|
Post by Medic13 on Aug 27, 2006 21:02:57 GMT -5
I know it's been briefly discussed before, but I think it deserves a closer look. I realize it's more a younger-folk type of thinking... does anyone else think that minimum standards of training at the state, regional, or county level would help the fire service as a whole? I'm not saying I think we should regulate every aspect of the fire service as much as EMS, but I do think that minimum levels of training for the basic positions in the department would help both the department in itself and the fire service as a whole. One common question in this area is the requirements to be an interior firefighter. Dept A might require FF1, structural burn, and hazmat operations... whereas Dept B only requires IST, in-house SCBA training, and a case of beer for the chief. I know the two are opposite ends of the spectrum, but wouldn't Essentials be a happy medium for a baseline? If Dept A and B are on the same box alarm, isn't similar training a legitimate safety issue? What about officers? There are actually line officers in this county who have little to no formal fire training, let alone an incident command class, yet can take command of scenes. There are even a few officers who aren't even considered green tags in their department... thats right... they've never been in a burning building, never used a rescue tool, yet their department allows them to command a scene and give orders. That's just asking for trouble. Aside from the obvious safety issue, it's a hell of a liability. To me, it just makes sense to have minimum training for officers. What does everyone think about the idea of having minimum standards of training for specific positions such as interior firefighters, rescue techs, and officers? If minimum training requirements were enacted, who would enforce them? Is it really a problem on a large scale, or is it more a department-by-department issue?
|
|
devildancer22
Full Member
anything I may post is my opinion only and may not be the opionion of others.
Posts: 32
|
Post by devildancer22 on Aug 29, 2006 16:17:31 GMT -5
Pete have to agree with you i also know of a few departments that require very minimum training or none at all to be a line officer back before i joined dept 22 it was like that here but after some changes we probably require more training to be an fire line officer or even fire police officer then some of the bigger Co's. Just to be a chief officer here you must have Esst or FF1,2 yrs fire ground experience and had to be a lower line officer for 1 year, arson investigation , incident command, green tag firefighter, must live in the coverage area,evoc and must be certified on all fire trucks and after we take the basic vehicle rescue class in oct and this coming spring that also will be added next year for a requirement even though we do not run a rescue that is provided to us by Canton or North Towanda To be a lower officer you must have esst or FF1, green tag fire fighter one year fire ground experience certified on all trucks. To be fire police Capt or Lt you must have ist , ri ,4hr hazmat refresher every 2 yrs, first aid CPR, basic fire police advance fire police and legal aspects of fire police now as far as being a interior fire fighter we try to get them Esst. or Respiratory One class as they become available if they don't have these classes but have in house training they can only do overhaul type work at a fire scene but must be with a interior firefighter or officer that has those classes or they don't do any type of scba work. But i think before it comes down to the state or county requiring that training i think the fire co's should require some type of training themselves to be safe and keep there people safe by having some training especially if you have to go to court better have some type of state training to fall back on or your probably going to get laughed right out of court.
|
|
|
Post by chief322 on Sept 2, 2006 15:57:56 GMT -5
I agree that a minimum amount of training should be required to maintain "firefighter" status as well as being a task or command level officer. That being said though, I do not believe in "grandfathering" any individual regardless of past experience or training. This seems to happen regularly throughout the fire service. As much as I have a bad taste for EMS, I applaude and support their (EMS) regulations for continuing eduction to maintain certification as well as requiring recert after so many years. I believe this should be required in the voluntary fire service as well.
Speaking as a former CFO, I have not taken an active training course as related to my field in over 5 years. Does this mean I should rest on my laurels, NO. It is for this reason I have retired. I have noticed many departments (or companies) within this county that have placed training requirements on their members only to grandfather those that have been their for umpteen years. Is this fair to those that you are trying to retain for the future?
It seems to me what is good for the goose is good for the gander, so to speak.
Lastly, speaking as a former CFO, are we above these standards as laid out?
I think not!
I will just enjoy my retirement and be an arm-chair quarterback.
Tim
|
|
|
Post by 921batt on Sept 9, 2006 13:08:53 GMT -5
I think that ANY standard in training will serve us well especially for the less experienced members. However there is no substitute for many years of experience.
You guys are scaring me up there, I don't want to go back to school to remain active in the fire service.
Just be kind to us Old Dogs. Ya know what they say about us learning new tricks. Just let us hone, refine and adapt our old ways to the new certificate oriented cover your buttox fire service. I've gotta say that some of the certificates I have recieved throughout my career were not worth the paper they were written on (not even suitable for wiping).
So when I take up residence there I may just be joining Tim with my own arm-chair and play post incident quarterback. But if you guys let me play without going to every school out there I may take a more active role.
Retirement is near! Joe
|
|
|
Post by 911wacker on Sept 18, 2006 0:48:59 GMT -5
As much as I have a bad taste for EMS, I applaude and support their (EMS) regulations for continuing eduction to maintain certification as well as requiring recert after so many years. I believe this should be required in the voluntary fire service as well. Bravo Sir, Well siad. In my opinion here the problem is fear of loosing more volunteers, granted some of these people are not helpfull and even dangerous because they have limited or no training. Nobody (lawmakers) wants to chance it.
|
|
|
Post by 4157 on Sept 18, 2006 3:11:35 GMT -5
It'd be nice if there would be a set of protocols, or SOG's that was enacted for entire regions. The biggest problem I see with the fire service is a lack of organization, accountability, obvious gaps in safety training and a whole list that I don't even know where to start.
EMS isn't all that great either; Pennsylvania is so far behind, it actually seems that every improvement takes us a step behind. Granted, we're not the worst state, as far as EMS goes. The regulation is basically on paper, and that's about it. We train to do better, but more often, most train because they have to, or they lose their certs. But, look up the EMS office administrative actions. Loss of certs doesn't stop them. Some people go five or six years before it is realized their EMT # isn't valid. One service in Eastern PA operated with no EMT's at all for years, and that was only discovered during an inspection. It seems their license had not been renewed since licensure was on a voluntary basis, that was in the 80's. At least we have modern regulations, in PA, ambulances must conform to federal laws and a list of specifications set by the NHTSA (google that, I don't have time to explain it). Some states set off on their own, through a loop hole in that federal code. If your ambulance is a certified Star of Life ambulance (look inside the oxygen compartment, there should be a placcard). You must conform to any regulation as set by your region, state and the federal government. However, in some states, North Dakota, Oregon, Washington, Utah, Idaho, California, New Jersey; to name a few, if you do not have a Star of Life certified ambulance (or do not put a Star of Life on your ambulance) you only have to comply with state regulations. North Dakota only requires the ceiling height in an ambulance to be 48". So, as long as your equipment and cot fits, you could still use a car based ambulance or a Type 4. You don't hear that one too often, most ambulances in this region are Type 2 or Type 3; 57's rigs are Type 1. Type 4 are sedans, like a Cadillac. They still use sedan based ambulances widely in Europe.
Since I volunteer, and speaking from my own point of view, we are our own worst enemy for the future of rural and sub-urban emergency services. What is a widely used excuse when it comes to a lapse in training? Volunteers. There is no way in hell to get rid of us, we're here to stay. But, I have to ask myself sometimes, why are we here? I volunteer because I enjoy it, I like the adrenaline rush every time the pager goes off, a little bit of danger, the thrill of fighting a fire; met a lot of great people; I don't care if we have to train 24 hours at a time, I like gaining new knowledge, keeps me safe and crewmates safe-which makes the whole team safe; I wouldn't quit. However, I question what some people have in mind when it comes to "emergency services". (I say that b/c it's pretty much mutual btwn. fire & EMS). The people who drive really fast with their big flashing light, put on the gear, get out and know only that fire, when uncontrolled, is bad; and you have to put water on it. But can't operate the pumps, can't tell if the bad fire is going to need water, foam, purple K, dry chem, or if what's burning is going to go out upon application of the water, or blow them to hell because it was a tub of sodium. Use that as an example sometime, you know what they'll say.. That'll never happen. But it could.. and what will you do? Probably kill yourself and everyone else.
I was taught when fighting a fire that you stay with your apparatus, get your orders and follow them. I see all too often that when a fire apparatus arrives at the scene, the firefighters doff the truck, and scatter like marbles. If your lucky, the driver will stay, but that luck is shattered when he/she doesn't know how to operate the pump. The last actual working fire I attended, a mutual aid call, I was executing my assigned duty. The OIC of our apparatus assigns each person a duty for arrival and set up, once that is complete, or trouble shooted; the personnel return to the apparatus and get reassigned. This is called a safety and accountability strategy. It works. Some companies need to try it. It took longer to execute my duty, because the truck I pulled 700' of LDH to didn't have a crew. They were free lancing, standing around in the collapse zone looking up as if the Hooters girls were dancing on the roof. Then you have the ones who show up in their, as it was coined, turn out shorts and bunker shoes, with the ultra TBI resistant Nascar cap, or as I call them Larry the fire guys. Climbing buildings with ladder placement, obviously learned from watching the Three Stooges fire brigade, errr I mean, training videos. Not that it's going to matter what your wearing when you slip on that ice and fall off a two story roof, while pulling 1 3/4" lines up ground ladders to third story roofs to apply water to the upper stories of another building, just like they do... In 1906.
Where would you start with training for 2006 and beyond?
I have no idea.. I'm not a TO, or a FSI. Take everyone that is capable of doing the job, and wants to do it; sit them down and say, X is what you need to do X. Angry? Well, if you want to do X, you need X training. If the interest is high enough for X, get with Dept. B, C, D, Etc. and ask them if they have anyone interested in X. Set up a schedule, you want all firefighters in the region to be trained in: the basics, start from scratch. Get your new guys, your old guys, the in-betweens.. IST, Hazmat, First Aid, IC, EVO, SCBA, Essentials, live burn, RIT, structural SAR, live burn, BVR, FF1, live burn, VRT, fire officer courses, etc.
Even is Dept. A doesn't have a rescue tool, but Dept. B does, but they lack manpower; if Dept. A is trained, and has trained with Dept. B.. They'll know how to work with, instead of against.
It seems fairly simply on paper or in print, but it all goes to hell once it is verbalized.. always seems like the goal is even farther away. Frustrating. How do you solve it? That's not a question I can answer...
|
|
|
Post by 911wacker on Sept 19, 2006 18:22:14 GMT -5
EMS isn't all that great either; Pennsylvania is so far behind, it actually seems that every improvement takes us a step behind. Granted, we're not the worst state, as far as EMS goes. It may be flawed but its a start and a far cry better than no guideline at all.
|
|
|
Post by 4157 on Sept 20, 2006 0:09:08 GMT -5
EMS isn't all that great either; Pennsylvania is so far behind, it actually seems that every improvement takes us a step behind. Granted, we're not the worst state, as far as EMS goes. It may be flawed but its a start and a far cry better than no guideline at all. I'm not indicating that the present protocols or operational standards are what is flawed. I was more on what lacks from the protocols, and SOP's being "behind the times". If EMS was as unregulated as the fire service, you'd still be calling a funeral home for an ambulance.
|
|
|
Post by fireman31 on Sept 20, 2006 16:32:46 GMT -5
i would like to bring you folks back to the beginning of this thread. witch was training. just to help you under stand some people do work nights and weekends in a odd rotation. some people only get one weekend a month off to spend however myself i have a family i try to spend my only weekend a month off with so its not that its hard to get people to take training it may be that they don't have the vacation to use for these classes. it was brought up in the training academy section of this pro board about day time training only one parson responded to this thread so if you want more training look in the right spots and consider other peoples schedules not everyone works the same schedule.
|
|
24wacker1
Full Member
Can't we all just get along?
Posts: 77
|
Post by 24wacker1 on Sept 20, 2006 18:20:52 GMT -5
so if you want more training look in the right spots and consider other peoples schedules not everyone works the same schedule. As the training coordinator for my department, I run into the same problem. There is one or maybe even two people that can't make the training that is normally scheduled because of their work hours. I can't bring in a state instructor for 2 people. And even getting a full roster for night and weekend classes is like pulling teeth. In house training is different. I usually try to schedule in house training for both a weekend day and a weeknight. The weeknight class is usually the same people that took the weekend class. They just don't have anything else to do on weeknights either. There is really nothing you can do about state training. 99 times out of 100 you can open a 16 hour daytime class to the entire county and still not have enough people. And as far as minimum standards go, in house training isn't suitable to wipe your butt with in court. To have a "minimum standard", you need to require state training. I would love to be able to schedule state training for weekdays, but unless the entire county quits their jobs, it's just not possible.
|
|
|
Post by 911wacker on Sept 22, 2006 9:02:07 GMT -5
In house training is different. See this is where you can make a difference, just because you are not a state instructor does not mean you cannot review the same kind of material so all your people can benefit. There are many downloadable drills online to review everything from essentials, initial attack and so on. If your in house trainings are derived from these "organized" drills, you'd be delivering nearly the same caliber of training.
|
|
|
Post by 4157 on Sept 22, 2006 14:57:53 GMT -5
Training on paper (certificates) is 100% useless if you cannot perform the tasks as trained.. Which is where in-house training comes in. If you forget a skill with out practicing it, that certificate is worthless.
|
|
24wacker1
Full Member
Can't we all just get along?
Posts: 77
|
Post by 24wacker1 on Sept 22, 2006 15:55:06 GMT -5
Training on paper (certificates) is 100% useless if you cannot perform the tasks as trained.. Which is where in-house training comes in. If you forget a skill with out practicing it, that certificate is worthless. Don't get me wrong here. I'm not saying that personel don't benefit from in house training. Most of the training that is scheduled in our station is in house. I'm just saying that as far as a "minimum standard of training" goes, in house training should not be considered. Who is to say that company "A" will train their personel the same as company "B" without a standard curriculum. I'm looking at the legal standpoint as well as quality of training. If department "A" is called into court with nothing on paper showing certification, then department "A" is going to be non existant.
|
|
|
Post by Medic13 on Sept 22, 2006 16:24:44 GMT -5
In-house training is 100% useless if you do not understand the tasks at hand. This is where training on paper (certificates) comes in.. if you don't know how to perform a skill properly, that in-house practice is worthless. ;D Combine the two... certified training enhanced by regular in-house practice. That dedication will undoubtedly produce better firefighters that can work together even if they don't know each other personally. There are several departents that train improperly to begin with. Just because someone has been doing something one way for 30 years doesn't mean it's right, safe, or current. The fire service is evolving. Firefighters should too.
|
|
24wacker1
Full Member
Can't we all just get along?
Posts: 77
|
Post by 24wacker1 on Sept 22, 2006 17:37:02 GMT -5
Well Said Thank you
|
|