Problem with Trustees

[JoeOFPD4]

ChiefReason suggested that I pose this little problem to you guys and see if you have any other help. I posted this in the Volunteer Forum under "inexperienced firefighters as officers" and got a lot of good feedback and debate. My chief appointed three firefighters to officer positions that have no fire ground experience other than charging a hose and spraying water. These guys were put into the positions to replace guys that had moved out of the district. They are not FFII nor are they willing to take the time to become certified. They will not attend additional training to teach them the basics of fire behavior, s&r, etc. It is pretty common knowledge within the dept. that these guys were put in these positions for personal rather than professional reasons and that well trained firefighters with several more years experience were passed over for the same reason. The appoinments are a violation of the by-laws written by the trustees that state the most qualified candidate with training certification should be appointed. The trustees submitted the issue to the dept. lawyer and he told them that in no terms were they to violate the letter of the by-laws, go figure. However, they didn't change anything. Officer appointments are next month and I was hoping you guys could share some ideas on the issue. By the way, I'm in southern Illinois, you know, south of I-80.

[jaybird210]

Joe, how crazy do you want to get with this?

Inexperienced, unknowlegeable officers are a SIGNIFICANT threat directly to your safety. You are in a very bad position, and I don't envy you a bit.

Here are some questions for you:
You say the district lawyer told them not to violate their by-laws and they did it anyway?
How well do you or anyone else on the department know the lawyer? Has anyone talked to the lawyer since this happened? It may be worthwhile to drop a dime and let him know that his clients are, in effect, breaking the law in direct opposition to his advice. He might want to send them a nasty-gram warning them that such behavior is danerous and reckless; that appinting unqualified individuals to officer positions (especially in violation of the by-laws) exposes them to significant personal liability if someone gets hurt or killed; and he may want to be dropped as their legal council if they insist on this course of action. I think that might be the first and safest volly to fire. Naturally, the lawyer may tell you to pound sand; that this is an issue between him and his clients.....

How does the rest of the deaprtment feel about this? Is there enough support for your position to bring the matter to a head in a meeting? What would be the potential fallout from such a confrontation?

Having bad officers will put an extra, and in my opinion, unnessesary strain on the rest of the firefighters. They will have to train harder, and be more vigiliant about watching their backs, because the officers surely don't have the tools to do it.

Please keep us posted on this.

Anybody else have any ideas?

[jboczek]

You've got a problem, Joe. In our place, the Chief makes recommendations on officers to the trustees who make the actual appointments. I've never known them to go against the chief's wishes, though. You could carry it further and sue the trustees, but nobody wants to cause a stink like that. Have your local newspaper do a story on the appointments and see what the trustees have to say to the public about inexperienced leaders. You know its not right, we know its not right. Somebody's got to take the next step to get to a solution.
See our thread on Trustees and you'll see a possible solution - elect the trustees rather than them being appointed. Get the ball rolling now so you can have an election next year.
One more thing - just cause you're south of I80 doesn't necessarily make you "southern". OUR defination of "southern" is more like south of Springfield.

[ChiefReason]

Joe;
Go to the "Springtime in Illinois" thread. There is a house bill being pushed that deals with promotions. That's right-promotions for officers of fire protection district fire departments. You might find it interesting.
Also, like Jack suggested; there is good discussion in the "Trustee" thread.
Hey; if nothing else, we're good listeners!:cool:
CR

[JoeOFPD4]

Heys guys, Thanks for the response. Jay, first off, the lawyer complained when I received permission from a trustee to contact him regarding a training structure we intend to build. He wanted to charge the district for a two minute phone call and the trustees turned it on me. The attorney doesn't seem to want to hear from the firefighters, guess I could do it anonymously. As far as the members go, it's split about 50/50 and one of those young guys put into officer positions has stated that if one of the guys who are complaining were in a fire that he might get left in there. Rest assured this statement was addressed by the trustees or else I would have contacted a lawyer to keep the guys safe. I guess that answers your question about fall-out.

Jack, I'm still south of Springfield. Northeast Madison County to be exact. Thanks agian guys and if anyone has any other ideas, please let me know. I was also wondering if any of the guys here attend Fire College, I'll be there and maybe we could get together and hash this out a bit more.

[ChiefReason]

Joe:
It's time to pull out and dust off LAIRDSVILLE!
Remember? It was Sept. 25, 2001. Lowell, Westmoreland and Lairdsville were having a joint training exercise in which Bradley Golden died.
Then Second Assistant Chief Alan Baird III lit a couch and mattress at the foot of a stairway with three firefighters upstairs to simulate trapped firefighters for a RIT exercise. He was charged and convicted of criminally negligent homicide. He had twelve years in.
But the interesting part is Adam Croman. According to his testimony at Baird's trial, he was asked by his father, then Chief of Lowell Fire Department to be the "RIT consultant" for the training exercise. Adam Croman was 21 at the time and had three years in. Croman stated at trial that he attempted to usher the other two, Ben Morris and Brad Golden out of the house, but lost contact with them. Ben Morris testified that Adam Croman left them in the upstairs bedroom, came back about five minutes later, stood in the doorway to the bedroom and said "come on guys, we have to get out of here". And that was the last time Ben Morris saw him. In fact, Ben Morris stated that he didn't even get to his feet. The last thing he remembers is waking up at the hospital.
In a word; Croman bugged out and left these two to fend for themselves. Both Morris and Golden were 19 at the time. Morris had been on for a year and Brad Golden had been on for a whopping 3 weeks.
Croman, a three year veteran at 21 years old and a "RIT consultant"?
Oh and you can also tell your trustees that there is a nasty civil suit going on against everyone involved that was filed by the family of Brad Golden. I don't know if Croman and Morris sued. Probably.
Worst case scenario? Well, it had the worst possible outcome.
Cause? According to the NIOSH report, part of the cause was having inexperienced or underqualified individuals in charge.
Maybe that will wake them up. Then again, they will probably think that it "won't happen here".
Keep us posted.
CR

[JoeOFPD4]

ChiefReason,
Did it. I met one on one with one of the trustees about a week after the first meeting. He initially had the frame of mind that courts don't prosecute volunteers for negligent acts that injure or kill people. I showed him the NIOSH report and the article from Firehouse that reported the verdict and quickly changed his mind in regards to legal issues. This trustee is a local businessman and I believe he is on my side on this issue but, he is only one person. Thanks anyway and please, keep the ideas coming.

[firemanjb]

Originally posted by JoeOFPD4
ChiefReason,
Did it. I met one on one with one of the trustees about a week after the first meeting. He initially had the frame of mind that courts don't prosecute volunteers for negligent acts that injure or kill people. I showed him the NIOSH report and the article from Firehouse that reported the verdict and quickly changed his mind in regards to legal issues. This trustee is a local businessman and I believe he is on my side on this issue but, he is only one person. Thanks anyway and please, keep the ideas coming.

Resort to how trustees are chosen. If your FPD is like most volunteer FPDs in IL, then your trustees are officially approved and appointed by the county board. The county board chairman may be interested to learn that the people s/he appoints are allowing the chief to appoint unqualified leadership. S/he may also be interested in learning of the civil suits filed around Lairdsville; I know if I was a lawyer, I'd go after the people who appointed the leaders too. Quiet pressure from the official overseer of the trustees may help straighten out the situation. Good luck.