The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
Responding to Negative Newspaper Editorials... Do you or don't you?
"Whenever there's a vacancy in the city or county Fire Department, there are literally thousands of applicants for each position. Why? Because firefighters get high pay, fantastic benefits and unbelievably generous pensions, which start as early as age 50.
But the main reason is that firefighters work only 10 days per month. They are off a full three weeks each month. Yes, they do put in 24-hour days, but with so few emergencies to respond to, firefighters have plenty of time on their hands during each shift for reading, sleeping, video games, watching TV, etc.
Because a huge part of the city and county budgets go for fire protection, this is where deep budget cuts must be made. But people get nervous at the thought of laying off firefighters.
So, what to do? Simple: Increase their work month from 10 to 13 days, which will require fewer firefighters. This still will give them 18 days off each month, which is a heck of a lot more time off than many of us get.
Local firefighters might threaten to strike, but they can easily be replaced from those thousands of applicants. After all, what other occupation would offer full pay and benefits for working only 13 days per month?
But we'll have to elect fiscally conservative majorities to the City Council and county Board of Supervisors to get such a needed reform because the current liberal majorities are the pawns of the fire (and police) unions."
- How would you respond to this or would you?
- Do you think it is a good idea to just leave it alone?
- Have you dealt with someone who does not like firefighters that writes editorial replies to the local newspaper
Feature: Notable Firefighter's Opinions...
Reply by
- My opinion is that any response should come from above, either a Chief or the PIO. It becomes risky when someone from the rank and file decides to counter anti-firefighter editorials or sentiment. Angrily and/or poorly written letters can do more harm than good.
-
Update: What kind of replies did the local newspaper receive from the public?
03-30-10 Comments: Responding to a letter writer's comments about firefighters, let's do some math. He said a firefighter works 10, 24-hour shifts per month, equaling 2,880 hours yearly.
Suggesting they work 13 shifts per month, equates to 3,744 hours yearly, about 30 percent more. Not missing something in the letter, that would be with no pay hike. In comparison, typical 40-hour/week employees put in 2,080 hours yearly, meaning firefighters work more than a 9-to-5 employee. Is it fair to increase that?
Firefighters aren't out on emergency calls for their entire shift, but do have other responsibilities. They have vehicles and equipment to keep clean and maintained, and have housekeeping chores around the station.
Firefighters don't have janitorial services coming in, cleaning the station. It's their job. Remember, the station is their home. They also are required to attend ongoing training, sometimes during their shifts, but often it's on their off days. They also have community responsibilities. They perform citizen training and education, work fairs and open houses and perform inspections for residences and businesses.
Now, let's talk about major emergencies, as with the Gap or Jesusita fires, or La Conchita mudslide. Firefighters remain on duty 24/7 until released, whether it's days or weeks. Add that to their 2,880 hours yearly and it can go well beyond the 3,744.
They need our support, not making them a target for saving money. There are other places to look. Cutting firefighters would be detrimental to us all.
03-29-10 Comments: I have been watching with interest and curiosity the mess our local politicians have put us in. How many of our city politicians have rushed into a burning building to save a child or fallen through a collapsed roof while doing their duty? None.
As for our Police Department, I don't think any of our City Council members or our mayor have had a gun pointed at them or removed hazardous material from a school or any public building. I could go on and on. (Read the front page of the March 18 News-Press). Every day the police put their lives on the line for us. The mayor and City Council did not hesitate to give themselves a hefty raise plus bonuses when they should have given themselves a 25 percent cut. But they chose to possibly dump almost two dozen officers from the department.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Vic Silverfish on
-
Whilst I'll grant you that fire-fighting is a dream job, especially if you are on a 24 hour shift, I think this sort of thing won't gain any traction. No pol on earth runs on the platform of "less police, less fire-fighting!"
Feel free to respond, why not? Talk about the amount of time spent drilling, pre-planning, doing maintenance, etc. I'd love to see a pol run on the platform of maximising the dollars spent in the FD. In my experience, no one seems interested in leverageing volunteers to cover hours (at night, for example) which might let you lose a shift of paid guys. No one talks about making sure you have enough paid guys to reduce (or eliminate) overtime. My old department actually lowered costs by hiring more people. the overtime was killing them.
Meh. this bozo is looking for some reason to hate liberals. go for it. We can take the abuse.
-
Permalink Reply by Mike Schlags (Captain Busy) Retd on
-
as always, love your aussie candor!
-
Permalink Reply by Fireyladd - Retired Chief Sharp on
-
BZY, in my community I wouldnt respond because our service and work speaks for itself. However on another note, I have responded to bad information or negative comments over the years. I believe our image and proffessionalism speaks for itself ,however we must always be in a position to give account for ourselves and present our work in a positive light. Though some may speak in a negetive manner most in this community know who the bitching whinning snivvellers are an their words just prove their ignorance. Most of the time I just get to sit back andd watch the others of our community chastize an blow them outa the paper with THEIR responses and support of us.
Sometimes its just an oppertunity to use the moment for some good old public education and fire prevention. :)
-
-
I concur Chief. My personal opinion is to leave any responding to this type of accusatory editorial to someone that represents the department or local, not a rogue firefighter with an opinion. Entering into a public bantering means no one wins. I believe that this type of editorial is meant to illicit emotion. We've seen it before here on the FFN with posts that have one goal, to get someone to respond. And we all know better, right? I look forward to seeing if anyone does respond to the editorial and who they are... To be continued... Regardless, I had fun doing the graphic art...
-
Permalink Reply by Olivia Jones on
-
I have delt with similar bad press, the only time anyone in our county has responded is when blatenly false and damaging accounts are prinited as fact in our local paper. Other than that I agree just let an editoral ranting about budget cost or our cushy jobs stand on their own. You are unlikely to change a negative persons opinion anyway.
-
Permalink Reply by Ron Ayotte on
-
I have responded to the "negative know it alls before"... taking each one of their taking points one by one and sending them down in flames.. for example...
"Whenever there's a vacancy in the city or county Fire Department, there are literally thousands of applicants for each position. Why? Because firefighters get high pay, fantastic benefits and unbelievably generous pensions, which start as early as age 50.
There are also thousands of applicants for colleges, medical school, professional sports tryouts, etc. Only the best and the brightest get in.
But the main reason is that firefighters work only 10 days per month. They are off a full three weeks each month. Yes, they do put in 24-hour days, but with so few emergencies to respond to, firefighters have plenty of time on their hands during each shift for reading, sleeping, video games, watching TV, etc.
A firefighters 24 hour duty tour is worth 3 of John and Jane Q. Public's work days. There are inspections to be done, training and equipment maintenance, housework (unlike other city departments and private employers, we do not have custodial staff) and of course responding to the emergency calls we get from John and Jane Q Public, whether they're real or percieved. Unlike the real world, we do not time off for meals, holidays off, nights and weekends off. We don't complain, we knew that when we took the exam and swore the oath to serve and protect. As far as "down time between emergencies", it is spent studying for promotions, having EMS classes, doing incident reports, putting equipment back in service, and yes, even getting to sit down and having a meal with their fellow firefighters.
Because a huge part of the city and county budgets go for fire protection, this is where deep budget cuts must be made. But people get nervous at the thought of laying off firefighters.
So, what to do? Simple: Increase their work month from 10 to 13 days, which will require fewer firefighters. This still will give them 18 days off each month, which is a heck of a lot more time off than many of us get
Firefighting is a labor intensive operation. Each fire truck and the personnel assigned to it have specific tasks that have to be done in a sequence that to the public appears to be chaotic, but is, in fact, rather well orchestrated as well as improvised when the situation goes bad within seconds. Remember that 1 tour of duty for a firefighter equals three eight hour days
Local firefighters might threaten to strike, but they can easily be replaced from those thousands of applicants. After all, what other occupation would offer full pay and benefits for working only 13 days per month?
It takes anywhere from 12 weeks to 24 weeks to train a new recruit in just the basics of the firefighting. Contrary to popular belief, it isn't brawn over brains... it is a balance of both. Building construction, hazardous materials, emergency vehicle operations, EMS, WMD training, technical rescue as well as firefighting operations is just a part... afterwards, this training must be continued and reinforced.
Most firefighter unions have a no strike/no slowdown clause in their contracts. Cities, towns and counties know this and use it against the firefighters, who still report for duty and do the job while the city/town/county wastes tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars hiring attorneys and consultants in an attempt to decimate he fire department. Remember, these attorneys and consultants collect their "thirty pieces of silver" and do not live in the communities they decimate.
Replacing firefighters with the "pool of applicants" with no training is an extremely expensive recipe for disaster. The costs of medical coverage for injuries and the potential for wrongful death lawsuits far outweigh the costs of maintaining a well trained and dedicated firefighting force.
But we'll have to elect fiscally conservative majorities to the City Council and county Board of Supervisors to get such a needed reform because the current liberal majorities are the pawns of the fire (and police) unions."
Fiscal conservatism... now that is funny. Saving pennies of the tax rate by cutting the fire department ends up costing the taxpayer more more money when their fire insurance rate increases by a hundred or more dollars a year due to the increase in fire losses in a community.. some savings.
Saving pennies on the tax rate by cutting the fire department actually causes the need to increase taxes. Property damaged or destroyed by fire does not generate tax revenue. Less revenue - more cuts - more fire losses... it's circling the drain. Look at cities like Detroit and Flint Michigan for examples... look at the abandoned/vacant properties in your community.. don't think that you are immune.
The Fire Service cannot hide behind the doors of the firehouse. We have to take our case to John and Jane Q. Public on a regular basis. When a Cub scout tour comes to the firehouse for a tour... assign a couple of firefighters to the kids... and assign a couple of others to talk with the parents about the FD, what we do and what we need. They are the people who vote, ladies and gentlemen... we have to win their hearts and minds.. even if it one person at a time!
-
Permalink Reply by Oldman on
-
I laugh at their ignorance. Why argue with an idiot? It's kinda like fishing in an aquarium... no sporting chance.
-
Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on
-
Something like this would probably get a rebuttal from the union with the misconceptions it touts, especially saying Increase their work month from 10 to 13 days, which will require fewer firefighters because the editorial obviously does not understand the concept of the federal labor laws. Most FF's average about a 56 hour work week and arbitrarily increasing work days means that either more time off is to be given or overtime paid, which equals cost. He obviously doesn't know about the fact about FD's inability to strike.
I concur with the sentiment that there should be some public education in some areas. It is an easy assumption made by those who think we just sit around, watch TV, read sleep, etc, but reality is the day consists of so much more, inspections, training, reports, maintainence, etc. It is stuff like this that gets easily missed or more apparantly ignored. The issue with FF's sleeping, etc at the station comes down to the simple little thing called response time and as I have stated to people, "Sleep is NOT a guarantee". I have had many sleepless nights at the station and ironically the so "few wmergencies" has increased each year, yet staffing has been cut.
So in the end, yes, I would mention something like that to such an editorial, however, I believe a more proactive approach is more appropriate. Many newspapers and media are looking for stories (Joe Shortsleeves), why not give them some? Offer to have a reporter ride along and see the daily activities, the training, maintainence, inspections and so forth. A day in the life story can negate the misguided opinions of such people like Joe Shortsleeves and this person.
-
Permalink Reply by Doug on
-
I agree with this concept. Invite a reporter or two from the same newspaper that published this editorial for a ride along. A FULL SHIFT ride along.
-
Permalink Reply by Just Plain Craig Moyer on
-
My thought is wait and see how the public responds. You might get one or two people respond either way and cancel each other out. A new newscycle might start meaning something bigger may come along and push that story to the back pf peoples minds.
You don't want to get into a pissing match with people who own the ink. If more issues on the negative side come out then sit down and decide what you want to highlight. People can only deal with one issue so saying we do this and this and this won't help.
I would use the one bullet defense. 5 people attacking one person and that person has one bullet. Someone might get shot but no one knows who. Put it like this. We work 24 hour in a row. There have been times when we have men onscene for up to 8-10 hours. They can be reliEved but if you had an additional 24 hours then the fatigue factors comes into play. WOULD YOU WANT TIRED FIREFIGHTERS COMING TO YOUR HOUSE TO PUT OUT A FIRE. Always make it a question that they can't say no too. Of course they don't want tired firefighers. Tell them doctors do the same thing and YOU DON'T WANT A TIRED DOCTOR HELPING YOU...WOULD YOU?
Would thier house catch on fire.. probably not but it could. Remember your not DEFENDING YOURSELF, your protecting the public and THATS THE IMPORTANT THING. People don't understand the training and drills we do. They just want the fire put out.
Sell it like that and you might not have any problems.
-
Permalink Reply by Eric Laroche on
-
I think you are right, you can't get the final words with that kind of person usually. And if your answer his published, it will be in a small place left in a page where no ones read. I might be exagerating a bit but one thing is for sure, it never will have the same exposure as the original editorial...
-
Permalink Reply by Jeff Allen on
-
This is obviously written by somebody so out of touch with reality that you just need to ignore it and let the non issue die a quick death, while you watch to make sure it does indeed die. Getting into a discussion with people who believe in this type of cut back is a no-win battle. As has been stated below unless the facts are invested with twisted lies and untruths you are best to just leave the snake alone.
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
