THE ONLY GAME IN TOWN, PART 1
EDITOR’S OPINION
When I hear firefighters, fire officers, and fire chiefs complaining about the proliferation of NFPA codes and standards, and ask what they intend to do about it, some shrug and say, “They’re the only game in town.” Ain’t it the truth.
From its humble beginnings in 1896 as a small group of insurance industry representatives looking to standardize sprinkler systems, the National Fire Protection Association has grown into the giant of the fire business. Long gone are the days when the NFPA and IAFC clashed for control of the fire service; the NFPA has cornered the market and has sucked the fire service into its vacuum of invincibility.
New NFPA president George I). Miller, in a recent published interview, has pledged “to search for ways to increase the distribution of NFPA codes and standards.” Hits goal cannot be good news to firefighters who are up to their necks in codes and fear the NFPA tentacles arc getting longer and more numerous.
File many comments I’m receiving from firefighters in the field make me wonder if the NFPA can see too far beyond Batterymarch Park. Many firefighters view’ the NFPA as less than sympathetic to their interests and as driven to propagating codes and standards that intrude on the administration and operations of fire departments.
While Mr. Miller is “convinced there is widespread support for the NFPA’s worthy goals,” some question whether the motivation behind fattening the pile of fire codes and standards falls strictly within the NFPA’s worthy mission or merely serves the more basic organizational instincts of self-preservation and self-perpetuation. Whatever the case, the code books get thicker and America’s fire losses continue to lead the world. By this time it should be clear to all that voluminous codes do not ensure fire safety in general and the safety of firefighters in particular.
Historically, our reaction to the American fire tragedy has been to throw more codes at the problem, much like a federal government that attacks bureaucracy with more bureaucracy, and in the end nothing is really changed. The NFPA resembles government to a large degree—-indeed, it is the government of the fire service —but is quite singular in that it is accountable to no one and operates without legal empowerment.
So the march to standardize, nationalize, normalize, and sanitize goose steps relentlessly ahead, and in many ways the fire service suffers. At the root of all this are some important philosophical issues, including national vs. local determination of firefighting/fire protection policy. However, most firefighters who are displeased with the codes and standards system in general have four basic points at the top of their hit list:
- Codes and standards continue to be manufactured faster than fire departments can comply with them.
- The liability hammer continues to be poised over the heads of departments and individual members alike because the courts take the position that the mere existence of nationally recognized “consensus” standards is sufficient to demand compliance, whether adopted by the department or not.
- Ilie NFPA drains money from fire departments. While membership dues and hefty prices for published products are significant factors in discouraging individual firefighter association memberships, the price of standard compliance is a killer because it deeply affects so many fire department functions—staffing, training, prevention/protection, you name it. No doubt, some codes and standards are necessary’, but an avalanche is not. The fire safety banner can be raised to justify codes; it does not, however, obscure the fact that bells and whistles and widgets add up to a lot of money that many, if not most, fire departments are without.
- Participating in NFPA activities is cost-prohibitive to most firefighters. What average firefighter can afford the money it takes to fly around the country attending technical committee meetings? Or the time and money it takes to attend conventions and exercise the right to vote? Fire service dues are channeled into glossy catalogs and periodicals and other projects that support NFPA business objectives but not basic firefighter member needs.
The NFPA will argue—with a volume of statistics, no doubt, and with frequent “pro code” articles in its publications —that it is doing everything it can for fire safety. Those who criticize its codes-as-products-to-besold mentality, or its goal to promote itself, or its insatiable appetite for code opportunities perhaps will be chastised in kind. Or perhaps they will be ignored, much as the NFPA ignored its members when it tried to keep the Robert Grant (past NFPA president) embezzlement scandal a well-guarded secret. Perhaps it is naive to think that corpulence of this not-for-profit institution shouldn’t happen at the expense of firefighters. Or perhaps the NFPA, instead of asking, in Mr. Miller’s w’ords, that members “renew their commitment to the NFPA,” should renew’ its own commitment to its members.
Perhaps firefighters should demand an accountability of the NFPA, but many are too busy fighting the fires and responding to the emergencies that nobody seems to be preventing. To be continued next month.
