Are Fire Fighters wasting our money?

[eyeball]

Volunteer Firefighters in Ontario get per call they respond to. I thought they were called volunteer because they don't get paid to sleep.

I never got a dime during the years I was a fireman. Lots of kudos and I was in a few photo ops for politicians. The experience looks good on a resume. If you're injured you're covered by worker's compensation.

[Je suis Omar]

But again it's a public service union so any attempt to fix the problems will be met with merciless fear mongering.

Sounds like a rant from a jealous person. Are you stuck in a boring dead end job with Kevin O'Leary?

[Boges]

Sounds like a rant from a jealous person. Are you stuck in a boring dead end job with Kevin O'Leary?

Sort of like how Unions always bring up the salaries of CEOs when doing contract negotiations?

[Je suis Omar]

Sort of like how Unions always bring up the salaries of CEOs when doing contract negotiations?

What does CEO stand for again, Boges, "Chief Executive Outlaws"?

[Boges]

What does CEO stand for again, Boges, "Chief Executive Outlaws"?

I don't think that's what it actually stands for.

But back to your initial post. Who wouldn't be somewhat jealous of people who get to pretend they're heroes who only work about a week a month and get paid to sleep most of the time.

Edited May 12, 2015 by Boges

[GostHacked]

How do fire fires prevent fires? I think public awareness can be done without paying people for 7 days a month to stand by.

Fire alarms being mandated help more than anything. Plus the construction of good new homes.

I don't believe cops prevent any crime. They just clean up the mess after crime does happen and try to ruin the lives of people that speed.

What about the plethora of OLD home still present in many of our cities? With the way modern housing is built with units so close together, you have a risk of the fire spreading to multiple homes. Of if a fire breaks out in an apartment or condo type situation. Have you seriously thought this through at all??

Would you want to take fire fighters off the tarmac of an airport just because planes do not crash that often? I think you'll find your answer there.

[Boges]

What about the plethora of OLD home still present in many of our cities? With the way modern housing is built with units so close together, you have a risk of the fire spreading to multiple homes. Of if a fire breaks out in an apartment or condo type situation. Have you seriously thought this through at all??

Would you want to take fire fighters off the tarmac of an airport just because planes do not crash that often? I think you'll find your answer there.

Who said fire them all?

I just said reform how they're distributed and don't increase staffing at a faster rate than the populations increase. Also their work structure should really be reformed.

Perhaps have firefighters stationed closer to older areas. I've seen brand spanking new fire stations build in new neighbourhoods.

[GostHacked]

Who said fire them all?

I just said reform how they're distributed and don't increase staffing at a faster rate than the populations increase. Also their work structure should really be reformed.

Perhaps have firefighters stationed closer to older areas. I've seen brand spanking new fire stations build in new neighbourhoods.

Firefighters are needed before new housing development starts. It's like getting insurance on your care before you hit the road.

[GostHacked]

What I propose is that ambulance services and fire fighting services be stationed together. Or since firefighters are usually the first ones on the scene, reducing ambulance stations and personnel might be key.

[Boges]

Firefighters are needed before new housing development starts. It's like getting insurance on your care before you hit the road.

And I think we need a reform to that system. Especially in new developments where the chances catastrophic fire are at a alltime low.

[Boges]

What I propose is that ambulance services and fire fighting services be stationed together. Or since firefighters are usually the first ones on the scene, reducing ambulance stations and personnel might be key.

I said that. The only reason Fire Trucks have a good response time is that there are so many of them. Because INSURANCE!!!

In Ontario, most EMS and Fire are funded by two separate levels of government. Usually Regional for EMS and Local for Fire. in Toronto EMS negotiates with the Garbage Men.

Edited May 12, 2015 by Boges

[GostHacked]

And I think we need a reform to that system. Especially in new developments where the chances catastrophic fire are at a alltime low.

Are they? We've already seen new housing areas catch fire in Ottawa.

Sure old sections are more prone to fires, like the fire on Bank street a month or so back, that could have really been nasty if it was not for the amount of firefighters.

And I think we need a reform to that system. Especially in new developments where the chances catastrophic fire are at a alltime low.

Only if some of you understood that approach when it comes to radical islamic terrorism. Not bringing it into this thread other than an example of insurance.

But combine the two. Send out a pump truck and an ambulance to the scene at the same time. Also firefighters just don't fight fires. They can rescue you from your wrecked car.

Edited May 12, 2015 by GostHacked

[Boges]

Did you not read the report in the OP?

Instances of fire are down by 40% while firefighters employment is growing faster than the population.

They don't need to be growing at this rate.

[GostHacked]

Did you not read the report in the OP?

Instances of fire are down by 40% while firefighters employment is growing faster than the population.

They don't need to be growing at this rate.

Why not? We've seen police/security services increase without the justification. Maybe we need to revisit ALL emergency services. Possibly reducing the amount of hospitals because people don't get that sick these days,

How do you propose to reduce the numbers while maintaining a proper and reasonable response times to emergencies? Regardless of how well houses are built these days, you have a response time that is critical. Miss that window and you now have a bigger problem on hand.

[Boges]

Why not? We've seen police/security services increase without the justification. Maybe we need to revisit ALL emergency services. Possibly reducing the amount of hospitals because people don't get that sick these days,

How do you propose to reduce the numbers while maintaining a proper and reasonable response times to emergencies? Regardless of how well houses are built these days, you have a response time that is critical. Miss that window and you now have a bigger problem on hand.

First I have even less regard for police. So don't use them as an example.

Why can't we look for better more efficient ways to deliver public services? Why do they need their hour structure. Why do we need response times that are rigid in some places but others just have people on call and get paid sort of freelance.

I'm not even asking for Firefighters to be fired on masse. Just slow the roll on increasing their numbers to more reflect how they're really needed. But as I've predicted people are just fear-mongering that asking for any level of accountability in fire services equate to allowing people to burn alive in their houses.

The idea that there are no ways to find efficient ways to deliver a service that's less needed these days are the reasons our governments are mired in debt.

[GostHacked]

First I have even less regard for police. So don't use them as an example.

The idea that there are no ways to find efficient ways to deliver a service that's less needed these days are the reasons our governments are mired in debt.

However the police are an emergency service as well. So we should be talking about them when discussing this. And yes everything can be more cost effective and efficient. But if you really want to clean up the mired debt, then you need to look at the government and not the emergency services. Cutting politicians salary would be where I'd start. Which would allow the funds to be used where they are really needed.

[Boges]

However the police are an emergency service as well. So we should be talking about them when discussing this. And yes everything can be more cost effective and efficient. But if you really want to clean up the mired debt, then you need to look at the government and not the emergency services. Cutting politicians salary would be where I'd start. Which would allow the funds to be used where they are really needed.

Cutting the salary of the elected politicians are a drop in the bucket, just a feel good measure.

Want to talk about cops? Sure. For the most part they're just tax collectors that look for reasons to justify their income by striking fear in the public. No one sees a cop and thinks, oh good they're there to protect me. They're wondering what they've done wrong.

Sure they have a role in fighting crime, but thats more to deal with the situation once a crime has happened.

I feel this way about just about every public servant. BUT Emergency services are portrayed as sacrosanct because they can hide under the protection of public safety. A great deal of their job has nothing to do with public safety, it's mostly about justifying their income.

[cybercoma]

A quick response to a fire is imperative. They grow horrifyingly fast. At the same time, only about 10% of fire department calls are now about fires The equipment and trained people need to be readily available, but the resources are badly misused. Firefighters often work only a half dozen 24hr shifts in a month, and much of their shifts are taken up by eating, showering, sleeping, and doing janitorial and equipment maintenance duties around the firehouse. For this their annual salaries are approaching $100,000.

Sending out a big truck with 5 guys on it to every little accident, stroke and heart attack call is a waste of resources. They'e sent because they're available and they're not doing anything else important. Amalgamating paramedic, ambulance and fire services as is done in a number of US cities, would ensure that those galumphing big fire trucks are not racing around the city to get to scenes where only 2 guys in a four by four can do the job. Almost all firefighters are cross-trained as paramedics anyway, and why are we hiring separate people to drive ambulances (also well paid) while $100,000 a year firefighters are busily washing floors and trucks and cleaning toilet bowls back at the firehall? Wouldn't it make more sense to hire a janitor for their halls if needed and have them driving ambulances?

So I agree with the facts about what you're saying.

I guess what I'm getting at is what is your suggestion for an alternative? I don't see how we can reduce the number of firefighters, since the population is getting bigger and we need coverage, even if they respond to fewer calls. I have no ideas for how to spend money more "efficiently" if you want to call it that. So what do you think? You seem to be suggesting that we amalgamate the paramedic, ambulance, and fire services would actually grow the paramedic and ambulance service, believe it or not. Typically those services are run by the provinces and don't actually have the same coverage as fire service, i.e., there's more firehouses than ambulance stations. So in the end, I don't this will save as much, if any money.

[cybercoma]

Generally, in small towns, we're paid on call.

It's the same in Ontario. At least it was 15-20 years ago when I lived there. There's composite departments with volunteers in smaller towns and full-time firefighters in the larger cities.

[Scotty]

So I agree with the facts about what you're saying.

I guess what I'm getting at is what is your suggestion for an alternative? I don't see how we can reduce the number of firefighters, since the population is getting bigger and we need coverage, even if they respond to fewer calls. I have no ideas for how to spend money more "efficiently" if you want to call it that.

We can start with cutting their salaries. These are jobs which are in high demand and always have been. Fifty years ago young men lined up for the opportunity to apply to the fire and police services. They were blue collar jobs then but were seen as good solid professions for young men without a lot of education or family connections. They do not require any exceptional set of skills which are hard to find and don't require a lot of training. The training for a police officer or firefighter takes less time than for a hairdresser. Despite perceptions, they are not really that dangerous either. There is no reason to pay them $100,000 a year plus benefits. These high pay rates are bankrupting municipalities and taking money away from infrastructure and social services.

So what do you think? You seem to be suggesting that we amalgamate the paramedic, ambulance, and fire services would actually grow the paramedic and ambulance service, believe it or not. Typically those services are run by the provinces and don't actually have the same coverage as fire service, i.e., there's more firehouses than ambulance stations. So in the end, I don't this will save as much, if any money.

I don't recommend amalgamation so much to save money as to make more efficient use of the resources we have. As you say, we have to have the fire coverage. We can't have fire halls twenty minutes away from fires. Every minute counts. But the competition to get into the fire service is so heavy that almost all applicants get paramedic certification. We have a shortage of paramedics and EMTs while qualified firefighters are washing their trucks and scrubbing the floors of their fire halls. Or sleeping. The 24 hour shift is incredibly wasteful. We pay firefighters while they're sleeping, showering, making breakfast, lunch and dinner, and eating them. Put paramedic vans and ambulances in larger firehalls. Put paramedic motorcycle in firehalls! You'd be able to respond quickly to health emergencies with people trained, authorized and equipped to do the job instead of sending out big fire trucks with five guys to do little more than give oxygen until the paramedics arrive. *even though they have paramedic training regular firefighters are not authorized to use all paramedic equipment nor do their trucks come equipped with it. Do you not find it ridiculous that in many places ambulances take a long time to get to the scene, because of a shortage, while firefighters are sleeping?

Thorold is a middle-class town of 18,500 in southwestern Ontario. It has maybe 10 or 15 fires a year, the mayor figures. But although its 18 firefighters don’t have much to do, they make big-city money. An arbitrator recently awarded them a retroactive 9.2 per cent raise that bumped their pay to $92,119. Similar settlements have been awarded throughout the province. Most of the people who make these towns’ Sunshine List (because their compensation is over $100,000) are cops and firefighters.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/why-firefighters-are-underworked-and-overpaid/article24459593/

Edited May 23, 2015 by Scotty

[Michael Hardner]

I guess what I'm getting at is what is your suggestion for an alternative?

As suggested, go to the collective unit and ask for a major cost-cutting. If they disagree, then take every legal means to reduce costs.

[Derek 2.0]

Cutting the salary of the elected politicians are a drop in the bucket, just a feel good measure.

Want to talk about cops? Sure. For the most part they're just tax collectors that look for reasons to justify their income by striking fear in the public. No one sees a cop and thinks, oh good they're there to protect me. They're wondering what they've done wrong.

Sure they have a role in fighting crime, but thats more to deal with the situation once a crime has happened.

That's not so, though the margins differ with different types of crime, for the most part, policing is both reactive and proactive at the same time.

------

I think one of the sole justifications for increased costs for firefighters, versus say a generation ago, is the growing number of firefighters that are now fully qualified paramedics, in essence filling two required roles for society..........likewise, though the instances of regular house fires are dropping in part to better prevention and building codes etc, we're also building far denser and taller cities that directly result in an increase in difficultly in fighting such fires. Furthermore, we're packing far more cars today on roads that were designed for less, hence more car accidents.

If one is looking to find cost savings, I think the natural solution is combine the roles of paramedic/EMT into that of firefighter......I see no reason why ambulances can't be crewed by two qualified (Rescue) firefighters with their turnout gear and equipment to respond to car accidents -or- an elderly person with chest pains, leaving fewer fire fighters to respond to fires with the more traditional fire apparatus.

Furthermore, looking for greater efficiency, one could also increase the paramedical qualifications of certain members from within the police. Both the RCMP and OPP do this to a very small (yet differing) extent with their Emergency Response Teams, there is no reason this too couldn't be expanded.

[Boges]

That's not so, though the margins differ with different types of crime, for the most part, policing is both reactive and proactive at the same time.

------

I think one of the sole justifications for increased costs for firefighters, versus say a generation ago, is the growing number of firefighters that are now fully qualified paramedics, in essence filling two required roles for society..........likewise, though the instances of regular house fires are dropping in part to better prevention and building codes etc, we're also building far denser and taller cities that directly result in an increase in difficultly in fighting such fires. Furthermore, we're packing far more cars today on roads that were designed for less, hence more car accidents.

If one is looking to find cost savings, I think the natural solution is combine the roles of paramedic/EMT into that of firefighter......I see no reason why ambulances can't be crewed by two qualified (Rescue) firefighters with their turnout gear and equipment to respond to car accidents -or- an elderly person with chest pains, leaving fewer fire fighters to respond to fires with the more traditional fire apparatus.

Furthermore, looking for greater efficiency, one could also increase the paramedical qualifications of certain members from within the police. Both the RCMP and OPP do this to a very small (yet differing) extent with their Emergency Response Teams, there is no reason this too couldn't be expanded.

Of course all three professions are represented by different unions, amalgamation would be pragmatic, meaning the public services aren't interested.

[Derek 2.0]

Of course all three professions are represented by different unions, amalgamation would be pragmatic, meaning the public services aren't interested.

Perhaps, but it also gives them an out for their membership if political pressure becomes present.

[Scotty]

I think one of the sole justifications for increased costs for firefighters, versus say a generation ago, is the growing number of firefighters that are now fully qualified paramedics, in essence filling two required roles for society....

But they don't fill those two roles. People who want to be firefighters take paramedic training because it looks good on their resume. But they're not hired as paramedics and they are not given the equipment to make full use of those abilities, nor do they have the legal right to do so, ie injecting certain drugs for example (which they don't have anyway). They are not employed as paramedics. So that has had nothing to do with the increasing costs.

Earlier in the thread it was pointed out that some jurisdictions in the US, at least, require all their cops to be paramedic trained, and fill dual roles. The trunks of their cars are loaded with paramedic gear, and they can get to health emergencies quickly. See the following video for an example.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxlIAQj4IWY

I think that's a great idea and we ought to do it here, too. But even filling dual roles we can't afford to pay all our cops and firefighters $100k per year.

Edited May 24, 2015 by Scotty