After reading “Fighting Fire with Words” and then “The More Things Change” (February 1997), I was left unsure of whether Bill Manning has reached the point in his career where he has lost touch with reality in the fire service or whether he is fulfilling his role, and quite brilliantly, as a magazine editor who is putting forth an issue in a light that is sure to strike some nerves so that readers will respond.
In the “old days,” fire departments made only fires. The public didn`t expect the government to do everything, but they did want fire protection provided. Today, the citizens have changed how they view government. They want the government to take care of all facets of their lives, and they want it for the same price. Look at the push for parks and recreation, social programs, and the focus on crime–to name only a few. This is the climate the fire service of today faces, unlike those of the “old days.”
The fire service must adopt the philosophy that we work for the citizens of the community. Citizens have scorned government for its bureaucratic practices, and we are seeing that this is no longer tolerated. Now is the time to act; let`s not wait until they have made further cuts into equipment and staffing or have contracted out for a private fire department. Private business is more than willing to give the citizens what they want and need, and politicians will gladly contract it out if it frees up money that can be used elsewhere. If we want to play in the game, we must play by their rules, since it is their ball. If not, they will find another more-than-willing participant.
Manning slammed just about every service that most modern fire departments provide. Does he really believe that we should not provide EMS, haz mat, water rescue, extrication, collapse rescue? He accused the fire service of having “jumped through the EMS hoops for city managers” and said that “we couldn`t wait to do something other than fire prevention and protection.” The reality is that we are out there busting our butts to get funding for manpower and equipment, and diversification is one avenue that we must go through to get that funding. As he indicated, we have 40 percent fewer fires than 10 years ago, which translates to either losing manpower, doing more, or both. That`s reality!
If all levels of fire service personnel were asked if they would rather just provide fire protection and prevention or do everything, I think most would say that they took this job to be a firefighter; however, when faced with whether they want to do more or lose funding, other services suddenly look more attractive, especially since we inherently like helping people, regardless of their problem. That is why we became firefighters.
Some fire departments are (un)fortunate enough to have many fires requiring large resources. In those cities, fires are viewed as a problem. Most cities, however, do not view fire as a problem, so we must find–yes, must find–other ways to give service to the community to provide the basic needed fire protection and education. That may not be fair, but again, that`s the game those of us out in the trenches must play–like it or not.
The fire service has been critized for trying to keep pace with an everchanging environment with which we must deal. The editorial indicates that the fire service should not have changed to the community-oriented, broader-based services organizations that we are today–that we need to be “fire departments.” But that is how we stay in the game, just as Fire Engineering meets its customers` needs by being filled with articles and advertisements related to the “We do EMS, mostly” departments. It is easy to call the fouls when you are in the stands; however, it isn`t as easy when you are the one on the court.
David Hall
Captain
Springfield (MO) Fire Department
