The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
Shane Ray's "Rethinking Volunteer Firefighter Certification" article will make some waves...
The new superintendant of the South Carolina Fire Academy asks some tough question and offers some creative solutions to the problem of volunteer firefighter certification and just what that should mean.
Here's the article: http://www.firefighternation.com/article/training-0/rethinking-volu...
It is thought-provoking, to say the least. What do you guys think?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Bob Callahan on
-
It doesn't, and there are places where this happens.
And that's life.
That being said, the exclusion of exterior personnel will not prevent situations where victims inside a structure may not be rescued and 1-2 room fires may not be extinguished, and the building may burn down.
Again, nobody has said do not train physically capable and willing personnel to operate interior. Nobody has said that a fire department should not have personnel to operate interior, if the manpower pool permits. Nobody has said a department should take a limit of 15 people trained to operate asinterior firefighters even though there may be more avaialble so that we have space to take 15 exterior members on the roster.
However, there are simply places where there is either a very limited number of people capable of operating or willing to take the time to train to operate interior. and there are departments that are, and likely always will, operate as primarily or exclusively exterior departments..That is a reality, like it or not.
Would I prefer that is not the case? Sure, and I think everybody would, but if the community does not support the fire department in terms of either/and manpower or financial resources to perform interior functions, that is what the community has for fire protection,
It's a bad situation but not training people to operate exterior, and certifying them as such will not make the situation any better.
Taking people who can operate exterior and training them to support interior operations mayl not prevent what you have described if a department lacks enough interior members. No denying that. And likely when people are trapped they will die. And as passionate as you are, and as passionate as I am about training, there will always be communities where the chances of dying in a fire are much higher when compared to other similiar communities because of the fire department, or the support the community provides.
But taking exterior personnel and training if there are a limited number, or worse case, no interior personnel, them as trained exterior personnel may prevent the spread of the fire to wildlands, or other structures. Or it may allow them to make an exterior attack on a vehicle fire attack protecting exposures or knocking the fire down from a distance before it spreads..
Is that the best scenerio? No, but it's better than multiple buildings burning or a simple vehicle fire, brush fire or trash fire igniting a home.
And it will provide trained members capable of supporting interior operations if a few interior members respond, which may but hem enough time to make a quick rescue or quick knockdown.
Is it the best situation? No, as i have already stated, but it is better than no fire department response..
Ttrained exterior members can be a valuable asset. members who are required to attend training. And members who, if there was a certification, would be forced to demonstrator those skills in a testing enviroment. In a limited interior member enviroment, yes, trained exterior members are as valuable because they allow the few interior members to operate ..interior.
We will disagree on that.
Have a great rest of the weekend.
-
Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on
-
The problem is that it isn't a perfect world, so mandating FF1 as the minimum standard is not practical in some places.
Thus, Chief Ray's consideration of "commensurate with your duties" training and certificaiton.
-
-
A few points here...
Some posters insist that the minimum standard for all firefighters should be NFPA Firefighter I or a very close equivalent. That is not realistic given the situations we've discussed. The areas under discussion are soo poor that they can barely afford the level of coverage they have now. Claiming that the community should just pay higher taxes in order to fund a fire department with additional training standards isn't a realistic option.
Claiming that you would sue the fire department if they didn't tell you in advance that they weren't going interior is silly for several reasons. The fire department isn't responsible for the property owner's carelessness or negligence that started the fire in the first place. If you move there without doing your due diligence and finding a local ISO fire grade of 9 or 10 isn't the fire department's fault - it's yours. Not every fire is an interior fire, especially given the delayed alarms and long response times typical in the rural areas under discussion.
Attacking members of a community in another state for your perceptions of their lack of civic-mindedness as completely silly, too. Those who make that claim have no idea of why the departments in those areas struggle, or if the cause is actually related to that kind of claim. Many of those areas require that their best, most employable people drive long distances to maintain stable employment. Those people tend to be at work, commuting, or taking care of their family responsibilities. No one has the right to insist that they join a fire department for ANY reason, let alone for free.
No one has addressed the financial isues - being a FD in a state that requires annual NFPA 1582 firefighter physicals and that requires annual SCBA fit testing/flow testing, but the local FDs not having the funds to pay for the physicals or to purchase the fit testing/flow testing machine and computer. Insisting that those places require all of their firefighters to be NFPA 1001 certified is ludicrous - they simply can't afford it, and their taxpayers have typically voted over and over to NOT fund a higher level of service.
Those votes rarely rise to the level of anti-tax sentiment that you find in Obion County, TN, but you don't have to cut services to that level to find financial struggles, manpower struggles, and enough resources to keep the FD open.
Here's a new example of just how much VFDs can struggle over something like the loss of some basic funding.
Frankly, I have not heard a REALISTIC argument against exterior firefighters or exterior firefighter certification in the places where a higher standard is simply not possible. To advocate otherwise fits the definition of delusional - insisting on something that is not real.
As for those who claim that a firefighter that is not certified to FFI - or that doesn't do all of the things that the poster or his FD do - is not a firefighter is also ludicrous. The actual dictionary definition of "firefighter" isn't that narrow. Claiming that "any citizen" can tell us what a firefighter does iis also ludicrous - even a lot of firefighters can't tell you what all of the NFPA 1001 Pro Quals are. Claiming that citizens can do that is just silly.
And remember, we're NOT talking about somehow claiming that an Exterior Firefighter certification qualifies an individual anything like a NFPA 1001 Firefighter I (let alone FF II) certification does.
Being a NFPA 1001-certified firefighter is similar to playing major league baseball. Not everyone can hit big-league pitching, and not everyone can meet NFPA 1001 standards, nor can all fire departments meet the NFPA 1582 physical standards.
Baseball has plenty of minor leaguers that fill a void, but that will never play in the big leagues. Interior structural firefighting is no different. One thing applies to both - If it was easy, anyone could do it.
It's not easy, and we shouldn't insist that someone whose batters can't hit a curve ball should shut doown his minor league team just because they don't play in the majors.
I'm all ears for PRACTICAL, REALISTIC counterpoints to an Exterior Firefighter certification for the people/places that need them. So far, I haven't heard anything close.
-
-
There you go injecting the real world into the conversation again...
One of the things that some posters have not mentioned is the need of the community and how to balance it against the available resources. You did a good job of that. So did Shane Ray.
No one is calling for the places that can afford certified interior firefighters to reduce their standards.
What Chief Ray is discussing is a realistic certification for individuals that have NO chance of meeting those higher standards.
-
-
It is not accurate to use your personal availability as a standard to judge every other volunteer, and it is unrealistic to think that everyone is willing to take the same amount of time away from their family as you do.
Your last argument is complete speculation. Even if it were accurate, you don't get to either make those choices for everyone else or to sit in judgement of everyone who doesn't do it exactly like you do it.
-
-
Don, your entire reply was ridiculous.
Case in point - above, you made that silly statement about standing outside and yelling "Yoo Hoo..." and then you claim that I'm the one taking this to ridiculous extremes???There are all kinds of historical examples to counter every one of your itemized replies. I've lived some of them personally.
As I've told you before, you don't have the right to insist that everyone do things the same way that you do it.And...when you argue some completely subjective and unprovable claim that citizen perception should dictate what firefighters actually are, and do, that's beyond silly. At least the others who advocate for all firefighters to meet specified standards actually cited some standards.
I know a lot of citizens. They offer a lot of opinions about what firefighters actually do and what our qualifications actually are. Those opinions are wrong much more that they're right.
No other profession advocates for unqualified citizen opinion to set their profession's standards - doctors, nurses, police officers, EMS, barbers, plumbers, electricians...but you want an exception to that for firefighters??? Do you REALLY not see how silly that looks?
-
-
Volunteer Fire Companies fight for survival in PA
PA loses more than 600 VFDs and more than 200,000 volly firefighters in 30 years.
Volly firefighters blame job demands.
Loss of seven volly firefighters cuts VFD's staff almost in half
A few stories of VFDs closing due to problems with adequate numbers of firefighters - ANY firefighters.
http://www.firefightingnews.com/article.cfm?articleID=92029
http://www.firefightingnews.com/article.cfm?articleID=92029
http://www.centralpafire.com/forum/showthread.php?38277-Volunteer-F...
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/06/30/2417770/final-call.html
Note that this problem occurs all over the country...
There are many more stories like these - and when these VFDs close, due to lack of community funding, replacing them with a much more expensive career FD is generally not in the offing.
-
Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on
-
Just a snippet form Jack's post and I agree with this sentiment:
It's 2011 and yet too many people are more than content with fighting fires in ways hardly different from those of the 1800's (and even 1700's). I, as have others, raised the issue of why it is that fire fighting is the only essential service still provided by volunteers. Police protection is considered a necessity, as is highway maintenance yet neither are performed on a volunteer basis. Quite likely the qualifications to be a school bus driver are of a higher standard than are those to be a firefighter in so many places.
Providing training and certifications for people not willing to put themselves in danger (for whatever reason(s)) means that a department may be able to entice more people to join and they may have a spectacular showing on the fireground with all the bodies but it fails to address making the level of fire protection better. Mostly, it's a band-aid, stop-gap measure; at best a holding position trying to maintain whatever level of fire protection exists. But it doesn't address the problem: Getting willing, capable people trained to perform all duties on the fire ground.
Why instead, isn't the focus on getting state and federal legislation passed that give volunteer (interior) firefighters tax breaks in the form of tax abatements, not taxing per-call stipends as income, breaks on local taxes or fees or providing health care benefits (in those poorer communities that itself would be a godsend.) Provide local tax breaks and or federal tax breaks for employers that release employees to respond to calls. Provide (or provide better) retirement benefits for those vollies that have served their community for 20, 30 or 50 years.
Instead, the discussion is on certifying people who might just as well be CERT members, because in the end, it's less about providing adequate fire protection and more about making sure everyone gets the chance to 'serve', in whatever capacity they choose. Meanwhile we'll debate 'what is "is"', parse every little thing and require we all define our terms from the get go while blithely ignoring the real elephant in the room: the failure of communities to provide for an acceptable level of fire protection.
The fire service is changing and has been changing and what we are finding are those who can't keep up with the changes for any number of reasons. True, you see those communities reliant on vollys see those members travelling further for employment, you see a lack of kids staying in the community who would perhaps become members, you see people with two or more jobs and so forth, that do limit time committment to volunteer. Yet at the same time we still see much of the "good ol boys" systems at play and those who want to be a FF in name only but not do the work for it. We see communities who sat back and not accepted the changes in the fire service and thought that perhaps 1970's logic and operations still applied.
We know, as a service, that there are significant training and learning the science behind fire to better and more effectively do the job. This means that a further time committment and certifications will be asked for. We see standards and training requirements changing to reflect the job and the basic NFPA standards we have. Yet, instead of pushing for these standards to be met, we are seeing a push here to water these standards down and to cater to those depts that don't want to affect change.
Looking through several links, much of what I just wrote here is what the issues facing volunteer depts boils down to. This aspect of "hiding" behind communities so poor they can't afford to have FFs meeting the standards is a damn excuse, not a reason. There are plenty of small rural depts in very poor areas of this state and yet, the state minimum standards are that of a FF to be interior qualified. There is no watered down exterior only version, so I again ask, if this state can do it, why can't others? Yet at the same time, these poor depts still have people showing up and training to these minimum standards......why endorse watered down standards?
Another aspect that sticks out in one of the links are two volly depts dissolved and the area was merged into a larger district. Why can't these depts, or moreso communities, choosing to push for exterior only personnel be looking at such mergers? Wasn't too long ago we read about the career dept of Santa Ana (I believe) merging with Orange County Fire. Instead of pushing for weakened standards, why aren't we seeing a push for alternative options like mergers, districts, county wide systems and so forth? I can say a big reason means the abdication of one's fifedom....hence going back to the similar thread concerning the Canadian dept.
It sure doesn't make sense, as a fire service, to be pushing for better, safer PPE, better tools, better screenings, more knowledge, safer rigs, safer firegrounds, push for RIT and FF self survival training, so the "Everyone goes home"....yet at the same time be counter-productive and push for weakening standards.
-
Permalink Reply by Don Catenacci on
-
Ah Ben,
You are typical of people that love to keep repeating misinformation over and over until you expect people to take it as gospel. Well, I apologize for the embarassment I am about to bestow upon you. I am the one who said citizens know what a firefighter is, I said it clearly and concisely that if you ask a citizen, even a child, what a firefighter does they will say fight fires and save lives. It had nothing to do with FF1 or pro board qualifications or any other standards. You just posted that to try and divert from what I said and all it did was make you look foolish. You know as well as I do most firefighters can't tell you the standards for FF1 let alone pro board qualifications, so for you to take what I said and reach out that far to justify your opinion is straight forward ludicrous and you know it. So once again, you lose, and no points will be awarded.
Firefighter 1 SHOULD be the REQUIRED MINIMUM NATIONAL STANDARD. Anyone that can't pass Firefighter 1 has no business operating on a fire ground. I would much rather see the firefighters spending tme training to a higher level so they could offer a higher level of protection to residents of the community.
You may believe a lawsuit is pointless. I guess time will tell. I would bet the insurance companies in those areas love the fact that these FDs have no problem with burning buildings down left and right. The fire department may not be responsible for the how the fire started but they for damn sure are responsible for their lack of action upon arrival at the scene. Just as every fire is not an interior fire, the inverse is not every fire upon the FDs arrival is a loser that must burn to the ground.
Well after listening to both you and Bossier Bobby I believe 100% that people around here have a higher level of civic mindedness and community spirit. People around here travel for work too. In fact I drive 100 miles one way to work, and when I am teaching it is not unusual for me to drive 50 miles or more one way. We have FFs that are farmers and work 16 hour days during planting and harvesting, yet they manage to respond and make drills when they can. We have married guys with families, yet they manage to make calls and drills. The only answer for me is that we MUST care more for our communities because both of my FDs have full rosters, have a majority certified to FF1 and some to FF2, many have taken Driver Operator and other courses. You tell me what makes us so different because it seems obvious to me.
Okay don't do even an entry physical, don't do any medical background checks, let's just let Joe Newguy with a serious heart defect die dragging hose, or putting up ladders, or placing the PPV fan, or directing traffic, or whatever. Because one line of duty death must be cheaper than physicals...Right?
Someone that does not go interior is simply not a complete firefighter. You may want to call those people firefighters, I do not. Support, gophers, or any other name that makes it clear what they are is fine, Firefighter is not.
Let's talk about funding shall we. Here is my brutally blunt assessment of funding for fire departments. If the community doesn't value the local fire service enought to fund them adequately then close the doors and shut down the FD. Honestly what is the difference? A firetruck shows up, water is sprayed on the outside of the building as it burns down. No fire truck shows up the building burns down faster. If I volunteer my time the very least I should expect is safe, up to date PPE, and equipment that is in good repair and as modern as possible. I have no responsibility to put my life in harms way if the community feels no responsibility to fund the FD appropriately.
We will never agree on this, but I do ask one thing of you. If you are going to try and counter the things I say, at least actually counter what I said instead of making up some nonsensical bull shit and trying to pin that on me.
-
Permalink Reply by Patti Walz on
-
I so agree with you there. Either you are committed 100% to the task at hand (which is being a volunteer FF or a career FF) or you should just consider stepping back and being support only.
I put the required hours in and then some because quite frankly I want to make sure that I go home to my family at the end of a call and I want to make sure that my fellow FF's go home to their families as well.
-
-
Jason I work a 50-60 work week, plus I do my training with the FD, plus I tend to my household, and I do other volunteer work and I help to take care of my dad when my mom needs a breather. I choose to ignore the whiners, and do what I need to do to ensure my safety and keep my certification current.
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
