age requirments

[CaptOldTimer]

Does your dept. have age requirments?
Ours are 21yo for applicants and 67yo for retirment. We have been considering making some changes to the retirment age. Only having 25 members we need to make room for younger firfighters but we also don't want to lose the experienced guys. How would you react.

The retirment age we affect the Chief and Asst. Chief in the next 4 years.

Try spelling and using grammar correctly!!


Maybe your Mother or Father could help you!

[PaladinKnight]

Or 67....




The guy that is 67 might have an issue if you try to put him out to pasture.

Keep the veterans irregardless of their age.

They can still do many things, like kicking the young'ens butts when they get too upity.

[HAFD112]

captoldtimer sets a good example of why some dept. have a retirment age.

I was just looking for help for trying to change these outdated rules.

If you don't like the way I write just shut your mouth. Don't post. I write in a conversational way and have had success with it.

Cap, If you think my mother and father somehow failed me in my education you kiss my...

[tree68]

I write in a conversational way and have had success with it.

For the record - the word is retirement. Conversational style or not, spelling is still important with regard to the written word...

As for maximum age - it depends a lot on how the department operates. If everybody has to be fully pack qualified, then they go when they can't meet the physical requirement.

If they can still adequately serve in a support roll and the structure of the department allows it, let them stay.

It's perfectly understandable to want to move people out if there is a set number of firefighters allowed and they're blocking new blood from getting in.

On the other hand, our "Fire Department, Inc." is really a social arm of the organization, and age isn't really a factor. So they can stay in and "active" 'til they die if they want. We just won't see them hanging off the tailboard, if you know what I mean.

[Eng34FF]

captoldtimer sets a good example of why some dept. have a retirment age.

I was just looking for help for trying to change these outdated rules.

If you don't like the way I write just shut your mouth. Don't post. I write in a conversational way and have had success with it.

Cap, If you think my mother and father somehow failed me in my education you kiss my...

Sounds like maybe you need some old timers around to keep attitudes in check.

If you want to bring in some new blood, that's probably a good idea, but why do it at the expense of the experienced guys. What is the reason for limiting the number of members? That's the first place I would look.

Again, we don't have any upper age limits. A neighboring department has a gentleman who has been active for over 50 yrs. He doesn't ride the apparatus, but he is still very active in fundraising and the administrative side of things.

[tree68]

He doesn't ride the apparatus, but he is still very active in fundraising and the administrative side of things.

This speaks to an issue in semantics.

While he's still a member of the fire department (and we have folks who fit the same description, as do many volunteer FD's), is he really still a firefighter or just a social member of the fraternal organization?

Traditionally, we often still call them a firefighter, out of deference to their experience and their time in the service, but in reality (and in keeping with the OP's question), they "retired" from firefighting years ago.

[CaptOldTimer]

captoldtimer sets a good example of why some dept. have a retirment age.

I was just looking for help for trying to change these outdated rules.

If you don't like the way I write just shut your mouth. Don't post. I write in a conversational way and have had success with it.

Cap, If you think my mother and father somehow failed me in my education you kiss my...

Now now not a nice way to talk to anyone who is trying to help newer members. Rules are rules. If you can't abided by them, you can leave the company, department or outfit.

Most states will allow members to be 18 years old to join and engage in active firefighting. Some may allow this at 16. IMO most 16 year olds aren't ready for serious firefighting. Some are, not all.

As far as the age limit, the Civil Service has a cut off on the upper age. A lot of departments by union contracts and state laws will not hire anyone over 35 or 38, as this is so the member can get their 20 or 25 years and be at the retirement age of 63.

Not saying members over that age can't do the job, as most are officers and some be of chief ranks. Hwoods and myself have been doing this job for ages. We still for the most part can outperform some younger johnnies and have the knowledge to help those youngins to be a better firefighter.

I suppose you think that once a member hit 60 or 65, they just are dead and there isn't benefit from having them around.

Who do you think us older guys learned from? I had members that came on the job in the mid 1920's to help and instruct me, and what I learned from those old guy, I still remember today!


BTW your arz isn't worth kissing my friend!

[Eng34FF]

This speaks to an issue in semantics.

While he's still a member of the fire department (and we have folks who fit the same description, as do many volunteer FD's), is he really still a firefighter or just a social member of the fraternal organization?

Traditionally, we often still call them a firefighter, out of deference to their experience and their time in the service, but in reality (and in keeping with the OP's question), they "retired" from firefighting years ago.

Point taken. We have several different classes of membership one of which is a administrative member to account for these individuals who still want to contribute but for whatever reason don't want to or are not able to run calls. My real point was that regardless of age, or ability to do the physical aspect of firefighting, they are still able to contribute to the department and releive some of the administrative burden from the "active" members.

[KanFireman]

This speaks to an issue in semantics.

While he's still a member of the fire department (and we have folks who fit the same description, as do many volunteer FD's), is he really still a firefighter or just a social member of the fraternal organization?

Traditionally, we often still call them a firefighter, out of deference to their experience and their time in the service, but in reality (and in keeping with the OP's question), they "retired" from firefighting years ago.

The same can be said for most of the brass in the career departments across the nation.

In my opinion if you've got a sharp mind, a quick wit, and are not dependent on a care taker; you can still contribute to your department in a some capacity. One of the best EMT/Paramedic instructors I've ever met was a retired RN in her 80s. She had more knowledge about prehospkital treatment of a patient than the combined experience of most established EMS Departments. Just because somebody isn't directly influencing the outcome of an incident, doesn't necessarily mean that the effects of their contributions aren't being felt.

[HAFD112]

At one time our membership was 35% over 70 yo. So the rule was made and the older guys were grandfathered.

The 25 person limit was set by the administration because of the amount of wages and insurance. Its all about money.

The big problem was 72 yo old guys would come to the station for a call after all the trucks were gone and check their name off the sheet and get paid! Or just pull the truck out the door and then go back in the kitchen and have a beer. This was all before my time and I don't think we need the rule anymore, but what do I know.

[HAFD112]

BTW, I'm 36yo and firefighter for 10 years, I had to wait five years for a spot on this department.

[CKirk922]

Our department is slowly moving from 30 years of experience and up to the younger generation of firefighters. In order to facilitate the transition we rewrote our bylaws and created a SENIOR RESERVE roster. Firefighters who no longer had the time or the physical ability to suit it up and get dirty on the fireground were given the opportunity(sp?) to more to Senior Reserve.

This position allows them to attend meetings, fireground functions, and training if they wish. They are not issued gear and are often relegated to advisory or administrative positions. The few that have chosen to go to reserves have opened roster spots for younger members.

It is not a perfect solution but it does allow people the chance to participate when they are able but does not tie up resources that need to be invested towards growth in the department. We currently have about eight of our 26 members who have 30 years plus and are active. There are a slew of 25 year personell. This is kind of significant since the department started in 1974.

[hwoods]

A Question...........

Gentlemen, If I May Ask: Why would anyone in their Right Mind (I Know, I just excluded Politicians) want to limit the number of Volunteers?? Here in my part of the World, a "Limit" on Membership is unheard of. And I can tell you that any attempt to impose such a limit would be met with a huge uproar. VFDs here have almost totally eliminated Residency Requirements along with some other really ludicrious items from their Bylaws........

[PaladinKnight]

Harve... let me add to this...

Gentlemen, (using Harve's example here):

You really need to listen to what Harve states here. He is perhaps one of the few guys left that wrote the book on "Raising the Bar" and "Pushing the Envelop".

This doesn't pertain to only volunteer departments... but all departments.

There are very few MEN in our presence that have earned the level of respect that this fine gentleman has.



Besides he set a whole new standard as to feeding and watering the horses along with fixing the broken wagon axles.

He is A-OK in my book.

[tree68]

Gentlemen, If I May Ask: Why would anyone in their Right Mind (I Know, I just excluded Politicians) want to limit the number of Volunteers??

I would submit that there was a day when open membership would have included most of the men in town (women not being a real factor "back in the day"). A significant number would have been there "for the beer," if you will. In many departments without a strong command structure, a fire scene would have been teeming with people - each doing their own thing. We all know that fires do go out eventually, but these would be the folks who earned the moniker "cellar savers."

My own department had a limit when I joined. They were under said limit at the time and I got right in. The bylaws stated that residents of the fire district (the hamlet - maybe a mile square) had preference over those who lived outside, which helped maintain a fairly quick response.

The downside of a limit was, of course, that members who no longer participated in responses held down spots that could be filled by folks who would.

We dropped that requirement a few years after I joined.