The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
Volunteer Fire Chief Suspended over YouTube Response Videos
A fire chief in this small town was suspended in 2007 over posting his personal car responses to emergencies on YouTube. In the wake of the video postings, the entire department was actually locked out from responding and mutual aid covered the town for one week. The social media aspect of liability is a hot topic today in the fire service. Many here have debated the "freedom of speech" aspect of their videos. What do you guys think?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QffHLMvaoqg&feature=related
In my opinion, when we are acting as a member of any department, paid, call or volunteer, everything is property of the town. I have known some department's to create social media policies, that clearly spell out everything you do, everything to photograph or video is property of the town and can't be released. This includes the newer helmet camera. Which in reality does reduce the town's overall liability from potential lawsuits.
I looked further and found a longer version of the original response video, it was about 9 minutes long. The call was for a medical emergency, child injured, actually mutual aid to another town. The video is for the most part uneventful, but one poster in the YouTube comments was quick to point out these comments...
Ed20298 says: The author comments about how this video isn't interesting, but it is you just have to look. Speed of travel is interesting. There's a section of I-95 that a measure mile is completed in 39 seconds, translation 92 mph. Plus on this video there is a 5.8 mile section of this video that is completed in 4 m 55 s. Average speed: 71mph, and its visable that there's slowing down for corners. With that said 75-80 is obtained during sections of this travel. Thats criminal speed in a "personal vehicle"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qOMHvpmbQo
So from simply a liability reduction standpoint, did the town manager see a different view of liability when a future accident happens. Lawyers and their team are paid alot of money to do research to support a case. Would an accident case with recorded video evidence of pre-exisiting driving habits be liability?
Just curious... Whats FFN's take on this matter?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by WestPhilly on
-
Art,
How does the posting of this video show Goodell's penchance (sic) for violating traffic codes? I'm willing to grant, for the sake of argument, he was driving too fast. But one instance doesn't show a penchant for anything. Are there other instances? Were they ever addressed by his bosses? Should we be firing people (as Paul suggests and as you seem to be on board with) for driving too fast before starting with less severe sanctions? Anybody familiar with the concept of Progressive Discipline? Had he been verbally reprimanded? A written reprimand? Demotion? Suspension?
-
Permalink Reply by Paul Montpetit on
-
West Philly...I took offense that a Chief would #1 Play with cell phone while responding...#2 Drive like a nut going to a call....#3 Posting the stupid video for all the world to see that his department acts this way......Like it or not we ARE held to a higher standard............Now a question for others....Let's say that I am a member of this Department (no, I am not)...Now I go out and drive 75 mph going to a call and John Q Pubilc files a complaint....How does the Chief "correct" me when he has demonstrated the same behavior...??
-
-
Paul,
I have a little time on the job, so I'm at least vaguely familiar with the "higher standard" we're held to.
I didn't catch the playing with the cell phone part. What was he doing, taking a picture of himself? I also didn't see him driving like a nut. Again, I'm willing to grant he needs to slow down, but as nutty driving goes, I think his was pretty far down on the scale.
Does someone need to discipline or "correct" this guy? I'm good with that. But firing would be incorrect.
-
Permalink Reply by Fireyladd - Retired Chief Sharp on
-
As has been stated here more times then I can remember. Anything you say, post or show on the internet can either be a support or a negative against you and your Department. Somehow people seem to think they live in a vacuum and simply post anything and everything on the internet with total disregard for the influence or bad thought they bring upon themselves and their Department. A recent posting by a young firefighter was a real bad example of just that. He made a very derogatory comment to another member on FFN. The person he made the comment to was personally upset by the comment. The young firefighters Chief was contacted and Bang!
No more job. I hope that this is a rare case but one to not be taken lightly. Our comments an posting on the internet are a example of who we are and who represent. Each one of us on FFN sign on here an represent an agency that we would like to believe is professional and above reproach. Your comments and postings here can destroy that in seconds by one simple click of the enter key.
-
Permalink Reply by Jack/dt on
-
Accepting that the town manager was within her right (having crossed the t's and dotted the i's of whatever employment policy they have), I don't see any problem him being fired.
And it had nothing to do with speeding but rather violating a direct order from his immediate supervisor, the Town Manager. Why the town manager felt the need to step in and order him to cease and desist was her prerogative, presumably how she wanted "her" department to be presented (and represented). Why she terminated him was also (presumably) her prerogative. Why did she lock the doors to the firehouse(s); she must have had a good (enough) reason. Beyond this, it's all speculative.
-
-
Jack,
Unless I missed something - entirely possible - Goodell was not terminated, but suspended. I agree it's within the prerogative of the Town Manager to take that action. I'm a little surprised that some have siezed on the issue of Goodells driving and think he should be fired on that basis. Doesn't this guy have anything positive going for him over the course of his service as a volunteer? Shouldn't any of that be taken into consideration?
-
Permalink Reply by FETC on
-
As far as I know he was not fired just suspended (relieved from duty) for two weeks.
-
-
My bad, suspension, not termination (that's what I get for scanning responses instead of more carefully re-reading the OP and links). Which makes the town manager even more fair than I painted her to be.
That so many picked up on the speed issue shows how quick to judge so many can be. Even when they think they aren't judging.
-
-
I actually don't have a problem with people judging. (Although, being "quick to judge" is a problem). I just have a problem with their judgement. Driving too fast is not a hanging offense. If it's habitual and past corrective measures have proven unsuccessful, that's something different. Do we know that to be the case?
-
-
I'm not aware of any speeding issue for this person. I've read what everyone else has. It seems that speeding became an issue on youtube and subsequently here, but to me the issue was one of not following orders, i.e. continued posting of videos on youtube.
The issue seems to digress into (a wrongly perceived) one of free speech. People seem not to understand that there can be repercussions from their "freedom of speech". Like the saying goes; If you think education is expensive, try ignorance."
-
-
Si.
-
Permalink Reply by Art "ChiefReason" Goodrich on
-
WP:
Did I say "penchance"? Hmmm.
Maybe I meant to say "pre-disposed" or "predeliction" or "propensity".
It appears that he had a strong inclination to break traffic rules. Oh wait; that means "penchance".
I don't think you have to be an accident reconstructionist or a vehicle velocity expert to know that those deer crossing signs were a blur when Goodall drove by them. If you listened, you could hear the rpms on his engine rapidly increase from when he "stopped" or rather "barely hesitated" at the stop signs to speed up again.
I said "penchance" because, in my opinion, he was speeding, distracted by talking on the radio, rolling stop signs or barely hesitating at them and crossing the center line while enroute to a mutual aid call.
Despite it was only ONE video, it was very revealing.
With regards to the city manager shutting the fire department down for eight days...if it was because of Goodall, then it was an ignorant decision, but if there were other reasons, then I would like to hear them.
Again; his posting videos on youtube are NOT protected under freedom of speech.
This was an employee/employer issue.
But, IMHO, he WAS speeding in his response video; putting many of the indigenous wildlife in the area at risk.
Hence; the signs with the profile of deer on them.
TCSS.
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
