Tweet
New Contract Prohibits Hartford Firefighters From Volunteering!
A BLOW TO FIRE DEPARTMENTS;NEW CONTRACT PROHIBITS HARTFORD FIREFIGHTERS FROM VOLUNTEERING OR WORKING IN OTHER TOWNS
Copyright 2003 The Hartford Courant Company
Hartford Courant (Connecticut)
June 29, 2003 Sunday, 1N/5/6/7 SPORTS FINAL
Newington could see a chunk of its firefighting power disappear. Vernon could lose two firefighters, and Rocky Hill has already lost one, all because of a new restriction by the Hartford Fire Department.
"If you're going to be a firefighter in Hartford, you can only be one in Hartford," says Hartford Fire Chief Charles A. Teales Sr.
A new restriction has left these nearby municipalities steaming.
"I'm not very happy ... ," said Newington Fire Chief James Trommer. "I don't see how they can tell someone what to do on their off time. My first reaction is it's a free world and a free country, and I don't see how you can tell me what to do on my off time."
A new contract between the city of Hartford and the Hartford Fire Fighters Association forbids full-time firefighters to be on active duty and combat fires as volunteers elsewhere. A clause in the contract states: " ... for the purposes of health and safety, members of the bargaining unit shall be prohibited from responding to fire department calls as an active member of another paid or volunteer fire department while employed for active duty with the Hartford Fire Department. Violation of this provision shall subject said employee to discipline."
Teale said the restriction would take effect June 30, 2008, giving the volunteers and their departments time to adjust.
"I don't have anything against volunteers, and I very often admire their dedication, but the problem I have is running the Hartford Fire Department and not knowing if the injuries or illness is sustained from one department or from another department," Teale said. "The art and science of fighting fires is very stressful to the cardiovascular system."
When he accepted the fire chief post in Hartford three years ago, he gave up volunteering for the Blue Hills Fire Department in Bloomfield.
The new contract clause is an effort to decrease the rate of lost time related to illnesses and injuries. If members were allowed to continue volunteering, Hartford would not be able to determine whether firefighters got hurt or sick from their city job or from volunteering, which could be costly to the city, Teale said.
"A member of the Hartford Fire Department is given time off not to fight fires somewhere else, but to recuperate from an arduous situation," Teale said. "If you're on call all the time, you don't have time to relax."
The "two-hatter" issue has been a long-standing sore point for the brotherhood of firefighters nationwide, causing rifts between volunteers and union members.
Trommer said Newington would lose about half a dozen of its most veteran firefighters and make it more difficult to find daytime help.
"I certainly understand and respect Hartford's decision, but they don't need to hurt volunteer organizations," said Newington Town Manager Paul Fetherston. "I'm hoping they would reconsider their position. I am also concerned if this is implemented that it would also hurt Hartford, who may need to rely on neighboring towns to back them up."
Rocky Hill Fire Chief Joseph Kochanek called the new rule "selfish." He said if anyone got hurt in Rocky Hill, that person would be covered by the town's workers' compensation.
"This is pretty silly. ... Everybody is a volunteer in their hometown, but they are being told that they're going to lose a lot of experienced people in the suburbs for no good reason."
Fire Chief Robert Kelly of the Vernon Fire Department said that town would lose two key officers, one a training officer.
"Both positions will be tough to fill, but we're going to have to. It's a shame that [Hartford] is doing this. You'd think that they'd be happy to let their men serve in the community that they live in on their off-time, which is their own time."
Farmington has a combination of a small group of career firefighters and a large group of volunteers, none of whom is employed by the Hartford Fire Department.
But Mary-Ellen Harper, the director of fire and rescue services, said Hartford's mandate would limit Farmington's ability to find firefighters.
But Scott Brady, secretary and treasurer for the firefighters' union in Hartford, said the decision was no different from any other employer taking precautions with its workforce.
"It's more of a physical deterioration," he said. "If you do this long enough, eventually parts of your body break down. The city is trying to limit its liability on injuries."
Hartford is not the only fire department to limit its members' outside activities. Some of the larger towns and cities, including New Britain, West Hartford, Waterbury and East Hartford, have similar clauses in their contracts.
The International Association of Firefighters' constitution prohibits union members from serving as volunteers. There are 53 local IAFF affiliates in Connecticut, said spokesman George Burke.
"We have one main reason alone, and that is safety," Burke said. "In the case of Hartford, they were looking for a way to not see their workers' comp reduced."
He said the clause also protects the firefighter's family. In a case several years ago in Texas, three firefighters were killed in a church fire. Two were career firefighters, but their families could not collect benefits because the firefighters had died volunteering outside their jurisdiction.
The West Hartford Fire Department has had a no-volunteer clause in its contract since the 1980s. Lt. Michael O'Donnell, president of the union at West Hartford, said it's often difficult for members to sever ties with their volunteer departments.
In West Hartford, a firefighter hired after 1986 who seeks to collect workers' compensation would have to prove that the job was the cause of the illness -- a regulation that puts the burden of proof on the employee.
"If they are volunteers of another department, that muddies the waters because the bulk of the compensation is paid for by the employers," said Assistant Fire Chief Charles Hurley of West Hartford.
Brady said that before he became a firefighter and a union officer in Hartford, he thought communities should move toward paid fire departments.
"Response time is key. Appropriate manpower is key," he said. "Communities have to take a hard internal look at what level of protection they expect from a fire department. If two or three volunteers are taken out of each department and the departments are no more, then that is a sad statement."
Copyright 2003 The Hartford Courant Company
Hartford Courant (Connecticut)
June 29, 2003 Sunday, 1N/5/6/7 SPORTS FINAL
Newington could see a chunk of its firefighting power disappear. Vernon could lose two firefighters, and Rocky Hill has already lost one, all because of a new restriction by the Hartford Fire Department.
"If you're going to be a firefighter in Hartford, you can only be one in Hartford," says Hartford Fire Chief Charles A. Teales Sr.
A new restriction has left these nearby municipalities steaming.
"I'm not very happy ... ," said Newington Fire Chief James Trommer. "I don't see how they can tell someone what to do on their off time. My first reaction is it's a free world and a free country, and I don't see how you can tell me what to do on my off time."
A new contract between the city of Hartford and the Hartford Fire Fighters Association forbids full-time firefighters to be on active duty and combat fires as volunteers elsewhere. A clause in the contract states: " ... for the purposes of health and safety, members of the bargaining unit shall be prohibited from responding to fire department calls as an active member of another paid or volunteer fire department while employed for active duty with the Hartford Fire Department. Violation of this provision shall subject said employee to discipline."
Teale said the restriction would take effect June 30, 2008, giving the volunteers and their departments time to adjust.
"I don't have anything against volunteers, and I very often admire their dedication, but the problem I have is running the Hartford Fire Department and not knowing if the injuries or illness is sustained from one department or from another department," Teale said. "The art and science of fighting fires is very stressful to the cardiovascular system."
When he accepted the fire chief post in Hartford three years ago, he gave up volunteering for the Blue Hills Fire Department in Bloomfield.
The new contract clause is an effort to decrease the rate of lost time related to illnesses and injuries. If members were allowed to continue volunteering, Hartford would not be able to determine whether firefighters got hurt or sick from their city job or from volunteering, which could be costly to the city, Teale said.
"A member of the Hartford Fire Department is given time off not to fight fires somewhere else, but to recuperate from an arduous situation," Teale said. "If you're on call all the time, you don't have time to relax."
The "two-hatter" issue has been a long-standing sore point for the brotherhood of firefighters nationwide, causing rifts between volunteers and union members.
Trommer said Newington would lose about half a dozen of its most veteran firefighters and make it more difficult to find daytime help.
"I certainly understand and respect Hartford's decision, but they don't need to hurt volunteer organizations," said Newington Town Manager Paul Fetherston. "I'm hoping they would reconsider their position. I am also concerned if this is implemented that it would also hurt Hartford, who may need to rely on neighboring towns to back them up."
Rocky Hill Fire Chief Joseph Kochanek called the new rule "selfish." He said if anyone got hurt in Rocky Hill, that person would be covered by the town's workers' compensation.
"This is pretty silly. ... Everybody is a volunteer in their hometown, but they are being told that they're going to lose a lot of experienced people in the suburbs for no good reason."
Fire Chief Robert Kelly of the Vernon Fire Department said that town would lose two key officers, one a training officer.
"Both positions will be tough to fill, but we're going to have to. It's a shame that [Hartford] is doing this. You'd think that they'd be happy to let their men serve in the community that they live in on their off-time, which is their own time."
Farmington has a combination of a small group of career firefighters and a large group of volunteers, none of whom is employed by the Hartford Fire Department.
But Mary-Ellen Harper, the director of fire and rescue services, said Hartford's mandate would limit Farmington's ability to find firefighters.
But Scott Brady, secretary and treasurer for the firefighters' union in Hartford, said the decision was no different from any other employer taking precautions with its workforce.
"It's more of a physical deterioration," he said. "If you do this long enough, eventually parts of your body break down. The city is trying to limit its liability on injuries."
Hartford is not the only fire department to limit its members' outside activities. Some of the larger towns and cities, including New Britain, West Hartford, Waterbury and East Hartford, have similar clauses in their contracts.
The International Association of Firefighters' constitution prohibits union members from serving as volunteers. There are 53 local IAFF affiliates in Connecticut, said spokesman George Burke.
"We have one main reason alone, and that is safety," Burke said. "In the case of Hartford, they were looking for a way to not see their workers' comp reduced."
He said the clause also protects the firefighter's family. In a case several years ago in Texas, three firefighters were killed in a church fire. Two were career firefighters, but their families could not collect benefits because the firefighters had died volunteering outside their jurisdiction.
The West Hartford Fire Department has had a no-volunteer clause in its contract since the 1980s. Lt. Michael O'Donnell, president of the union at West Hartford, said it's often difficult for members to sever ties with their volunteer departments.
In West Hartford, a firefighter hired after 1986 who seeks to collect workers' compensation would have to prove that the job was the cause of the illness -- a regulation that puts the burden of proof on the employee.
"If they are volunteers of another department, that muddies the waters because the bulk of the compensation is paid for by the employers," said Assistant Fire Chief Charles Hurley of West Hartford.
Brady said that before he became a firefighter and a union officer in Hartford, he thought communities should move toward paid fire departments.
"Response time is key. Appropriate manpower is key," he said. "Communities have to take a hard internal look at what level of protection they expect from a fire department. If two or three volunteers are taken out of each department and the departments are no more, then that is a sad statement."
- just not a firefighter. The fact that no other injury-prone professions are listed smells fishy to me.
Comment