Skip to content


How Hot Does A Barrel Fire Have To Get For Proper Helmet Crustiness?

12 comments

The Legend.

I have been very busy.  So in a recent Firehouse Zen post on our Facebook page, I asked what subjects you all might like to read about on FHZ. One popular request was from alert reader Pete, asking “How hot does a barrel fire have to get to make your helmet look really crusty?”

Well, Pete, in answer to your question, I’m not quite sure, having never done that myself before, but I’m sure there’s someone out there who could answer that question for us. But the subject begs another question like “How crusty does someone have to look to you before you feel like they know what they are talking about?” I have found, for example, in the individual with a dozen patches on his or her coat, an inverse relationship between the “advertising” and how much I trust their “experience” on the scene. When I was young, I had the patches. Fortunately, I had some real jakes pull me aside and explain just how squirrely that looked.

If you are a young firefighter (or an old one looking for some real guidance) truly looking for a mentor, instead of looking for who has the nastiest looking gear or the most patches, maybe you should just talk with some of the informal leaders of the group and find out who THEY really respect. Watch their faces when Chief So-and-So speaks: if even these guys are listening and soaking in what is said, then you can trust that they believe that person is a leader. If they look like they’re not paying any attention, chances are the individual may have a title, and may even have the education, but maybe not the street cred to back it up. That kind of observation is much better at judging who’s “been there” than looking at the amount of garbage melted on their lid.

Note the helmet in the picture.  While some of you may understand that the helmet is upside down (to better protect the ratchet system), some of you more insightful ones might wonder why I have an upside-down helmet as my featured photo/logo.  Well, it’s because the useful part of the helmet isn’t the shell, the truly useful part is the space in which you put your head. So while some of our brothers are obsessing over the proper level of carbon on the hard part up there, what would be a better thing to concentrate on is what is filling the hole, when it comes to deciding who is the best person to look up to.

While taking really good care of your protective ensemble is important, there’s nothing wrong with a little smokiness to show you have been there. But the truth of the matter is that even though someone may LOOK the part, it’s what is under all that crust that really counts. So skip the barrel burnishing and earn your look the old fashioned way; safely but aggressively, taking reasonable risk to save lives, taking a little risk to save property, and none at all for the already lost. Get in there and get it, but don’t be stupid in the process.

Roto-Ray and Federal Q’s On POV?

8 comments

It's my world and you all are just living in it.

It’s a little bit of stand-up, but a good question. When I wrote the other day about the critiquing and counter-critiquing going on with a certain news article, I thought what I said might hit a little bit of a nerve, or at least people would peek in to see what was going on. Nada. Virtually no reaction.

However, when I wrote about the Roto-Ray a few weeks ago, I got more hits than I have ever had in my history of blogging. I’m thinking by mentioning the Roto-Ray, the Federal Q, and POVs in one title, I’m going to be the high flyer of the internet.  Maybe I should invoke Lindsey Lohan’s name and I’d be a blogging God.

It is said that a good writer writes to his audience. While I consider my audience to primarily consist of enlightened fire officers, I’m beginning to realize that I am NOT writing to the people who need it most: young, impressionable firefighters who need career guidance toward a future officer (and leadership) position. I’m pretty sure, given most of the comments and all, that the people that are reading my blog already get it. I’m preaching to the proverbial choir.

Unfortunately, the things I find interesting as a 46 year old are not what interests a 22 year old, it seems.  Or anyone in society these days, either, I guess.  I mean, I was doing a hold-down-the-button scan of TV the other day and did a drive-by of the Joy Behar Show.  On it, the discussion was regarding the trashy/slutty minor daughter of a reality TV star who is posing in a bikini and whether it is wrong or not.  Is it wrong?  OF COURSE it is wrong to exploit your daughter for ratings!  What kind of morons are you people anyway?  What’s worse is that I’d bet the market share for that show was through the roof.  If this isn’t evidence that our society is going to hell in a handbasket, I don’t know what is.  And the demographic these shows are targeting is pretty obvious when the commercials are all for bail bonds, accident lawyers and payday loan sharks.

It’s no wonder a flight attendant goes nuts and tells everyone to f*&% off, grabs some brew and jumps out the emergency exit.  It’s like a majority of people just don’t get it anymore.  People are rude to total strangers and think it’s okay.  They hide behind their cute internet pseudonyms and say hateful things, make unfounded accusations, and put it out there as genuine fact.  We have politicians actually CAMPAIGNING on hate platforms as they scare the populace into thinking the end is near.  It’s no wonder everyone is stressed out, angry, abusive, and hateful; their “leaders” are setting the prime example!

I plan to continue blogging on substantial matters and hope I can persuade others to check out Firehouse Zen and even more so, to share it.  Even if you don’t share the link, share what you learned.  There’s a lot to be said for rational, intelligent discussion about differing points of view and learning in the process.  It reminds me of an interview I was listening to on NPR the other day with Governor Mike Huckabee.  When asked whether he was a conservative or a moderate, he insisted he was a conservative.  In fact, he said, he had very strong convictions about almost everything.  The difference, however, was that he was willing to listen to alternative points of view and appreciate their perspective, if at all, to help sharpen his own argument.  While I’m not hawking for Governor Huckabee, how refreshing and unusual it would be if our politicians stopped beating their war drums and listened a little while to other views and to consider them just as logically as they would consider their own stances?

Whether you read my blog regularly or not, I’m hoping you do, but thankfully, my children’s college education doesn’t rely on it.  But I would hope that you would at least share what you learn here and come back and read often, as well as to provide me with some insight as to how this information impacts you as well.  What would be greater would be if some of us actually live it.

A Little Safety Parable

2 comments
You too could be roadkill. Photo courtesy of aanimalcontrol.com

You too could be roadkill. Photo courtesy of aanimalcontrol.com

So I’m walking from our house to the beach with my three daughters.  There’s a road we have to cross in between here and there that’s pretty busy.  On occasion tourists come flying around the curve, not realizing that there’s an area where you have to cross (although it’s not a marked crosswalk).  While no one has been hit at that spot in the 29 years I have been living on the Island (that I know of), I know it’s a bad section that you can’t see around.  It occurred to me today when I was making that crossing that it’s a lot like the risk we endure as firefighters.

I had the opportunity this weekend to read a recent article on Stat911, that seems to have created some serious wailing and gnashing of the teeth between people who call themselves brothers.  Honestly, it was pretty sad to me as I read these comments.  I admit, it is a little bothersome when a video comes out and a number of people point out the obvious mistakes made, but as I mentioned in an earlier article here on FHZ, we should be looking at things that go wrong and learning, and resolving to keep from repeating events that maim and kill our brethren.

Conversely, instead of saying how stupid some of these people are, perhaps we should offer some constructive criticism and offer suggestions on methods that would help solve the problems, rather than lowering the bar into that angry pit of accusatory language.  And when we generalize about whole departments or organizations based on a squirrely few, we aren’t doing anything other than trying to piss one another off.  I agree 100% that some of the repeated actions (or inactions) taken by other firefighters that endanger themselves and their their colleagues are a little infuriating (like refusing to wear a seat belt), but like the point I have also made over and over again, people aren’t going to learn when you rub their nose in it, they will learn when they see the logic in changing.

But back to my story.  There is, of course, risk in crossing the street, but we accept that risk when we go for a walk, don’t we?  As a pedestrian, we take a calculated risk every time we go out in the road, but it doesn’t stop us from doing it.  In fact, walking in the middle of a busy street is exhilarating.  There’s a certain adrenaline rush when you run out in front of moving cars.

As a responsible father, however, I’d advise against running in front of a moving car.  I’m sure I’d get in a little trouble with my wife, the law, and probably get a few death threats if I just let my children run out in front of cars.  If my four-year-old got struck by a car there, after having  just let her run out there, knowing the risks involved, wouldn’t that make me a little bit liable?  But given the logic espoused by a few of my more enlightened colleagues, I suppose I am overreacting when I tell my girls it’s a wise idea to look both ways at that intersection.  After all, no one has ever been struck or killed here.  If I insisted on having the street marked with lines and a sign, I might be construed as overreacting if you ask some of these folks.

I eat risk for lunch.  I eagerly chose to pursue a fire service career because it was exciting.  Even more so, I focused my whole career to concentrate on special operations.  I’m the Deputy Director of a US&R Task Force.  I used to teach high-line rope rescue, and hold internationally recognized instructor certifications in SCUBA and water rescue.  I hold NPQ and IFSAC certifications as a HAZMAT Technician.  Two of my favorite hobbies are mountain biking and skiing.  I’m not in the slightest bit worried about taking risks.

But there is a serious difference between taking stupid risks and calculated risks.  Firefighting isn’t Jackass.  We have a serious job to do that involves serving the public, and using our personnel as cannon fodder doesn’t do the job.  If you take a risk and die trying to save a life in our job, I’ll be the first one to sing your praises.  If you take a risk and die trying to save a burning trash pile, I’m sorry, I’m not impressed.  If you get burned because you failed to use the safety equipment we provide you, I guess my first question will be, why wasn’t it used?

I think some of the plastic vests and hard-hats are a little much sometimes, but I can understand the effort to make ourselves more visible and to avoid having something clonk us on the head.  But as a leader and chief officer, I also know what can go wrong, what can go seriously, seriously wrong, and to ignore it because I’ve never seen it first hand would be folly.  And to just turn my back on personnel who fail to use good safety practices, knowing what the outcome could be, would be negligent.

Quit the name calling and sand throwing and act like grown-ups.  You can argue that it’s just “ragging”, but it’s not.  The language some of you all out there are using is just plain wrong and malicious.  And it certainly doesn’t represent your side of the argument professionally at all.  I can give people crap all day long with the best of them, but that’s not what some of you are engaging in.  What you are engaging in is simply destructive behavior, and it’s one of the reasons why our profession isn’t always taken very seriously. The only people we are hurting here is ourselves.

Stuck In The Past

5 comments

The definition of something “world-class” years ago led me to consider what we mean in the fire service when we say “world-class” in the same breath as “progressive” and “professional”.  The use of these terms is truly in the eye of the beholder.  Given the evidence that continues to mount in the Charleston incident, many people in that community are struggling through the nightmare of believing their fire department was the definition of excellence only to find that the leadership mentality was still operating in the past.

I guess its all in how you frame your reference as to what is acceptable versus what is “excellent”.  It certainly sounds as if that culture is evolving into a better place with Chief Carr at the helm.  But across the entire fire service, while exposed to so many ideas, we continue visit the same problems within our own organizations that other organizations have been experiencing for years.

Professionalism or progressiveness isn’t defined by experiencing the same problems over and over again. Being effective doesn’t include repeating mistakes that others have made, got the t-shirt for, and moved on from. If learning isn’t occurring from all of the rhetoric, then what use is it?  When your organization is experiencing such dysfunction that it is obvious even to the newest recruit, then how clueless are you to insist that everything is coming up roses?

The sad part is that this lesson has to come on the backs of dedicated firefighters and the deaths of our brothers.  While it appears our friends in Charleston are moving forward, we continue to read story after story around the rest of the nation of lessons that continue to be learned the hard way.  After all, how many unbelted firefighter LODDs need we read about before deciding once and for all that using our seatbelt is a smart idea?

Instead of reading the news and saying, “Wow, that’s incredible”, perhaps we should be saying, “Wow, how do I make sure that doesn’t happen here?”  Be an agent of productive and progressive change.  Set the positive example and show others what the real definition of progressive and professional is and be a real leader.

The Roto-Ray: Beauty or Beast?

6 comments

The Roto-RayAhhhh, the Roto-Ray.  For those of us who grew up in or around East Coast fire companies as children, they are something we cherish dearly, a unique spinning tornado of light on the front of a shiny engine or truck.  The department I work for, in a reach toward tradition and including a touch of modern technology, specified LED Roto-Rays on the fronts of our new fleet of engines and our future tractor-drawn aerial (minor refurb of Truck 7′s  trailer with a new prime mover).

When I posted some pictures of our new quints on Facebook the other day, I was surprised to hear that some people aren’t fans of this fancy warning light.  In response, I searched for similar feelings and found that there are, in fact, quite a few who don’t like them, and quite a few who do.  So I guess, Roto-Rays are the Philadelphia Flyers of warning devices: You either love them or you hate them.

A write-up I found on them came from the Fenton Fire Apparatus website, from which I have paraphrased:

Roto-Ray Warning Lights have been used on fire and rescue apparatus for over 65 years.  Roto-Rays are three sealed beam lights rotating @ 200 RPM in a horizontal plane that still commands attention in today’s traffic. The Roto-Ray Model 200 has three red sealed beam lights; the Roto-Ray Model 200W, available where permitted by state law, has one white and two red sealed beam lights.

Both models draw @ 10 amperes at 12.8 volts D.C. current [Since I'm not a technical guy, I don't know if this is for the new LED version or not]. Both models are available in four different mounting applications. Roto-Rays have an all spur gear drive train with all-driven components using ball bearings. The lamp spider is made of aluminum or polished chrome. All housings are made of 16 gauge steel.  All Roto-Rays except the hidden mount are available in an all-chrome version. Roto-Ray Warning lights have been tested by an independent testing laboratory for compliance with applicable California and Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) standards.

I also found the patent information on the Roto-Ray, which was issued in 1930 to Edward Rumsey.  So that’s a little about them.  Anecdotally, I think they work great.  A few weeks ago I was driving down the road in daylight hours and I caught in my rear-view mirror this visible circle of red and white behind me.  It was our Engine 6, pulling out onto the main drag about 3/4 of a mile behind me.  Between the reflective chevron striping of the front bumper and the Roto-Ray, it was pretty visible.  Scientifically, I have no proof (sounds like an Executive Fire Officer research paper to me).

I have found a few threads where these devices have been debated like at NassauFDRant and of course, at the ol’ Firehouse Forums.  There are also dozens of pictures and videos of them online, like this beautiful Hyattsville rig.

So what say you?  What’s the controversy, other than cost (which seems like some of the issue)?  Or tell us your special Roto-Ray story.  In the meanwhile, I’ll do some deep Internet searching to see if I can find more history (like where the first one was used) and I’ll post it if I find it.  Stay safe and thanks for reading.

[Editor's Note: I have also added a picture of the front of one of our rigs so you can see it; I'll find the night shot at some point]

Two HHIFR engines with Roto-Rays and chevrons.

Where Were You That Night?

12 comments

I probably can’t tell you anything about the Charleston incident that you don’t already know, except the incident from my personal perspective, and I have never shared that with anyone except my family and some close friends until today.  And despite the statements bashed around in the days afterward about why things were the way they were prior to that night, there’s no amount of warning, yelling, or cajoling that could have happened before that day or after that day to really change things, because honestly, you can’t change someone who won’t listen.

As was quoted by at least one of my friends from the CFD prior to that night: “We’re the FDNY of the South.”  When your fire department has a Class 1 ISO rating and homes aren’t burning into the dirt on a daily basis, the public is just fine with whatever it is you are doing.  Whether your organization is using the most modern equipment and techniques, or whether they are utilizing tactics thrown away in the 70′s, there are much more important things on the public radar.  Things like whether or not the garbage will get picked up, or who the next contestant is on The Bachelor, or which rehab facility Lindsay Lohan is skipping out of.  The entire community of Charleston and the fire department itself, prior to that day, was fine and happy with the status quo.  Just like any disaster, it isn’t until people die that questions begin to be asked.

This isn’t an indictment of the department, its culture, or anyone in particular.  All I know is what I know and the things that were said before, on and after that night.  A big reason why I have never said anything really about it until now is that I wasn’t asked (I was this time).  But nothing I care to say would be intended to disparage the reputations or the character of the brave members of the CFD.  I simply believe that the charismatic style of their leader at the time led them down a primrose path.  He thought he was doing the right thing, everyone else there thought he was doing the right thing, and nothing seemed like it could go wrong, until it did.  Catastrophically.

I wasn’t at the incident in the beginning and frankly, in retrospect, there were many disasters converging at that exact location that evening.  It was inevitable that something bad would happen, given some of what we knew before, and of course, given what we know now.  I had to shake my head in wonder when I saw that one poster on a blog page wanted to know, “Where are all the chiefs in SC?” on the issue.  ”Why wouldn’t they do something before this disaster?”  Well, let me tell you a little bit about fire departments in the United States: Unless the public or their elected officials detect a problem, there is never going to be any change, no matter WHAT the chiefs in the neighboring communities or the state have to say about it. After the disaster, it is true, the collective anger and frustration not only from within, but from the overall fire service community was instrumental in causing a change, but really, it took the deaths of nine brave souls to make that change manifest.

All we can do now is honor the lives of those who go before us, pray for the families and help them deal with this tragedy, and hope we all learn from the events that evening.  Senseless doesn’t begin to describe the loss suffered by the principals of this story, and although I chalk up a great deal of what happened to hubris and over-confidence by the Fire Chief, and by default, the organizational culture, I don’t take anything away from the extremely fine and dedicated brothers who serve the community of Charleston, SC.  I can only pray that we don’t experience something like this again anywhere else on the globe.  In my heart, however, I know there are departments out there who learned nothing from this, therefore, we are only a heartbeat away from repeating these mistakes again.

I was lying on the couch in my living room when I got the first call.  The power was out at our house, so I was just working on my laptop, having just put the children to bed.  At the time, I was the Acting Director of the South Carolina US&R Task Force and awaiting our hiring a full-time Director to take my place in Columbia.  One of my Task Force Leaders rang my cell phone and asked if I had been briefed on what was going on in Charleston.  He said that there were several firefighters unaccounted for in a fire at the Sofa Superstore.

I am intimately familiar with Charleston.  I did the majority of my paramedic clinical time there in the 80′s and fell in love with the place.  My mother-in-law grew up in Charleston and we would go up there to visit her family, especially her well-connected sister and brother-in-law, often.   And when our second daughter, Caroline, was born, she developed complications resulting in a helo ride to the Medical University and a subsequent six-week stay in the neonatal ICU.  In response, my wife and I literally moved to Charleston and lived at a friend’s second home at King and Broad for the entire time.  We go back often and have developed many close friendships there.

I am also friends with a number of Charleston’s firefighters, although I never had the honor of meeting any of our brothers who passed that evening.  But at the time, no one really seemed to know who was involved, much less who was missing, so for all I knew, it could have been any one of the people I had grown to know over the years of interacting with the department.  And yes, I knew Rusty and many of the command staff who were there that evening, much as a result of my capacity with the Task Force and the ultimate oversight of their regional response team’s interaction with the State US&R Plan.

There’s really not much you can say when you get one of those calls.  I’ve been called for others like it before and several hours later find that the news was completely distorted from the original message.  You know, everyone ends up accounted for, or there was a mistake in transmission, or something like that.  And although I had every reason to believe what I was being told was true (this TFL has always been a good friend and dependable officer), I have to admit I was a little skeptical.  I told him to call me if he had any other information, and I’d call the State Fire Marshal, John Reich, who as the ESF-9 coordinator for the state, I technically reported to, and give him a heads-up.

When the power came back on a little while later, I clicked over to the Charleston news station and saw the coverage, and was immediately swayed by what was going on: an active search and rescue incident looking for multiple companies of missing firefighters.  Needless to say, things began to move pretty quickly, and it was really pretty much a blur after that.  Multiple phone calls between multiple state officers and the next thing was, the State Fire Marshal was asking us to represent the state at the incident and to offer whatever assistance was needed.

I can tell you this, given any State agency’s relationship with local entities, we were instantly cognizant that what we DIDN’T want was one of our incident support teams (IST) rolling in there and announcing we were there to take over, because we weren’t.  Not only would that be extremely callous and insensitive to the situation, we have no statutory authority to do so, short of a gubanatorial declaration of disaster (and that wasn’t coming).  So this was going to be a mission of extreme delicacy and an offer of assistance from the State Fire Marshal’s Office, and as such, I felt like it would be best if I went personally, even though we had an IST sitting across the river in Mt. Pleasant.

I called up Ed Boring and Jason Walters, who at the time were both Task Force command officers and work with me at Hilton Head Island, and told them I was heading up to Charleston on direction from John Reich.  Ed and Jason continue to work with me and over the years have become two of my closest friends not just because of our shared interests, but also because we served together at Katrina.  Nothing like a disaster and riding around in a dark-colored Suburban to create a bonding experience.

On our arrival, we were each stupified by the absolute desolation on the scene.  We got there before midnight, and at that point it was still not clear how many souls had been lost.  Everyone was in shock, or so it seemed.  The fire was still burning in places, but everyone seemed to be moving like their feet were in concrete.  Not in a slow, poorly organized way, but in a stunned, defeated, bewildered way.  It was definitely the scene of an enormous and horrendous event.

We delicately announced our need to report to the command post so we could speak to the incident commander, and kept getting pointed in a direction until we were finally pointed toward an empty pop-up tent with a single fold-up chair in the middle of the parking lot.  No one was there.  So we began to again poke around a little bit more, until we found Battalion Chief Robbie O’Donald, over by the ladder truck, which was still in the air.  Robbie, who was a member of SC-TF1 and also a member of the Charleston command staff, had very obvious burns across his hands and arms, but was standing at the front of the building with a portable radio.  I remember very softly calling to Chief O’Donald, because I honestly believed he was in total shock.  The burns on both of his arms were pretty graphic, with skin literally falling off of his arms, but here he was, still at his post.

After a brief discussion about who was in charge and where he was at, I asked Robbie if he realized his arms were burned.  He just kind of nodded and made a quiet, brief comment about trying to get someone out.  I asked him if he wanted to get his burns checked out, he just said he’d be okay.  Ignoring my suggestion, he led us over to a nearby gas station where the police had set up a command post of sorts, but no one was there either, so we went back over to the front of the store and stood around for a little.  Finally, I said to Robbie, “Hey, John Reich sent us up here to see if there’s anything we can do for you.”  Without answering me, he began to detail out for us where all the firefighters were lost at, including two on the other side of the wall from where we were standing.

I remember there was a back hoe sitting in front of the store.  ”You aren’t going to dig them out with that, are you?” I asked.  Given the state everyone was in, I didn’t quite know what to take for granted.  ”Man, I can bring you the entire task force down here, or just trucks and equipment if you guys want to do this yourselves, but you tell us what YOU want, we’ll do whatever it is YOU want.”  Trying to push him a little, I gave him my official business card, to indicate the official nature of my being there, and told him to take it to Rusty, and to let him know that whatever he needed, we’d get it there, just name it.  So Robbie took the card and went into the building and out of our sight, which was where Chief Thomas was.

After a while, Chief O’Donald came back out and told me, “Chief Rusty says we’re fine.”  Something in his face told me differently, and I’ve had enough experience to also know that things weren’t fine.  But I wasn’t going to argue.

“Robbie, we’ll be right over there,” I pointed to the street, “if you guys change your mind.”  He was staring back into the building again and I put my hand on his arm to let him know we were serious.  ”I don’t have the authorization to make a decision for Hilton Head, but given what’s going on here, if you need people up here to cover you guys, I know we can get a bunch of guys up here to cover you at least on a volunteer basis.”  He shook his head again and said, “Chief Rusty said we’ve got it.”

So we just wandered back to the road and got out of the way.  I called John Reich and gave him my report and said that we needed to send another representative later on when some of the shock wore off.  Then Ed and Jason and I stood by the road and watched as they carried the first five or six out, I don’t even really remember because at that point, I felt like this was something they needed to do themselves, and I wasn’t going to push the matter.  If they were my people, I’d want to be the one who carried them out, so I understood.  I also felt like our presence there, at that point, was more of a bystander than being of assistance, so we made our offers again, and with them saying once again they had everything under control, we left.  The ride home was pretty quiet.

I look back on that night with a certain amount of disbelief.  Did a department who fought as many fires as Charleston did really think they were going to make a knock on a commercial building fire with a single 2 1/2 inch supply line from a distant hydrant?  Did they really think an attack on a heavily-loaded big box with booster lines was a sufficient attack strategy?  Did they completely forget about the thermal imager sitting on their apparatus?  Did their hubris really lead them to reject the notion of calling for outside resources early into the incident?  Did the idea that “we fight these fires every day” with no semblance of modern command and control overwhelm the logical need for a coordinated rescue supported by protective lines?  Rather than trying to attack a fast-mover without opening up the overheads, might we have not approached this with a more defensive attack once it was realized that a victim was trapped in the rear of the building?

We can “what if” this incident to death, but it doesn’t reverse the past.  I personally know many of the key players in this saga and I can reassure you, none of them went to work that morning thinking, “Hey, I think I’ll kill off a few firefighters today”.  But that’s what happened and no matter how sure you are of yourself, when you lose nine firefighters and someone asks you, “Given what you know now, would you fight this fire differently?” and you say, “No”, you have got a serious problem.

Resources will always be a problem in the fire service.  We never have what we really need to do our jobs and we are always going to be understaffed.  We will always be questioned by the public as to why it takes so many of us to fight a fire and why does it all cost so damn much.  Then when all hell breaks loose, if we don’t make things happen, the public will scream that we didn’t do our job.  It’s the never-ending dichotomy of public service.  But to look at the lessons learned that evening and ignore them, well, it’s tantamount to killing your people.

It’s this simple: if you can’t fight the fire without killing your people, then why bother?  If a rescue were being made, it’s one thing, but the men who lost their lives weren’t in any position to mount a defense for the rescue teams; they were in attack positions and eventually retreat positions with nowhere to go.  They were actively trying to seek out a hidden fire while the whole time they were playing a game stacked against them.  There WAS no “Plan B”.  I’m not sure there was a “Plan A”.  If you drive by there today, it’s a big vacant lot.  These guys gave up their lives for their community, they gave what is identified in the Bible as being the greatest gift one can give to their fellow man: their lives.  But just like the 343 men who died in the World Trade Center, the public has a short memory of these people and their mission.  And when we ask for more funds, more manpower, or more equipment, more training, more support, or more apparatus, unless the stain of blood is still on the hands of the civilians from the latest disaster du jour, they have moved on to the next media extravaganza of the week.

Me, I have an obligation to my family to come home in the morning.  I have an obligation to the families of my personnel to make sure they leave in the morning as well. If I don’t keep sharp, if I don’t fully comprehend the situation I am sending companies in to engage, and if I don’t have the means to put the tools in their hands they need, then I am failing them.  No amount of pride, a patch, a label, or honors will do you any good when you are carrying out your dead and for what?  If we can’t be there for each other, what have we really got?

Where were you that night?  You may not have been there, but the lessons are all available for us to read and to learn from.  If we fail to address the deficiencies, or short of that, at least identify methods of modifying our approach, or even less, realizing we simply don’t have the appropriate resources and stating: “we’re going to let it burn”, then we are ignoring the legacy of these fine men, these Charleston Nine, who have gone on before us.  As leaders, we have a responsibility to learn and not make the same mistakes again.  Honor these men by perfecting our craft and striving for positive change in the fire service.  I never knew them, but I’ll bet that’s what they’d have wanted.  Let’s keep them forever in our memory and insure they are never forgotten.

Back To Work

No comments

The Road Warriors at Bryce Canyon (or as they consider themselves, "The Wonderpets"As some of you may have realized, I was on a vacation. While the first days involved attending to the business of the NFPA Technical Correlating Committee, of which I am a member as a result of my chairmanship of NFPA 1006, the remainder involved a jaunt by RV through some of America’s National Parks and Monuments with my wife, her sister, and my three young children.  My wife and “Aunt Patrice” were pretty self-sufficient, as many adults tend to be.  The three young ones, however, do require supervision (hopefully you all recognize this as being said tongue-in-cheek, since they are three little girls, ranging from 4 to 9, and each of them is already convinced they know WAY more than Dad).

While the supervision of children isn’t that much of a stretch from my real job (supervising firefighters), it does bear discussion here, since it doesn’t seem that all fire officers have the same understanding.  Supervising my children involves primarily looking out for their welfare.  It involves insuring they don’t plunge headlong off of one of the many steep overlooks of the Grand Canyon, and that they don’t shove an entire roll of toilet paper into the RV toilet, both of which could result in a disaster requiring lots of paperwork.  This actually sounds much like my work at the fire department as well.

Watching children involves logistical functions such as scheduling and insuring they have the right materials for the job, which in my case involves a lot of distraction and could involve duct tape and beer, were it not for the intervention of my wife and Aunt Patrice.  Likewise, I could probably fix most of my problems at the fire department with a lot of duct tape and beer, but I know laws prohibit the former and policies prohibit the latter, so I have to actually use the skills of negotiation, coaching, mentoring, and apparently, parenting.

So you see, my job as a father (and sherpa) doesn’t differ really much at all from my job as a Battalion Chief.  When you put it in that perspective, seriously, you realize that the people you work with and for require your insight and creative application of problem solving to make the day go safely and effectively.  Sun Tzu once said, “Treat your subordinates as you would your beloved children, and they will willingly die for you when you give the order.” While I don’t desire that from either my subordinates or my children, you get the point that if you apply the skills of GOOD parenting to both your children and your charges, they will hopefully respect and obey your orders, and do what is necessary to achieve success.

While my leave was really only marginally scarred by a Philadelphia loss to Chicago (where, coincidentally, Aunt Patrice is from) and the constant updates on the games from she and her friends, I had a great time and actually look forward to singing “Here Come The Hawks” for Fire Daily on the World Wide Web.  I got to somewhat enjoy the final game from the comfort of the Maswick Lodge in the beautiful Grand Canyon and when it was all said and done, I said to my children (who Patrice convinced should all be loud, raucous Hawks fans for my benefit) that you know, it’s just a game. When I walked out onto each of those vistas of Zion, Bryce and of course, the Grand Canyon, I realize that ultimately, none of it really matters unless you build something out of all of these experiences, and share them with others.  That’s really where leadership falls into the grand scheme of things, and if we can’t enjoy the sunsets and laughing at ourselves from time to time, what good is it all?

I’m glad to be back at work.  Enjoy your day with your people as well, and remember, it’s all in how you choose to look at it as to how things will go for you and your team.  Maintain a positive perspective and even the big things can be made right again.  Be safe.

Safety Message With A Parental Advisory

7 comments

Repeat after me: "It will all be okay." Breathe deeply.

That got your attention, didn’t it?  However, I strive to maintain a “G” rating on FHZ, and the language is not that bad.  I’m not interested in pushing any of your buttons; I just want to get this safety message across.

So let’s just jump right into it.  Depending on where my shift falls, I drive my youngest daughter to school three or four times a week.  Without fail, there is one dumbass who every morning, manages to tie up the carpool line for an extra five minutes while she yaks incessantly to one or another of the other parents waiting in line.

When she finally decides to pull up her tricked-out Escalade and discharge her whiny little brats, she ties up those exiting by stopping and talking to someone else.  Thus far, I have not succumbed to the (strong) urge to walk up and pull her out through the partially open window of her status machine.  But even as I originally contemplated this post, she ran a stop sign, swerved across three lanes of traffic at carpool pick-up, cell phone in one hand and double decaf frappe crappacino in the other, cutting cars off, just so she could pull up next to one of the other moms (there for the afternoon social, of course) and gab some more. (Breathe deeply).

“Where is he going with this?” you ask (cautiously).  Well, while watching this daily comedy of the bizarre, I was thinking that perhaps our apparatus operators are also too distracted while driving very large, inertially-challenged, parade beasts, and maybe this is part of the cause of so many minor and major vehicle collisions each year.

Take for example, the discussion that I encountered this past week.  I am the Chair of our department’s standard operating guideline committee and people sometimes pull me aside to discuss recent changes to our manual.  With recent changes to the way we back our apparatus, our logic is to make everyone get off the apparatus (except the drivers, obviously) and act as spotters to provide some more eyes on the blind sides of the apparatus.  As you can expect, there are those who think more than one spotter is a bad idea.  I think that given the number of accidents we have had, we should be doing anything in our power to change things, since the current modus operandi doesn’t seem to be working all that well.  If one spotter isn’t working, two or more might be better, but one certainly doesn’t seem to be doing the job now.

In our organization, the command staff (unreasonably, I guess) believes that any number greater than one is an unacceptable statistic for collisions.  We LIKE being proactive.  Consequently, we have people who think a few collisions is okay.  ”It’s the price of doing business”, I heard someone say.

Of course, when assigned to spot the apparatus, if we happen to be doing so with a spotter who can actually manage to do more than fog a mirror, that’s all well and good.  I say this because we have drivers who still manage to back into something even with an individual out there to plausibly prevent such an occurrence.  Of course, that’s if THE SPOTTER isn’t themselves distracted by their own cellphone, the hottie crossing the street, shiny objects, or the flashing lights.

Between the radio going, the siren blaring, the other distracted drivers, the officer ordering, and the three swans-a-swimming, our modern fire apparatus operator has a serious challenge when it comes to paying attention to the road and the myriad hazards encountered between Point A and Point B.  In today’s emergency services, and having read some interesting posts by members of some of the forums, while many of us believe the foremost concern of the apparatus operator should be the safe operation of their vehicle, there are people who are more concerned with what music they should be blasting on their way to “the big one”.  Then we wonder why we have accidents.

Years ago, I heard someone say that if every vehicle on the road was equipped with a nine-inch stainless-steel spike in the center of the steering column, we would probably decrease the number of traffic accidents ten-fold.  While I agree that a sharp object pointed at my chest would probably cause me to think twice before exceeding the speed limit, I think a less lethal solution, like a machine that would punch you in the balls for exceeding the physical limitations of the rig, might just be the answer.  Trust me, if I were smacked in the cajones every time I unlawfully exceeded the speed limit, it would get my undivided attention.  I certainly wouldn’t make that mistake twice.  So, if you’re sincere about avoiding this terrible contraption: FOCUS ON DRIVING THE (Pick one: engine/truck/medic/rescue) SAFELY, because I’m off to get the patent.

It is painfully obvious each time we roll a vehicle, smash one into a car at an intersection, park one on the train tracks, or run over our back-up man that there are serious issues of attention at play here.  Instead of focusing on getting to the fire first, we need to focus on getting to the fire in one piece.  And so long as officers on these rigs sit silently and pray that the ride ends up well instead of speaking up and ordering the driver to slow down and drive reasonably, we will continue to lose our brothers and sisters for what- so some hopped up adrenaline junkie can pretend he’s Mario Andretti racing in a 25-ton killing machine?

Just as my story about the clueless soccer mom riled some of you up, so should the image of a fire apparatus driver ramming into the side of a carload of kids be equally, if not so much more, reprehensible.  After all, our subject mom is just another dumbass civilian with a cell phone.  But you, my friends, are caretakers of the public trust.  The taxpayers chose to allow you to drive the biggest, shiniest example of the American Fire Service down its public thoroughfares because they had a semblance of trust that you wouldn’t mow them down like a dog when you were running to that alarm activation.

Let’s be serious about safe driving of our trucks.  If you really want to kill yourself, do it at the scene where at least you can pretend you were saving someone’s life.  Driving down the highway like a maniac isn’t helping anyone, may likely kill someone, and is really just an excuse for showing off.  Don’t be a dumbass.

Do your job and be proud you are a firefighter, and keep your community safe by easing back a little on the throttle.  Focus on what is important; delivering your highly trained crew with the necessary equipment to the scene of the emergency, and insuring that not only they arrive safely, but everyone and everything encountering you in your travels survives the experience as well.

Capitalize on Your Strengths

2 comments
DC Ed is not happy.  I didn't break it and don't ask me to fix it either.

DC Ed is not happy. I didn't break it and don't ask me to fix it either.

I was watching a gentleman installing some cabinets in our laundry room the other day. A few months ago, one of the cabinets fell off the wall; luckily, we saw it was going before it did and got the items out before it literally came down. The man was looking over the remnants of the previous installation (I wasn’t the installer) and made some comments about how to properly put cabinets up. I sheepishly informed him that I had no clue. While I’m pretty confident in the belief that if your community is in a total disaster, I’m probably one of the first people you should call.  If you need a cabinet put up, I’d go elsewhere.  Quickly.

I can put up a raker shore, but it isn’t going to win any awards for precision cuts and edges. If you need to dig someone out of a building, or lead a company into a fire, or command a major incident, I’m your guy.  If you want it done right, you can forget anything involving auto repair, carpentry, or the finer points of heating and air conditioner installation.  Asking me to wire something is probably not wise (or safe) either.

We all have our strengths; each of us are good at some things and may be horrible at others. Instead, there are managers who try to fit the proverbial square peg into a round hole. Most of the people I work with can patch something together (see The Fixers), but the attempt is very much something not up to any standard.   When they are showing off their “handiwork” to me, I usually end up saying, “Well, it will hold until someone can get here to fix it better”.   Usually I end that with a little smile to acknowledge their efforts, knowing that I’m certainly not criticizing: if I had done it, it would probably look worse.

When we put together teams, to develop effective teams requires thought as to what is needed by the organization, but failing to consider the small team dynamics and assume everything is going to go swimmingly, is simply nonsense.  We used to have a chief whose idea of improving small team (i.e.; company) effectiveness was to put one good guy into a team of poor performers. That way we could “spread the wealth”. Ultimately, this would result in my look in return (me rolling my eyes heavenward, knowing what was going to happen) and a muttered, “We’ll see.”

No surprise then, when months later the recently transferred good performers were  looking for jobs elsewhere while the poor performers were laughing about how they “ran off another one”. If you really DO want to get rid of your best people, keep feeding them to the sharks. It’s usually not a matter of IF they bail, but WHEN.

Building a good team requires strong leadership. For those of you who are aspiring officers, this is your opportunity to shine. If your officer has some areas where they would like to improve, this is your chance to offer assistance in what he or she lacks (subtly, I’d suggest). Are they poor at documentation? Offer to help with reports. Are they better at medical than fire training? Offer to help with the former or the latter, whichever would help them. I had officers who wouldn’t know a decent knot if it hit them on top of the head; I was ultimately the go-to person anytime someone needed a good ropes and knots class.  The experience you will get in leading will pay dividends later.

If you are an officer, it is wise to be self-aware of your abilities.  Build on your strengths and surround yourself with those who can help you with your weaknesses. I would suggest informing your crew of how they can help you and ask for suggestions to improve. If done correctly, they will appreciate your candor, they will get a chance to show their particular expertise (and impress you), and put together with each other member of the team, fill an important role.

If you are building a home, you wouldn’t  have the framers do the electric and the roofers do the plumbing, would you? If it doesn’t make sense to do that with something as trivial as putting together a building (said tongue-in-cheek, I hope you realize), why would to take that same chance when building an effective fire and emergency response team?  Be smart and seek the people out to best fill the important roles on your team. You all will be that much happier with the end result.

Almost Good Enough

1 comment
Pseudoladder.  Could pass as a truck company in some places.

Pseudoladder. Could pass as a truck company in some places.

What does it mean to be “good enough”? Is being good enough sufficient to meet the needs of our customers? Is it good enough to meet safety requirements? Is being “good enough” good enough to keep civilians from being killed, much less firefighters?

When we establish a standard, the document is a minimum definition of what is “good enough”.  While standards may prove irksome to people, those standards keep what is featured in the attached picture from being termed a “truck company” in some communities.  When we have standards it keeps the old “five bubbas, a pound hound and a pickup truck” example that I like to use from time to time from being called an “urban search and rescue task force”.

As an officer, and more accurately, a leader, what is “good enough” for you to proclaim that title?  Is it a minimum standard of education and experience?  Or was it that you had the lowest social security number?  Or even worse, was it because you are a “nice guy”?  That would be the ol’ elected standard, in some places.

In most businesses, unless you are related to the boss by blood or marriage, there are certain standards required for achieving the pinnacle of success in your company.  It may very well have been that you were the person who lasted the longest, but chances are that you had some kind of a spark of leadership somewhere if someone decided to put you in charge.  Fogging a mirror might not be the only criteria, but if you fogged it the best, maybe that was the deciding factor.

As a leader in emergency services, “good enough” gets personnel injured or killed.  ”Good enough” costs the public millions of dollars in waste.  ”Good enough” is the price for an annual fire loss that leads all industrialized nations.  So long as we continue to settle for the status quo, “good enough” is good enough.

If you fail to recognize that just being good enough isn’t, take this as a call to achieve more than that.  By establishing vision, promoting core values, declaring a mission and goals, and doing something to tie all those things together, you take your team from existing to succeeding.   By seeking innovation and more effective practices, we strive for excellence.  By observing the mistakes of others and instead of ridiculing those people, learning constructively from their experience, we avoid having to make the hard (and painful) mistakes ourselves.

No one reading this probably feels like “good enough” is the answer to anything; by reading this, it shows you are probably interested in motivating yourself and your team and are looking for answers.  If anything, be reassured, “good enough” has killed and injured more of us than any one factor, by way of heart attacks, falls, drownings, vehicle accidents, and any other number of causes of firefighter deaths.  It shows itself in complacency and in acceptance that what the current situation is cannot be altered.  I challenge you to look into your soul and wonder if by standing around and doing nothing, you were leading, or simply accepting your role in the line.

Be excellent and strive for being the best.  It will keep you and your crew alive and it will better serve the public you are charged with protecting.

Taking The Plunge

No comments

webIMG_2005Happy New Year!

Recently I was on my way to work and marveling at the sunrise (I get a good shot of it going over the Cross Island bridge on the way to my station) and got to remembering one call where a person dove off that very same bridge.  I was thinking, if you’re going to pick someplace to move on from, that’s a pretty scenic spot to do so.  It also brought up to me the dichotomy of risk vs. reward.

While the individual I was remembering had a reputation for making daring but risky decisions, you have to understand the motivator for someone like that.  If you can pull it off, you’re a God.  A stunt like that makes for a lot of interesting conversation later in life.  The downside, however, is when you fail, you fail catastrophically.

When we choose to forgo a risk/benefit analysis, we do just that.  In fire/rescue, the risk we take also involves death-defying heroism if you can pull it off, or grave consequences if you don’t.  While diving off a bridge seems to be the start of interesting cocktail party conversation, failing to appreciate the impact when you hit the water (literally) or the swiftness of the current below indicates a lack of total understanding of the problem.  When we plunge headlong into a fire with no idea of the conditions or into a rescue without considering the hazards that exist, we aren’t being professional.  We are choosing bravado over intellect.

I’ll keep it short because I’m juggling a few projects, but appropriate risk/benefit analysis requires a total understanding of the situation.  Failing that, at least a brief contemplation of the major risk involved is required.  There are people in our business who don’t even think when they go into harm’s way.  How many times in a media interview with “the hero” have you heard someone say, “I didn’t even think about it”.  I’d be curious to know if we were able to interview those who didn’t make it; would they say the same thing?

Understand your situation and make intelligent decisions, not irrational ones. It’s the difference between the steadfast and respected commander and the impulsive private.  If you want to be a leader, act like a leader.

Playing With Sharp Objects

No comments

webIMG_1668Recently I was dwelling on an inventory of stupid and dangerous things I have done in the past. Since the list was way too long to go on about, I began to wonder why I did those things.  While some of them were from my youth (like jumping off a roof with an umbrella), and some were from my bachelorhood (getting my Suzuki GS750E up to very unsafe speeds), it occurred to me that a lot of them occurred during my adolescence after watching the movie “Hooper“.  At no time during any of those periods did I have a suicide wish- I didn’t WANT to die- but in my mind, I hadn’t really given it much thought.  I hadn’t fully considered the consequences.

You can put the dangers out in front of someone in back and white.  You can paint the picture for them in classes and education.  You can bore them to death with your blog, like I do.  I think that what it really comes down to, though, is that unless you have a very graphic experience with death and understand not only the implications on you, but on others, I don’t think most people can really grasp the message.

There is a lot to be said for working in our business.  I have seen my share of people ejected from vehicles to convince me that wearing a seatbelt is a good thing.  I have seen enough burned homes to understand that being fire safe will head off a lot of heartache.  But no matter what, we have people who ride in fire apparatus without seatbelts and won’t keep their fire station free of hazards, and then they wonder how they end up on the national news wire.  Risk vs. benefit doesn’t have to be limited to the fireground.

I enjoy fighting fires, but some of the fires I used to fight still baffle me.  I have literally put everything on the line for an unsavable building before and to what end?  They tore down the building later.  But we still have people charging into fires, like they just want to roll in it for a little while.  Well, the excitement of the fire is one thing, but I’ve actually seen what a fire can do to someone, so you’ll have to excuse my reluctance to get up close with it and get to know it better.

As emergency service leaders, we need to remind ourselves that just because we used to play in the street when we were kids doesn’t mean it’s a good idea.  Riding on tailboards and charging into unsafe buildings was fun until we saw people dying from those decisions.  Be the grown-up and help point out to your personnel that just because things used to be one way, we have actually learned from our mistakes and it only makes sense to avoid these problems in the future.  Revisiting them for experience’ sake isn’t fun, it’s just stupid.

An Atmosphere of Trust

2 comments
webMen of Iron BW 2

You want that hole WHERE?

Having worked my normal 24 hour shift, I got up at 0530 and went to the station’s kitchen to make a pot of coffee.  As I stood there, filling the pot with water, I realized that the crew’s dinner kitty was still sitting there on the counter.  Although it wasn’t much, it made me think about the trust that you find (or don’t find) in some firehouses.  It contrasted with a discussion I overheard about one shift raiding the other shift’s fridge just the day before.  Now while most of our stations are “hardened” facilities and require an ID card for entry, I remember when we could leave the place wide open and never have to worry about anything being touched.  In this day and age, not only do we need to worry about some mutt walking in while we were on a call and stealing a laptop (it happened to one of our guys), we have to worry about the criminal elements who want our ID, uniforms, or even a vehicle, so they can pose as a firefighter.

Trust, however, is a pretty interesting concept of its own.  As a leader, you have to earn the trust of the troops.  And as I pointed out, twenty years of being their buddy can go right out the window if you hose them on one thing.  I’ve found that it’s better to be circumspect than to lie to another firefighter.  If you just can’t talk about it, you might as well lead off by saying that, because if you try to act like you are bringing them in on “the scoop” but you can’t tell them the full details, your credibility is shot.

I look at the way my crews trust me in differing degrees.  Do they trust me to command them going into a burning building or to guide them at a building collapse or a confined space incident?  I’d guess most of them do since I’ve never had them second-guess me on a scene.  Do they trust me on most things?  I’d guess they do.  Do they trust that I’ll get the roster right in the morning.  I’d bet much less so (I’m notorious for having to re-send everyone the “amended” roster).  But whatever you do, you had best build credibility in the areas you want them to find you credible in, because if you don’t, your word is crap.

I know company officers (and chief officers) who simply aren’t trusted.  The guys may like them, they may have a beer with them, but get them aside and they’ll tell you, “This officer isn’t trustworthy”.  They may feel like the officer has got their back on daily things but just can’t trust them to make the right decision on the fireground.  And on the fireground, when people have the possibility of being injured or killed, you’d better bet that if you are leading a crew, a section, or the entire incident, you’d better have some credibility.  Because do you know what happens when you don’t have credibility?  No one will listen to you.

When elements of mistrust exist on a regular basis between the troops and the brass, those factors simply add to frustration levels that always exist anyway between these two dynamics.  If you are an officer trying to increase team morale and trying to slow down the rampant rumor mill, you’ll find that deep at the seat of these sentiments lies that mistrust.  Be it that the previous leaders were untrustworthy, or that others have continued to fuel the conspiracy theories for their own amusement, in any case, so long as your people fail to trust you, no amount of money, new trucks, etc. will stop the train.  It requires making that leap to show them that you can be trusted.  In exhibiting your faith in them, hopefully they can begin to have some faith in you.

Maintaining this kind of relationship requires a lot of work.  From first-hand knowledge, it can often be frustrating.  I am a “firefighter’s firefighter” (or at least I hope that’s how my people see me) and I still walk the walk as much as talk the talk.  Yet when I pinned on those chief’s bugles, it didn’t matter that some of these individuals have known me and what I am about for decades: I’m a chief now.  The whole element of trust seemed to have to begin from scratch and work its way back to the same level it was at when I was a Captain, I guess.

The problem is that for as much as you try to show these people that you are only interested in doing the right thing, because of years of mistrusting anyone in a white helmet, they don’t feel comfortable putting their trust in you.  Firefighters pride themselves in being a cynical bunch; show me one firefighter worth his or her salt and I’ll show you that they have a skeptical eye about pretty much any subject that presents itself.  It’s a survival mechanism.  While others pride themselves in seeing a half-full glass, we fully expect that the glass is half-full alright: with an unknown toxic.  Firefighters require everyone and every incident to prove it is safe to trust first, and only then will they dip their toes into the pool.  So an understanding of that culture requires actually living it because the lack of “street cred” automatically targets you as being an outsider and unable to be trusted.

We as leaders must work hard to develop a space of trust.  Of all of the qualities of a leader, trust is most important.  Frankly, no one is going to follow you if they don’t trust that you’re going to take them someplace they want to go.  While you may have all kinds of degrees and certificates, there’s nothing other than setting an example for your troops that is going to teach them that they can follow you and that they can trust that they’ll survive the experience.  If you are trying to change your organizational culture and continually meeting resistance, chances are that your either personnel aren’t mature enough to appreciate that individuals are different and new  leadership isn’t automatically to be distrusted (until you’ve done something to break that trust already), or because no one has ever given them a reason in the past to let go of their fears and follow you.  In both cases, it’s going to require you to stand in front and establish that relationship or understand that you need to develop a thick skin, because the sniping will never end.  Standing up and setting an example seems to be the most productive means of accomplishing the mission.

Eating Our Young

5 comments

It’s not going to require much reading to see why the fire service can’t get enough of it’s collective s*** together to provide a united front on anything.  Check it out at Dave Statter’s blog at STAT911.  You can skip the video (for my purposes) and go straight to the comments.  There’s enough anger and bile in this area to prove my point.

We will never move forward in little packs of warring tribes.  We need to show a little love and respect for our brothers, regardless of who they are, where they work, career or volunteer, and their personal opinions.  Laughing at a burned brother, making derogatory remarks about each other, etc. is counterproductive, but even worse, the people who are laughing out loud are the politicians and the competing interests, because they know that so long as we continue down this path, there won’t be any resistance from us when it really is needed.

Science Is Your Friend

1 comment

While taking Honora to school a few days ago, Bob Edwards was speaking on NPR Radio with Chris Mooney and Sheril Kirshenbaum, the authors of the book, “Unscientific America”.  While the book apparently discusses “scientific illiteracy”, some of the commentary seemed applicable to what we currently endure in the fire service; clinging to tradition for tradition’s sake and the global ignorance of scientific findings that can improve our efficiency and safety.

The authors, in discussing their premise, suggested that the general populace isn’t stupid when it comes to science, they’re just disengaged.  The idea that they put forth is essentially that science needs to discover a way to get people to re-engage on the issues, which is not as easy as it might seem.  While the scientific community as a whole might not necessarily agree upon the ways to communicate their issues, for scientists and supporters of science to simply dismiss the “emotional side” (my quote) of others when it comes to scientific issues is turning their back on the problem.

In the early to middle parts of the last century, scientists were looked at as heroes.  Science brought us protection against disease; it brought us innovative fabrics and materials.  Science ushered in a nuclear age and took us to the Moon.  Science, however became pedestrian or became background noise.  Although Mooney and Kirshenbaum didn’t suggest it, I suggest that maybe we all began to take these accomplishments for granted.  Consider that every other time I upgrade my computer it becomes a third smaller and four times faster (and I seem to have to upgrade these bad boys about every two or three years).  While the laptop I am typing this on has 500 GB of storage, my first work computer back in 1988 had MAYBE a 120 megabyte hard drive.  Since I wasn’t so computer literate back then, I couldn’t even begin to tell you how much RAM it had.

While these technological miracles happen almost daily, maybe they’ve become a little too commonplace.  And of course, the unintentional wall established between science and the rest of us (maybe I’m a bad example) doesn’t afford any converts.  In fact, the authors discussed that Carl Sagan suffered considerable stigma from the scientific community because of his efforts to put science in a context others could understand.  The result was that he was considered to have “populist” (their quote) views and was somehow, not worthy of inclusion into the supporters of science.

What has happened is that science just isn’t as popular a subject.  Mooney stated that if you read the newspaper, “Science doesn’t beat the horoscope or the sports pages” among most people.  Along with the theory that your political view influences your perspective on science (I’d agree with that), especially in this day of deeply divided emotions about our nation and the people who run it, I’d bet that the thought of discussing some of these scientific endeavors (stem cell research, evolution, etc.) with some of your friends or family probably makes you uncomfortable, regardless of where you stand.  So it’s no question that science in many circles, isn’t exactly a hot topic of conversation.  In fact, unless you are surrounded by a bunch of like-thinkers, you might well avoid scientific discussion altogether.

So just as goes science as a discussion for us all, so goes the fire service for those of us within it.  Go to any firehouse and you’ll see some strong feelings on certain fire service topics.  For any of us to discuss deeply held beliefs about our fire service brings up some pretty raw emotion.  Depending where you sit on many of these issues, sometimes it is better to sit it out and watch the fighting than it is to engage.  Why is that?  Well, I know personally, while I don’t shy away from conflict, I am not interested in engaging in an all-out battle with anyone who just can’t see any side of the issues except the one they are on.  If I choose to remain open-minded and civil, so must you.  That doesn’t seem to prevent people from acting like assholes though (yeah, I said it).

Blogging and posting is a little unique.  The anonymity of being online seems to permit some of the less enlightened individuals to pipe up when they should probably just stick a sock in it and slink back to their corner.  Especially when I’m being lectured by some moron who has two or three years under his (or her) belt and all of a sudden, they are the subject matter expert du jour.  Since the privacy of the internet protects cowards and psychos from getting popped in the mouth if they cross the line, I’d just as soon focus on positive discussion, but it doesn’t seem to stop some of them.

The emergency service industry, as does the scientific community, must remain objective while considering the deeply held beliefs and traditions of those who came before us.  While it seems that logic should overturn any voodoo, the scientific community can’t be dismissive of the emotion attached to these beliefs, because they can be equally as powerful, and no scientist has really been able to explain that.

I’ve said before that I love the traditions of the fire service.  I come from four generations of firefighters and I am proud of that heritage.  But just as my grandfather and my father were renegades and agitating for change and improvement, so do I.  I’m happy to keep a roto-ray on the front of my engine, but I’m not so keen on rushing so quickly to a fire alarm that I flip a rig.  I guess that’s a tradition that seemed to occur a lot in the past that I’d just as soon leave behind.  And yes, there are some who still think that this is acceptable behavior, as do those who think risk/benefit analysis is for sissies.

If we really want change, we have to understand that it scares some people.  Being dismissive of their fears or their preconceived beliefs doesn’t bring them to us in harmony, it creates division.  Understanding how and why things do the things they do is just as important as understanding who we are and where we came from and how we got here.  Since most of you reading this already get “IT”, I’m probably preaching to the choir, but perhaps we can do a better job of reaching out to the dinosaurs and conveying our respect for the way things were done, as well as educating them on safe and effective practices.

Understand that although scientific exploration may bear out an idea and that idea is as right as rain, that same idea will remain locked up in your head somewhere if you’re unable or unwilling to frame the idea into something everyone can understand and eventually, embrace.  If I had the universal answer to all of our problems, I wouldn’t be sitting here asking you open-ended questions.  But it seems that the questions keep getting asked and we aren’t hitting on the answers.

As a brotherhood, we need to band together and discover what others have found before us.  That together we can work toward improving public safety while striving for our own safety as well.  That tradition is important, but it doesn’t supplant common sense.  And that science, in reaching out to find answers to our questions, has achieved a method of achieving logical approaches to many problems, but we have to sometimes choke back emotion and realize that improvement sometimes means walking away from the treasured, but flawed, reasoning of our past.

Turtles, Circumstances, and Change

No comments

Hilton Head Engine 7Just this week, not only on our relatively quiet haven of Hilton Head Island, but right here in the community in which I live (Palmetto Dunes), comes a story which has become national news.  Before I knew it would be on CNN and everywhere else, I read in our Island Packet this article on a romantic proposal gone wrong, and the subsequent death of sea turtles.  Now while I never really thought I might read in the same article anywhere, the words “sea turtle”, “romance”, and “death”, you really might be wondering, “What does this have to do with the fire service?”  I can reassure you that it does. 

 

How it does is that it clearly illustrates the law of unintended circumstances.  I’d be willing to bet you that no one involved in this story desired to kill off 60 turtles and had no idea that their simple luminary tribute to the sanctity of marriage would touch off what ended up on the AP news feed.  But as a result of something they did, or might also be the case in our situation in fire and emergency services, didn’t do, there was heartache, conflict, and even injury and death.

 

Actions are taken in our fire stations and on emergency scenes on a daily basis that sometimes go badly, and I would venture to guess that 99.9% of actions that resulted in poor outcomes were purely unintentional.  However unintentional these actions (or inactions) are, though, our actions may have wide-ranging impact on our entire organization.  Our actions or inactions may not even be noticed today, or could end up as front page news.  We must constantly be vigilant of the actions we take and how they affect our current situation, and even more importantly, our team, our agency, and our customers.  What may seem insignificant to us may end up costing someone their life later.

 

Working together as a team, we have to have the courage and the ability to say, “Hey, that doesn’t look right” to our colleagues, and they should also be able to say it to us.  It’s a basic tenet of crew resource management.  Fostering this attitude in your team requires cultural and social change, especially in our traditional paramilitary hierarchy.  Our most important role in this concept is awareness of the things we do and importantly enough, to do things right, as well as to be open to the suggestion from others that we should be doing something differently.

 

Being in the position of a transformational leader requires more than being right, it requires us to be open to the idea that we might not be.  As part of a team, when we make a mistake, we must strive to understand what occurred and what the results were, so that we and others don’t repeat that mistake.  When we mistakenly lay off blame we don’t really learn from the mistake. 

 

I had a driver once who had a minor accident with the apparatus we were assigned to.  It was obviously a result of a failure for someone else to do their job.  But he owned that situation and every time he pulled out of the station from then on out, I noticed him looking to insure it never happened again.  It is imperative for us to understand our shortcomings (hey, I have many), own them, and resolve to do better next time. 

 

I’d say that if that couple ever does decide to re-visit our Island again, they’ll never forget to blow out the candles when leaving the beach.  It’s called a watershed moment,  In our lives, it is one thing, but when we have one of these events occur while operating as part of a team we are tasked with leading, it is a requirement that we critique it, learn from it, and resolve to not let it happen again.

(Insert Task Here) For Dummies

1 comment

IMG_0144 webI’ve been very busy working on my wife’s company’s website and unable to really spend any time blogging lately.  That’s probably a good thing as I really have wanted to learn a little more about creating sites from scratch (or close enough, using Dreamweaver) but found it to be much harder at first than I thought it would be.  I created a whole bunch of sites several years ago which caught the attention of many of you (the old HHIFR Station 6 – The Icehouse website as well as one for each of our stations, etc.) using a VERY user friendly online program.  Then when someone decided to jack up the price on the site hosting and it ultimately started to come out of my own pocket, I just let it close down.

But anyway, since then I have undertaken several web management and development projects and the long story short, I had to purchase the book “Dreamweaver for Dummies”.  It really opened up the door and now I am making much more headway than I had at all before.

I have contemplated a “Firefighting for Dummies” book, but I’m not sure that’s a good thing.  Or how about “Paramedic Certification For Dummies”?  As I’m writing this, someone is probably stealing my idea, but I’m afraid itn not likely that any fire academies or paramedic training institutions out there are going to spend big bucks recommending a book to their students that suggests they are dummies (I think the books are mostly of the “self-help” genre).

So anyway, as I was writing this, I’m watching the news and on a neighboring island, there have been a significant number of drownings this summer.  Now the video-journalist shoots a picture of the beach and on it there are not one, not two, but FOUR signs warning people about the rip currents, etc.  I’d bet there’s more, but the segment had to fit in people talking and stuff.  There’s talk now about educating the tourists and other beachgoers.

Any time that you have multiple signs on anything warning about something and people disregard the warnings, something tells me an education message isn’t going to do much more than heap onto the pile of ignored information.  I don’t know what the answer is.  Think anyone hanging out at the beach would like to purchase an advance copy of “Beaching for Dummies”? 

When we put people through a training academy and we tell them about the safety issues of our job, then educate them on a daily basis, warn them with little tags and signs on the equipment we use and the apparatus we ride, and put posters in stations, etc. and unsafe behavior continues, is it an education issue or an attitudinal issue?  There’s a favorite question someone asked in a seminar I was in once, as to whether the problem a subordinate had was a commitment issue or a competence issue.  The difference, he said, was, “if you were to put a loaded and cocked .45 to the head of the person and said, ‘do the task’, if they could then do the task, the issue wasn’t a competence issue, it was a commitment issue”.

Now I certainly don’t advocate trying this at home, but it kinda makes for an interesting point.  Because the issues I am discussing here are the ability for personnel to take precautions regarding safety issues, it really is an issue of life or death and yet there are those who choose to challenge the odds anyway.  So is it really a competence issue?  Is it a commitment issue?  I’d suggest that it’s the challenge of “it can’t happen to me”.

Despite the warnings, despite the education, and the despite the dangerous nature of our jobs, firefighters continue to exhibit risky behavior when no value is gained by their doing so.  Something as routine as buckling your seatbelt doesn’t take away from the glory and excitement of going to a working fire, yet firefighters are killed and injured every year because they fail to do it.

It puzzles me as to why people continue to do things that are contrary to common sense.  Hell, I’m one of them.  But there are things I do that I know will save my life and I make it a point to share those tips with people on a regular basis, and yet I see those same people ignoring that advice and getting hurt.  Maybe we do need a “Firefighting for Dummies” book.

Star of Life Law Blog

1 comment

I am encouraged by some of the blogs that are going on out there right now and I try to throw a link to the good ones over on the side over there (you know, over THERE, on your right).  A great one that popped up in the past few days has some serious merit; the Star of Life Law blog by my friend and colleague Pete Reid, who is not only a practicing lawyer but a practicing paramedic.  I am a man who has braved some serious fires and disasters, dove into alligator and shark infested waters (not at the same time), and fathered three girls, but if there is a subject that strikes fear in the hearts of all of us, and that’s the legal side of the business.  It’s likely because we don’t fully understand it, but given the few posts Pete already has on there, he has the opportunity to help us at least stay out of trouble.

As I posted before, a quote from a lawyer on lawyers:

“Lawyers are like vultures – most people look upon the vulture as a vile creature, eating carcasses and garbage, reprehensible to watch.  However, if there were no vultures, think about all of the roadkill that would rot on the highways, in the forests, and elsewhere.  Vultures take care of the messes we find distasteful.  If people would just get along and deal with each other in a civil manner, we wouldn’t need lawyers.” (Judge Thomas Kemmerlin, in a Leadership Hilton Head session)

While Pete is certainly not a vile creature (he’s actaully a really nice guy), he does offer a perspective on the legal side of emergency services that I hope to include in our discussions on here, because after all, he’s the lawyer.  If people didn’t sue people, we wouldn’t need lawyers, but if we do our job, we shouldn’t have to worry about being sued either.  Unfortunately, that’s not always the case and frivolous lawsuits cost a lot of money to defend, money that I’m sure most of us have allocated for more important things, like food and a mortgage.  So learn, educate others, and protect yourself.  Go check it out.

Thoughts While Sitting in Traffic

1 comment

Sorry for not being around lately. I’ve had family in town and lots of stuff to do with the wife and girls. However, as I returned home from work the other day (this is at about 0645 in the morning), I was riding side-by-side with a vehicle best described as a “vintage beater”. As we approached a traffic light from a little way out, it changed to yellow. I knew that even speeding up I wouldn’t catch it, but the beater didn’t even bother and ran the red from so far out that I was shocked he hadn’t hit anyone.

In my recent attempts to not be angry (what good would it do?), I instead got to thinking about what would have happened had he actually hit someone, and what, at that time in the morning, was so important that he might risk his and and the lives of others in order to save a few seconds. I even caught up with him at the next light and I was driving the speed limit.

Later that afternoon, however, I WAS in a hurry to go somewhere. I was driving along and had the very same scenario presented to me. As tempted as I was to just fly through the intersection, since I was late to an appointment, I didn’t, and was a little frustrated as I sat there and waited for the light.

It occurred to me that doing the right thing may be inconvenient at times, but in some cases, the risks you take are certainly not worth the end result. It also occurred to me that even though you may feel like you are saving time by taking a short-cut, it doesn’t always work out that way and in fact, it might even be detrimental to the outcome.

How many times have you been working on a project and felt that taking the easy way out was warranted, only to have to go back and re-do things because you didn’t do things right the first time? When thinking about it from a safety perspective, how many times have you felt compelled to leave out a step (packing up, using gloves, etc.) because you felt like time was of the essence? How much longer would it have taken to complete that important mission had you gotten injured or killed because you took that short-cut?

Sometimes the shortest path between two points isn’t a straight line. Take the time to do things right and more often than not, you’ll be rewarded in the long run.

Firefighting as Asymetrical Warfare

2 comments

2005-1139There used to be a day when warriors considered it less than chivalrous to take cover or to shoot from a prone position.  Most of us in this millennium probably would never consider it a good idea to stand up and march forward upright into a withering hail of bullets unless we were certain we wanted to end it all right there.  While Napoleonic tactics continued to be used on the battlefield well into the 1900′s, for centuries, experts in the art of warfare were aware that when fighting a battle with an enemy that had a decided advantage, less than conventional tactics had to be applied.

As anybody who has ever been in the military knows, the one of the least preferable places to engage the enemy is on his own ground.  This is especially true in urban warfare, where going house to house can bring on any sort of undesired surprise.  Again, marching down the street in perfect formation, wheeling into position to the left or right, and moving forward to the center of the contested area is likely going to result in a heavy body count.

The advantage for the opposing force utilizing unconventional tactics is surprise; your force doesn’t know where or when the attack will come, you are unfamiliar with the terrain, you are unfamiliar with the weapons that will be used against you, and the attack is most likely going to come where your units are concentrated and have little ability to maneuver or escape.

Likewise, as we engage a fire in a building, especially in commercial occupancies, we have a disadvantage in that we are relatively unfamiliar with the layout, we may or may not be familiar with the fire load and the construction, and we don’t know for sure how long the fire has been burning, where it has extended to, or what components have been impacted.  We can get good reconnaissance when we do our preplans, but even then, unless it is a building you are in routinely, you probably aren’t going to have a good feel for the “terrain”.

Nonetheless, we have some holdouts in the fire service who continue to embrace the romantic image of the valiant firefighter, bolt upright, dashing into the flames with no regard for his own safety, and emerging unscathed with babe in arms, to the cheers of the crowd.  And before some of you haters out there begin to judge, realize that I come from four generations of these, of whom I am extraordinarily proud to be descended from.

And although I’m okay with that image in my heart, there’s a point where my head takes over.  Because while there is a certain amount of adrenaline surge in the glory of headlong engagement with the enemy, my years of education and experience kick in and I realize that I am locked in mortal combat with an enemy that has a decidedly favorable advantage.

If I choose to ignore the risks involved to the point that only the mission matters, if we had an unlimited amount of resources with which to throw at the enemy, maybe that would be okay (stick with me, now).  I don’t know about your department,  but in my department, we would have a limit of about one dead firefighter before things get a little crazy on scene (I’m being facetious; I hate to spell that out, but I’m heading off the hate mail).

There is nothing wrong with that image of valor I discussed before, but as I said in my earlier post, misusing the resources we have been allocated, of which losing personnel would be probably the most severe (at least it would be in my department), is a seriously poor contribution to minimizing the disaster and bringing it under control.  In fact, in most cases, it exacerbates it.

In no way should my opinion be construed as being against taking risk.  Risk is part of my job and if God strikes me down while taking what I considered to be a good risk versus an appropriate return, than so be it.  But risk to the exclusion of common sense isn’t valiant, it’s stupid.

Most of the firefighter deaths in this nation don’t come from valiantly charging into a burning building to save a life.  Most of them come from preventable issues, like cardiac-related incidents and motor vehicle collisions.  And while I mourn my fallen brethren just as terribly whether done on scene or in training, my job as a responsible emergency service leader is to insure that we aren’t throwing away souls toward lost causes or through poor judgement.  I know my family is appreciative when I come home intact, and so should yours be.

Saying you are for doing the job regardless of the safety aspects isn’t manly, it’s irresponsible.  Being cognizant of safe working practices doesn’t mean I stand outside a building and tremble when I roll up on a structure fire, but it does mean that I look at the fire progress, the extent of involvement, the building construction, and the likelihood of interior tenability (among other things) before committing my personnel.  Realize that this comes from a guy who has charred several helmets off the top of his head in his day and has had his share of hairy saves.  And I loved riding the tailboard just as much, if not more, than any of you out there as well.  But there comes a time when you look at what you are doing, and remember how close you came to throwing everything you had at the fire, only to have the insurance company write it off and be out there with a track-hoe the next day, hauling your “saved” building into a dumpster.

As Chris Naum says in his post on The Kitchen Table, there is a place in between overly cautious and overly aggressive that the good firefighters take their place in the line.  I ask that you consider that location and mark it out, and strive for the use of thorough size-up, sound tactics, and reasonable safety measures while remembering that there are more out there who depend upon you than just that victim.  Don’t throw everything you have at a situation you can’t win.  Choose your battles through knowledge and skill, and do the best you can do.

Let's Take an Unemotional Look at the Problem

2 comments

webimg_0912While I have been pursuing the discussion on The Kitchen Table only peripherally as I have been very busy lately, I noted an undertone of something that I guess has nagged at me for quite some time.  After thinking about it for a few days, I realized that the issues could actually be approached from a very pragmatic view which I’d love to share with you all today.

Let’s just clarify some statements.  I was not at FDIC for the big discussion, so I am only acting on what I am reading.  But let’s just say that the argument that some organizations are too worried about safety and are not pursuing fires aggressively enough, and are therefore doing a disservice to their communities is a valid one.  And let’s also bring into play another thing I keep hearing, that it is ridiculous to refer to the people we serve as “customers”, as also valid, although I think that customers is a better term for them than some of the other names I have called them under my breath at 0400.  But I digress.

So then, what are they?  Well, I guess the best thing to say is that they are “taxpayers”.  After all, our service is largely supported by tax revenue in one way or another, so I think that is probably a pretty accurate definition, although I could argue that some of them aren’t paying taxes and maybe should be deserving of no service, but then again, I digress.  Let’s say that even in a community that supports a robust volunteer response agency by way of donations only, the citizens and other potential users are in some form or fashion, paying for a service in which they expect some competency, timeliness, and efficiency.

As users of funds that don’t belong to us (they belong to YOU, the taxpayers), I would expect that you probably hold us (the emergency service providers) to a higher expectation, simply because on a daily basis, you don’t use our service.  Therefore, you continue to pay fees, taxes, and donations in the hope that, God forbid, if you needed us, we would come.  And if we did come, we would be prepared, equipped, and with sufficient resources to bring the disaster to bear.

Furthermore, I would expect that as a taxpayer, you expect any funds expended would be done so in a responsible manner.  You would expect some financial discipline, that the agency would be responsible and accountable, and that any real property and other assets would be lovingly cared for and maintained, just as if it belonged to someone else.  Because you know what, THEY DO.  Those red trucks and your uniforms and everything else was paid for by someone else (in most cases).

Likewise, if I, as a taxpayer, saw you doing something irresponsible with those assets, I’d be upset, regardless of how right you thought it was.  If you were using those assets recklessly, I’d suggest that perhaps you should consider that I worked very hard to acquire the funds with which I surrendered to you for the purpose of protecting my community, and I’d rather that you used good judgement in how you used that asset.  Just as I’d hope none of you would drive an engine into a burning building to put the fire out, I’d ask that if you did see some compelling reason to do so, that maybe you would share it with me so I too, could be enlightened and could understand.

Therefore, when I (as a Battalion Chief for the organization I work for) am given a certain number of assets, paid for by you the taxpayer, entrusted to care for and to use prudently, efficiently, and competently to provide emergency service, I take it VERY seriously.  I am, believe it or not, a pretty conscientious guy.  And when those assets include, but are not limited to, a station, an engine and truck company, a bunch of expensive equipment, and most importantly, the eight people assigned to those companies, I am called upon to use the best judgement and skill to bring those assets together to create a life-saving, fire-kicking, roof-chopping machine.

However, if I (as the BC), fail to take a reasonable assessment of each situation in hand, and determine the real problem, the cost involved, and the efficacy of the plan using the assets I have, I am negligent in my duties as a steward of the public trust.  I would hope that the fire service has come far enough that you all see yourselves as better than cannon fodder, but I really think that sometimes, the thought that we aren’t anymore, troubles some of you.

If I have a life that needs to be saved, I will risk a lot to save a lot.  If I have a reasonable expectation that to take a little risk, I can make a significant difference in the outcome of the emergency, I will weigh my options against the risk and put my plan into effect if so moved.  But I absolutely refuse to believe that in this day and age, with insurance companies condemning a structure in which firefighters died saving, that this is a GOOD thing, well, if not for the emotional attachment I have to my brother firefighters, as a steward of taxpayer funds, I’d suggest that it is neither wise, prudent, efficient, etc., etc.  In fact, now that I have opened us up for the possible long-term care of injured firefighters, the possible loss of civilian lives, the possible lawsuits, the unbelievable amount of time that will be required investigating the loss, and the mounds of paperwork, my decision to do so would be such that any reasonable individual would take one look at it and say, “What were you thinking?”

Again, taking the emotional aspect of it out of play, people screamed bloody murder about a plane flight over New York that cost the taxpayers over a quarter-million dollars (not to mention the sheer stupidity of the decision, but again, I digress), think of how angry taxpayers would be if you said that you just chucked several million dollars out the window in insurance claims, medical bills, replacement personnel, and overtime to deal with this problem? 

Hey, if you don’t want to approach safety from an emotional and traditional standpoint, then don’t.  But as a responsible supervisor of taxpayer funds, failing to approach this from a purely pragmatic standpoint, is more than just foolish, it is irresponsible.

Let's Take an Unemotional Look at the Problem

2 comments

webimg_0912While I have been pursuing the discussion on The Kitchen Table only peripherally as I have been very busy lately, I noted an undertone of something that I guess has nagged at me for quite some time.  After thinking about it for a few days, I realized that the issues could actually be approached from a very pragmatic view which I’d love to share with you all today.

Let’s just clarify some statements.  I was not at FDIC for the big discussion, so I am only acting on what I am reading.  But let’s just say that the argument that some organizations are too worried about safety and are not pursuing fires aggressively enough, and are therefore doing a disservice to their communities is a valid one.  And let’s also bring into play another thing I keep hearing, that it is ridiculous to refer to the people we serve as “customers”, as also valid, although I think that customers is a better term for them than some of the other names I have called them under my breath at 0400.  But I digress.

So then, what are they?  Well, I guess the best thing to say is that they are “taxpayers”.  After all, our service is largely supported by tax revenue in one way or another, so I think that is probably a pretty accurate definition, although I could argue that some of them aren’t paying taxes and maybe should be deserving of no service, but then again, I digress.  Let’s say that even in a community that supports a robust volunteer response agency by way of donations only, the citizens and other potential users are in some form or fashion, paying for a service in which they expect some competency, timeliness, and efficiency.

As users of funds that don’t belong to us (they belong to YOU, the taxpayers), I would expect that you probably hold us (the emergency service providers) to a higher expectation, simply because on a daily basis, you don’t use our service.  Therefore, you continue to pay fees, taxes, and donations in the hope that, God forbid, if you needed us, we would come.  And if we did come, we would be prepared, equipped, and with sufficient resources to bring the disaster to bear.

Furthermore, I would expect that as a taxpayer, you expect any funds expended would be done so in a responsible manner.  You would expect some financial discipline, that the agency would be responsible and accountable, and that any real property and other assets would be lovingly cared for and maintained, just as if it belonged to someone else.  Because you know what, THEY DO.  Those red trucks and your uniforms and everything else was paid for by someone else (in most cases).

Likewise, if I, as a taxpayer, saw you doing something irresponsible with those assets, I’d be upset, regardless of how right you thought it was.  If you were using those assets recklessly, I’d suggest that perhaps you should consider that I worked very hard to acquire the funds with which I surrendered to you for the purpose of protecting my community, and I’d rather that you used good judgement in how you used that asset.  Just as I’d hope none of you would drive an engine into a burning building to put the fire out, I’d ask that if you did see some compelling reason to do so, that maybe you would share it with me so I too, could be enlightened and could understand.

Therefore, when I (as a Battalion Chief for the organization I work for) am given a certain number of assets, paid for by you the taxpayer, entrusted to care for and to use prudently, efficiently, and competently to provide emergency service, I take it VERY seriously.  I am, believe it or not, a pretty conscientious guy.  And when those assets include, but are not limited to, a station, an engine and truck company, a bunch of expensive equipment, and most importantly, the eight people assigned to those companies, I am called upon to use the best judgement and skill to bring those assets together to create a life-saving, fire-kicking, roof-chopping machine.

However, if I (as the BC), fail to take a reasonable assessment of each situation in hand, and determine the real problem, the cost involved, and the efficacy of the plan using the assets I have, I am negligent in my duties as a steward of the public trust.  I would hope that the fire service has come far enough that you all see yourselves as better than cannon fodder, but I really think that sometimes, the thought that we aren’t anymore, troubles some of you.

If I have a life that needs to be saved, I will risk a lot to save a lot.  If I have a reasonable expectation that to take a little risk, I can make a significant difference in the outcome of the emergency, I will weigh my options against the risk and put my plan into effect if so moved.  But I absolutely refuse to believe that in this day and age, with insurance companies condemning a structure in which firefighters died saving, that this is a GOOD thing, well, if not for the emotional attachment I have to my brother firefighters, as a steward of taxpayer funds, I’d suggest that it is neither wise, prudent, efficient, etc., etc.  In fact, now that I have opened us up for the possible long-term care of injured firefighters, the possible loss of civilian lives, the possible lawsuits, the unbelievable amount of time that will be required investigating the loss, and the mounds of paperwork, my decision to do so would be such that any reasonable individual would take one look at it and say, “What were you thinking?”

Again, taking the emotional aspect of it out of play, people screamed bloody murder about a plane flight over New York that cost the taxpayers over a quarter-million dollars (not to mention the sheer stupidity of the decision, but again, I digress), think of how angry taxpayers would be if you said that you just chucked several million dollars out the window in insurance claims, medical bills, replacement personnel, and overtime to deal with this problem? 

Hey, if you don’t want to approach safety from an emotional and traditional standpoint, then don’t.  But as a responsible supervisor of taxpayer funds, failing to approach this from a purely pragmatic standpoint, is more than just foolish, it is irresponsible.

Putting Things In Perspective

No comments

As much as the media hype is annoying and excessive, my heart breaks for the parents of the first swine flu death in the United States, as well as for all of the other deaths that have occurred so far. As the parent of three young children, I can only imagine the pain that the family is going through and pray that things work out somehow.

However, as I was explaining to several people, and I have also said in my Twitter and Facebook feeds, we need to look at this situation and put it in perspective.

According to the Global Energy Network Institute, 35,ooo people die DAILY from starvation in the world.  Yet since these people probably aren’t subscribers to USA Today or have TVs to watch network news, I guess it’s not that much of a problem.

According to the American Heart Association, over 150, 000 people die each year from myocardial infarction (heart attacks, for you non-medical types).  The actual figure for 2009 translated into an average of 413 people dying per day, from a largely preventable disease, and a disease that we as EMS providers toil daily to educate the public about and secure funding for programs to mitigate against, but there is no media frenzy.  Now realize that number has dropped since 1980, so we are chipping away at the problem, but still, this is an astounding number of deaths from something we could work harder at solving.

Then of course, there is something much more preventable, that of death from injury.  According to the CDC, in 2006, people were dying at a rate of 490 a day from injuries.  How many times have we tried to get that message out, but have our PSAs relegated to after the 11:00 news when everyone has gone to bed?

I think we need to look at the swine flu situation carefully.  We need to take reasonable measures to mitigate against further outbreak and to minimize exposure to ourselves and our families.  But like the HIV hysteria of the ’80′s and every other crisis that comes along, the media has done a great job overselling the drama when it suits their purpose, and a mediocre job of helping us get the message out about many other efforts like putting smoke detectors in homes. It is our job to continue to bubble up the real message to our customers and it is our job to help the CDC and other parties to keep the effects of this pandemic to a minimum.  But the hysteria can stop already.  I have enough drama in my life, I don’t need this to make it that much more of a challenge.

Take universal precautions, eat and drink healthy and stay fit, and stay well.  Let’s not make this any worse than it needs to be.

To The Easily Offended

2 comments

sctf1-tx-060aIn another post, I mentioned a great homily by Father Chris where he spoke about getting the message out (you know, THE Message).  I specifically discussed one of his points about how, when someone in today’s society doesn’t agree with you, the expectation is that they have a “right” to be offended.  How if you have decided you don’t want Christianity in your life, you have a right to be offended by the manger scene on the corner, or if someone says that they believe that ___ is a sin, people have a right to be offended that you are talking about religion.

I guess where I am going with this blog is that there are a lot of people who should pretty much lighten up about some things, but it seems to me there’s a few people who should also lighten up and get with the program about things like firefighter safety, or more accurately, accountability, use of IMS, and not sending people in to fight fires in “lost causes”.

It seems that whenever one of these subjects comes up, there are always one or two out there who say, “Hey, we’ve been doing it this way for years, and I’ve been fighting fires since you were in diapers, blah, blah, blah, blah.” (I wrote that because that’s about where I stopped listening).  I remember one particularly spirited discussion on NIMS and what a crock of crap it was and that members of the XYZ (read: big city) Fire Department, by God, have been doing it this way without that NIMS stuff and maybe you all shouldn’t be a bunch of sissies (that’s not the word he used), blah, blah, blah.

So I guess what you’re saying then, is that despite any meaningful adaptations there are from the way we did stuff to the way the rest of us are doing stuff (in the 21st century) all of it is pretty much useless and we should go back to fighting fires with buckets and grappling hooks.  That would be fine, except that building construction has changed significantly and you aren’t going to pull much thatch off the roofs in my neighborhood.  Or maybe using single 2 1/2-inch supply lines and booster lines is really okay, except that in my city, we have large properties with huge fire loads that give off mega-amounts of BTUs that you won’t overcome with that red garden hose.  And being grossly out of shape is okay, except that now we carry more equipment than we did before, including the fact that we are going to have to go up and down stairs wearing SCBA and the heat being produced by today’s burning couch and other contents far exceeds the heat output of fires in the 50′s and 60′s.

Maybe, just maybe, it’s time some of you dug some of the wax out of your ears and listened to the voices of today’s fire service, and if you can’t fathom why change can be good, consider maybe it’s you that needs to change (a change in profession, that is).  Learn more about where we are going by studying the traditions of our past, but realize that tradition is nice when it comes to parades and retirements, but it has absolutely no place in the field of modern combat we call the fireground.

Life Changes In A Split Second

No comments

The other day I think we all were thinking about the death of the child struck by a Kansas City engine as reported by Firehouse.com.  As you have probably heard thousands of times before, it doesn’t take too many incidents like this one to remind you that we have a huge responsibility while driving our apparatus, and even when all things are going right and being done well, all it takes is someone not paying attention or distracted to get in our way and change everything. 

 

Having a child at that age, I have preached to her about going into the street ad nauseum, but you know, kids sometimes just don’t remember that kind of stuff when they are excited or paying attention to that ball, or whatever the circumstances happen to be.

 

We need to be hypervigilant when it comes to operating these trucks; anticipating what is going to happen is much preferable to having to react to it unexpectedly if it does.  When you see children playing nearby, don’t just drive by and wave- think about what you would do in the event one darted out into the street.  Let off the accelerator and cover your brake, or at least look for evasive action options in case.  It seems ridiculous that we have to be so defensive, but on the other hand, these guys in KC will probably be second guessing their actions forever, even if they had nothing to do with the way things worked out.

 

Be alert to your surroundings, buckle up, and let’s all go home in the morning.