Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

WTF, wake up guys!!!!!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • NortheastFH
    replied
    Originally posted by MassFireGuy View Post
    I bet you post it on YouTube as well.
    i'm going to go on a long overdue rant and then I'm done...

    Massfireguy, fffred, and even whocares (though from midwest ... you guys are always refreshing. it takes your kind of years of experience to be able to cut through the crap and bottom line things like you do. no matter what the topic; NFPA bs, tactics, politics or even petty helmet debates. you guys seem to be the only ones that aren't full of crap and hopelessly confused by their lack of experience. This is becoming the "talk" vs the actual "walk" site. and some on here can really spin the crap quite well and give off an air of experience. however, their post content is the real proof in the pudding.

    no matter what thread comes up here, you'll be faced with the same amateurs fighting you to the death. it's a parallel universe made possible in bulk quantities, by the internet.

    Massfire, you were dead on with the youtube comment. Nmfire, was actually banned from a whacker site called elightbars.org. his unbridled sharp tongue got the better of him and on a whacker site nonetheless. he knows more about lights and sirens than the worst hoopie you've seen and has been posting about lights for years. the light interest and years worth of message board posts far outweighs his actual "fire" related postings. i can understand knowing about lights and sirens, but he crosses that threshold of "normal". although, it does sound like he might of grown up a little from his volunteer light days in the recent past.

    Deputymarshal epitomizes the sharp tongue "type" that nmfire displays, but is far more relentless. he will contradict just about anything. people are very careful not to contradict him, because he is like a wordsmith, able to spin almost anything to his advantage in an argument. he also carries his occupation title with him, so people are more respectful to him then they would be if it was another individual posting. If you love this job like me you wouldn't become a fire investigator until you were too old and couldn't do the job anymore. it's not a wonder when this type leaves the job. he did after all come from IT, before getting into the fire svc...just sayin'. from the first time i saw him defend the NFPA, the red flags were up.

    these safety sallies and fire duckers will fight everything. including some of the most fundamental parts of this job. if you doubt me, just look at the thread where these amateurs including pirate boy will even stoop to speak negatively of Ray Mccormack's FDIC speech. thank god for brothers like Ray that are still sticking around the fire service to lead. unfortunately the longer time goes on, the FDNY seems to be the last bastion of this and everything right about this job is becoming the minority, while you jerk off's attempt to discredit them, become the majority. fighting the basics of "putting the fire out" with stupid semantics. again, parallel universe, but true.

    i long for the days of posters like 111truck (RIP), ndemarse, (stopped posting because of the bickering sallies) and others. the good ones don't stoop to bickering with online losers. you won't see many of them here. other good guys that have stuck around are nyckftbl, calmb4storm and the boston guy with the 3/4 boots in his prof. picture.

    this will be my first and only post. thank god for you brothers that are leading the way among this "progressive" generation of wolves in sheep's clothing.

    Leave a comment:


  • MassFireGuy
    replied
    Originally posted by fffred View Post
    again,

    i'm amazed at how cavalier everyone is about big brother. (except for mr. Whocares who seems to often be on the same wavelength as me on many issues, except pike axes! Lol)

    and also i'm surprised at how many amatures are out there.

    Give your department what they claim they want the cameras for...."safe responses" and to protect you.

    What do i mean?

    Lets just say, a department i'm familiar with placed cameras in just less than a dozen companies a few years back. They proposed a 90 day pilot program and after this time had elapsed, the program would go citywide in all appratus. The fire commish at the time was quoted as promising that these cameras were comming because they wanted to reduce accidents.

    Well oddly enough the pilot program was canceled after just more than 3 weeks! Why you ask?

    Well as it turns out the fire department and the city were more concerned with the fact that response times for those companies with cameras and those of the companies that shared quarters with them or responded in with them frequently increased by over 1 min!

    The men driving the rigs knowing a camera was closely monitoring their every movement, defered to the side of caution on every response. Don't cross the double yellow, too dangerous, come to a full and complete stop at every red light or stop sign. (you can imagine what this would do to the fuel bill and maintenance for brakes at the shops if something like this happened citywide)

    in lieu of making a resonable judgement on how to proceed to a box based on expereince and conditions, they focused on what the department claimed was the priority...reducing accidents.

    Therefore when response times increased by over 1 min. It was proven that the priority wasn't safety, but hooking guys up they made misjudgements in their attempt to respond in a timely manner as was encouraged by the chiefs who bore the brunt of the wrath from the upper command.

    You want the cameras gone....give them "safe responses" protect yourself, and your family legally and financially and when response times increase 25% you can see for yourself how important your department considers the need to have you on film 24/7.

    Ftm-ptb
    i hear ya.

    Leave a comment:


  • MassFireGuy
    replied
    Originally posted by LVFD301 View Post
    Pass devices? Did you hold out for extra compensation for them?
    Pass devices cannot be used against me. Camera's can.

    It's not paranoia. It's reality. Anything can be construed as anything. If someone doesn't like you and wants you gone than this gives them the power to do so. This is why Unions were created.

    Maybe its me. Maybe its because I'm in Massachusetts where you have to be in a union, but it works. I'm protected. My family is protected. I know I am paid well and that I cannot be fired for unjust reason.

    I do not need big brother. No one does. Whats next? A camera in bedrooms to make sure no funny business is going on? What about the bathrooms. After all we could be doing drugs. DRAW THE LINE.

    Leave a comment:


  • MassFireGuy
    replied
    Originally posted by Catch22 View Post
    I'm a IAFF member, so fell free to explain why in the world a camera requires additional compensation.

    This is nothing like planting GPS in your skin. Now, planting one in an SCBA would be a good comparison. The apparatus belongs to the city, they have the right to alter them in any means they see fit, just as they can alter your SCBA with a pack-tracker system.

    When it comes to guys like you, I see one of two issues. First is you're paranoid and the second is you know you're going to get caught doing the crap you're not supposed to be.
    You caught me, brother.

    Leave a comment:


  • MikeWard
    replied
    Originally posted by JMac73 View Post
    I was called out one time on one of these for having a T-shirt on instead of a polo shirt. Great use of resources, huh,?
    We used to have a senior command chief hang out at the hospital after 9 pm to gig the guys who were not wearing their uniform shirts while on the ambulance.

    JMac73, I appreciate the issue with inconsistent and "gotcha" dings, but were they reviewing the tape as part of a near-miss (alert) or after accident review?

    Leave a comment:


  • DeputyChiefGonzo
    replied
    There are times I wish the camera was there... think of the revenue that could be generated by ticketing the morons that cut out in front of us, refuse to pull over to the right, pull to the left and such... if only that funding could go right into the FD's budget... we would have enough to completely staff the FD, add companies and have a surplus to buy equipment.

    The entire driver's education program and licensing system for all drivers needs to be overhauled. Actually teach people to drive... skid control, accident avoidance, defensive driving, and knowing the limitation of what their vehicle is capable of...

    Radio transmissions are taped.... keep that in mind.

    Company Officers have to have the stones to pull someone out of the driver's seat if they screw up... you are their leader, not their buddy buddy.

    FD's have to train their personnel in emergency vehicle ops, accident avoidance, skid control and using ABS braking systems... driving a pumper, ladder or rescue is not like driving the family around in a minivan.

    ECC's, LCC's RCC's and ambo squads need to realize that they are responsible for the lives of their personnel to and from the firehouse on a call.

    Cities and towns should require that all personnel have a CDL... and pay for the licensure just as they would for any other mandatory training session and or professional license. ( fat chance of that happening....)

    Cities and town cannot defer maintenance.. as a matter of fact, I think all emergency vehicles should be inspected quarterly... the politicians will whine, complain, gripe, kvetch and bitch about the costs, but then, they aren't the ones driving and riding in the rigs, either.

    Leave a comment:


  • BoxAlarm187
    replied
    Originally posted by FFFRED View Post
    And also I'm surprised at how many amatures are out there.
    Care to elaborate?

    Not all of us work in a management vs. operational personnel evrionment. In this neck of the woods, the sky really ISN'T falling.

    Leave a comment:


  • FireMedic049
    replied
    Originally posted by FFFRED View Post
    Again,

    I'm amazed at how cavalier everyone is about big brother. (except for Mr. Whocares who seems to often be on the same wavelength as me on many issues, except pike axes! LOL)

    And also I'm surprised at how many amatures are out there.
    What do you mean by "amatures" in regards to this discussion?


    You want the cameras gone....give them "safe responses" protect yourself, and your family legally and financially and when response times increase 25% you can see for yourself how important your department considers the need to have you on film 24/7.

    FTM-PTB
    Maybe we aren't talking about exactly the same thing, but the dashcams that I'm familiar with record anytime the vehicle is on, but the only data available for review and download are short clips of about 15 seconds before and 15 seconds after an event (like a collision or some other "severe" movement of the vehicle) or a manual activation. The aren't like a survaillence camera that constantly records activity, all of which can later be reviewed.

    Leave a comment:


  • FFFRED
    replied
    Again,

    I'm amazed at how cavalier everyone is about big brother. (except for Mr. Whocares who seems to often be on the same wavelength as me on many issues, except pike axes! LOL)

    And also I'm surprised at how many amatures are out there.

    Give your Department what they CLAIM they want the cameras for...."Safe responses" and to protect you.

    What do I mean?

    Lets just say, a department I'm familiar with placed cameras in just less than a dozen companies a few years back. They proposed a 90 day pilot program and after this time had elapsed, the program would go citywide in ALL appratus. The Fire Commish at the time was quoted as promising that these cameras were comming because they wanted to reduce accidents.

    Well oddly enough the pilot program was CANCELED after just more than 3 weeks! Why you ask?

    Well as it turns out the Fire Department and the City were more concerned with the fact that response times for those companies with cameras and those of the companies that shared quarters with them or responded in with them frequently INCREASED by over 1 min!

    The men driving the rigs knowing a camera was closely monitoring their every movement, defered to the side of caution on every response. Don't cross the double yellow, too dangerous, come to a full and complete stop at every red light or stop sign. (You can imagine what this would do to the fuel bill and maintenance for brakes at the shops if something like this happened citywide)

    In lieu of making a resonable judgement on how to proceed to a box based on expereince and conditions, they focused on what the department CLAIMED was the priority...reducing accidents.

    Therefore when response times increased by over 1 min. It was proven that the priority wasn't safety, but hooking guys up they made misjudgements in their attempt to respond in a timely manner as was encouraged by the Chiefs who bore the brunt of the wrath from the upper command.

    You want the cameras gone....give them "safe responses" protect yourself, and your family legally and financially and when response times increase 25% you can see for yourself how important your department considers the need to have you on film 24/7.

    FTM-PTB

    Leave a comment:


  • hwoods
    replied
    And...........

    To refer back to my post on Page 2: I failed to mention that I am not aware of "Management", including myself, reviewing a Dashcam Tape to see what Shirts the Crew was wearing or to hear remarks about someone's Mother-in-law. The purpose of the Cameras is to Protect Our Own People as much as possible.......

    Leave a comment:


  • FireMedic049
    replied
    Originally posted by Whocares View Post
    The firehouse belongs to the city too, so I suppose you would have no problem with them putting cameras and mic's in the kitchen, right? Of course you wouldn't because you are not paranoid and never, ever say or do anything inappropriate, right? Put the "Kitchen Cam" online and let civilians watch it too!
    Employees in a number of places (particularly retail stores) do work constantly while on camera. The primary purpose of those cameras is "loss protection" regarding theft by customers rather than by the employees. So there clearly is a legitimate business purpose for their usage in that setting.

    I would have a problem with putting up surveillance cameras, etc. inside the firehouse because there is clearly no legitimate business reason to need them in general inside the station. The only real purpose for doing so would be to "spy on" the employees for disciplinary type reasons.

    I would have no problem with a dashcam in my fire truck because I can see a valid, legitimate purpose for its usage. I've also been working on ambulances with dashcams for atleast 4 years now and have seen not "downside" to having them if you are operating the vehicle appropriately.

    As someone pointed out, we aren't injuring or killing ourselves and civilians with our conduct inside the fire station anywhere close to what is happening with our apparatus on the streets.

    Bottomline, if you are doing what you are supposed to be doing, then the cameras are shouldn't matter.

    Leave a comment:


  • FireMedic049
    replied
    Originally posted by JMac73 View Post
    I would have no problem seeing them used for disciplinary purposes.

    I was called out one time on one of these for having a T-shirt on instead of a polo shirt. Great use of resources, huh,?
    I can certainly understand the apprehension to the cameras if management is going to be using them in this fashion. If this is concern, then that needs to be clearly communicated in the objection. Without doing so, all objecting to them does is say that the employees are worried about be caught operating the apparatus in a manor that they know they shouldn't be.


    Would it be that difficult to negotiate the scope of their usage? Limit their usage for disciplinary reasons to actions directly related to the operation of the apparatus (like speeding and running red lights) and not stuff like wearing the wrong uniform shirt.

    Leave a comment:


  • Catch22
    replied
    Originally posted by DeputyMarshal View Post
    One sure way of recognizing small minded, insecure "managers" is their notion that every new piece of technology, every SOP, and every other resource should be purposed exclusively with finding new and innovative means of handing out punishment rather than trying to use them as tools to improve service delivery.
    Who said anyone handed out punishment? He got "called out" for not being in the appropriate uniform. Unless the definition of "called out" is different, he simply had a ranking officer point it out and gave him a few words about it.

    We're in a job that's in view of the public. Policy violations can also be in the view of the public. Do you suppose there's ever been a photo on the cover of Firehouse, the local newspaper, or anywhere else that's ended up with guys being caught violating policy?

    Now, as a manager/supervisor, if you're reviewing pictures, videos, or what have you, what are you supposed to do? Ignore the infraction or bring it up? Ignore it and the next guy that violates that policy has grounds to scream that you're harrassing him or discriminating against him because you had photographic evidence of someone violating the same policy and no reprecussions occurred.

    We are our own worst enemies...

    Leave a comment:


  • Catch22
    replied
    Originally posted by JMac73 View Post
    I was called out one time on one of these for having a T-shirt on instead of a polo shirt. Great use of resources, huh,?
    And what would the difference have been if a chief driving down the street would have seen you? Or if Joe citizen knew that you were supposed to be in a polo and called it in?

    Pretty simple solution- don't violate policy.

    Leave a comment:


  • DeputyMarshal
    replied
    Originally posted by JMac73 View Post
    Great use of resources, huh,?
    One sure way of recognizing small minded, insecure "managers" is their notion that every new piece of technology, every SOP, and every other resource should be purposed exclusively with finding new and innovative means of handing out punishment rather than trying to use them as tools to improve service delivery.

    Leave a comment:

300x600 Ad Unit (In-View)

Collapse

Upper 300x250

Collapse

Taboola

Collapse

Leader

Collapse
Working...
X