IAFF Local 385

The Secret List

THE BIG O

Hey...
Like many of you, I am getting ready to spend a little time off with my family...and can't wait. But when I got this information, I just had to share it with our small and intimate group on The Secret List.

I guess you also saw the news this week where the Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff has a "gut feeling" that our Country may get attacked again. People need to pay attention to that. If he has a gut feeling-he probably has one of the more informed guts in our nation. I don't know about you, but
I think of my kids, my family and friends when the terror threats come to mind. Most people do.
So if The Secretary's gut is bothering him-so is mine.

Sadly, since 9/11, we have seen loads of funding for some projects-and cuts in others. For example, you can get your personnel trained in all the NIMS programs...100, 200, 300/400 and so on....but that doesn't mean your FD will be any better at handling a house fire. But, if you need tactical "use daily"
training such as flashover training, that may be a bit more challenging-or impossible. If you want to increase or maintain staffing-that may make your gut ache. O !

What some folks do not seem to understand (or don't want to understand) is that no matter what you do-if you respond to house fires (for example), it takes coordinated firefighter staffing, performing specific tasks, to quickly and effectively put out the fire. From the hydrant to the pump panel to the
hose lines to the venting to the searching to the rescuing to the leadership and all the required tasks, if the right # of trained FF's required for the tasks don't arrive quickly, with good bosses, lead in a coordinated effort, it usually doesn't work.

Generally, if you have more well trained, well lead and "arriving on a timely basis" staffing, you have a greatly increased chance of putting that fire out quicker...not always, but almost always. If someone is trapped in that house fire, and you arrive with less personnel, you have a calculated, measurable and provable less chance to save the trapped person than if you had the required staffing.

Customer service.

As Cities across America plaster slogan type words like "commitment to excellence", "committed to service excellence", "at your service", "the best in customer service" on their buildings and vehicles.

I always wonder what is "behind" those words. I love slogans. Here are some specific Cities that had old slogans-and some of their new slogans:

Atlantic City: America’s Favorite Playground (1993), Always Turned On (2003)
Cleveland: It’ll Rock You (1999) See Something New (2005)
Dallas: The Texas Star (2000) Live Large. Think Big. (2004)
Houston: The Real Texas (1993) Expect the Unexpected (1997)
Chattanooga: The Attraction’s Only Natural (2002)
Rochester, MN: Rah-rah-Rochester (2006)
Seattle: City of Flowers (1942) Metronatural (2006)
Montreal: The More You Kiss, the Frencher It Gets (2006)
(FirefighterCloseCalls' personal favorite)
Trenton, NJ: Trenton Makes. The World Takes (1910)
Tacoma: America’s No. 1 Wired City (2001)
Omaha: O! (2003)

Slogans should reflect something-and if you are lucky, it is something real that really reflects how they operate. If the slogan says "Commitment To Excellence"...that should be the standard-or someone’s standard. The water should be excellent, the parks should be excellent, the elected officials should be
excellent and the cops should be excellent at giving people breaks. Simple stuff.

When I saw this list, and saw Omaha, Nebraska's slogan, I think it fit perfectly based upon a fire department study they just had done. When I read the study, I said to myself ...O! Oh. Oh no.

A consultant's report (below) recommends reducing the number of firefighters staffing fire apparatus in Omaha from 4 FF's to 3 FF's. The report said that the FD is overloaded and essentially, the report says that the OFD doesn't have to be as good as they are, if the City wants to save money.

Richard Brady, president of California based Matrix Consulting, said that the city could save $5.1 million annually by reducing the OFD by 105 firefighters, among other minor changes. That would be about 15 percent of the department budgeted to have 661 firefighters.

The Matrix report claims that those cuts would not harm the ability of the OFD to "respond" to calls. They claim the OFD could save about $5 million a year by reducing the number of firefighters from 4 to 3 on each pumper and ladder, among other changes. A total of 105 firefighter jobs could be eliminated. An additional $700,000 could be saved by reducing the "captain-heavy" staffing of the department.

The study concluded that the OFD is performing far above national standards, and thus can reduce the number of firefighters assigned to each apparatus. Dropping from 4 FF's to 3 FF’s would not create staffing or response problems, the Matrix study said. Nationally, departments should be able to get 15
firefighters to a fire scene within eight minutes 90 percent of the time, the study said, and Omaha meets that standard 97 percent of the time. Wouldn't you think the citizens of Omaha have a "gut feeling" that's a good thing? Wouldn't someone running for election want to use that as a positive thing? Shouldn't citizens wonder about response, staffing and the relationship to timing,
performance and service delivery? Is the $$ savings per citizen all that much, where they would be willing to reduce that level of "customer service" ...when they call 9-1-1...after little Irving plays with matches, sets the bedroom on fire and is trapped?

It is a FACT that additional firefighters can make a difference-a real, measurable "customer service" difference when the critical services a FD provides are urgently needed. And while terrorist related local homeland security response service (another term for fire department) is VITAL at the local, first
responder level-how can a community expect THAT to happen, when the staffing to handle the day to day services are recommended to be cut? If the FD is doing great and meeting or exceeding goals, does the public want the cuts? Is the public aware of the cuts? Is the public willing to accept the cuts? It's
THEIR FD. Sometimes they are willing to accept cuts-until they have a fire. And then all the standard "oh my gosh-it was horrible" questions come out. Elected people are elected to look out for the public good-and to provide the best possible public safety response "when we are having a horrible day".
That's just my gut feeling though.

Some consultants will say anything they are asked to. Some provide information based upon the fact that budgets are tight. Some provide information based upon the fact that there are labor/management issues. And some provide facts without any prejudice or being told how the report should play out.

Saving taxpayers money is a big deal-and running a FD with a fair deal to the FF's as well as the citizens paying the taxes is a big deal as well. And when money is being wasted-that too is a big deal. But when a FD is successfully delivering excellent service 97% of the time, why cut it without first making sure that is what the citizens of the community are willing to accept? After all, it's the citizens that are supposed to matter. The "customers" who expect the "service".

When a consultant claims that staffing cuts would not harm the ability of the OFD to provide service....my gut feeling is that it shouldn't be very hard for the OFD members to convince their community differently. It just depends whose house is on fire and who is in that house...as to it mattering or not. Just ask'm. Ask all those impacted by the cuts-from the taxpayers to the
elected folks, what they want responding to their or their loved ones "once in a lifetime" emergency.
O!...Oh. Ohhhhhhhh.
Take Care,
BillyG
The Secret List 7-12-07
_www.FireFighterCloseCalls.com_ (http://www.firefightrclosecalls.com/)