The poor volunteers...

Ridryder911

EMS Guru
5,923
40
48
Sorry, stolen from another site presented by one of posters. Don't know how we missed it?

http://www.cbs7.com/news/details.asp?ID=12030

End of Volunteer Fire Departments? 4/27/09

CBS 7 News Staff
April 27, 2009

One new piece of legislation could bring an end to many West Texas volunteer fire departments.

Dallas Area Representative Yvonne Davis put in 2 sections to House bill 3390 that would require the Texas Commission on Fire Protection to increase minimum educational and training standards for volunteer fire fighters.

Although it sounds good on the surface, it would require personnel to receive nearly 350 more hours of training and force departments to buy new equipment.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Well here we again, only this time not limited to EMS.

R/r 911
 
Last edited by a moderator:

TransportJockey

Forum Chief
8,623
1,675
113
Sounds like a good bill. If I were in Tx I'd bug my reps to pass it through
 

Foxbat

Forum Captain
377
0
16
The bill doesn't seem to quantify the training required.
I wonder what would be included in these 350+ hours. Are they going to add more basic fire training, or are they going to throw in more hazmat, rescue, and EMS stuff?
 

JonTullos

Forum Captain
341
0
0
Why do some people get excited when something bad happens to the volunteers? Seriously... I see so much volly bashing and I don't understand it. There are a lot of towns and counties who simply can not afford to pay for a department. If volunteer fire and medical responders aren't allowed to do their jobs, the only losers will be the citizens. Say what you want, you're entitled to your opinions. I've been around volunteer departments and personnel all my life and I've seen very few whackers (at least compared to what some would have you believe). I'm a volunteer myself. The guys and gals I work with are some of the best you could ask for. More training is good, I'm all for it (I want to learn more myself!). But, when the demands become more than can be met within reason then it becomes a really bad situation.

Disagree with me if you want, that's your right. This is my two pennies.
 

Aidey

Community Leader Emeritus
4,800
11
38
I'm having a hard time reading the bill due to the formatting, and like Foxbat says, I can't see where they quantify the training.
 

AJ Hidell

Forum Deputy Chief
1,102
3
0
Why do some people get excited when something bad happens to the volunteers?
Bad? What is bad about improved educational standards? :unsure:
 

Aidey

Community Leader Emeritus
4,800
11
38
I don't think people think the improved education standards are bad, I think what is bad is the attitude that anything that makes the volunteers give up is good.

If someone said "Increased education is good, but I hope people don't suffer because there is a mass exodus of volunteers" I don't think they would be accused of bashing volunteers.
 

reaper

Working Bum
2,817
75
48
I don't think people think the improved education standards are bad, I think what is bad is the attitude that anything that makes the volunteers give up is good.

If someone said "Increased education is good, but I hope people don't suffer because there is a mass exodus of volunteers" I don't think they would be accused of bashing volunteers.

Well, with the increased education standards, there will be a mass exodus of volleys. Then they will be forced to have a paid dept, or have none, that is their choice! I will not feel bad for citizens, if they choose to have no service to cover them!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

AJ Hidell

Forum Deputy Chief
1,102
3
0
If someone said "Increased education is good, but I hope people don't suffer because there is a mass exodus of volunteers" I don't think they would be accused of bashing volunteers.
So it's better that people suffer from poorly trained volunteers who may or may not even show up in the first place, then to suffer from them not being there? I dunno... neither are attractive options to me. If they go away, it won't be long at all before they are replaced. No big deal. Sometimes it takes going cold turkey to break a nasty habit. I'm okay with that.
 

Foxbat

Forum Captain
377
0
16
Getting career and volunteer staff to same level of training is not impossible. I heard of county-wide fire systems where all volunteer and career firefighters go through exactly the same courses at the same fire academy, only volunteers take it on weekends over longer periods of time.
Even in my county there are some small career or combination fire departments which do not have their own training centers and their members go through training with volunteers (and are often taught by instructors who are volunteers).
You can make the transition in a way that forces volunteers out, or you can make it in a way that will keep most of them. It all depens on what the intent is.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Aidey

Community Leader Emeritus
4,800
11
38
Well, with the increased education standards, there will be a mass exodus of volleys. Then they will be forced to have a paid dept, or have none, that is their choice! I will not feel bad for citizens, if they choose to have no service to cover them!

I think you underestimate volunteers. Yes, some will leave because they don't like it, and some will leave because they will be unable to do the training because of their every day life. But those who truly want to stay with it will, and they will try as hard as they can.

It takes time to put a tax structure in place and form a paid department. In some places inclusion in a fire service area must be a unanimous vote, so one stubborn neighbor could prevent a whole neighborhood from receiving fire protection

So it's better that people suffer from poorly trained volunteers who may or may not even show up in the first place, then to suffer from them not being there? I dunno... neither are attractive options to me. If they go away, it won't be long at all before they are replaced. No big deal. Sometimes it takes going cold turkey to break a nasty habit. I'm okay with that.

There are some volunteers I trust more than paid FFs. The volunteers have no protection, they have to fight to keep their positions. The paid guys know the union is behind them, and thus they tend to aim lower than they may if they didn't have that protection.

Getting career and volunteer staff to same level of training is not impossible. I heard of county-wide fire systems where all volunteer and career firefighters go through exactly the same courses at the same fire academy, only volunteers take it on weekends over longer periods of time.
Even in my county there are some small career or combination fire departments which do not have their own training centers and their members go through training with volunteers (and are often taught by instructors who are volunteers).
You can make the transition in a way that forces volunteers out, or you can make it in a way that will keep most of them. It all depens on what the intent is.

I agree. One of the 1/2 volunteer 1/2 paid services in my area requires everyone to pass the same PAT that the big city department here requires. They also have pretty demanding training requirements. Yet, somehow, they have enough volunteers they aren't even taking applications right now.
 

AJ Hidell

Forum Deputy Chief
1,102
3
0
The volunteers have no protection, they have to fight to keep their positions. The paid guys know the union is behind them, and thus they tend to aim lower than they may if they didn't have that protection.
That is exactly the problem. Volunteers are so single-mindedly obsessed with maintaining their good 'ol boy hobby, and the perks it gives them, that they give no consideration to the best interests of the community. It's a very selfish mentality insidiously masquerading as altruism.
 

daedalus

Forum Deputy Chief
1,784
1
0
After volunteers eventually get the boot, communities will have to decide for themselves is a paid, professional, educated EMS is right for them. Let the people decide.
 
OP
OP
Ridryder911

Ridryder911

EMS Guru
5,923
40
48
Why do some people get excited when something bad happens to the volunteers? Seriously... I see so much volly bashing and I don't understand it. There are a lot of towns and counties who simply can not afford to pay for a department. If volunteer fire and medical responders aren't allowed to do their jobs, the only losers will be the citizens. Say what you want, you're entitled to your opinions. I've been around volunteer departments and personnel all my life and I've seen very few whackers (at least compared to what some would have you believe). I'm a volunteer myself. The guys and gals I work with are some of the best you could ask for. More training is good, I'm all for it (I want to learn more myself!). But, when the demands become more than can be met within reason then it becomes a really bad situation.

Disagree with me if you want, that's your right. This is my two pennies.

Yes, there are some communities that cannot afford professional and need volunteers and again I honor those areas, those are very remote and few. While you may not agree the town does not need a paid Paramedic in lieu of swimming pool for this summer or lights for the baseball field, etc.

My opinion against volunteers is that they want the role and function and respect of the professional .... only, if they can have it their own way.

Sorry, that is not how life is.

You want to play with the real ones, you need to be able to keep up with them. Fire alike illnesses and injuries have no prejudice on whom or where it attacks. There are reasons my crews study hours a week after working 12 -15 calls a day. To maintain proficiency and be abreast of not what to do but to know the latest and be the best for their patient.

The reason I posted, is this is the same attitudes we met when increasing the EMT program.. They want the honor but not the work.

R/r 911
 

CAOX3

Forum Deputy Chief
1,366
4
0
That is exactly the problem. Volunteers are so single-mindedly obsessed with maintaining their good 'ol boy hobby, and the perks it gives them, that they give no consideration to the best interests of the community. It's a very selfish mentality insidiously masquerading as altruism.

Wow, I dont even know a volunteer, fire or EMS. "single mindedly maintaining their good ol boy hobby and the perks it gives them" Is this truly the mentality of volunteers? I find this hard to believe, I wouldnt volunteer for anything never mind EMS and putting out a fire for free? Not a chance.

Keep in mind I know little about the fire service besides the fact that they assist us with patient care on scene, as far as putting out fires I have no idea whats involved. So I guess my opinion is basically baseless. Anyway I will throw it out there.

With that in mind how much education does it take to put out a fire? The process hasent changed in a thousand years.
 

MtJerry

Forum Crew Member
31
0
0
Yes, there are some communities that cannot afford professional and need volunteers and again I honor those areas, those are very remote and few. While you may not agree the town does not need a paid Paramedic in lieu of swimming pool for this summer or lights for the baseball field, etc.

You really need to get out and see some more of our country ... I don't mean any personal offense by this, but you are a very well educated man who just made a very uneducated comment.

Come visit Montana, or Wyoming, or some of the other areas where the population of the entire state would barely occupy most larger cities. It's just not possible to have paid fire and EMS in every township or county for that matter. Volunteers are a valuable resource for our country.

If the bill in question provides the money to pay for such training (including pay for time off work) then it's a great idea. Unfortunately, as with most political decisions, it's likely a knee-jerk reaction to a lawsuit somewhere and there has been very little thought put into it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mountain Res-Q

Forum Deputy Chief
1,757
1
0
Can we clarify? Are "we" basing Volunteer Ambulance Folk or Volunteer EMSers or all Volunteers in Emergency Services or all Volunteers in avenues of service?

Because, while I can see a desire for paid professional EMSers nationwide (despite some logistic problems with that), volunteers have been the backbone of Fire and other organizations forever. In my neck of the woods, if it wasn't for the volunteers to augment the paid, then the response of engines to fires would be cut in half, their wouldn't be enough staff to man the water tenders or breathing support or FF rehab, and their wouldn't be anyone to respond in lieu of the paid to a medical aid when the paid are already on a call. I'm sure theat the volunteer ffs would love to get paid, but that is not why they do it, and I feel that a debt of gratitude is owned to them (especially those that I know that have spent 20-30 years doing it). Likewise, 96%+ of all SAR in the U.S. is volunteer. We (my team) have the authorization to maintain a team of 52 members. For what we do we should be paid comparable to Paid Municiple Fire. ($XX.XX times the hundreads of hours we put in each year in missions & training equals what?) If we didn't volunteer we would need (as a county) to raise taxes by at least 5% to maintain the team. We do not fit into that "good ol' boy" mentality and take our responsibility VERY seriously. Hell, I spend more time training since I joined SAR 4 years ago then I ever did working paid Ambulance. As I say, "There is nothing stronger than the Heart of a Volunteer." I would rather spend 1 day volunteering on a mission than getting paid for 1 week on any other job. If SAR would go paid, I would be thrilled as nothing makes me happier than when I am doing that. So are we saying that all volunteering is bad in Emergency Services? If so, I will tell that to the group that washes county emergency vehicles for free as part of their service to the community. On the other hand, if we are talking EMS Ambulance specific, then we need to keep it confined to that and not bash the generic volunteer who includes, for me, Fire (MFR & EMT), SAR (MFR, EMT, Paramedic, and MD), and Boat Patrol (MFR & EMT).
 
Last edited by a moderator:

MRE

Forum Captain
312
10
18
I wouldnt volunteer for anything never mind EMS and putting out a fire for free? Not a chance.

Luckily the members of the 75% of all fire depts in the country that are volunteer do not share that same view. Not volunteering for anything? Seems a little selfish.

With that in mind how much education does it take to put out a fire? The process hasent changed in a thousand years.

Anybody can dump a bucket of water on a campfire, but to be a good firefighter I would put the required training on the same level as EMS.

I'm doing my Firefighter I/II course now, and its very much like the EMT-B. Around 150 hours of training, written and practical exams at the end. There are actually two practicals, one with live fire and one non-fire.

What most people don't realize (myself included until recently) is that firefighting is not simple at all. If not done properly, many things at a fire can hurt or kill you. For instance, enter a burning room and spray water in the wrong way and you can upset the thermal balance and cook yourself. Medics do drug calculations, pump operators do pressure and flow calculations to supply their different lines and nozzles appropriately.


Back to the issue at hand, being a volunteer should never be used as an excuse not to conduct yourself professionally or be adaquately trained to do your job. If the training requirements are made to be unreasonably difficult to meet, that is a different issue all together.
 
Top