Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse

Firehouse.com Forum Rules & Guidelines

Forum Rules & Guidelines

Not Permitted or Tolerated:
• Advertising and/or links of commercial, for-profit websites, products, and/or services is not permitted. If you have a need to advertise on Firehouse.com please contact [email protected]
• Fighting/arguing
• Cyber-bullying
• Swearing
• Name-calling and/or personal attacks
• Spamming
• Typing in all CAPS
• “l33t speak” - Substituting characters for letters in an effort to represent a word or phrase. (example: M*****ive)
• Distribution of another person’s personal information, regardless of whether or not said information is public knowledge and whether or not an individual has permission to post said personal information
• Piracy advocation of any kind
• Racist, sexual, hate type defamatory, religious, political, or sexual commentary.
• Multiple forum accounts

Forum Posting Guidelines:

Posts must be on-topic, non-disruptive and relevant to the firefighting community. Post only in a mature and responsible way that contributes to the discussion at hand. Posting relevant information, helpful suggestions and/or constructive criticism is a great way to contribute to the community.

Post in the correct forum and have clear titles for your threads.

Please post in English or provide a translation.

There are moderators and admins who handle these forums with care, do not resort to self-help, instead please utilize the reporting option. Be mature and responsible for yourself and your posts. If you are offended by another member utilize the reporting option. All reported posts will be addressed and dealt with as deemed appropriate by Firehouse.com staff.

Firehouse.com Moderation Process:
Effective immediately, the following moderation process will take effect. User(s) whose posts are determined by Firehouse.com staff to be in violation of any of the rules above will EARN the following reprimand(s) in the moderation process:
1. An initial warning will be issued.
2. A Final Warning will be issued if a user is found to be in violation a second time.
3. A 3-day suspension will be issued if the user continues to break the forum rules.
4. A 45-day suspension will be issued if the user is found to be a habitual rule breaker.
5. Habitual rule breakers that have exhausted all of the above will receive a permanent life-time ban that will be strictly enforced. Reinstatement will not be allowed – there is no appeal process.

Subsequent accounts created in an effort to side-step the rules and moderation process are subject to automatic removal without notice. Firehouse.com reserves the right to expedite the reprimand process for any users as it is deemed necessary. Any user in the moderation process may be required to review and agree to by email the terms and conditions listed above before their account is re-instated (except for those that are banned).

Firehouse.com reserves the right to edit and/or remove any post or member, at any time, for any reason without notice. Firehouse.com also reserves the right to warn, suspend, and/or ban, any member, at any time, for any reason.

Firehouse.com values the active participation we have in our forums. Please ensure your posts are tasteful and tactful. Thank you very much for your cooperation.
See more
See less

Another politician in our corner.......

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by johnny46 View Post
    If unions booted substandard members, they would be looked upon as an assurance of quality work. Too often, unions protect people who don't do their jobs, and there is a common attitude of entitlement amongst public workers. We need unions, but the unions need to do what's right, not simply what will benefit them.
    And I'm sure that's exactly what a lot of American's think.

    What I do find interesting is how quickly some will immediately attack the writer of the article, but I have yet to see anyone provide any information disputing what he says.

    Comment


    • #17
      That $123K is the highest civilian pay (for "GS" employees) not including "locality pay." The "rest of the US" locality pay makes that max $148K. Some areas may go as high as $160K. That's for a GS-15, Step 10, which is to say top management with a lot of years on the job. Not a wet-behind-the-ears dishwasher, a mechanic, or a warehouse clerk. WG rates (generally the "trades") top out just over $100K.

      An article in USA Today (via Monster.com) indicates that the average pay for 8 of ten careers that exist both in the federal arena and private industry is around $67K on the government side (vs $60K on the private side, but that's another story).

      While there are certainly people making the kind of money the story suggests, there are many more making a lot less. I don't have anything to back it up, but my gut feeling is that the average pay for a federal worker is closer to the $40K-$50K range. Probably lower.
      Opinions my own. Standard disclaimers apply.

      Everyone goes home. Safety begins with you.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by tree68 View Post
        That $123K is the highest civilian pay (for "GS" employees) not including "locality pay." The "rest of the US" locality pay makes that max $148K. Some areas may go as high as $160K. That's for a GS-15, Step 10, which is to say top management with a lot of years on the job. Not a wet-behind-the-ears dishwasher, a mechanic, or a warehouse clerk. WG rates (generally the "trades") top out just over $100K.

        An article in USA Today (via Monster.com) indicates that the average pay for 8 of ten careers that exist both in the federal arena and private industry is around $67K on the government side (vs $60K on the private side, but that's another story).

        While there are certainly people making the kind of money the story suggests, there are many more making a lot less. I don't have anything to back it up, but my gut feeling is that the average pay for a federal worker is closer to the $40K-$50K range. Probably lower.
        I'm curious if Senators and Representatives and their salaries are included.

        Comment


        • #19
          Well..........

          Originally posted by Catch22 View Post
          I'm curious if Senators and Representatives and their salaries are included.

          No, it only includes people who Work.........
          Never use Force! Get a Bigger Hammer.
          In memory of
          Chief Earle W. Woods, 1912 - 1997
          Asst. Chief John R. Woods Sr. 1937 - 2006

          IACOJ Budget Analyst

          I Refuse to be a Spectator. If I come to the Game, I'm Playing.

          www.gdvfd18.com

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Catch22 View Post
            And I'm sure that's exactly what a lot of American's think.

            What I do find interesting is how quickly some will immediately attack the writer of the article, but I have yet to see anyone provide any information disputing what he says.
            I thought that was what I was doing above.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by johnny46 View Post
              If unions booted substandard members, they would be looked upon as an assurance of quality work. Too often, unions protect people who don't do their jobs, and there is a common attitude of entitlement amongst public workers. We need unions, but the unions need to do what's right, not simply what will benefit them.
              I would tend to agree, however our employers' action is often a major factor in those situations. There have been numerous times that I've seen the Union put into the position of having to "defend" that substandard employee because the employer can't exercise a little restraint and follow proper procedure for disciplinary action.

              For example, I've seen a person in a "last chance" status fail a drug test and then be fired for it. The Union was obligated to "fight" the action because 1) they have to do so and 2) because the employer acted improperly and you need to "protect" the rights of the "good employees" for the future.

              This person got reinstated because the employer improperly ordered and administered the drug test and the results became inadmissible evidence. With no admissible evidence to justify termination, there was no choice but to reinstate him.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by FireMedic049 View Post
                I thought that was what I was doing above.
                I stand corrected. I meant that as a direct comment toward those that like to come in wailing and thrashing about because some politician said something they think the "brothers" should be livid about without a shred of individual thought or information.

                If you've got information backing your opinion, that's great. Unfortunately, it seems to be a rarity these days.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by FireMedic049 View Post
                  I would tend to agree, however our employers' action is often a major factor in those situations. There have been numerous times that I've seen the Union put into the position of having to "defend" that substandard employee because the employer can't exercise a little restraint and follow proper procedure for disciplinary action.

                  For example, I've seen a person in a "last chance" status fail a drug test and then be fired for it. The Union was obligated to "fight" the action because 1) they have to do so and 2) because the employer acted improperly and you need to "protect" the rights of the "good employees" for the future.

                  This person got reinstated because the employer improperly ordered and administered the drug test and the results became inadmissible evidence. With no admissible evidence to justify termination, there was no choice but to reinstate him.
                  You really think that's a good thing? The guy failed a "last chance" test. If your at a "last chance" stage...haven't you already failed before?
                  "This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Bones42 View Post
                    You really think that's a good thing? The guy failed a "last chance" test. If your at a "last chance" stage...haven't you already failed before?
                    Like many, you seem to be missing the point. The point isn't that an employee with an obvious drug problem got his job back. The point is that employers frequently disregard established rules and procedures for handling numerous "disciplinary" situations and that directly leads to "bad employees" getting their jobs back!

                    Obviously there is a problem and this employee should be terminated. However, the employer has to abide by the proper procedures to do so. In this particular case, I forget some of the detail, but basically they ordered the person to take the drug test in violation of the established drug testing policy. It's basically the same concept as the handling of evidence in a criminal trial. If the evidence was wrongfully obtained (i.e. no search warrant), then legally the evidence doesn't exist and the criminal could potentially avoid prosecution.

                    Another good example was the aftermath of that fatal fire in DeKalb County, GA. Errors were made and clearly disciplinary action of some sorts was warranted. The County basically overreacted to the public outcry regarding a perceived dereliction of duty and fired several people pretty much immediately.

                    In the end, exactly what I said would happen, happened. The union firefighters all got their jobs back directly because the County failed to follow the proper procedures to investigate the incident and take disciplinary action. Instead of being patient and doing it the right way, they basically just gave the public what they wanted - some "heads on a platter".

                    Unfortunately, when these thing happen, the typical reaction from the public seems to be to blame the "Union" for protecting the "bad employee" rather than recognizing that the employer (in some cases public officials that they elected) engaged in procedural errors and/or misconduct that directly caused their action to be reversed.

                    It's basically the same thing as blaming the Defense Attorney for a criminal's acquittal because of misconduct by the Police or DA.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Leeland View Post
                      I wish I made that much... Hell I still have to pay for my health insurance, taxes, retirement. Maybe Mr. Pawlenty should spend a day or a week doing what I have to do. I don't belong to a union but sometimes wish I did so numbskulls like this would be put in their place.

                      Of course he never mentions anything about fire fighters which is the only good thing about the article.
                      Ever listen to Jason Lewis on 100.3 KTLK? That SOB is constantly talking about how "police and firefighters need to stop living frivalously off the backs of the taxpayers." Really Mr. Lewis? Frivalously? Do your f-ing research.

                      In MN, what is it? 95% of all fire departments are volunteer or paid on call? $7.50 to maybe $10.50 per hour (when actively on a call), if they get paid at all, and maybe a small pension. All for risking your life to help others like him. And, last time I checked, I didn't get an employee discount on my taxes for being on the fire department.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by johnny46 View Post
                        If unions booted substandard members, they would be looked upon as an assurance of quality work. Too often, unions protect people who don't do their jobs, and there is a common attitude of entitlement amongst public workers. We need unions, but the unions need to do what's right, not simply what will benefit them.
                        Very well said. My FD isn't unionized, but my full time job is, and I see that crap all the time unfortunately.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          WTF Pawlenty

                          Thanks Nate. My Dept is one of two in our county which is NOT paid on call. We get a yearly sum towards our retirement. That's IT!!!!!

                          Now, my "job" I'm a "County Guy". Our "step increases" we got in 2010 but not 2011 and we got NO Cost of Living Allowance for either year. This is the States' largest county. I don't know how Mr. Pawlenty can even touch on the subject.

                          Comment

                          300x600 Ad Unit (In-View)

                          Collapse

                          Upper 300x250

                          Collapse

                          Taboola

                          Collapse

                          Leader

                          Collapse
                          Working...
                          X