BY JIM MASON
I SIT HERE AT MY PC MORE THAN 30 years into a fire service career, and I am still haunted by the words of one of the greatest fire service mentors any apprentice could possibly have.
My fire service career began as a volunteer in a small south central Pennsylvania fire department. The year was 1972; the department held the distinct honor of being led by a chief named James W. Cutchall. Cutchall was not only a great mentor but also an outstanding human being and a remarkable motivational instructor. He was well known for making statements that would leave lasting impressions during our frequent training events.
One of the more notable statements he would leave with us is that “99 percent of the fire service is common sense and the other one percent is knowledge we receive through education.” Some may argue that it is actually a 90/10 split, but I am sure that 99 percent had a better punch when making his point.
Cutchall’s words haunt me because we are now well into 2007, and I still see many areas in which the fire service totally avoids, renounces, or just plain refuses to use good common sense (CS).
Let me digress for a moment and explain this for those of you that may be a little “CS” impaired. Many of you may recall your grandparents’ speaking of horse sense, mother wit, or maybe rationality. Webster’s Dictionary defines “common sense” as a noun that means simply “sound practical judgment.” The analytical Euripides once wrote that the best prophet is common sense, our native wit; the philosopher Henri Frederic Amiel said that “Common sense is calculation applied to life”; and the distinguished professor Thomas H. Huxley stated that “Science is nothing, but trained and organized common sense and … all truth, in the long run, is only common sense clarified.”
One of the best definitions I have found for common sense is the basic level of practical knowledge and judgment that we all need to help us live in a reasonable and safe way.
A FAILURE TO DEPLOY COMMON SENSE
All across this great nation there are fire departments, volunteer and career, being managed by people with noble intentions, but it seems in some cases that we are failing to use sound, rational judgment when making critical decisions. Today, we still read about departments feuding over territory and hostility at incidents concerning procedures. Many departments lack proper response protocols to ensure safe operations, and we hear all the time about departments allowing untrained personnel to ride apparatus.
I realize that many volunteer and career fire departments are experiencing severe personnel crunches, but what kind of sense does this make? We have departments assigning mutual-aid companies because of who they are, not what kind of service they can bring to the incident. There are departments driving well out of their way on mutual-aid assignments when readily available units in the vicinity remain idle.
The example that still troubles me is the almost insistent duplication of fire service equipment. This is probably one of the most absurd issues facing us today: We are wasting millions of dollars because we refuse to talk to each other. I find it hard to believe that in this day and age some departments still believe that, if our neighboring department has one, we need to buy one bigger, better, or with more chrome on it.
Don’t get me wrong. The whole federal grant program has been great for many departments. I just don’t understand why we can’t seem to include communications equipment into the equation. With grant money, many departments have realized a longtime dream of finally being able to properly equip apparatus and members, but what good does this do for many of us if we still can’t talk to each other?
I don’t have all the answers, but it completely baffles me that we can’t seem to get together and find a way for all emergency services to vastly improve radio communications. In the wake of 9-11 and the events in the Gulf Coast region, we still find radio interoperability next to impossible. What good sense does that make?
What we really are talking about is safety. We try to educate our apprentices on everything under the sun to prepare them for this great profession, but many of us are failing miserably when it comes to the subject of common sense and its application to firefighter safety.
In March 2004, I had the privilege to meet with many of our nation’s top fire service leaders at the first National Fallen Firefighter Foundation Life Safety Summit in Tampa, Florida. This meeting was the most gratifying experience of my fire service career. We assembled to focus on the extremely important subject of how to prevent line-of-duty deaths. I clearly remember one distinguished chief asking the question, “But isn’t this all just common sense?” Of course, the answer was, and is, yes. The initiatives produced at the summit were very well thought out and especially significant to all of us in the emergency services. However, it is unfortunate that we find it necessary to put many “common sense” issues in written form so that those of us who are “CS impaired” have a point of reference.
I fully understand that our culture has drastically changed since the 1970s. It appears that numerous laws have been implemented over the years that make a serious attempt at abolishing any need for good old horse sense.
We now have laws that mandate corporations to attach labels to everything anyone might have the remote possibility of injuring themselves with, on, or in the performance of. Honestly, those of us in the fire service should be above all that, correct? Do we really need to see the graphic sticker of amputated fingers projecting out of the side of a running lawn mower to know better? Don’t tell me you haven’t observed these warnings and shaken your head. Aren’t we beyond all that?
Leaving the station on apparatus without wearing a seat belt is not good common sense. Sending perfectly healthy firefighters into an unstable, unoccupied structure isn’t rational either, but obviously we need to be told this over and over again.
Ever since I took my first step into a firehouse, I was instantly aware that this profession is defined by honor, tradition, and valor. I believe it is this generation’s duty to add the word “responsibility” to that definition.
I believe that in the fire service culture today too many critical decisions are based on several factors: peer pressure; politics; emotions; ignorance; and, unfortunately, sometimes malice.
Now more than ever, I feel it is time for those of us in the fire service to take a good hard look in the mirror and ask ourselves a few questions: Am I doing everything I can to ensure the safety of those I am associated with in the fire service? Am I doing the very best I can for my department and the community we serve? Last but not least: Am I doing the best I can for myself-physically, spiritually, and emotionally?
Personally, I don’t believe I can answer all three of these questions with a positive response, but I feel it is time we all conduct a personal inventory and strive to ensure the safety of ourselves, our fellow firefighters, and the communities we aid.
Be proactive. Assist your department with implementing National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 1500, Standard on Fire Department Occupational Safety and Health Program, and the 16 Life Safety Initiatives. After all, it just makes good “common sense”.
SCOTT REICHENBACH is an assistant chief with the New Cumberland Federal Fire Department in Pennsylvania. He has been a volunteer and career firefighter for more than 34 years.
