Click the image to watch the interview with Commissioner Donald Austin.
Bill Carey at Backstep Firefighter sees flaws in the commissioner's comments
Saying, "There's not a building in the city that's worth losing a firefighter's life, particularly if it's vacant", Commissioner Donald Austin is setting policy for the Detroit Fire Department. The Detroit native, who spent his career in the Los Angeles Fire Department, calls the new policy, "kind of a paradigm shift".
The story comes from WDIV-TV. Here's more:
Detroit Fire Commissioner Donald Austin said firefighters would previously enter every building they responded to as a precaution. But now, Austin said, firefighters will only go into a burning building if there's a clear indication that someone is inside.
"Just to assume that a vacant building always has a squatter or a homeless person in there is kind of a false assumption," Austin said.
Austin said he'll be spreading the word to his chiefs to use caution, but ultimately the fire leader at the scene will have the final decision on whether to send firefighters into the building or not.
Also on STATter911 …
- Detroit Fire Commissioner proposes letting vacant buildings 50% involved burn to the ground. Donald Austin asked to make cut in next year’s budget. – April 22, 2012
- Is this ‘let it burn to the ground’ at work? Interesting video from Detroit. – May 8, 2012
- UPDATED – Fireground audio: Four firefighters hurt when dwelling explodes. Same neighborhood where six homes burned two nights ago. – September 20, 2012
- UPDATE – Belgian firefighter says TV reporter wrong that they paid $2K each for Detroit FD ride-along/training. LeDuff rains on critically acclaimed ‘Burn’ local premiere. – September 29, 2012
Comments
Powered by Facebook Comments
Having reading discussions on this issue in the firehouse.com forums, I am donning my official Statter911 flak jacket . Should be less name calling. Dave's an awfully good moderator.
Still waiting on the official secret decorder ring to arrive in the mail, however. That might be a good thing. I think these postings contain subliminal suggestions to buy Firegeezer mugs.
I guess I am a little less caring in my old age, but I think it's a good idea. Mr. Austin doesn't want to plan any F.F. funerals.
In a city like Detroit that has thousands upon thousands of vacant dwellings and buildings left to rot and weathered on for decades, Understaffed Fire Stations, Rampant arson…if it prevents another FF death…then it is worth it!
My 2 cents from Calif.
Fire Commissioner's Donald Austin's directive will Not be a "popular" one and despite the controversey this will undoubtly cause between the:
"You have to search every time" vs. the more conduct a " Fireground Risk Analysis" as outlined in the I-Chiefs Document -"Rules of Engagement"-2010 ed. will help in organizing the fireground to conduct safe operations.
Many times we've seen video's of fires being attacked in the "Offensive Mode" when it would be safer in the "Defensive Mode".
One of his biggest poblems is to maintain the current staffing levels after the City Council over rode the mayors Budget for Fy 2012 which includes reductions in the DFD. It's is"Oxymoronic" (in my view) due to the controversey that occured after last September's Major Wind Driven Fire event , the same day as California's PG &E San Bruno GasPipeline explosion.
Good Luck Commissioner!
Your changes may not be "Popular", but after 30 years in "LA" you know what to expect.
"Just to assume that a vacant building always has a squatter or a homeless person in there is kind of a false assumption," Austin said.
To me assuming every vacant building is empty without searching is also making a false assumption. A very dangerous assumption, like the reporter said "the city's 80,000 vacant buildings are often inhabited by squatters and homeless."
I respect the commisioner's effort to keep his men safe but once again the fire service goes to far. How about buildings that are falling down or obviously structually unsound, (previous fire) etc, are exterior unless we know for a fact someone savable is inside and the rest of the time we do the job we signed up for and go inside search for life and extinguish fire vacant or not.
Besides, all this policy does is cover the adminsistrations butt. If a civilian dies they can say well our firemen and the incident commander have the option to enter its on them, conversly if a fireman is killed or injured at a vacant they can point to this policy and be absolved of blame and hang the first line officers and IC out to dry, See how that works politicalits called CYA 101
what may work in DC obviously doesn't work well for Detroit. Nearly 1/3 of residences are boarded up or half burnt down. Obviously this is a serious concern and a big contrast to the percentage of vacants in Washington. Just some food for thought.
Nova,
How do you know what works in either place? DC certainly has changed in the past 10 years but we still have our share of vacants and believe me the homeless and the drug addicts know where they are and how to get in. Nowhere did I say this is what we do and Detroit should copy dc .
I have been to Detroit and have many friends on the job there. They do not rush in to vacants just to see fire. They do it because due to the state of Detroit many times someone is squatting there. They have more than enough work to go around, and had developed their policies based on what works for them thru trail by fire, the way SOPs should be developed.
All was saying is this is a bad policy and lives will be lost and good firemen will be made scapegoats in the name of politics
I applaud the Chief for taking a stand. Turn on the damn deck gun and douche that abandoned house until water comes out the attic window. Save a FF today.
The only flaw in this plan that I can see is…In Detroit, how do you tell the difference between an abandoned house and an occupied house….In Detroit they both look like shacks.
I know he is trying to do the right thing. Any firefighter death from a vacant structure is unacceptable.
One the other hand, consider this. On vacant structures where the power is removed, you have to ask yourself how the fire started. Unless, it was a lightening strike then there is a good chance that someone could be there. You can't make a cookie cutter statment about every building. A risk benefit analysis and a 360 lap mast be done prior to attack mode decision.
I don't necessarily agree that this is a "cookie cutter" type statement. He set a clear expectation – no clear indication of a life safety issue means a defensive operation is desired, but also stated that the IC would have the authority to make the actual call.
Seems reasonable to me.
Right on point Larry
I am in total agreement with DC Fireman, this is just another way of Upper Management CYA. Just as DC we have blocks and blocks of vacants with a single occupied dwelling spread through out in Baltimore. I fully understand the risk benefit fator and analysis, but someone or something had to start the fire, as per the "new" Detriot policy, do we just watch a small trash fire in a rear room and get the big hose ready and wait for it to come to us? I beleive the Commish states it is up to the Fireground Chief or whomever has command. Is that not the way it has been always, Please leave the decisions to the members who are actually fighting the fire……………………. I think that when I took my oath 24 years ago, I knew that I might perform the ultimate sacrafice,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it is truly part of the job…. I plan to live many years due to my education and EXPERIENCE….
FTM-PTB J
FDBY
you are douche