and all the bugles is nothing more than the head of the social club then it stands to follow that he will run the department as a social club.
But then again, if a department 'elects' its chief then it got what it voted for. So maybe it's time for the state to step up and increase/enforce the requirements for volunteer fire departments. Unless you have people lobbying for you at the state level that too many requirements are unfair to impose on 'volunteers.'
I guess the bottom line is that if you can't do the time, you can't be on line. If training is "too hard" or you don't "have the time" then maybe you need to re-think your priorities. If you can't or won't train then you shouldn't be a firefighter. What fire departments need are capable, qualified, well trained firefighters, not LODD candidates.
Don't get mad, get better.
Stay safe-ish.
-
Permalink Reply by Chief Dino on
-
Our training program had lapsed and when we finally had an honest discussion with ourselves one of the guys actually asked "is getting certified gonna make us a better firefighter?" Really are ya kiddin?
-
-
Everyone just loves the little game posts but run away from a post that asks a difficult question: Is 30 minutes of training a week enough?
How much do you train on a monthly basis, 2 hours, 3, more, less?
Is training even necessary?
How many in your department are Dead Firefighters Walking? Are YOU one?
-
-
Jeff, I understand what you're saying but the reality is that VFD's are here to stay, they serve a valid purpose. What some seem to feel is that, while they want to be considered professional, they think that there are already too many regulations and requirements placed on them.
It is possible to be both volunteer and professional (in the larger sense) by working to be the best they possibly can. Whining about not enough time for or too much training and too many regulations is inexcusable. As this post points out, they are dead firefighters walking. They are LODD candidates.
There's no reason a volunteer department can't get 3 hours of training a week. Seems to me if they can find the time to respond they can (and need to) find the time to train. Meeting minimum standards simply means that a department is minimally trained. I don't want a doctor that has been minimally trained, I want one that is fully trained. Same goes for the fire department.
As for your comparison between police and fire, it has been shown that police presence does in fact reduce crime. It's never been shown that a paid fire department presence has ever reduced fire. The response may be quicker but it has nothing to do with whether something is going to burn or not. How quickly and effectively a fire is put out does have everything to do with manpower and training. Funny how it always comes back to training. If only training were more like a game I'm sure many in here would be all for it.
-
Permalink Reply by Kevin Dunbar on
-
Well I challenge your statement in regards to paid fire reducing the occurrence of fire. In a progressive paid fire department companies do fire inspections in their perspective districts, along with that they may have an inspection division that does this as well. I am not saying that a volunteer department can not do the same, but a department with paid staff can cover a lot more buildings in regards to this matter, and doing inspections has been proven to reduce the amount of fires.
-
Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on
-
I agree with what you are saying here Jack and you are correct. There is no excuse for not training or being up to standards. These minimum training requirements, whatever they may be for each dept, is just that, the minumum, but when one makes a committment to a dept and community, it should be a committment and training is a large part of that.
When I was a volly, I was a part of an internship program with the dept while attending school. Interns had to be at all drills and had their own drill night the off week, so essentially 3 hours a week, 12 hours a month. The volunteer FF's had 2 nights a month for 6 hours a month and EMS was one night a month, 3 hours. Again this was the bare minimum of what was asked and even so, many volunteers seldom showed up. Is training necessary? Absolutely. With my former and current depts outside training was encouraged, yet seeminly the same few were the ones to take part.
Thing is though, such training issues are not just the problem of the volunteer fire service and the same mindset can be seen in some members of my own dept. We train more as a career dept than when I was a volly, but it is also what you put into it. We typically have scheduled HOT training monthly with other companies or anything from extrication to acquired structures, but we do training daily as a company, anything from the fireground basics to new ideas, etc someone may bring in. Training can also be where a FF drives or rides the seat while doing inspections or going to a PR event, or shopping.
Problem is this training mindest and issues mentioned here are also seen on the career side. Guys with the "we just did this" or "I already know how to do that" etc can be as bad as not doing training at all. Such attitudes can be a cancer, especially to newer FF's who may truly benefit from the training or those who haven't in a while, but don't want to speak up. So from that standpoint, such issues have been addressed and while not completely solved, nor will it really may ever be, it does start from the chief, but also to the person running the house. Some captains have assigned their crewmembers a training day where someone comes up with a topic to train on, others come up with their own. The chief established that training needs to be done, but may not be around to physically ensure it is being done.
Thing is with training it should have a nice mix of the old and new and how a dept will address such issues. Too often training can focus on the latest "fad" or consumed by the mandatory stuff like NIMS, meanwhile ground ladders may not have been practiced on for a long while. On the flip, a company can pull lines and flow water each day, but isn't familiar with new building techniques.It helps to have people involved and read threads like this and see different opinions and think how to bring in different ideas to their own depts. Reading the close calls and LODD's and instead of concentrating on what should have been done or the lessons learned, but to also see what is lacking on one's own department.
The most unfortunate thing is you read a LODD and you have the dept say "Please learn from us so you don't have to live this", but how much really is taken to heart? For us, it did take a LODD to become a wake up call and we have been out there saying "Please learn from us", but we still see LODD each year. The mindset problem may not just be about training, but to think it won't happen to you. FDNY may have a LODD, and it is easy to say "we don't have high rises", but couldn't something still be learned? A rural volly dept could have a apparatus accident and a career dept can say "we don't run those rigs" but something can still be looked at in one's own dept.
The problem....complacency.
The solution...Learning, honing skills, learning something new, if you think you know it all, then it is time to retire.
-
-
Kevin I agree with your point. Fire prevention and inspections as well as fire and building codes and enforcement do help to reduce fires. I was trying to make a point that police really couldn't function on a volunteer basis the way VFD's can.
-
-
John,
Exactly. I too see it and admit that I succumb to the "I already know this" attitude. Hard sometimes not to get a bit complacent. I push all of the time for new training on the things we seldom or never do. Those are the ones that will bite us for sure.
I'm not a fan of complicated drills with multiple companies (unless it's a mutual aid dept, always good to train outside our area). I'd rather the practical, rote stuff. Throw a few ground ladders, advance hose lines, switch up the crew, pre-plans and white board what-ifs. It's all good.
The point being, it's training. Training is good, it's essential and it can be the difference between
making it and not. When shit hits the fan you tend to revert to a default mode, let's hope the default mode is training based and not panic based.
-
-
Actually our multi-company drills tend to be a ladder and a pump or pump and an ambo or two pumps, etc typically. So the personnel number training can vary. I personally likethe scenarios of responding on scene and how this situation would be mitigated as though other companies were minutes away yet. Gives us a chance to switch roles around that normally don't happen.
I like the default mode analogy, that is exactly so. In the Navy we ran a fire drill daily and many times things were simulated. Problem is when things were consistently simulated, that is how it happened when things were real. I recall an incident where smoke was reported, we had a line out and the person at the valve said "simulating water". Uhh no, charge the line for real.
-
-
lol well at least it wasn't a nuke being requested, or worse, being simulated and he offered up the real thing.
I hate pretend training. If we're supposed to flow water, charge the damn line. If we're throwing ladders, climb the damn thing. Maydays, evacuations, ff removal, hazmat etc all need to be done as if it were real. That's what the default mode is. Training like you fight.
-
-
Thank's Jeff.
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
