|
Post by MAYTAG on Jul 14, 2005 10:40:53 GMT -5
At the July 26, 2005 FCFCA meeting, the following was voted on and adopted as FCFCA Staffing Standard; ******************************************** General Operational Guideline - # TBD Unit Staffing Level Report Adopted:_____________ Due for Review:_______________ Effective:_____________ ……………………………………………………………………………………………… PURPOSE:
A. To establish a guideline for the reporting of staffing of fire/ rescue apparatus. B. To assist the Incident Commander in determining the total staffing of qualified personnel to assist in the proper planning of operational tactics and objectives.
PROCEDURES:
A. Each unit shall report their total unit staffing to headquarters during response. B. Each unit shall also provide their total staffing on arrival on scene or at a staging area. C. The unit staffing shall include the driver/ operator, officer and all firefighter/ rescue personnel. D. The unit staffing SHALL NOT include Junior Members and/ or Probationary Members. E. Headquarters {SHALL} track responding units and their respective staffing level and when appropriate, they {SHALL} relay the units responding and the TOTAL staffing of all units to the Senior Officer or primary unit of the first due department.
EX: Headquarters, Engine 291 is responding with 4. Command 29, Engine 291 is on scene with 4. Staging, Engine 291 is in staging with 4.
This indicates E-291 is staffed with one (1) driver/ operator, one (1) officer and two (2) firefighter/ rescue personnel. ********************************************
After a lengthy, open discussion, this was adopted with changes in {BRACKETS} to Section "E". This will lay 60 days and take effect on September 27, 2005.
|
|
|
Post by best2122 on Jul 26, 2005 3:57:50 GMT -5
Sounds good.....truly
|
|
fox8
Junior Member
Posts: 1
|
Post by fox8 on Aug 22, 2005 23:46:55 GMT -5
I was just wondering how it's progressing and what are the chances of it going into effect. Also What are the pros and cons (if any) to this.
|
|
|
Post by vol4life on Aug 28, 2005 15:47:39 GMT -5
Just a question, how will you get an acurate count of manpower if say Eng XYZ responds with 3 but 8 show up POV? Now you have a total of 11 but the IC is getting a report of 3. I assume this idea is to get manpower counts for additional resources on major incidents? If this is the case what ever happened to accountability? Also under NFPA is there a "minimal staffing" guideline? If say Eng XYZ goes out the door with 1 then do they meet the NFPA staffing requirement? If NFPA (being nationally recognized standard) has a prevision listed for minimal staffing and training levels and the unit dispatched to an incident does not meet these requirements are we advocating they do not respond to avoid any type legal issues that may arise if god forbid something happens? I understand departments respond every day "undermanned" and if the standard is just for manpower reports it will not be as accurate as using accountability so why don't we try and improve accountability? Maytag Question, if you are working a major incident will you really be able to remember all the units and the staffing along with the 101 other things going on? (by the way no disrespect to your memory)! Just my thoughts and questions. Stay safe!
|
|
|
Post by MAYTAG on Aug 30, 2005 7:47:26 GMT -5
Craig,
I feel this standard is worth while and a valuable tool for the IC in any event, especially large scale incidents.
I will address your concerns point by point;
1. Members in POV's: This was talked and talked about about at many committee and FCFCA mtgs. When the unit goes responding, they annouce their staffing.
As they arrive on scene or in staging, they again annouce their staffing. This is done to reflect any members in POV's or units that stop and pick up members at homes, places of employment, etc.
I think this fully answers your question on a change in staffing levels and accountibility.
2. NFPA 1710 and 1720 address staffing, but it's the 2 in 2 out Standard. There is no NFPA Standard that I am aware of that says you have to have X amount to resond, etc.
Our Standard is NOT meant to say you can not respond or for HQ to add more apparatus. It is merely a means to provide an accurate accounting of staffing for a particular incident. This is a constant question asked on many incidents; HQ to Engine A, what is your staffing?
3. Accountibility is not being used appropriately in this county and yes, we need to improve it. Staffing is a totally seperate issue and something the IC needs to know not only in the initial stages of the incident, but during the entire incident so they can properly utilize their resources and also not over extend them.
4. The way the Standard is written, HQ will at some point relay the staffing to the IC and yes, I would be able to remember that information as it is probably one of the most important pieces of information the IC needs.
Hope this answers your questions, if not, ask away and I'll try to provide an answer.
I feel regardless of how it's written or explained, there will always be people that do not agree with or like it.
This standard is being done in counties and cities all accross the nation, so tell me what is so different with Franklin County? Someone please provide valid reason(s) why we should NOT be doing this. I HAVE NOT HEARD ANY SO FAR !!!
|
|
|
Post by vol4life on Aug 31, 2005 20:57:42 GMT -5
Thanks for the info Tag! You answered the questions I had. Oh wait one more question, what is the next standard the Chief's Association going to tackle? Any ideas?
|
|
|
Post by moose on Sept 1, 2005 14:31:44 GMT -5
Pipeman, The whole intent of this standard is to give the I.C. an idea of how many personel are comming for the get go. As far as the 2 or more showing up isn't their responsibility to report to their company officer or the I.C. for an assignment. This falls back on departments training there own. Is there a need for for all the other units you mentioned to go responding with staffing? Could be,they may have additional personel on that unit that could assist on an incident.IE Air 53. As Maytag said all are invited to the standards committee meetings to express there departments concerns!
|
|
|
Post by vol4life on Sept 3, 2005 3:45:06 GMT -5
moose, Is this not what we are doing now, asking questions and getting answers? Tag correct me if I am wrong but this is one of the reasons this forum was set up, to discuss information and get answers to questions? Maybe even get a good debate in now or then!
|
|
|
Post by FraCumPhoto on Sept 7, 2005 18:06:21 GMT -5
Keep up the good effort Chiefs Association. Hang in there. The staffing will pay off one of these days for everyone. Keep fighting that Communications Board and the Alliance Committee. I am still hearing alot of negative things, and still here ready to write a story. As for VOL4life, the next item should be standard box cards or somewhat close to standard. Opps I forgot, your department is from the South, different views from us in the North, as in the staffing thing. Work as a team effort, the progressing word is "Regionalization". Have a nice day!!
|
|
|
Post by MAYTAG on Sept 8, 2005 7:16:15 GMT -5
Ya know, I keep hearing mention of soooooo many negatives on the Staffing Standard, but yet no-one can or will state what those legitimate negatives are!!!!
Now one of the items that we started to look at is a standardized box card.
|
|
|
Post by vol4life on Sept 12, 2005 23:19:25 GMT -5
Explain to me where the "North / South" thing was brought up in anything I posted. I asked questions that I wanted to have explained to me, heck I thought the civil war was starting up again! Who said I was against staffing levels? Just didn't understand the reasoning and purpose. The issues were answered case closed for me. Now as far a standards when it comes to box cards I would be all for that! Heck that has been a topic of conversation off and on for a while! Now as far as fighting the Alliance committee, why are we to be fighting the entity made up of the individuals that govern our departments? Last time I heard the committee was made up of township representative's (along with others). Maybe I am wrong (I haven't heard the comments about the committee) but I think it would be wise to work with these folks instead of against them. Maybe it's a "southern thang"
|
|
|
Post by MAYTAG on Sept 13, 2005 7:17:28 GMT -5
Vol,
In reading FraCum's post, I think his intention of "fighting that Std Comm & Alliance Comm" was directed at those committees and for them both to keep fighting for better emerg svc's.
|
|
|
Post by FraCumPhoto on Sept 13, 2005 20:07:57 GMT -5
Maytag,
You are very correct. I was saying that it was brought to my attention that there was some problems getting things done between the FCFCA and the Alliance Comm and of course the Communications Center. Just talked about again Sunday at the Volly Ball tournament. Have a nice day everybody.
|
|
|
Post by vol4life on Sept 14, 2005 12:26:28 GMT -5
My bad I misunderstood! I read more into it than what was in front of me, FraCum I apologies. Be safe!
|
|
|
Post by MAYTAG on Sept 14, 2005 14:12:36 GMT -5
And just to make things crystal clear, there are/ were no problems between FCFCA and the Alliance in getting things done, other than the typical issue of we could all use a little more participation from officers, members and departments.
|
|