BY PAUL J. URBANO
Last month, when discussing dedicated company assignments, we explored some ways adopting this practice can improve overall fire company operations. Since dedicated company assignments can be perceived as restrictive, not to mention a major cultural change for some departments, let’s address some common questions and concerns.
Q. How will the personnel in the fire station get training or experience on the other apparatus or companies?
A. Being in the same station offers immediate access to the other companies for training and familiarization. This offers more opportunities than if members were assigned to single-company fire stations. If you are assigned to an engine company at a single-company fire station, you can and should participate in multicompany training with neighboring truck and rescue companies. If not already part of your department culture, it’s important to embrace the “every day is a training day” philosophy.
Q. What happens when dedicated company members are off-duty?
A. Fortunately, we work most of our scheduled shifts per year, but when members are off-duty, there are a few ways to fill in:
- Fill in from within the companyi.e., the engineer acts as the officer, and the firefighter acts as the engineer; of course, this depends on training, policies, and contracts.
- Move across the floor from the engine to the truck or rescue.
- Fill in from another fire station.
- Call in overtime.
Some departments have established fill-in prioritiesin-house members have priority to ride on the other company before an outside member. It’s important this be done with good intentions, such as having the appropriate training.
Q. What happens when a truck company member has to work on an engine company, or vice versa? After being assigned to one type of company for awhile, how can this person still be proficient in the other?
A. As mentioned above, we must make time for training every day and at least every week for volunteer departments. Many departments have established a progressive career development path by allowing members to gain experience on engine companies before being assigned to truck or rescue companies.
Additionally, consider the impact on acting, relief, or fill-in officers and engineers when temporarily assigned outside their normally assigned company. They don’t have the luxury of knowing the company members, the apparatus, the area, or the assigned members.
Q. What if someone does not want to work on a busy engine company all the time?
A. Although there are many variables, working on a busy engine company can be a good thing, especially if you’re not as experienced as you’d like to be. However, you could bid into a slower company in your fire station or another station when the timing is right (there’s a vacancy and you have the seniority).Burnout is a valid concern; however, it will most likely be the exception than the rule. It’s important to remember that some of our busiest engine companies are not as busy as some of our ambulances.
Q. Won’t it interfere with the ambulance rotations?
A. We must be careful not to allow the integration of fire and EMS to interfere with how we assign personnel. Here are some proposals to address this:
- Firefighter/EMTs assigned to engine companies can rotate between engine companies and ambulances as assigned firefighter/paramedics do on advanced life support engines.
- Firefighter/EMTs assigned to truck and heavy rescue companies can rotate to an ambulance three shifts per quarter to maintain EMS knowledge, skills, and abilities.
- Firefighter/EMTs rotate from their assigned company to the ambulance for one shift and back to their assigned company.
- Senior (advanced, master) firefighter/EMTs assigned to truck and rescue companies at multicompany fire stations don’t rotate to ambulances.
Q. What if you don’t have the staffing to support this concept?
A. Although staffing levels are a challenge for many fire departments, we should be cautious in how we allow them to dictate personnel assignments. We should assign personnel based on sound operational need. Staffing levels, whatever they are, shouldn’t force us into normalizing unsafe practices.
Q. Can this concept create division within a fire station?
A. Yes, but divisive attitudes are a choice and can happen for a multitude of reasons regardless of rotating or dedicated companies. It’s important for personnel to be leaders at their level to help department culture change toward a more “pride and ownership” and “everyday is a training day” mindset. Although we function as teams within teams, it’s important to remember we are all on the same team. Officers, especially company officers, must not allow divisiveness to infiltrate the organization.
Q. What if this concept facilitates laziness or complacency?
A. Company officers and chief officers must not tolerate this behavior. For our safety, we must avoid the attitude of “kicking back,” “taking a break,” or “hiding,” because laziness facilitates complacency, and complacency kills firefighters.
Q. Isn’t multitasking a current trend?
A. It’s true that employers get more value for their dollar through multitasking, but today’s fire service is becoming more and more complex, requiring a wider array of knowledge, skills, and abilities. Every year we seem to have more training and safety requirements to accomplish. Our safety is directly related to our proficiency; therefore, it’s important to recognize when we are spreading ourselves too thin.
The fire service prides itself on solving all kinds of problems from a minor vehicle collision to a complex fireground operation; however, it’s important to realize that problems, projects, and requests are unlimited whereas resources (people, money, and time) are limited.
Q. Aren’t we smart enough to do all this stuff in the fire service?
A. Yes, we are definitely smart enough; today’s fire service is full of educated, multitalented people. The real question is, How much is enough or too much? How much time do we have for training to master all that’s expected of us? Even with dedicated company assignments, we’re more likely to be generalized specialists (jacks-of-many-trades, masters of some).
Q. What if the department is too transient?
A. Even though today’s fire service may be more transient (this may also be generational in nature), we must be cautious in allowing this to dictate how we operate. We should take a serious look at the revolving fire company door and determine if constant rotating negatively impacts company continuity, cohesiveness, consistency, and ultimately fire company competence. Note: There is a distinct difference between fire company competence and individual competence.
Q. We haven’t killed anyone with the way things are; why change now?
A. This is a very dangerous and irresponsible attitude. Just because it has been working doesn’t mean it’s right. It may only indicate you haven’t been caught yet.
Additionally, why complicate things by adding unnecessary risk for company officers? They are the ones dealing directly with the constant change of personnel rotating through their respective companies, not to mention changing apparatus themselves. We should be setting them up for consistent success.
Q. Is it possible that company performance will degrade over time?
A. That is always a possibility, regardless of whether you use rotating or dedicated company assignments. Establishing a culture of discipline is crucial, but it’s also important to be able to recognize the warning signs of deteriorating company performance such as lack of motivation, lack of teamwork, diminishing competence, and divisiveness within the company or toward other companies.1
Q. How did we come to constantly rotate personnel in the first place?
A. We may have drifted into constant rotating out of convenience or fairness. Gradually, constant rotation becomes part of our culture; we normalize it.
- We rotate so often, sometimes multiple times per shift, that we must continually manipulate our staffing and adjust our accountability system to reflect staffing accuracy.
- In “Drifting into Failure” (Editor’s Opinion, October 2007), Fire Engineering Editor in Chief Bobby Halton states: “Drifting involves small changes or adaptations to existing proven firefighting practices, which, before several seemingly innocent changes, were working well to protect us. These changes to our accepted practices by themselves appear to be insignificant; however, over time, and combined with previous adaptations and changes, [they] put firefighters at unacceptably high risk.”
The Anchorage Fire Department has begun implementing ways to improve consistency at the company level, thus slowing down the revolving fire company door. For starters, more than half of its 13 fire stations consist of single-engine companies, which are already dedicated companies by design. Some company officers have assigned their crews to dedicated companies at multicompany fire stations. Other company officers have paired themselves with engineers. Even though they still rotate from apparatus to apparatus, they rotate together but less often.
The intent of this article is not only to share the advantages of dedicated company assignments but also to encourage further discussion pertaining to company assignments. Have we drifted into our current practice? Is it based on tradition, convenience, or budget? Are we willing to evaluate its effectiveness to determine if current practice is still the best practice?
Understandably, if rotating is part of your department’s culture, there will be resistance to changing the status quo. Nevertheless, we must ask ourselves if constant rotating will improve company performance without compromising safety. If not, we must look for alternatives such as dedicated company assignments.
Changing to dedicated company assignments is not a cure-all, but coupled with a disciplined, progressive training culture, this practice can go far toward improving fire company operations (teamwork) while increasing our margin of safety.
Reference
1. Okray, Randy and Thomas Lubnau II, Crew Resource Management for the Fire Service (Fire Engineering, 2004), 155.
PAUL J. URBANO began his fire service career in 1986. He has been a member of the Anchorage (AK) Fire Department since 1995 and serves as the captain of Fire Station #1. He has an associate’s degree in fire service administration from the University of Alaska Anchorage.
