Dr. Svensson pointed out in the very beginning that his observation of the situation is as from the perspective of an outsider.  And while he has experience as a firefighter, he also has experience as an educator and a researcher.  So instead of approaching his discussion from a hysterical standpoint, he used a historical standpoint: that facts are facts and frankly, the methods of changing our culture isn’t working.  Sometimes some tough love is necessary, if we are sincere in wanting to bring everyone home in the morning.

Furthermore, at no point in his presentation (and I have listened to it and took copious notes) has he said that the Swedish fire service is better than any other fire service. In fact, he prefaces his presentation by saying that Sweden also has issues and they are not “better”.  But while data can always be manipulated to say what you want it to say, try looking at this objectively:

What gain do we get from having an increase in firefighter fatalities?  It’s not that we encourage firefighters to die, but the trend is there.  Just based on the data Dr. Svensson shared, firefighter fatalities in America have been slightly reduced, but for the most part, have remained steady.  Put that rate, however, in the context of decreasing civilian fatalities and decreasing fire responses, the ratio of firefighter fatalities per civilian fatality has INCREASED.  Likewise, the ratio of firefighter fatalities per fire has also increased.  Dr. Svensson even stated, this was AFTER pulling out the training and station deaths.  The inference is that even with a reduction in call volume, we continue to see a steady stream of firefighter fatalities.  And based on the language used by some of the commenters, the macho and egotistical feedback has been pretty predictable.  Why do we take so much pride in our injury and mortality rates?  Could it be that we are okay with it that way?   

One issue I really found interesting was his discussion of cardiovascular fitness relative to the job.  I have said on number of occasions that I am appalled by the continued reluctance of the fire service to embrace meaningful fitness standards.  At the same time, these issues are relative to the general population: fitness is decreasing, obesity is increasing, and subsequently, cardiovascular issues are also increasing.  In the meanwhile, the job of fighting fire has not changed, in fact, it has grown more challenging, and is compounded via station closures and staff reductions by having less personnel in many communities to now do the job that many were allocated to before.

Fitness requirements support a simple fact: we need to have an acceptable standard of fitness, therefore we need to have more comprehensive medical screening.  The problem is, as Dr. Svensson observed, in the United States, we evaluate ability, not fitness.  This is directly a result of equal opportunity mandates but has an undesired effect.  In an effort to minimize discrimination, we have embraced ability testing to determine whether a person can do the job.  We say, “If you can do the job, you should be allowed to” because we are trying to be more inclusive.  But the tell-tale issue for whether or not a person is going to stroke out on us or have an MI isn't whether they can or can not pull a ceiling or drag a dummy, it is much more insidious than that.  Cardiovascular issues that are killing firefighters aren’t readily apparent.  And I know firefighters that can whip through an abilities test without too much going on, but it doesn't require a physician to take one look at them and say, this guy's a candidate for the Big One.

But honestly, I could go point for point about the presentation and I'm not.  At least not with you all.

I intend to have my personnel listen to the presentation and view the PowerPoints included.  I also intend to ask them to challenge themselves and ask, "Is he right?  Is he wrong?"  And I'm going to trust that my people are going to listen to what is going on and look past the harshness of the message and evaluate it like grown-ups.  There is importance of having knowledge of the past in order to understand the present.  And we have quite a few people who are okay with romanticizing the concept that it is our duty to die in the line of duty for no apparent reason.  It is okay to be maimed for life for no apparent reason. It is okay to shovel a company into a burning building with deteriorating conditions because if we don't, we are pussies.

Well, it is okay only because the “leaders” in our business hype it as the standard as to what should be.  Their mentality is okay for a future of knuckle-draggers, but what if we gave you a finite number of resources and told you that if you screw them up, you don’t get more, so you’d take better care of them?  Or even better, if you are reckless with those resources, you have to pay for them?  Well, how much longer do you think it is going to be before the lawyers realize that incident commanders sending their personnel into a situation with no control, no coordination, or no meaningful mission (other than "searching" an untenable building) are in fact, killing personnel, and liable for wrongful death restitution?  It won't be long, because it is already happening.

The tradition of the fire service I had passed to me from my father, who got it from his father, and got it from his as well has been established that we must do whatever it takes to save lives.  But there is a profound disconnect: Have we in fact created these expectations ourselves?  Maybe this is where we ask the public: What is it you want from us?  If you read any of the civilian comments in these communities where they are struggling with funds, there is a certain amount of "screw the firefighters" being said and not a whole hell of a lot of support.  Perhaps we need to really educate the public and seriously ask them: "If you are expecting us to sacrifice our lives to get you out, there needs to be some relational support.  Otherwise, f*&# off."

If we keep repeating traditions that don’t make sense and cause us unwarranted pain, what does that make us?  Stupid?  I think that's what Dr. Svensson said that some of you all are upset about.  If you had a son who was pledging a fraternity, and the traditional hazing was to get painfully burned over a percentage of his body because hey, that's the tradition, I'd bet you'd tell him he's nuts.  The only tradition I am buying into is that as a firefighter, I am willing to take a risk to save someone if I have the possibility of saving someone.  But we aren't even doing that.  We won't even buckle our seatbelts, and where is the tradition in that?

The most telling part of the presentation came in the discussion on survival training.  While I don't necessarily agree with some of the issues, the real focus was this: Right now we focus on how to get out of problems.  Maybe we need to be re-focusing on how to stay out of trouble to begin with.

They don’t think about safety because it is simply a part of what they do.  It is not a thought, it is ingrained in their culture.  It's not standing outside a house quivering because we are too scared to fight the fire.  It is taking resources, defining the problem, and using the resources wisely and to the best effect to create a solution.  We are letting our egos get in the way of facts. Instead of getting cranked up about what was said, listen to what he is saying. There are other approaches that make sense, yet we continue to ignore them.

I'm not even going to suggest that we should have a safer work environment.  I'm just going to say that instead of pointing at the Swedish guy and being offended at what he said, perhaps we should listen, take what we can from the discussion, and learn.  He used that language for a reason: to make a point.  He isn't over in Sweden right now rubbing his hands gleefully because he has offended the Americans.  He made it clear that as an outsider looking in, he sees a problem and wants us to be aware of it.  However, he is also concerned that we are ignoring the issues based on our emotional reaction to the problem, rather than the rational explanation of how to solve it.  I don't like being called stupid either, but as I have been told before, if the shoe fits, wear it.

Share on Facebook

Hilton Head Island Truck 6 working in Palmetto Dunes.

Since I was the lifer truckie captain and one of only three in the department who had even sat behind the wheel of a TDA before (I’m pretty sure that’s the only reason I got the job), I got to shop, spec, purchase, equip, and train the company in our new concept. We brought in an expert who was likewise, a lifer truckie, and learned to drive the TDA the old fashioned way (drive it around the parking lot for a while).

My observation was such that, as an educator, there was probably a more effective method of developing drivers for this specialized piece of machinery. When we were doing research on writing a course on driving tillers, I found a shocking lack of information (at that time) on them and ultimately, a few colleagues and I developed the coursework from which we certify our personnel to drive. This, to satisfy the naysayers, also involved INTENSIVE driving of the vehicle: beachfront parking lots during summer, night driving, driving in the rain, and lots and lots of situational stuff. Needless to say, when we were done, that first round of drivers was pretty proficient.

Lately we have been finding that there is a desire for some to want to reduce the requirements for TDA chauffeurs and tiller operators and I expressed my opinion that this was not the way to go. Our organization does all kinds of stuff in our community in conjunction with our customer service outlook, as well as respond on emergencies. Time is very valuable, but I also know of a long and distinguished history of TDA mishaps that each time point to a missed element of discipline and training. There are basic laws of physics that really come into play with a tractor-drawn aerial that don’t in your basic straight frame aerial, and I have been less than tolerant of relief drivers who don’t understand that.

So you can imagine my interest when I found out about this video collaboration between the Raleigh and Seattle Fire Departments as can be seen here:Raleigh and Seattle Collaborative Training Video I have been watching to see what lessons we might get out of the Raleigh TDA rollover and it seems as if we will have a very valuable tool for educating not only TDA drivers, but all firefighters as well.

But while this could evolve into an entire lesson on driving tillered apparatus, the discussion I want to actually have is that there is a wealth of information out there that you all have the opportunity to obtain. We find too often that people are unwilling to accept the observations and experiences of others and instead “reinvent the wheel” regularly, wasting time and money in the process. But these two departments saw needs and worked together to produce a valuable teaching tool.

There is no shame in finding out what mistakes (or positively, what efforts) have been previously made in our business and asking questions about he good, the bad, and the ugly. This is called research. We ask questions to determine an answer to a problem and rely on science and experience to make decisions. The problem is, it requires effort and it requires being candid about the issues. But no progress gets made without learning about what went right and what went wrong.

Check out the video and tell me what you think. I have already viewed it a number of times and take away something new each time. We are fortunate (and thankful) that no one was killed in this event. And it goes without saying, I thank both departments for their sincere effort in making the job safer. But the lessons learned are no good to anyone if we keep them locked up in a closet. Share the knowledge, collaborate, and learn from one another.

Note: I meant to add this link as well and failed to do it: The Fire Engineering article that spurred my interest. I like to give credit where credit is due.

Share on Facebook

Sometimes we have to make decisions in a fog. But not always. Take the time to see the whole picture.

The brotherhood of fire and rescue is but a microcosm of the greater part of society.  In turn, a visit to any un-moderated site will reveal that the general public isn’t any better about being civil, so we probably shouldn’t put a whole lot of worry into the declining civility among people who profess to be part of a brotherhood.  It’s just become a norm of our victim society that it’s okay to be self-righteous and it’s okay to go after anyone who doesn’t think like us.

You would think a group of people who profess brotherhood as a redeeming value would be a little slower to throw one of their brothers under the bus when something goes wrong, but as I mentioned in the Tuscon post, that is obviously not the case.  In the event that an individual within our ranks does something completely against the grain of our collective morals, like set fires or engage in child pornography, I am entirely understanding about the emotion involved in that rage.  It is proportionate to the offense.  But since I’m sure you all have heard of cases where the other side of the story ends up being a compelling explanation, we need to take care and exercise caution about expressing our condemnation, because, as we command officers tend to say, the truth actually lies somewhere between Points A and B.

I’m not a hypocrite by any means; I am right there with you.  I just happen to also take a little bit of time to rein in my passions a little.  If you were standing next to me at the moment I got the news of a “firefighter declining to respond to an incident”, I’m sure you’d have seen another side of me.  However, the luxury of the internet is not only real-time event coverage, but the ability to pause before re-communicating your opinion, especially since unless you were there, it is your opinion and based on conjecture, not on tangible evidence.  You might not be able to take back what you just blurted out of your mouth, but you can certainly check yourself before clicking the radio button.  Very few of the stories I hear are actual prima facie cases.  Since these stories unfold so quickly, we often find that there is more to the story that doesn’t get revealed due to the emotions choking the lines of communication.

It brings up the topic of this page, however, since some of the e-mail (I typed in “e-mal” in my draft – was that a slip?) doesn’t seem to agree with me and of course, there are those who can hide behind their pseudonyms in the comments.  While I am sure the act of someone failing to go to an emergency challenged our beliefs in what was good and right about our profession, on lesser occasions, the anger and vitriol for say, someone not wearing their gloves in a picture, is a little over the top.  And I say “a little” in my most sarcastic tone of voice.  Some of the comments from the peanut gallery are also those who, given their profiles, probably haven’t seen too many incidents more challenging than a dumpster fire, and even then, they weren’t even in charge of that.

Individuals these days, in this moment of instantness (you like that?), are quick to react instead of reflect.  They simply don’t have the patience for the whole story.  They want their news, their blogs, their everything instantly and then they act on that information accordingly.  In a time-compressed environment, there is only a moment to digest what we have heard and then to regurgitate it so that we can be the first to make a comment.  The first to comment must be the best informed, right?  The self-appointed subject matter expert?  The one on the inside, right?

For me, I see it in the type of readership I get here at FHZ.  The comments are usually thoughtful and agreeable.  I post every comment, pro or con, so long as it isn’t spam.  And although I may not agree with you, I consider your perspective on the issues as valuable and enlightening.  But I get the impression that the few individuals who have seen fit to be trolls (with one notable exception) haven’t read farther than the first paragraph anyway.  Anything over 140 characters for a lot of these individuals is a lot of wasted time reading.

We don’t do controversy here on this blog.  We are interested in a bigger picture.  If it is an event that is truly worth discussing and there are alternate points of view, we engage in another time-wasting effort: dialogue.  We ask questions.  We pose thoughts.  We engage in critical examination.  We remain open-minded. It’s a little too much for some people, I am aware, but it keeps the riff-raff out.

The readers of this blog generally have proven to be those who I could sit down and have a beer with and talk about something other than the fire service, or have a conversation about the fire service in say, the context of a retail business, or a day care, or the University of Life.  They can see things for more than what is printed on the face.  They possess deeply considered ideas or are able to see that there are advantages to listening to the opposition.  The readers of this blog are those who I consider to be the hope for emergency services to evolve out of the tar pit of whackerdom and rise to the level of professionalism.

If you know of someone who operates on a different playing field than the norm, send them here and ask them to say their piece so we know they are here.  But most importantly, we are looking for readers (and commenters) who have ideas to share and innovative ways of looking at things.  Just because the issue appears to be obvious, it isn’t often the case.  We want to talk with REAL leaders, those of you who consider enlightened leadership to be a desired trait, not a hurdle to our position.  We need engagement, not brick walls. Haters and groupthinkers need not apply.

Share on Facebook

I’ve been really busy getting the home ready for the holidays. In the meanwhile, though, here’s an update on where and when I’ll be in your part of the world:

February 19-20 – Command for Company Officers, Ballardsville FD, Crestwood, KY (near Louisville)

March 8-9 – Command for Company Officers, Canyon Lake, TX

March 10-11 – Incident Safety Officer, Canyon Lake, TX

March 26 (one day class) – Command 101, Johnson City, NY (near Binghamton)

I expect to continue working with Ron Richards and Task Force 1 to present some really dynamic programs.  There are also some real quality courses being presented that I am not teaching, and you can see those class offerings in this link.  and I even have one in the works that I’ll hopefully be offering beginning in late Spring 2011.  If you are interested in having me come teach or speak at your event, I’m happy to work with you, or point you toward Ron who can help set up some really nice programs with multiple instructors, if that’s what you are looking for.

I hope to have a nice post here in a few days when things settle down but it looks as if everyone else seems to be carrying the load right now just fine.  Until then, thanks again for reading and I hope you are having a great holiday season.

Share on Facebook

I’m not advocating continual monitoring of the “pre-hospital dead”, although I would hope that this is a good case for the medically affiliated that we need to insure pulslessness and apnea, and confirm asystole in three leads (and print it).  That is called triangulating your facts and documenting them in the hopes things don’t change later (like the person is actually alive).

No, what I want to discuss is that in all kinds of places where we need to make a decision, even though something appears to be true right now, it might not be in a few minutes, a few hours, or a few days.  Conditions change and regardless of the origin of the facts you hold dear, they might not always be accurate facts.  The response to this ever-changing environment isn’t to throw up your hands in frustration (like my children and firefighters seem to do sometimes), but to re-evaluate your situation and to flex with the new conditions.  There’s a quote attributed to Whitey Ford I heard years ago (and of course, I can’t find my source now) and I have to paraphrase it because I don’t remember it exactly: “Don’t make up your mind about something until the moment you absolutely have to; it may be that by the time for coming to a conclusion occurs, the conditions may have changed.”

People who worked with me closely before I made Chief probably recall my frustration with schedule changes, personnel changes, equipment and apparatus changes that occurred over the course of a shift, often with no warning.  Now as a Chief Officer, I have a different perspective on the situation because I now have to step back and look at “the whole forest”.  I now understand how and why some of those “course changes” have come about and I also see why frustration with those changes is counterproductive.

As firefighters, we deal with changing conditions on scene without too much drama.  We know Murphy is a constant companion and if anything, we are surprised if everything goes RIGHT on a scene.  No incident is “textbook”.  But because we are good at our jobs, we flex with the new situation, understand it, and make whatever we have work.  Why we can’t do that in our daily operations, I guess, is my question.

If there’s anything I know about myself, it’s that I know I am not a patient man.  In fact, I’m probably one of the least patient people I know.  I also know I don’t have a lot of tolerance for less-than-excellent performance.  But part of maturing and growing involves experience, and experience shows us that there are many changing elements that occur over the course of a day, and a life, and reacting to them rather than soaking them in and understanding them (and then solving the problem) isn’t productive.  In fact, it is stressful and irritating to those who we have to live with.

I have a lot of personal growth and understanding to continue working toward and I wish some of this stuff would have been shared with me when I was a firefighter and a young officer, but it wasn’t.  I now have that benefit of experience, though, and it is my responsibility to share it with you all.  Take the time to understand the situation and instead of criticizing, find benefit in the lessons we learn and resolve not to let mistakes happen again, or at least in the environment we personally control.

Get facts before making critical decisions and don’t dwell on them too long, because in many cases, the facts will change before you even get a chance to decide on them.  Take decisive action when necessary, and when not, take considered action, and always, always, continue to re-evaluate the situation. By understanding your surroundings, you will be safer and your life richer for it.

Share on Facebook