Bruce Philpott, New Fire Models, Segment 4: Reduce Overtime Costs By $6 Million Annually

Before I begin tonight’s topic of fire personnel staffing, I would like to summarize the material that was presented over the last two weeks. As you will remember, my research into responses on medical emergency calls identified a pattern of excessive delays as a result of a policy found in the Glendale Fire Department’s Policy and Procedure Manual. These responses represent from 50% to 100% added time when compared to an average response time. Of the five random calls in Fire Station 27’s district that I examined, all of them fit into the category of “Failed Responses” as defined by Civic Technologies, a consultant hired by the GFD who submitted their report in 2004. The common thread binding these five incidents labeled as “failed” or unacceptable delays were when the responding firefighters on Engine 27 were jogging at Brand Park. Had they been in their neighborhood fire station at the time, they would have gotten to these emergencies within their average response time of about four minutes. With heart attacks being the biggest and preventable killer of our more mature citizens in Glendale, why would this city and its fire department permit such a policy to exist? The difference between a four-minute response and an eight-minute response can mean the difference between life and death. What has the GFD identified as the reasons that are causing these delays? And what has the GFD done to remedy them? I again encourage the city council to act upon this sooner than later because the public has been put in a greater than necessary risk as a result of delayed responses. This can be fixed immediately by suspending this policy until the fire department has submitted its report and the city council can make further deliberations based on its findings. There is no down side to suspending this policy. Firefighters can get the same workout by using the fitness training equipment that is in every fire station. There is no need to go to remote parks or other areas out of district to keep physically fit. What is more disturbing is that Civic Technologies identified southeast Glendale as having the highest number of “Failed Incidents”. My research focused on a less troubling area in Fire District 27. The problem is much greater in southeast Glendale. Has the GFD investigated these delayed responses, identified the problems and taken corrective measures? Glendale citizens and taxpayers deserve to know.

Now, I will shift my focus on ways that the city can recover $6 million dollars annually by changing its policy on fire apparatus staffing.

In 1999, the Glendale Fire Department spent $1.6 million dollars in overtime staffing. Last fiscal year that figure jumped to $5.8 million dollars. This overtime payout increased by nearly 300% in that period, despite the best efforts of fire management to impose controls. This overtime account will continue to spiral out of control unless workable measures are put in place by entities other than fire management, which has demonstrated its inability to make the necessary changes. I will be presenting some information that may alter your understanding about staffing issues on engine and truck companies, which is where 95% of overtime is spent. The career firefighter study group has developed safe and sane methods to bring this expenditure to near zero.

Former Fire Chief Gray, during a presentation he made to the city council in June, 2007, said that the National Fire Protection Association, commonly referred as the NFPA, under Section 1710, “requires” that engine and truck companies be staffed with a minimum of four firefighters. In saying that this requirement is the primary reason why there is so much overtime, he inferred that the mandatory staffing with four firefighters was out of his hands, that it is beyond his control, leaving him, the city and taxpayers no alternative choices. He said they have to fill every vacancy due to such things as sick leave and vacation time. To further support the need to staff engines and trucks with four firefighters, he also referenced an OSHA rule that, for safety reasons, requires four firefighters to make up an entry team at a structure fire. Two go into the building with the fire hose to extinguish the fire. The other two remain outside, focused on the two-man entry team, for it is their responsibility to go in and rescue the two-man entry team if needed. This is known as the 2 in, 2 out rule and because the entry team requires four firefighters, fire management and the fire union have told the public and city council that to accomplish this, all engine and truck companies have to be staffed with a minimum of four firefighters.

Over the next two weeks I will present information, evidence if you like, that will prove these assertions to be inaccurate and are actually costing taxpayers millions of dollars without any enhanced benefits.

The fire department’s own activity logs show that they routinely operate engine companies with three firefighters for extended periods of time; from two to eight hours is common, and sometimes for the entire shift. The staffing with three occurs most often during periods of highest call demand. I discovered this information as I examined hundreds of engine and truck company activity logs. While staffed with three, these engine companies respond to fire and medical calls with no problems encountered.

Here are some typical reasons firefighters are absent from their four-person crew, leaving staffing levels at three:

1. To conduct background investigations, often gone for eight hours.

2. To participate in union meetings (up to six on-duty firefighters are allowed at a time). They leave engine and truck companies all over the city to attend meetings about union business.

3. To attend captain meetings: fire captains leave their stations and assemble at headquarters and are not available for hours, leaving three firefighters to staff the equipment and respond on calls. The remaining crews move up to the next position, engineer to acting captain, and firefighter to acting engineer. On one hand this is healthy because it allows personnel to experience the responsibilities of the next promotional position for professional growth. However, on the other hand, if staffing with four were a requirement to maintain an acceptable level of safety and efficiency, the captain meetings would be conducted through teleconferencing, thereby maintaining full staffing of emergency response vehicles. But prolonged staffing with three does not seem to pose a problem with the union or fire management.

4. To staff another engine or truck, often times for the entire 24-hour shift.

5. To get some specialized training or prepare for a promotional exam.

6. Some times no reasons are documented in the records.

I obtained a random sample of 36 activity logs that include all engine and truck companies from all three platoons over a three-day period in June 2007. Exactly one out of every three posted at least one entry where a company operated with three firefighters for hours at a time.

Here are a couple of conclusions that can be drawn from this information:

1. The fire department has determined that it can operate safely with three firefighters on engines for extended periods of time, even during periods of high call volume, because they know that they can assemble large numbers of engines and trucks and fire personnel in a few minutes at any location in the city should a large emergency arise. In a Glendale News Press article dated October 5, 2005, Burbank Fire Captain Ron Bell said, “With a few calls, we can get 100 engines out here” . . . that’s 400 firefighters. When two homeless people were stranded on a sand island in the LA River recently, Brian Humphrey, spokesperson for the LA City Fire Department stated that 100 firefighters responded from Los Angeles and Glendale. Fire resources are extremely abundant. Remember, engine companies, on average, are tied up on fire and medical calls for one hour and fifteen minutes or about 4% of their 24-hour shift.

2. The fire department gives short shrift to the notion of always staffing engine and truck companies with four firefighters, even though they contend it is a requirement. If it was a safety issue to protect their membership, the fire union would have filed a grievance, but none have been filed. Fire management is solely responsible for setting staffing policies and it clearly supports staffing with three on a routine basis.

As you will learn, failing to comply with NFPA standards is common and has no adverse consequences. Nationally, the most common staffing of engine and truck companies is with three, not four. Question: has there been a time when a call was not adequately handled by an engine or truck company responding with three firefighters? The Los Angeles County Fire Department routinely staffs with three and operates with no problems, as do many other cities, and some have a Class I rating. Even though engine companies staffed with three respond on fire and medical calls all the time, I have not been able to find any problems in the data due to under staffing. The president of the international firefighters’ union is a corporate officer of NFPA. Contrary to what you have been told by fire officials, the NFPA cannot “require” the staffing of four firefighters on engines and trucks. The NFPA has no statutory or enforceable powers. Our fire department has decided to cherry pick which of the “guides” it chooses to adhere to, like staffing with four, but ignores others that require documentation and reporting.

It may be of interest for you to know that the State of California has not adopted NFPA 1710 and neither has the City of Glendale. In fact, according to an analyst in the California Fire Marshal’s Office, he is not aware of any city in the state of California that has adopted NFPA 1710. Shamefully, many cities have subsequently adopted the four staffing model because they were told and lead to believe it was a mandatory requirement.

However, Cal/OSHA does have enforceable statutory standards on safety in the workplace. On the issue of minimum staffing on engine and truck companies, Cal OSHA and Fed OHSA remain silent. OSHA, unlike the NFPA, does not set minimum staffing for engine or truck companies. Local communities set their own policies on staffing. Staffing varies from one to six on engine and truck companies depending on the unique needs and requirements of each community. The debate over one versus two police officers in a patrol car has continued over the last four decades. OSHA allows local governments to set their own staffing policies, recognizing that the vast majority (75%) of fire departments in the country are either staffed partially or completely with volunteers and three firefighters on an engine or truck company is common.

Time is short so next week we’ll be back to complete this segment of our presentation.

Contact information for questions and copies of the document:

Bruce Philpott

Phone: (818) 240-8949

Email: logicpoint@aol.com/

Copywrite 2007