IAFF Double Talk - Opposes being forced to join with Police

[medic417]

From firehouse.com found post #44 with a letter from IAFF opposing being forced to join with police.

http://forums.firehouse.com/showthread.php?p=1037880

In part says the following:

"The IAFF opposes the consolidation of fire and emergency services departments with local law enforcement agencies, including the move to so-called "public safety officers" who are cross-trained to perform both fire/EMS and law enforcement functions at the same time at an incident.

Implementing PSOs undermines effective fire suppression and emergency medical response by relying on personnel on scene to act in multiple roles -- roles that are often at odds with each other and which cannot be done simultaneously, such as securing a crime scene and treating a gunshot victim or attacking a fire.

The roles, training and equipment for fire fighters/paramedics and police are vastly different and distinct and should remain separate. In addition, the consolidation concept breaks up the company unit of a fire department, whereas police respond as individuals or in teams of no more than two. It also frequently means a reduction in fire fighter staffing and crew size.

Attempts to consolidate fire and police departments are traditionally associated with efforts to cut the cost of public safety, but the anticipated benefits are rarely realized and instead result in poor service, increased risk for the community and require additional resources -- thus increasing costs. "



Wow how could they say that? They have claimed for years that there is no problem multitasking. They force EMS into fire. But now some are trying to force fire into police they don't like that do they. Police and fire are more closely related than Fire and EMS. Also EMS is a two man team. I don't know but seems like they just made my point of opposing EMS being forced to join fire for me.

 

[AJ Hidell]

Lying hypocrites. So typical.

 

[Aidey]

The only reason the IAFF ever supported EMS being joined with fire is because it allows fire departments to justify expanding even as the number of fires decreases.

 

[medic417]

The only reason the IAFF ever supported EMS being joined with fire is because it allows fire departments to justify expanding even as the number of fires decreases.

So adding police response would add even more budget money, so they should support it.

 

[Aidey]

No, because the police would be legitimately busy. They couldn't use the money for police for new trucks.

I should note I wasn't referring to fire departments that also have fully staffed ambulances that transport. Just the ones that justify their staffing and equipment budgets by providing non-transport first response in an urban location there is already an ALS transport agency.

One legit reason it's not a good idea is because as a MICP I can tell a patient "I need to know if you've done any illegal drugs tonight. It won't go beyond me and you" where as a MICP/Police officer couldn't do that.

 

[medic417]

No, because the police would be legitimately busy. They couldn't use the money for police for new trucks.

I should note I wasn't referring to fire departments that also have fully staffed ambulances that transport. Just the ones that justify their staffing and equipment budgets by providing non-transport first response in an urban location there is already an ALS transport agency.

One legit reason it's not a good idea is because as a MICP I can tell a patient "I need to know if you've done any illegal drugs tonight. It won't go beyond me and you" where as a MICP/Police officer couldn't do that.

I would say while working the ambulance shift a ff/cop would have to stay mouth shut about anything illeagl seen or heard. There is no conflict of interest if one feels fire and EMS can be one.

Personally Fire and PD are closer and better soul mates than Fire/EMS. Fire should have no ties to EMS. They are completely different systems and specialtys. Thats why I think it is so funny that the IAFF in their position make the best arguement for seperation than any I or any other opposer of fire having control of EMS could ever make.

 

[Aidey]

A lot of police officers I have met (mostly the newer/younger ones really) have a bit of a no tolerance attitude. I also think that even if the policy was to keep the roles separate, patients who were aware the person was both a police officer and FF would be hesitant to talk.

I pretty much agree with you when it comes to the separation of Fire and EMS. I'm a firm believer that if you are going to do something, do it all the way, or none of the way, not 1/2 way.

If a Fire Dept is going to do EMS, then they need to do it all the way. Dedicate at least 60% of the budget, time, training etc to EMS. Don't do EMS and provide it with 10% of the budget and one training night a month so that they can hardly afford more IV catheters while you are replacing 2 year old turn outs with new ones.

Or alternatively, get out of it completely. No more of this ALS engine first response crap. Oh woo-hoo, you beat the Amb on scene by 1 minute, which apparently justifies paying someone paramedic/FF wage, stocking ALS equipment (including a $20,000 Lifepack), decresing the life span of the engine, and incresing the risk of everyone driving around you by going code.

 

[JPINFV]

Just for fun, I came up with this interesting little word swap.

"Implementing fire based EMS undermines effective fire suppression and emergency medical response by relying on personnel on scene to act in multiple roles -- roles that are often at odds with each other and which cannot be done simultaneously, such as treating a smoke inhalation victim and attacking a fire.

The roles, training and equipment for fire fighters and paramedics are vastly different and distinct and should remain separate. In addition, the consolidation concept breaks up the company unit of a fire department, whereas paramedics generally respond in teams of no more than two. It also frequently means a reduction in paramedic staffing.

Attempts to consolidate fire and emergency medical services are traditionally associated with efforts to cut the cost of public safety, but the anticipated benefits are rarely realized and instead result in poor service, increased risk for the community and require additional resources -- thus increasing costs."

 

[Ridryder911]

Well, well, well. The shoe is on the other foot. You mean the "heroes" can do everything? Say its not so!

R/r 911

 

[sir.shocksalot]

Just for fun, I came up with this interesting little word swap.

"Implementing fire based EMS undermines effective fire suppression and emergency medical response by relying on personnel on scene to act in multiple roles -- roles that are often at odds with each other and which cannot be done simultaneously, such as treating a smoke inhalation victim and attacking a fire.

The roles, training and equipment for fire fighters and paramedics are vastly different and distinct and should remain separate. In addition, the consolidation concept breaks up the company unit of a fire department, whereas paramedics generally respond in teams of no more than two. It also frequently means a reduction in paramedic staffing.

Attempts to consolidate fire and emergency medical services are traditionally associated with efforts to cut the cost of public safety, but the anticipated benefits are rarely realized and instead result in poor service, increased risk for the community and require additional resources -- thus increasing costs."

Someone should print that and mail it to the IAFF.

In my opinion its only a matter of time before fire will have to get out of EMS. In these economic times fire departments are looking to save money and an easy way to do it is cut ambulances to private companies who provide ambulance services for free (to the city). Where is the sense in having tax payers pay for ambulances that a private company can provide the same service for free.

 

[AJ Hidell]

Someone should print that and mail it to the IAFF.

Better yet, mail it to Dr. Pepe, without telling him of the editing, and ask him how he feels about what this IAFF local is saying about fire-EMS. I'd love to see his response.

 

[boingo]

So adding police response would add even more budget money, so they should support it.

Give it 15 years, they'll be begging to do the cops job too. Not that long ago most FD's wanted nothing to do with EMS....times change.

 

[medic417]

Just for fun, I came up with this interesting little word swap.

"Implementing fire based EMS undermines effective fire suppression and emergency medical response by relying on personnel on scene to act in multiple roles -- roles that are often at odds with each other and which cannot be done simultaneously, such as treating a smoke inhalation victim and attacking a fire.

The roles, training and equipment for fire fighters and paramedics are vastly different and distinct and should remain separate. In addition, the consolidation concept breaks up the company unit of a fire department, whereas paramedics generally respond in teams of no more than two. It also frequently means a reduction in paramedic staffing.

Attempts to consolidate fire and emergency medical services are traditionally associated with efforts to cut the cost of public safety, but the anticipated benefits are rarely realized and instead result in poor service, increased risk for the community and require additional resources -- thus increasing costs."

Great edit. That is what I feel as well. Fire needs to get out of EMS.

 

[Veneficus]

Just for fun, I came up with this interesting little word swap.

"Implementing fire based EMS undermines effective fire suppression and emergency medical response by relying on personnel on scene to act in multiple roles -- roles that are often at odds with each other and which cannot be done simultaneously, such as treating a smoke inhalation victim and attacking a fire.

The roles, training and equipment for fire fighters and paramedics are vastly different and distinct and should remain separate. In addition, the consolidation concept breaks up the company unit of a fire department, whereas paramedics generally respond in teams of no more than two. It also frequently means a reduction in paramedic staffing.

Attempts to consolidate fire and emergency medical services are traditionally associated with efforts to cut the cost of public safety, but the anticipated benefits are rarely realized and instead result in poor service, increased risk for the community and require additional resources -- thus increasing costs."

you need to get the EMS provider of the year award.

 

[rchristi]

In the town where I live the Law Enforcement/ Fire department were joined under one Director. But that did not last when the Fire Department found out that state law required that Police departments had to be be run by a certified law enforcement officer. However, that did not keep the Fire department from hanging on to EMS when the Department was separated from the Police Dept.

 

[AJ Hidell]

I have seen the so-called "DPS" concept tried half a dozen times in various suburbs over the last thirty years. I used to think it was the coolest idea ever when I was in my twenties. Three jobs = three times the siren action! What could be cooler than that, eh? I enjoyed my time in such a system, because it never got boring, and I got to practice all three of the jobs that I loved. But it doesn't take too terribly long for you to settle into one favorite and begin neglecting the others. The one that ultimately suffers is EMS, because it is the one that nobody really wanted to do in the first place, and it is the one that requires the most effort to maintain competency. Only one of those half a dozen systems around me remains a combined service, and it is a very small bedroom community. They say "it works", but they send their medics to the 800 hour, wham-bam patch factory for training, so you can guess how competent their medics are.

When you grow up, you someday (hopefully) come to face the reality that, juse because something is "cool" doesn't make it a good idea.