Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DCFD Hair / Beard Policy

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by dcfdlt:


    Point two. There is a misunderstanding within the fire service that we are a para-military org. This is against the constitution to deem ourselves as such.
    A more correct term is rank and file org. There are many people who like the regimented environment and feel this fosters esprit de corp. We had a brother on the job the other day say "if you can't follow rules and regs on this issue than you won't be able to follow orders on the fireground." Bullsh*t!! Performance on the fireground and in the firehouse is what counts not the length of your hair. I have always been "clean cut" so this is not my fight. IT IS OBVIOUS THERE HAS DEVELOPED MUCH HYPOCRACY IN THE AMERICAN FIRE SERVICE. IT'S WHAT YOU LOOK LIKE AND NOT IF YOU CAN DO THE WORK.
    :from Merriam-Webster online Dictonary-
    paramilitary-: of, relating to, being, or characteristic of a force formed on a military pattern especially as a potential auxiliary military force

    Maybe you should learn the definition, because paramilitary organizations are not unconstitutional. Hm, wonder where they get Lieutenant, Captain, Chief, Battalion, Division, Company. Can't quite figure out where they got all those terms from. Must have been the Good Humor Industry. From your whole reply, I wouldn't want to be a fireman under you. Personally. Take it how you want it. So it will be quite pointless to try and reason with you. You might have missed the part of Officer training where they teach new officers that the apperance to the people passing on the street, who need directions or something does greatly affect opinion on your Dept. But what did my Capn' know.

    Doc DC3

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    FIREREBEL, my apologies...I thought you were just jumping on the bandwagon with the anti-length of someone's hair. While the Fire Chief may indeed have legit management perogative in trying to enforce this order (I believe he will lose in the courts as has happened the last NINE times over two decades the issue has been brought up), the whole thing is diversionary and a distraction to the bigger picture. It's just like every Chief in the past twenty years...they can't do anything about the big things so they go after the little ones. 15hoseman, you are right there, brother. Be safe

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by NozzleHog:
    From the Firehouse article on this subject:

    "'I'm very upset', said W.G., a 10-year veteran firefighter with waist-length dreadlocks. "I risk my life for the citizens of this city."
    "W.G. was suspended for two days. He has not cut his hair in nine years, citing his religious beliefs".


    Is it just me, or does anyone else find this a little fishy?
    The thing that bothers me the most about living in a "PCU" type college town is that almost everybody has dreads. If they were all real Rastafarians it'd be ok, but since most of them are upper-middle-class white kids turned hippie, I understand Nozzlehog's thinking. Let's do some more math; if "W.G." is a ten-year veteran, he had to join at at least 18, making him at least 28. That's to old for hair like that.

    Althea

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    DCFDLt: the ems people should be fit tested for their HEPA masks.

    #2 what do you mean by bring the EMS people up to our pay scale, last I checked the Paramedics make more than firefighters (at least starting salary), plus they get overtime after 40h.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    dcfdlt:

    I'll be the first to admit, I don't know a whole lot about the inner workings of the DCFD, just what I read and hear.

    A lot of DCFD's problems have been made very public lately and, as I have said elsewhere in these forums, I was, and am supportive of the firefighters in DC. When I saw Local 36 take a stand on what seemed to me to be the wrong issue, I thought it would be helpful to say so. I realize now that I should have kept my mouth shut.

    I wish you and all the brothers in DC the best of luck in dealing with this mess.

    Take care and stay safe,
    NozzleHog

    [This message has been edited by NozzleHog (edited 04-11-2001).]

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by dcfdlt:
    Well fellas, it seems like we got a few divergent ops. LET'S GET A FEW (SCOOBY_FEW) THINGS STRAIGHT (n0o pun intended). The Local has decided no to make this a priority issue and has defered to ACLU with the handful of individuals petitioning the court. Second, we now have EMS people (who are civilian emps, not sworn) wearing the same uniform. Ronnie thinks he can bring EMS into the same rank and pay structure as the fire side. The point is that they do not need fit testing, so its a personal grooming policy and not really safety, so he should stop calling it as such. Obviously, it would have been a good idea for a fit test for the fire side before starting this crap, he could have avoided a lot of bad p.r.

    Point two. There is a misunderstanding within the fire service that we are a para-military org. This is against the constitution to deem ourselves as such.
    A more correct term is rank and file org. There are many people who like the regimented environment and feel this fosters esprit de corp. We had a brother on the job the other day say "if you can't follow rules and regs on this issue than you won't be able to follow orders on the fireground." Bullsh*t!! Performance on the fireground and in the firehouse is what counts not the length of your hair. I have always been "clean cut" so this is not my fight. IT IS OBVIOUS THERE HAS DEVELOPED MUCH HYPOCRACY IN THE AMERICAN FIRE SERVICE. IT'S WHAT YOU LOOK LIKE AND NOT IF YOU CAN DO THE WORK. BTW, Firerebel, I don't get that username. Does that mean you work in the Southern states or are you a fireground hellraiser?
    DCFD,
    You raise some real good points, but bringing up my username is well a non-issue..just to set things straight, I have been a huge James Dean fan all my life and due to his movie " REBEL WITHOUT A CAUSE" and my love for the Fire service the two went perfect together, as you can read my registration and sign-on I am from what we call a " midwestern" state..Iowa...not the South...but thanks for asking.now that I am done with my Geography lesson for the day..Now to more important issues..


    [This message has been edited by FireRebel (edited 04-11-2001).]

    [This message has been edited by FireRebel (edited 04-11-2001).]

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Well fellas, it seems like we got a few divergent ops. LET'S GET A FEW (SCOOBY_FEW) THINGS STRAIGHT (n0o pun intended). The Local has decided no to make this a priority issue and has defered to ACLU with the handful of individuals petitioning the court. Second, we now have EMS people (who are civilian emps, not sworn) wearing the same uniform. Ronnie thinks he can bring EMS into the same rank and pay structure as the fire side. The point is that they do not need fit testing, so its a personal grooming policy and not really safety, so he should stop calling it as such. Obviously, it would have been a good idea for a fit test for the fire side before starting this crap, he could have avoided a lot of bad p.r.

    Point two. There is a misunderstanding within the fire service that we are a para-military org. This is against the constitution to deem ourselves as such.
    A more correct term is rank and file org. There are many people who like the regimented environment and feel this fosters esprit de corp. We had a brother on the job the other day say "if you can't follow rules and regs on this issue than you won't be able to follow orders on the fireground." Bullsh*t!! Performance on the fireground and in the firehouse is what counts not the length of your hair. I have always been "clean cut" so this is not my fight. IT IS OBVIOUS THERE HAS DEVELOPED MUCH HYPOCRACY IN THE AMERICAN FIRE SERVICE. IT'S WHAT YOU LOOK LIKE AND NOT IF YOU CAN DO THE WORK. BTW, Firerebel, I don't get that username. Does that mean you work in the Southern states or are you a fireground hellraiser?

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Could not have said it better myself Nozzlehog!

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    From the Firehouse article on this subject:

    "'I'm very upset', said W.G., a 10-year veteran firefighter with waist-length dreadlocks. "I risk my life for the citizens of this city."
    "W.G. was suspended for two days. He has not cut his hair in nine years, citing his religious beliefs".


    Is it just me, or does anyone else find this a little fishy?

    - Let's do the math, a 10 year veteran, hasn't cut his hair in 9 years...Does that sound anything like "I'm off probation (rookie year), now I can do whatever I want". Apparently hair wasn't an issue when he was trying to get the job or a probie who could be easily fired for insubordination.

    - "Waist length dreadlocks", "religious beliefs", sounds like W.G. is a Rastafarian, a religion that considers smoking "ganga", aka marijuana, a sacrament and a necessary part of their religion. Does W.G. practice this too? Should DCFD be required to allow this practice as well? That would be good precedent to set..."Hey mon, I'm a rasta too"!

    Or the statement, "I risk my life for the citizens of this city." Yeah, and so does every other firefighter on that job. That doesn't give them a license to make up their own rules as they go along.

    Someone plese tell me that the D.C. Firefighters union has moved on to bigger and better battles to fight.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    There ara a few things most of you people dont understand about my Fire Dept.
    1. WE DONT FOLLOW OSHA.
    2. WE ARE STILL NOT NFPA COMPLIANT.
    3. ALL RULES DONT APPLY IN D.C.
    4. Chief Few charged those 5 men with and get this " FAILURE TO WEAR UNIFORM CAP SNUGGLY ON HEAD". Aricle XXI out of our Order Book, safety is NOT THE ISSUE.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Performance Standards in teh DCFEMS?? Ha ha

    I believe the root of this problem is that no one is happy with the chief. Everyone has wondered how far the Union would let him go before actively fighting him. While most of us would have rather had some other issue be the crux of a Union / Chief fight, I guess when ol'Ronnie told ol'Ray that he could have a beard, well then the ol'sh1t hit the fan.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    How can Chief Few ignore the law that OSHA sets (Copied and pasted from OSHA website) 29 CFR 1910.134:

    (g)
    Use of respirators. This paragraph requires employers to establish and implement procedures for the proper use of respirators. These requirements include prohibiting conditions that may result in facepiece seal leakage, preventing employees from removing respirators in hazardous environments, taking actions to ensure continued effective respirator operation throughout the work shift, and establishing procedures for the use of respirators in IDLH atmospheres or in interior structural firefighting situations.

    (g)(1)
    Facepiece seal protection.

    (g)(1)(i)
    The employer shall not permit respirators with tight-fitting facepieces to be worn by employees who have:

    (g)(1)(i)(A)
    Facial hair that comes between the sealing surface of the facepiece and the face or that interferes with valve function; or

    (g)(1)(i)(B)
    Any condition that interferes with the face-to-facepiece seal or valve function.

    END OF PASTE

    Setting uniform standards has to have a reason other than the chiefs likes and dislikes. If jewelry is forbidden than an SOP stating that all members are forbidden to wear it and the reasons for it (Conducts heat etc.) If an exception is made for someone wearing a cross then the SOP is no longer valid.

    If long hair is considered dangerous to FFing then this must be explained in the SOP and acceptable hair standards must be described. If hair is dangerous than having long hair is not the problem. Having long hair that sticks out of the PPE is. Thus the SOP for structural FFing should state that at no time is hair to be visible outside of the PPE.

    The point I'm trying to make is that SOPS must be performance oriented. There are many ways to meet the criteria. It is nobodies bussines how the criteria is met.

    Take the OSHA standard above. It does not state that a beard is forbidden but that hair must not get between the face and seal. If you can figure out how to grow a partial beard that does not interfere with the seal then you meet this perfomance standard.

    By setting performance standards and not getting into the details of how they are met we will create a fire department where all who can meet our standards are welcome.



    ------------------
    Brian Johnson
    Assistant Chief
    Okinawa, Japan

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by Dalmatian90:
    Professionalism has nothing to do with how you look, but how you act.
    To say that beards or long hair present an "unprofessional" appearance is nothing but pure and simple prejudice, and we do no one any good perpetuating such prejudices.
    Really, so all branches of the US military are prejudiced? All military schools, service academies and the overwhelming majority of police and fire departments are prejudiced? Interesting point of view.

    Here's a question for you, Dal: Why do we wear uniforms? Is that a prejudice too?
    If what you say is true, we could show up at Mrs. Smith's emergency in dirty cut-off shorts, flip flops and a food stained Mickey Mouse t-shirt, unshaven with hair down to our *** because, hey...Professionalism has nothing to do with how you look, but how you act. Gee, think of all that money we've wasted.
    Give me a break. People join the fire service knowing that we are a para-military organization with rules and regulations that require them to work as part of a team, and to be recognizable as part of something larger than themselves, not 900 some odd individuals. There is an appropriate expression: "Lead, follow or get out of the way".

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    To the best of my knowledge their are no SCBA manufacturers out there that are willing to say it acceptable to have facial hair of any length while using their product. If this were indeed the case, wouldn't the supervisor of an individual who had facial hair and suffered a respiratory injury due to not having a proper seal be liable?

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Our dept. allows moustaches, but earrings on either gender (or nose rings, or eyebrow rings, or whatever-rings) are not allowed on fire calls. Most of the women in our dept. have shoulder length hair which is completely covered by our Nomex hoods. None of the guys presently have long hair, but two used to have it at waist length (yeah, we're in California). They put it in ponytails or pigtails under their helmet and hoods. Another dept. I know does only exterior structure protection and it seems like they all have dreadlocks--- they have extra long shrouds on their helmets, and dealies that cover their beards, as well as Nomex hoods.

    Leave a comment:

300x600 Ad Unit (In-View)

Collapse

Upper 300x250

Collapse

Taboola

Collapse

Leader

Collapse
Working...
X