Read New York Times editorial on the Tennessee fiasco
Previous coverage of this story on STATter911.com
Before going into last night’s Firefighter Netcast I had only one problem with my good friend The Fire Critic’s views on the fire department in South Fulton, Tennessee letting a family’s home burn to the ground because a $75 fee wasn’t paid. Now I have two problems.
In his opening monologue describing the events, Rhett Fleitz did what I have seen and heard many a fire chief do when the bad news showed up on radio, TV and the newspapers. Rhett almost reflexively blamed the news media for sensationalizing this story. Rhett you are definitely chief material with natural reactions like that. There is a future for you buddy.
But let me give you a reality check with this ancient lesson from the news business. Dog biting man is not news. Man biting dog is. I know Rhett that you are probably still trying to figure out why I brought this old saying into the conversation last night, so let me put it another way. Firefighters putting out a house fire often isn’t news. Firefighters sitting and watching a house burn is (if you still don’t get it, ask Willie to explain it to you).
There are a lot of citizen commentaries like this on YouTube. It gives you an indication of the depth of the emotion with this story and the reputation problem the fire service faces. Click here for more.
I can be as a big a critic of my former profession as anyone, but this is in no way, shape or form a problem of the news media hyping a story. This story doesn’t need hyping. Rhett’s objection was the headline “Firefighters watch as home burns”. That isn’t hype. That’s a fact and a very accurate headline.
In fact, Rhett bringing this up really does my job and makes my argument about this case. It’s simple. This wouldn’t have been a story making news around the world if the fire department did what fire departments are supposed to do and put out the fire. Yes, there is a lot more to this issue and it is much more complicated than that. But that’s the bottom line.
During our debate Rhett said he still stands by his other comment that caused me to wonder if he really has a clue about what he is saying as he tries to juggle the content of multiple blogs (the other day the man I used to call ”the hardest working man in the fire service blog business” was so desperate for content he put naked boobs on FireCritic.com). Rhett says he still believes, “The only thing that failed here was the homeowner not paying the fee. Everything else operated as it should.”
I will explain it again to all of my friends who agree with Rhett. And looking at the comments, there are quite a few of you. This is a case where you can’t just say the rules are the rules, and make sure each one is followed to the letter. It draws you to the wrong conclusion.
Yes, you can point to the requirements and say that the homeowner blew it and give the example that GEICO won’t let you make a claim on car insurance that you buy after you total your car. You and Rhett are technically correct on each one of these points. But you are morally wrong (not that I am normally an arbiter of morals) and it is the wrong answer for the fire service.
Your correct assessment of the individual facts doesn’t mean your answer to this problem is correct. In this case it’s just the opposite. You’re failing to see the big picture (now who is sounding like a fire chief?).
It is the job of the fire service to be there when someone else is having the worst day of their lives, no matter how wrong they are for getting themselves in that situation. In this case the fire service blew it big time and it is once again costing a great amount of reputation equity.
Let me give you an insurance analogy that better relates to this case. You have no health insurance. You take your child to the emergency room with a badly fractured leg. Because of the lack of insurance does the doctor refuse to treat your kid or tell you to come back when the leg is infected and his life is in danger? You know the answer to that and that should have been the answer in South Fulton.
But to me this is not really a problem with the firefighters on the scene. I know there are many of you think they should have disobeyed orders and attacked the fire. I don’t blame the front line firefighters. But I do blame the fire department. A distinction lost on my friend Rhett last night (and he is my friend and I continue to defend his right to be wrong). Even the woman whose son decked the fire chief agrees this wasn’t the fault of the firefighters.
But the Fire Department should never have put those firefighters in that position. They were set up to fail. Yes, I know there is a great responsibility by Obion County, its citizens and the political leaders of South Fulton in this matter. That is not lost on me. But the fire department shouldn’t allow everyone else to put them in a position that goes against what being a firefighter is all about.
If this is truly a policy dictated by others and not the fire department, than this is one one of those rare situations where the fire chief, backed by his firefighters, must collectively hold their breath until they turn blue. They need to take a stand.
And I am hoping the leadership in fire departments all over the country where this scenario can and does happen will look at this black eye to the fire service and realize they don’t want their department to become the next postor child for this issue.
Rhett tells me not all of the municipal departments providing fire protection service for Obion County operate this way. According to Rhett some don’t charge at all and others have a policy similar to the one I’ve shown from the Karns VFD, a Tennessee department about five hours to the east of South Fulton.
In case you missed it, Karns is implementing subscription fire protection. But they are smart enough not to put themselves in this untenable position of having to refuse to put out a fire. They will do what firefighters are supposed to do, but after it’s the smoke clears the homeowner will get a hefty bill for the fire department’s services. Not ideal, but it saves firefighters from being the man who bit the dog.
Also on STATter911 …
- Pay for spray in South Fulton, Tennessee could be changed today. Town is voting on putting out the fire & billing later. – March 15, 2012
- ‘Pay for spray’ update: Tennessee’s South Fulton FD says it was not on scene of controversial fire. Local chief says Kentucky company got close but had no authority to act. – December 9, 2011
- South Fulton Mayor David Crocker makes Keith Olbermann’s ‘Worst Persons’. – December 7, 2011
- Don’t vote for me! I mean it. But I do have a suggestion. Also, listen to Tiger & Glenn tonight. – January 12, 2011
Comments
Powered by Facebook Comments
think this is way wrong
The statement (Rhett) in the netcast trying to relate to a denial of PSOB payment in a LODD because the victim was not supposed to be there is a big, big stretch. We’ve already seen, and will continue to see, LODDs that the actions at the time of death were and are questionable. PSOB will hardly ever be an instrument in changing administrative policy.
Bill Carey
Yes dave, I understand what makes news.
You sure do have a lot to say today…last night I heard you tell me I was right numerous times…
I will have more of a response for you tonight. Thanks for joining us last night!
If anyone missed it, you can listen to it at http://blogtalkradio.com/firefighternetcast
Read what I’ve written Rhett. It is very consistent. I have focused on your one stupid comment that you should be smart enough to apologize for. It’s okay to admit you are wrong Rhett. It will make you a bigger man. And everyone knows you need that.
Of course you are right about the rules. I have never said you weren’t. It’s your faulty conclusion and this smokescreen about the press. People who don’t have a good argument always blame the news media.
I look forward to your response. You might want to have Willie edit it so you don’t blow it for a third time.
Statter
Dave, your example of the hospital treating the broken leg is off the mark. In your example, the hospital has no real risk to treat the uninsured patient. The hospital simply gets stuck with the bill. If the uninsured patient posed a significant risk to the hopsital or its staff and the hopsital’s insurance limited its protection I’m not so sure that broken leg would get treatment. I am no fan of subscription services, but if that is what your community uses, then shame on you if you shirk your personal responsibility to support the system by paying your dues. In this environment, we should not be encouraging people to shirk their personal responsibility to support these services. We vilify people like Xinos who doesn’t see any value in the fire service, but we more or less defend this homeowner who felt the fire service wasn’t worth $75 a year. Our message should be that everyone needs to do their part, because it is likely that you will need the assistance at some point in your life and the outcome of not having adequate service is dreadful.
Steve,
There is no more significant risk in fighting this fire than one at the home of one subscribes to the service. What about the homeowner who tries to fight the fire himself or herself and gets trapped? Then the fire department says they will step in because there is a life safety problem.
I am not defending the homeowner. His wife says they overlooked it. That it wasn’t intentional. That they’ve paid it in the past. How many times have you overlooked a bill? I know I have missed a few.
This system also relies on the fire department not overlooking that they received the payment. How many of you have departments that never make mistakes in bookkeeping?
You guys should stop defending a system that has always been broken, leaves too much room for error and will make all firefighters look bad.
Statter
Dave,
You’re spot on except in one regard. It is as much the Firefighters on scene at fault as the Fire Chief. As a Fireman I have a moral obligation to do what is right and not simply stand by when what I know is wrong goes down. This includes willfully disobeying orders that are patently stupid, wrong, and/or dangerous. I’m having trouble wrapping my head around the fact that the FD responded to this fire and then did nothing to protect this family’s property. I don’t know how many Firefighters responded, but apparently there wasn’t even one amongst them with a moral compass to do the right thing. Of course doing the right thing doesn’t get you popular or top shelf spots at brand name companies within your department or allow you to zoom up the career ladder and I suppose that’s why I’m “stuck” at my current rank and why I’m tasked with protecting the particular piece of real estate I’m assigned to in my jurisdiction, but it does garner me a certain amount of respect from the brothers with whom I serve, and management does know one thing for certain about me: I will always do the right thing. And so it is with this incident, if only ONE Fireman had been present and opened a single hoseline on this house, even if it was from 500 ft. away, this wouldn’t be the story that it is and the Fire Service as a whole wouldn’t have a black eye. It IS possible to be 100% technically correct and 100% wrong at the same time.
Oldhead,
You are not going to get an argument from me on this point. It is also my gut reaction. But I am having a tough time putting the blame on the firefighters stuck this stupid system. Right now I would just hope the firefighters are stepping up in a different way demanding that their chiefs and political leaders change a system that will continue to take chunks out of their Side C if it is not abolished.
Statter
Oldhead hits the nail on the head. We are not mindless automatons, that only move when the white hats give us permission to.
If you are given an unjust or inhumane command than it becomes your moral obligation to refuse that order. I think of Hugh Thompson, the helicopter pilot at My Lai, having the brass to do the right thing. I happen to become very uncomfortable with the statement, “we were just following orders.” These words rang hollow at the Nuremberg Trials, and although this action isn’t even close in level of disgust and horror, they ring hollow here.
I think of the Berlin Airlift when the Soviet Union attempted to starve the people of Berlin. There were plenty of Americans that were recalled to active service and risked their lives to feed the people that just 3 years earlier they had been doing their best to kill. When Gail Halvorsen dropped his candy bombs on the children of Berlin he was disobeying orders, and very quickly his superiors realized the goodwill they would generate in the press and with the people of Germany by bending the rules. Would we argue that their parents had made their decision to support the Nazi Party, and therefore forfeited their right to life and liberty.
The citizens of this district have a bad system, but I am amazed by what I’ve read from other postings. In my large southern municipality stations and personnel are utilized to afford the most complete protection to the most people. We don’t put more stations, with more personnel, and more apparatus in the wealthy neighborhoods that pay more taxes. Wealthy people pay more taxes, and they get the same service as the rest of the folks in the city.
The system is flawed, the local officials are flawed, but that didn’t mean the fire service had to be flawed in this situation.
With much respect,
TG
Gordo,
The “just following orders” line entered my mind a couple of times as I have been writing about this story. As I told Oldhead, there is no doubt you are right about standing up to an unjust or inhumane command.
How many firefighters have disobeyed orders for a lot lesser things that this?
But again that isn’t my focus. This is not a failure of a citizens failing to pay a bill as my friend Rhett keeps hanging his hat on, this is a failure of leadership. That is my focus.
Thanks.
Statter
A question from a statement in the netcast; what do we (the career and volunteer fire service) expect when we read the IAFF statement and as Rhett mentioned, and wonder where the NVFC statement is? How about the IAFC as well? What are we actually looking for when it is said that these organizations should weigh in on the subject? Are we looking for some guidance or a bullet list of budget and public relations remedies? Their opinion will make as much a difference as the IAFF’s did, and listening to friends who are career firefighters in my area, about as worthy as the paper it is printed on.
This didn’t even make the “Secret List.”
What good do we think nationally recognized organizations will play in the matter? All politics is local and just like firehouse roulette, this subscription issue will come up again.
Bill Carey
I can tell you from experience this has happened for years where subscription fire agencies exist. In a state in the SW the subscription department will come and put the fire out, not leaving firefighters in a bad decision place, and then charge you a fee; permitted by the governing state agency. To place firefighters and chief officers in this position to make that decision is reprehensible. To chastise the firefighters formnot taking action is also reprehensible> I remember a case in a lareg city in the SW state that disciplined a three person engine compnay for going outside the city limits to a vehicle accident, with fire. The saved the driver and then took a three day suspension. As our good friend would say WTF? Never place our fireifghters in this position.
“There is no more significant risk in fighting this fire than one at the home of one subscribes to the service. What about the homeowner who tries to fight the fire himself or herself and gets trapped? Then the fire department says they will step in because there is a life safety problem.”
This scenario will play out in the future, much like the “food on the stove with child locked inside” type of calls that are in our area, when the non-subscriber becomes savvy and decides to lie to the dispatcher.
Bill Carey
Dave you are 100% correct on this one. We as firefighters are supposed to protect life and property. Money is not suppose to have a factor. We are suppose to help the poor and the rich and everyone in between. As a career firefighter, I also understand the money side of the business, but when an event happens you throw the money out the window and you do what is morally right. This is what sets our profession above the rest.
While we are at it, lets stopping sending EMS/Ambulance Services to those folks without health insurance!!!
What I keep coming back to with this story is Chief Brunacini’s mission statement for Phoenix Fire Department and much of the fire service: “Prevent harm. Survive. Be nice.” Clearly, South Fulton FD failed on the first and last actions, and somehow I don’t think survival of a $75 business model counts either.
Since first reading about this story yesterday morning on this site, I’ve taken the past 24 hours to clam down and take more than a few very deep breaths.
It was working until went for breakfast at my normal spot this morning. Before I was even seated a waitress asked me, “Did you hear about those firemen who watched that fella’s home burn down?” After several minutes of trying to explain to her – and the dozen or so diners – the how’s and why’s (to no avail), I finished my breakfast and beat a hasty retreat.
I arrived home and decided to listen to the archive of lastnight’s FirefighterNetCast. I was going to listen to all of it, but after 44 minutes of it, I was fuming again, and closed the player. I’ll get back to this in a moment.
I spent the better part of yesterday trying to seperate the hype from the facts surrounding this tragedy/travesty. Here are the facts as I know them:
The home owner was burning trash when his fire spread to a harvested cornfield. He called 9-1-1 and South Fulton FD and two other (automatic mutal aid) FDs were dispatched. Before responding, all untis were cancelled by the South Fulton Fire Chief because the home owner was a “non-subscriber”, not having paid the $75 subscription fee. As the now uncontrolled fire increased in size, the home owner made repeated calls to 9-1-1: when the fire threatened (and eventually spread to) outbuildings and eventually his home. Each time he was informed the FD would not be responding because he wasn’t a paid subscriber. When the flames spread to vegetation of a neighbor – who just happened to have paid the $75 fee – the South Fulton FD and two mutual aid FDs DID repsond. Upon arrival they tended to the vegetation burning on the subscriber’s property and left the flames on the non-subscribers property unchecked.
Now, back to lastnight’s podcast: Mr Fleitz made some comments that – like this entire situation – need to be addressed. Included amongst them:
1)”the media bandwagon hyped this story.” I am no defender of the media, but in this particular case they did what they often fail to do – they told the facts. The headlines read, “Firefighters watch house burn.” The only thing that may be inaccurate is the term ‘firefighters’.
2)”What was supposed to happen. It was predictable.” SERIOUSLY, Rhett?! Firefighters are “supposed” to watch a person’s home and belongings and memories be detroyed instead of doing what they’ve (hopefully) been trained to do, which is STOP IT? If it was some damn “predictable”, why didn’t the South Fulton FD has a contingency plan for such a case as “non-subscriber’s” home burning. Perhaps they’re so undertrained that they thought “surround and drown” was simply “surround”.
3)”…for the good of everyone.” I can’t (without the use of exorbitant amount of profanity) respond to this, other than to ask Mr Fleitz to explain to the home owner how “good” it was for him and his family.
4) Finally, Mr Flietz, and his co-host, repeatedly blame the home owner for this. There are two ways I could try to rebuff this ignorance. The first way is to liken it to blaming a rape victim for wearing a certain type of clothing, except that the rape victim wouldn’t be expecting the rapist to assist her. The second way is more to the point and a but more realistic: Rhett, the homeowner says he simply “forgot” to pay the fee. Have you never forgotten anything, Rhett? Are you going to blame the next non-payer who chose to spend the $75 on feeding her family instead? Poverty in rural America – particularly in TN and the rest of Appalachia – is rampant. Such a likelihood is very possible.
Speaking of rural America, the United States Department of Agriculture has a USDA Rural Development program that provides loans and grants to individuals and businesses AND FIRE DEPARTMENTS in rural areas. I’m curious to know whether South Fulton FD ever got any monies from this program, and if so whether their inaction violates any guidelines or policies governing the use of the monies.
As for the “you gotta do what the chief officer tells you” crowd, I call BULLS*IT! How can you possibly stand by and watch someone’s home burn – not to mention doing so as the home owner is begging and pleading you to act? Fight the fire, do what you’re REALLY “supposed to” do!
In closing, Mr Fleitz said something 8:13 into the podcast that I can actually agree with him on. He said, “I don’t think. I don’t think.” Agreed, Rhett. Agreed.
Thanks for letting me vent, Dave. You saved me a visit to an anger management therapist.
The only problem with your post Clark is Rhett is going to think I wrote it.
Statter
Dave,
I couldn’t agree more on the failure of leadership, both those appointed and those elected, but once resources were dispatched to deal with the neighbor’s home, they should have stopped following orders.
Dave, I am in total agreement with you. I think a lot of people are looking for a reason to support another fire fighter or department getting some bad press. However, this is a case of poor policy not being thought through and a world where even small town news can be national news in a matter of seconds. As you said, fire fighters putting out fires isn’t a big news story…but failing to do so is. Any department who uses subscription needs to think it through. How quickly would a police department get on the news for not responding? What about EMS refusing to transport without payment?
I know this was outside of city limits and this is a “service” they offer to county residents. But no one thought out the perception factor if someone didn’t pay. Short sighted management has exposed them to so much grief. Kudos to Karns fire for using some brain power when designing their subscription.
Dave,
Agree with you 100%. There is a huge discrepancy between “everything happened as far as SOPs, regulations, etc.” and “everything happened as it SHOULD.” When we took our oath to protect lives and property there was no stipulation.
Those fire departments are to blame if for no other reason than they weren’t proactive enough to work with the local government and fix that “archaic, broken” system as you put it.
This is the best analogy I can come up with. A trauma surgeon comes upon an accident scene and notices a person injured in the accident bleeding out but fails to render aid.
Some things should never happen.
Dave:
What you are asking for is anarchy.
I am a former chief and currently, I serve as president of the board of trustees for our fire district, so there is plenty that is wrong with me!
First; I would never have a process in place that would deny, even by default, the benefits of our services. Those not taxed for it would pay a user’s fee.
To promote or condone the notion that this fire department should have violated a policy because it was the moral thing to do opens up the fire service for various insubordinate acts.
You know and I know that, if an LT. instructs a firefighter to do something, he’d better damn well do it or face the consequences. If that firefighter says, “no, I have a morality problem with that order”, exactly how far will he go when he’s kicked in the ass? End of the tarmac or across the street?
And the reasoning at his hearing will be that “orders must be followed to maintain chain of command and discipline”. And the relationship between the chief and the board of trustees is no different. Board sets the policy and the chief follows them.
If subscribers are told that they will receive no service if they don’t sign up, then what was the expectation?
And to correct a minor error, in the earliest interview, Catrick said he didn’t pay the fee, but thought they would come anyway. As you can see, he didn’t “forget”. His “I forgot” story was honed for Keith Olbermann. Doesn’t matter, I know.
I don’t fault the media. It’s news and worthy of coverage.
I blame an antiquated system, tempered by poor policy and poor execution.
We can “what if” this into perpetuity and we can express our strong opinions until the cows come home, but we weren’t there.
I can only tell you that I was strapped with poor policy as chief and we got them changed. Period.
And that is what needs to be done in Obion County.
Chief,
I used the terms anarchy and chaos last night when talking about a firefighter not listening to orders. I agree with you that would be the case. What Texas Gordo and some others are saying is that anarchy may be what’s needed to right a wrong. And I believe the way this was handled is wrong (I know we disagree on that.)
While I completely understand Gordo’s point, sympathize with it and wonder what I would do in that situation, it is not the point I have been trying to make. In fact I am not focusing on the firefighters actions at all. I am amazed that the leadership in the fire department and in government allows it to get to this point.
In a press conference (see my latest post) a few local chiefs are finally showing the public some leadership on this issue saying they have been trying to get rid of this subscription service and want to ditch it, but the county rejects their plan and wants instead to expand subscription service to the rest of the county. The problem is the chiefs should have shown this leadership immediately after the fire occurrred. Not a week later.
And they shouldn’t give up on this. They have the attention of the public for the moment. This is one you don’t give up on until you win. As we have seen the stakes are too high. It is the fire department’s reputation on the line. They can’t afford to lose the trust of the community any more than they have already.
Thanks for writing chief.
Statter
I apologize for mispelling the homeowners last name. It should be “Cranick”.
I offer no excuse.
Only wish that there was an “edit” feature.
Rogue Medic posted a message from one of the chief officers:
“The chiefs of Obion County have worked for 4 years to offer the county a proposal of a fire tax or just fund the 8 municipality fire departments a mere $360,000 to provide ALL residences of the county fire protection, however the current county commission refuses to force a tax upon our citizens.
Now a word about Mr Cranick, he was sent 3 letters reminding him of his fire dues, after that they called him 3 times and each time he said he would come and pay tomorrow, after the third phone call the dept dropped his name off the list.
The fact of starting a fire in burn barrel when we have not seen rain in two months is not that smart anyways, it then spread to a shed and after 30 minutes of trying to put out the shed he finally calls 911 knowing quite well they failed to pay for the subscription.
The FD did respond after a paying neighbor called that the fire was spreading toward their house and they responded and extinguished the grass fire and then returned to quarters. They did not stand there and watch it burn.”
http://roguemedic.com/2010/10/comment-from-a-fire-fighter-in-obion-county/
You know Ward, I listened to you last night. You didn’t offer much in the way of an opinion. Just these facts. I think you just like to stir the pot and are trying to keep you neck from being chopped off and falling into that pot.
A lot of the facts came out in the press conference that Bill and I both posted. Bill has the reporter package. I have the raw video. I don’t care how many letters they sent him. It’s a bad system that needs to be changed and clearly some of the chiefs agree.
I am just wondering if they could have done more before the fire. They certainly should have been heard the day of the fire and not waited a week.
Statter
This bring a whole new meaning to the term Abandoned House.
Ray: Amen.
Dave
Dave: “I am just wondering if they could have done more before the fire. They certainly should have been heard the day of the fire and not waited a week.”
probably need a fire-oriented media specialist to guide them (!!)
In this environment you need someone like that before it hits the fan. If they had been out there the day of the incident with this press conference (or at the very least a day after) they would have been better off and at least shown they have been trying to solve the problem.
Still doesn’t solve the issue of not putting out the fire. Ray McCormack called this a “new meaning to the term Abandoned House.”
I call this an “offensive operation”. The operation sure as hell offended me.
Ray McCormack called this a “new meaning to the term Abandoned House.”
I call this an “offensive operation”. The operation sure as hell offended me.
Two UPDATED terms for the 21st century fire service!
Perhaps Tennessee should alter their state motto to “Tennessee: The Volunteer if you pay state”. Either way, it sure gives “fire stand-by” a whole new meaning.
No; I believe that the correct term is fire watch.
Clark; it could also be Tennessee; I volunteered to pay; I didn’t say I would, State.
I think the fire service in our country has had enough time to evolve past this pathetic scenario. The fire protection fee for every property in America should be automatically deducted from the county tax bill. Make it a federal law. The fire service doesn’t need a tarnished reputation and exposures don’t need to burn because someone ran out of checks.
No small irony this discussion is taking place during Fire Prevention Week.
i live in obion county, the 75.00 is to put you on the list that is all . if they come out they charce you 500.00 . after the put out the fire .and if there is a fire in the city at the same time , the city fire comes first. so if they are at you house , and a fire breaks out in town . they will leave you still burning,so really can you say extrotion money for half ass protection
I bet everyone pays their $75 next year. End of problem !
“.. they will leave you still burning,so really can you say extrotion money for half ass protection…”
What an ingrate. That city fire department does not owe you anything. Start your own county fire department. Ben Franklin did it, so can you. As the Chief, I would cut my agreements with the county at the first opportunity. Interestingly, no one from county government is stepping forward. This is their problem, not the city firefighters. Heck, I am amazed that the city offered even the level of service that they do.
Admittedly I am not in Tennessee but, in my community, to staff a fire station with career firefighters is somewhere in the vicinity of a million bucks in on-going operating expense. You can’t run a fire department on cost-recovery basis from a homeowner. (4 positions funded per 24 hr shift, 24/7/365, FLSA is a bitch)
I suspect that you have a bunch of self-professed, independent country folk. They cry when they get taxed and yet they want municipal services. Can’t have it both ways.
If your are so concerned start a community VFD. You got some time, maybe you become the Chief.
You are missing part of the problem, dave. if the house was in the jurisdiction covered by their insurance, then fight the fire and bill them, it wasn’t. there was a clause in their policy to allow them to deal with situations outside there area but only if they are subscribers, they weren’t. bad situation. the officers of the department should have anticipated this, but didn’t. the county should have anticipated this but didn’t care. bad news all the way around but had one person gotten hurt on a fire and not been covered, it would probably ruin their family financially and close the department for good. no good outcome in this situation any way it goes.
No argument there Robert. But the biggest sin here to me is not putting water on the fire once you are on the scene. You can justify doing that as exposure protection.
Statter
Everyone seems to want to blame the Chief and the Firefighters on scene, my question is this; “What would the County’s discipline have been to those on scene, had they disobeyed the County SOP’s and supressed that fire?” Unless the critics of that FD know that, then they need to stop being “Armchair Quarterbacks”.
I am a Career Firefighter (in a tax funded area), who started out a a Volunteer Firefighter for another FD, and I am usually blessed with a “zen” balance, I can neither condone nor critisize the actions of that FD, because I was not their, am not a memeber and do not reside in that area. What I do know, is that Politicians and City managers tend to come down on FD’s pretty hard when theeir directives/SOP’s are disobeyed.
The only one I truly find at fault is the homeowner, who knew that the tax was not paid, but got angry when service was not provided. I know that if you do not pay your; cable, phone, water, electric, auto, home or life insurance bills, that you are not provided the service or benefits. So simply put, did the FD follow the SOP’s, statutes, Directives or such as set out by the County, answer yes. Is that the fault of the homeowner, yes, because the fee should have been paid period.
There was no reported life safety issues, exposures were protected, and let us not forget that this was a mobile home, which as we all know, unless we get there almost immediately and sometimes even then, are usually going to be a “Defensive Operation” are you going to risk your crews life to save a mobile home, 2 Volunteer Firefighters in West VA. died in 2009 because of a decision like that, I know, because I drove 10 hours total through 2 states, to attend their services on my day off. The NIOSH report, although correct, was still pretty harsh, especially for a small all Volunteer Fire Department, whose budget is rather small.
Now would I have done the same thing, that is a question with lots of variables, but let me say this, I am not going to put my job in jeopardy to save a property that had no life safety issues. I love the job, and to me being a firefighter is a way of life and a calling, but it is also how I pay my bills, and I am not going to risk my employment, so that I look better in “other peoples eyes”.
You can comment all you want, but as my Captain used to say in the 3rd/325th, “You have the right to say what you want, we will defend that, as we swore to do. But unless you were there, don’t be surprised if I punch you in the mouth…”
Simply put, unless you were there, plan to go there, or are from there it is none of your business. What they do in LAFD, FDNY, FWFD, SFFD, or BFEFD, has no bearing on me and my job, unless were are looking to adopt or discard something they do or do not do.
Concentrate on your own FD and your own community, because I bet when you do that, then you will see, that you may not want to be throwing rocks at plate glass houses.
Sgt. Christian
Quad 5/Engine 2
BTw; And what would our discussion have been, had a Firefighter been injured/killed or a “Close Call” had happened, while attempting to supress this fire.
“Little Gain, Little Risk… Big Gain, Big Risk”
Sgt. Robert Christian
Quad 5/Engine 2