Love or Hate TWO HATTERS and are you one?

[wilderness]

Are you in support of Two Hatters......
personally i have no problem, with a guy who fills both jobs

If he is full time and wants to come out and help and work with me as a volunteer............... more power too him

[Red_Devil]

I am a die hard IAFF union man, but when it comes to this topic I gotta step to the side and say Hey wait a minute here, I love and am very proud of my union, been a hall stewart for 3 yrs now. But when it comes to the 2-hatter issue, I dont see nothing wrong with a fulltime firefighter wanting to help out with the volunteers. First of all a lot of fulltimers get their start in the rural settings of a volunteer dept. Many of the members wanna give back to where they got their start, and with the training and experience you get as a fulltime member when you go down to the volunteer hall and train that experience you take with you in priceless to the volunteers. What about the fulltimer who is sitting at home on his day off, sitting within distance of a local volunteer hall, when the call goes out for help, he is right there, hes at home during the day, fully trained, wanting to help but cant, in the job we are told minutes can save a life!.

All and all, we become firefighters cause we love the job, and enjoy hellping others when they call us, naturally we wanna help at the local volunteer hall.

[Brando]

I dont see anything wrong with it and would welcome a full-timer to train us or lend a helping hand at calls. That being said, rural firefighting is a far cry from city firefighting. Guess it depends on the individual.
I thought that it was pretty rare though around here that full-timers are allowed to.

[Rescue78]

I think there are arguments on both side.

That being said, I'll plea the 5th. ;)

[bestcoast]

Originally posted by Rescue78
I think there are arguments on both side.

That being said, I'll plea the 5th. ;)

I agree but i'm leaning to the No side....BC

[FireEMTGuy]

I have no problem with two hatters, they enjoy serving their community and give extra skills and knowlage to a dept.

However if that two hatter is taking a place of another young to be FF who wants to gain some experience, let the new guy in. The seasoned two hatter probably did the same thing and if the shoes were reversed, I am sure he would want the opportunity to volunteer and gain experience.

[telesquirt]

I also have no problem with the two hatter issue--especially if the volly dept has no chance of ever being a union hall.

And to the person with the second post------who are you and what have you done with Red Devil ? ;)

[Red_Devil]

hahhahah whats that suppose to mean? hehehehe im not an a**hole all the time!!! most of the time t hough ;)

[scoop422]

I don't care if someone two-hats in a community with no full timers but in a composite department I don't agree with it because then they are truly taking a job.

[Red_Devil]

I will agree with that one!

[wilderness]

Amazing not one two hatter wonder what all the bitching is about.....................................

[BillyBlazes]

I have no problem with two hatters on small departments that will never have the tax base to afford full time fire crews.

I was once a two hatter and was frustrated by the inability to stop fires from destroying friends and neighbours homes because of the lack of resources and water supply.

The big problem with the two hatter issue is that some small municipalities will not boost their professional ranks because they are using volunteers instead. The Ontario Fire Marshal's office should set ratios to be met by municpalities that states
how many full time firefighters per dollars of tax base they have. This would solve the big problem and the municipality could have as many volunteers above this number as they feel they need.

But as most of us know the OFM lacks the desire to get involved.

[Leafs Fan]

^^^^^^^^^^^ What he said.

[cfergie]

I am a two hatter. I have 12 years as a volly and 2 years as career. I checked with my union rep upon starting with my career dept. and was told there is nothing in our contract that would stop me from volunteering. There is actually 3 or 4 of them on my job. I live in a smaller area about 1 hour from where I work. Our volunteer dept is one of the bigger ones in our area (29 members, 200 calls a year). I feel that volunteers are a huge asset in areas like mine. some of the depts in our area are 12-20 members and run 30-80 calls a year. If it wasn't for them, there would be NO service at all. These are the areas where I am 100% behind the idea of volunteer FF. I have learned though since going career that there are some comp. depts that are holding back career positions BECAUSE they have volunteers. This I think is where volunteers get a bad rep. and I agree. If the place can afford it, they should have career FF instead of volunteer. Besides, in those cases it is most likely that the guys they hire will be the ones who are already there.

I can clearly see both sides of this argument, I just want to make clear that there are areas where the volunteers are the only thing some people have and they struggle with a $25,000 a year budget to run that dept.

[resqteacher]

We've already lost an awesome two-hatter due to union pressures and probably will lose our other soon. I think they are invaluable in terms of experience and knowledge at a scene and in the hall for training.
It seems that the union isn't realistic in thinking that every municipality that haves a volly department could afford a career dept if no one volunteered.
I dont think it would go that way - and would likely lead to private or contract fire protection. I don't think any of us (career or volly) want to see that.

That's just how I see it.

[Whitewater_419]

I am definitely in support of two-hatters. The experience they bring to a volunteer hall is invaluable, but more importantly, the contribution they bring, just like all the other volunteers, is priceless to their community.

Given the costs to run a department in a rural area, especially one like ours, which comprises five different communities, I can't imagine the horrors of lack of equipment if our community had to go full time (I say this simply because there just isn't enough of a tax base to pay the required number of full time FF's and all the equipment we need)

My hat's off to those who care enough about their job and community to be a two hatter.

[Red_Devil]

very very well said whitewater

[Rescue78]

Ok

I was gonna plead the fifth but something here is getting to me. Yes I am a career firefighter part of the OPFFA and IAFF, but I was a volunteer before and the two-hatter issue is still something I don't have a full good understanding of. Of course I know what it is, but I can't pretend to know all of it's effects on the comunities or the firefighters or full time departments.

The one thing that gets to me is that when people talk about the issue, it seems like the only argument people use is " our municipality cannot afford or justify a full time department."

Nobody, no matter how hardcore pro union they are, is thick enough not to understand that. Nobody says that all Ontario should be career firefighter. Everybody knows that is impractical.

There are numerous other reasons for this issue, some of which I agree with and some of which I don't.

Here is one that makes total sense to me. It was actually part of this site on the headlines one day.

In emergency services, it is not wise to share manpower. Right in the police act it says you cannot be an auxiliary officer while being imployed as a full time police officer. Imagine if military personel were reservists at the same time.

When comes a large emergency think Ice Storm 98 for example. The municipalities have a look at their resources. So for the sake of shooting numbers, the Municipality of Anywhere figures they have 100 full time firefighters, 200 volunteers, 200 police officers and 200 auxiliaries officers. When comes time to mobilize those resources, s**t hits the fan because they quickly realise that 50 of those volunteers and 50 of those full timers are in fact the same person. 75 of the auxiliaries also cannot be utilised because they are required to be on shift as firefighter of police officer. 700 people on paper is in fact 575. You are now short 125 emergency personel.

By the way, IAFF firefighters are also not to serve as auxiliary police or part time paramedic.

I'm not hard core pro or against two-hatting, but if we are going to discuss it, let's at least use the right arguments.

[bestcoast]

Very well said Rescue78....I had to go with my Union and voted No.......BC.....:cool:

[ThFyrWthn]

Well, that seems to be a simple math issue to me. I choose to have faith the municipalities could handle that super complicated equation :rolleyes:

So they would have three catagories instead of two, come on, that's not too tough a concept I'm sure. They certainly shouldn't be restricting these guys from volunteering because they can't figure it out on paper.

In the areas where there aren't enough volunteers, these guys are gold. My hat's off to them.

btw... I also agree with Billyblazes, with the ratios that should be established.

another P.S. My only concern in the whole thing would be the fatigue issue. You have to be safe, these guys could get overworked.

[bestcoast]

One issue I would have would be someone from my crew dragging his a$$ into work tired and fatigued from working at a fire scene with his volunteer department. That put's my safety in question as well as his and that is unacceptable in my opinion. Also running the chance of injury and yes I know you can be injured doing anything soccer, skiing, etc... but getting hurt while dragging hose for another department then booking off and abusing our sick plan would not sit well with me. Having said that i don't know what the answer is but protecting IAFF member's and having them focus their energy on the Department they work for and the citizen's of that city they are sworn to protect is why I voted no.......my 2 cent's.......BC...

O.K. now rip me to shread's.......:cool:

[scoop422]

What about if you get injured volunteering(paid volunteering) and must go on Comp? Do you get your career wage or your vollie wage? Or if you are a true volunteer do you get anything? You must think about your family.

[L477]

I started out as a volunteer, I got paid to go to training sessions and to respond to alarms. The Oxford dictionary defines volunteer as 1.a person who offers to do something. 2. a person who enrols for military or other service voluntarily, not as a conscript. To undertake or offer voluntarily, to be a volunteer.

Oxford again Voluntary: 2.working or done without payment, voluntary workers or work.
This may be just symantics, but lets call them Part time Firefighters.

[bcfire]

What about if you get injured volunteering(paid volunteering) and must go on Comp? Do you get your career wage or your vollie wage? Or if you are a true volunteer do you get anything? You must think about your family.
Good point Scoop, I never thought of that at all. I think the outcome should dictate what full-time guys should do. After all family first!I guess I was supporting the freedom of choice for what the full-time guys did on their days off, I have to admit bestcoast' comment about being in tip-top readiness should figure into to it too. If a guy books sick because he's pooped or goes to work and can't measure up, thats serious stuff too. Thanks for the extra in-sight.BCFIRE

[iamvff]

Just for the hell of it, if you have a double hatter on your dept. just ask them if you have concerns. Maybe they can put your concerns to rest, or maybe you can make them realize your concerns. talking goes a long ways!! Don't condem something if you are not quite sure of the details.

Our dept has both life insurance and worker compensation. I am not to sure of how much, but the improved it substantially a few years ago. I think the wages, if injured, are based on your actual job wages, and I think the life insurance is around 500K. I am not 100% sure, but I will check and re-post.

be safe
iamvff

[bestcoast]

Just for the hell of it, if you have a double hatter on your dept. just ask them if you have concerns. Maybe they can put your concerns to rest, or maybe you can make them realize your concerns. talking goes a long ways!! Don't condem something if you are not quite sure of the details.

Our dept has both life insurance and worker compensation. I am not to sure of how much, but the improved it substantially a few years ago. I think the wages, if injured, are based on your actual job wages, and I think the life insurance is around 500K. I am not 100% sure, but I will check and re-post.

be safe
iamvff
Well said as usual Iamvff, nice signature by the way.....BC..

[Whitewater_419]

I think the thing to realize with regards to two-hatters coming in tired, risking union guys, etc, is this: They are firefighters, too. They consider their full time brothers just as much family as their on-call brothers. Personally, I would put it as a safe assumption that if a two hatter came in after a massive structure fire all night into the full-time hall, he'd be letting the hall captain know that he's running on half batteries and should probably be put on light duty, for the safety of his crew.

[kriand]

Here is my situation and opinion.
16 years volunteer(Captain)in a town with no fulltime Firefighters .Coming up to 7 years Fulltime (FF)with a GTA Dept.
--What I do in my off time is my buisness, as long as it's not illegal or sheds a bad light on where my paycheck comes from.
--If I'm due back into work , I usually will take that into consideration when responding to the volly calls . We still have a few other Captains around to respond so missing some calls is not an issue.
--I'm usully more tired after playing hocking during the day than at a rare structure fire in my town.

I've seen guys with the Part time jobs coming in for the night shift and having a nap as soon as they get in. So I don't buy the "too tired from the Volly call argument"

Personally, I will resign in the near future, but not from union pressure.
1. When the town goes to fulltime suppression crews
or
2. I reach my 20th anniversery.

I've spent a lot of time and effort in the volly dept and it was a big factor in getting hired fulltime.To just up and quit is not easy.

You don't have to agree with my opinion, but respect that it is my opinion.

[no-post]

I don't know, I think that the issue of being "tired" due to a major call and going into work the next day is a non-issue. Heck, vollies do this 24/7. It's a judgement call. A ff who knows he has to go to work, and needs to be as close to 100% as possible, should ask to be relieved when there is sufficient manpower on scene. It's one of those inherent risks that come with volunteering. "A thimble full of commmon sense goes a long way".

As for the compensation issue, a volunteer firefighter who is injured on the fire ground, or training, is covered by comp, and is paid according to his regular pay, at whatever job they work at. Vollies should be covered under their muni's comp plan, and compensation is wage loss insurance ( ahhhh, all that tax free money.....).

[ladderman1]

I must say there are two arguments to everything. I started out as a volunteer (Paid on call) for ten years in BC. I got some of my best training through this rural Department. I went career three years ago and do love the job. Unfortunately a lot of smaller volunteer departments are hurting for members and need people to help out. I am a union man believe me. But why did you want to do this job in the first place? To help others who cannot neccessarily help themselves. If you have the skills and the time to serve in your community you should be able to without repercussions. So you get hurt "heaven forbid this happen to anyone". If you did it saving the life of another Bravo I commend you. I would do it in a heartbeat. I know of several Fulltime members in BC that help and I wish I lived in an area where I could do the same.

[ladderman1]

There is two arguments to everything. I started out with a rural Volunteer Dept in BC. I was there for ten years. Some of the best training I got was through this Dept. I have gone career for three years now and would not give it up for anything. I am also a union man through and through. There is a bigger picture though!!
A lot of smaller volunteer Depts are hurting for people. No one seems to have the time to help out as a volunteer. If you have the skills and the time why can't you help the community in which you are a part of?
I hear arguments that you could get hurt because you are tired. What about the guys who trade shifts to get extra days off. Where does this come into play? Don't get me wrong I am not knocking this practice. I do it myself and find it to be somewhat of a privalege. But we cannot use this as one of the excuses to say no double-hatting.
If you get hurt "heaven forbid" while saving the life of another in a volunteer position "Double hatting" I commend you for your effort. It takes a special person to put their life on the line for another. There are several people I know that are fulltime and volunteer in BC and I wish I were in a area that I could do the same.

WHY DID YOU DO THIS JOB IN THE FIRST PLACE? To Help others who cannot neccessarily help themselves.

[Kearley]

You're inspiration, my inspiration, for this career is to save lives no matter what, personally from volunteering in Emerge/Trauma and seening children come in convulsing on stretchers. There is no dispute over that. Any self respecting FF would pull over on the road when seeing someone in distress. If it were up to me I'd have a jet and a bat-signal to be where ever anyone was in danger, expecially a child. That's never the issue.
The discrepancy when it comes to a union and a city is not what the service is, but that it's a service non the less. The city has paid a particular price for a service they request. And I'm sure at one point in negotiations the city said; "Why are we paying you guys, if you help them for free. We will accept your raise if you stop two hatting."
That's the difference between good sameritan and civil servant. We are all good sameritans at heart. But our Career is one of a civil servant.
Sure a career FF experience is invaluable to a volly, but it is paid for by the city.

[Scuba]

Well put ladderman1!

I think that summerizes what I think about the 2 hatter issue.....

Just like I try eliminate any anamosity between my employment and being a VFF by seperating the two as much as possible (with the understanding by my supervisor that I can respond should I be called to) I would do the same if I were to become a fulltimer - I think the old proverb comes into effect.....

"You gotta remember who butters your bread"

However I too must add that I think the whole deal of two hatters has been blown way the hell outa perspective by groups with the idea that the world can be protected by full time fire fighters.......

[Leafs Fan]

The OPFFA recognizes that not every municipality can afford fulltime firefighters. At no time have they suggested that volunteer depts should all be replaced, that is something that has been started by the tabloid media in this country in an effort to stir up trouble and than a storyline.
First off let me state I was a two-hatter for 8 years,I served as a volunteer in a rural community where I was born and raised. I felt after being hired fulltime in the city that I should continue to offer my services in repayment for the career oportunity given me by volunteer training.
The problem with two hatting in the eyes of the union is more in the area of small career and composite departments. These firefighters who make their living in the fire service are continually living under the threat of being replaced by paid on call firefighters. Places like Kapuskasing,Gananague,Prince Rupert, Hawkesbury to name a few have seen city managers look to lay off fulltime employees in favour of volunteers. The union's position is that a fellow union firefighter that might volunteer in these areas is literally taking a brothers job. no other trade union would allow this, the IAFF is no different.
Also, when negotiations for contracts occur it is hard to justify an increase in wages and benefits to a city council when they see us doing it for practically nothing on our time off. These are not my ideas, they are sad truths already seen in our province.
my suggestion, there has to be a compromise. The IAFF should allow two hatting in rural areas where there are no fulltime firefighters and a tax base that could never support them. But, the provincial governments should set requirements that municipalities should move to fulltime firefighters when the tax base and population reaches a certain criteria. It would be a slow progression starting with just a few fulltime and growing as the municipality does.

How come we don't see volunteer snowplow drivers, or volunteer hardware store employees?
Sorry for the long post,

[kufire]

As a recently new 'Volly', I'm truly grateful to the full-timers that give their time back to the community they started in. The knowledge and expericence the bring is priceless.
Whether full time or at the volunteer level, I believe we all do it for the same reason,...to ride around in trucks, play with hoses, and get the adrenalin rush going!

[Whitewater_419]

As a recently new 'Volly', I'm truly grateful to the full-timers that give their time back to the community they started in. The knowledge and expericence the bring is priceless.
Whether full time or at the volunteer level, I believe we all do it for the same reason,...to ride around in trucks, play with hoses, and get the adrenalin rush going!

Well, I think it's a little more than that :)

Last night, we were called out to a chimney fire in the village: When we arrived on scene, the homeowner, with her little eight month baby in her arms and other two young daughters gathered near her by her car outside, was in tears, saying that she saw flames coming out of her chimney and she was afraid her house was going to burn down.

The smile and relief on her face, and those of her other little girls, when we were done, telling her that there was *no* damage to her house, that the chimney fire was all out and that the most damage her home had suffered was the need to replace a $30 chimney cap - *that* is why (in my opinion) most of us do it.

Though my part in the operation was small (carrying ladders, layout out tarps in the house and carrying out stove contents), it still made me feel darned *good* to leave that scene knowing the people who lived there suffered no more than an hour's concern and a little chill while waiting outside.

Another cool thing: Coming up on scene, setting up the trucks and incident command boards, one of the little girls was scared and crying: Leaving the scene, the same little girl was running out to the trucks with her mom, smiling and waving goodbye. I was co-driving with Wilderness and when he gave a yelp on the sirens for the little girl as we left, that clinched it: She looked like she was going to do a cartwheel, she was so happy :)

[Leafs Fan]

As a recently new 'Volly', I'm truly grateful to the full-timers that give their time back to the community they started in. The knowledge and expericence the bring is priceless.
Whether full time or at the volunteer level, I believe we all do it for the same reason,...to ride around in trucks, play with hoses, and get the adrenalin rush going!

You are probably right Kufire, we all chose the fire service for the excitement and sense of purpose as you stated. But after you decide to make it your career it also becomes important in the sense that it pays your mortgage and feeds and clothes your kids.

[thebossman]

What about the member who works all day or nite poring concrete or spark watch for a local contractor is he/she not to just as tired as a volly who may be out for a fire call. Not to many are all niters.

[kufire]

Well, I think it's a little more than that :)

Last night, we were called out to a chimney fire in the village: When we arrived on scene, the homeowner, with her little eight month baby in her arms and other two young daughters gathered near her by her car outside, was in tears, saying that she saw flames coming out of her chimney and she was afraid her house was going to burn down.

The smile and relief on her face, and those of her other little girls, when we were done, telling her that there was *no* damage to her house, that the chimney fire was all out and that the most damage her home had suffered was the need to replace a $30 chimney cap - *that* is why (in my opinion) most of us do it.

Though my part in the operation was small (carrying ladders, layout out tarps in the house and carrying out stove contents), it still made me feel darned *good* to leave that scene knowing the people who lived there suffered no more than an hour's concern and a little chill while waiting outside.

Another cool thing: Coming up on scene, setting up the trucks and incident command boards, one of the little girls was scared and crying: Leaving the scene, the same little girl was running out to the trucks with her mom, smiling and waving goodbye. I was co-driving with Wilderness and when he gave a yelp on the sirens for the little girl as we left, that clinched it: She looked like she was going to do a cartwheel, she was so happy :)
I don't disagree with you on the feeling you get when you do help someone. Just trying to keep the posting light hearted.
Ran into a similar situation with regards to dealing with little kids. Happened at an MVC. No one severely hurt, but the little girl was pretty scared seeing mom with a neck brace on and me supporting her head until the Paramedics showed up. I think of my own daughters and hope anyone capable would show up to help.

[firefighter316]

I understand the concern about a 2 hatter being fatigued coming off a volunteer fire to start his career FF shift. My argument is that those occurances are relatively rare and is much more likely to happen say, in Toronto when they go to 24 hr shifts next year. How fresh is the FF going to be in his 20th hour of a busy shift when the call comes in?
I say 2 hatters are a wonderful thing.

[Red_Devil]

With the whole arguement of being fatigued if a career firefighter goes to a volunteer call then goes to work and 24hr shifts, myself being a true blue die-hard union member, I can honestly say that I dont have a leg to stand on when it comes to saying fulltimers shouldnt volunteer cause in a 24hr shift your gonna be tired if you catch a house fire or 2

[HOSE_HOUND]

I personally have no problem with volunteering my time with a rural fire department. I have often taken my bunker gear to rural towns where I have friends on the local councils. I let them know I'm in their town for a weekend or whatever, if they felt they needed me. I would not hesitate. However, as a strong union member in my own department I believe there is a line to draw. I do not volunteer my time to composite departments. This is a definite no no! I am not in favor of stagnating even one paid position because cost effectly I can volunteer my time and save some municipal management money. Currently, our department is composite, with one station being volunteer during the evening hours and on weekends, while our paid firefighters man the station during working hours. The ironic thing about this situation is that the station must be manned, but the same volunteers continue to volunteer their time while also expecting to have the next paid jobs when they are posted. If they were to resign, paid position would have to be made. Kinda like working yourself out of a job, don't ya think?

[smoke286]

I am a two hatter. I have 12 years as a volly and 2 years as career. I checked with my union rep upon starting with my career dept. and was told there is nothing in our contract that would stop me from volunteering. There is actually 3 or 4 of them on my job. I live in a smaller area about 1 hour from where I work. .

I would put it to you that few firefighters working with large urban depts have a problem with members who volunteer their time.(things may be a bit more touchy in small or Composite Depts) And in most cases no one would have a problem with someone volunteering in a rural FD far enough away from their place of employment. The problem lies with Career Firefighters that volunteer in the same jurisdiction that they work in , such as the kerfufle recently over Mr Lee in Whitby. There is a serious argument in those cases, one that I support.

[bruincool]

I am a member of a paid on call department. We have a member who is a career firefighter(IAFF). He is a good instructor and a dependable member.

We recently had election of officers in our vol. dept. This member ran for Asst. Chief and won the election. Our vol. dept borders his career dept. My question is he in a conflict of interest considering he is an IAFF member? The two departments are in the same dipatch area and have mutual aid agreements with each other.

The other situation that hasn't come forth yet is that he will be attending the same district Chief meetings that his Chief (employer) does every month. I'm sure his Chief will not be too thrilled about that situation.

I would appreciate your comments and feedback.

[dentedhead]

I am a member of a paid on call department. We have a member who is a career firefighter(IAFF). He is a good instructor and a dependable member.

We recently had election of officers in our vol. dept. This member ran for Asst. Chief and won the election. Our vol. dept borders his career dept. My question is he in a conflict of interest considering he is an IAFF member? The two departments are in the same dipatch area and have mutual aid agreements with each other.

The other situation that hasn't come forth yet is that he will be attending the same district Chief meetings that his Chief (employer) does every month. I'm sure his Chief will not be too thrilled about that situation.

I would appreciate your comments and feedback.

If one of the members of his local decides to bring forth a constitutional grievance he dosent have a leg to stand on.The OPFFA and IAFF is quite clear about two hatting(provided this is an Ontario dept).His choices are either quit the POC or leave the association.That option would of course leave him jobless.

It wouldnt be the first time this has occured.The chief of Brampton is or at least was also a district with Caledon FD who are now I think composite.

Chances are this fellas chief wont give a rats ass unless its going to cause grief on his watch.This is primarily a labour issue. I have only ever heard of one chief speaking out against it and that was in the US soimewhere.

Now before the regular cast of muppets start on their rant about two hatting and the evil IAFF.My personal opinion is its not something that I would do. I took an oath to abide by the rules and constitution of the IAFF so I try to do just that. Im not perfect but I try to keep it within the lines.

If someone worked in say TO and lived in Palgrave then I dont see it being that big a deal. Just do the Clinton, dont ask dont tell.However if you worked in Waterloo and vollied in Woolwich that is just asking for trouble from your local. Same thing if you work in a large composite like Hamiliton and actually work PT in a semi rural station.

You asked I answered,here we go round 27!!

Dentedhead

[North_of_60]

I am a member of a paid on call department. We have a member who is a career firefighter(IAFF). He is a good instructor and a dependable member.

We recently had election of officers in our vol. dept. This member ran for Asst. Chief and won the election. Our vol. dept borders his career dept. My question is he in a conflict of interest considering he is an IAFF member? The two departments are in the same dipatch area and have mutual aid agreements with each other.

The other situation that hasn't come forth yet is that he will be attending the same district Chief meetings that his Chief (employer) does every month. I'm sure his Chief will not be too thrilled about that situation.

I would appreciate your comments and feedback.

Well I guess I should add my 2 cents....

I think that it was not the best idea for him to run for the position of Asst Chief. He is asking for trouble and as Denthead mentioned, this issue has been dealt with before in Ontario. The other conflict that I see is what happens when there is a mutual aid call, he shows up and some of the POC members of your department start looking to him for guidance...that is just asking for a fuzzy chain of command and if it is a mutual aid call, it is probably serious and a fuzzy chain of command is ABSOLUTELY the wrong thing to add to it. Although I have no doubt that he is both qualified and will do well as the Asst Chief, I think that for all concerned (especially him and the job that pays his morgage etc.) if he steped back to being a FF.

I know that it is a little different but there have been a couple of issues in the territories with people from the Fire Marshals Office being members of the various Fire Departments in the communities where they live. The issues arise when there need to be investigations of incidents conducted by the Fire Marshals Office and these people are in a conflict of interest. Common sense should dictate what you do.

Do I have a problem with 2-hatters? Not usually. I agree that they should not be with composite departments or departments that are dragging thier feet in changing from Vollunteer/POC to composite/carrer. However, in a small Volly/POC department that is not going to become composite/carrer any time soon, absolutely no problem with it. This is the only problem with having a union that covers such a wide variety of departments, they make rules that make sense in some areas and not others (that is not a slam on the IAFF, it is a fact of any huge union). I think that most IAFF Firefighters do realize that 2-hatters are out there and don't mind too much, but when 2-hatters blatently flaunt the rules, they are asking for trouble from all directions.

Stay Safe and keep each other safe,

North of 60

(Sorry for the long winded response, I just seemed to get on a roll :D)

[bestcoast]

Now before the regular cast of muppets start on their rant about two hatting and the evil IAFF.My personal opinion is its not something that I would do. I took an oath to abide by the rules and constitution of the IAFF so I try to do just that. Im not perfect but I try to keep it within the lines.



Once again you took the words right out of my mouth brother. My thoughts bang on..................BC................

[bestcoast]

If your gonna Double hat at least don't advertise the fact!!!....lol......might not be a good idea to have an IAFF logo on your lid while your fighting a Fire for a Volunteer FD if your trying to keep it on the down low!!!!...right out of firehall.com galleries action shots.........stir stir stir..................BC.....................

[rescuechris]

I'll admit that I'm a 2 hatter, but the fact that I work shift work and have the advanced knowledge means that during the day when we have lower response numbers I'm there for the call. Although if ever I though I was taking someones place then I'd step aside unless the brass tells me otherwise but seeing as we're still recruiting I'm not really worried...

[TruckCo11]

You need to remember what the origins of this issue really is, and where it stems from. It has nothing to do with volunteer departments, it has everything to do with IAFF members screwing other IAFF members. I happen to think that is bulsh*t. If you truly understand the issue, it’s origins, and the ongoing problems it causes in places, it becomes a much more clear issue.

Now, having said that, I do have a problem with the blanket policy that the IAFF has adopted in regard to resolution 43, and the wording the international has about volunteering. The problem is that they have declared all volunteer departments as ‘rival’ organizations, which is not true. Some fit the description of being ‘rival‘, but there are even more that are not. It is true that there are volunteer departments that will NEVER have fulltime staff, and because of that fact, the term ‘rival organization’ is NOT applicable.
The problem that I have is that a similar policy, and attitude is not taken in regard to IAFF members who work for private ambulance companies, in localities that have fire-based EMS. Where I work, volunteers replacing us isn’t an issue, but the private companies providing EMS is. We operate a fire-based EMS system here, and private companies are a significant part of it. Were the private companies to be removed from the system, many jobs would need to be added to replace the service now provided. It may be just me, but this would fit the definition of a ‘rival organization’ to me. No action has ever been taken by either the IAFF, or my local. It is a fact that some of our own members, along with members of our surrounding suburbs work for these companies.
In my opinion this is a somewhat inconsistent position that my union has taken, as we do have a written policy against our members volunteering.

My attitude is do what your conscience tells you to do. I support the IAFF policy, but do feel it is unenforceable because of reasons I have sited. The ‘two-hatters’ out there do have to remember where their paycheck comes from, and who pays more if the issue is pushed.

[smoke286]

I'll admit that I'm a 2 hatter, but the fact that I work shift work and have the advanced knowledge means that during the day when we have lower response numbers I'm there for the call. Although if ever I though I was taking someones place then I'd step aside unless the brass tells me otherwise but seeing as we're still recruiting I'm not really worried...

You do realize that you work in a closed shop don't you? And that if the union wished they could withdraw your credentials, and that this action would result in you being unemployed? And yet you're not worried? Wow you are either really dedicated to your volunteer activities or pretty obtuse.

[dentedhead]

I am a member of a paid on call department. We have a member who is a career firefighter(IAFF). He is a good instructor and a dependable member.

We recently had election of officers in our vol. dept. This member ran for Asst. Chief and won the election. Our vol. dept borders his career dept. My question is he in a conflict of interest considering he is an IAFF member? The two departments are in the same dipatch area and have mutual aid agreements with each other.

The other situation that hasn't come forth yet is that he will be attending the same district Chief meetings that his Chief (employer) does every month. I'm sure his Chief will not be too thrilled about that situation.

I would appreciate your comments and feedback.


See I wasnt being a dick!!

Well no more so than usual anyhow!!

http://www.firehall.com/forum/showthread.php?p=74317&posted=1#post74317


Dentedhead

[smoke286]

So errrr.... He's a wannabe?

[kriand]

sniff sniff,,,, ya , I smell troll.......

[rescuechris]

You do realize that you work in a closed shop don't you? And that if the union wished they could withdraw your credentials, and that this action would result in you being unemployed? And yet you're not worried? Wow you are either really dedicated to your volunteer activities or pretty obtuse.

I'm an industrial firefighter volunteering in a Rescue (not fd) organization...

And in Quebec we've got different unions...

[ve2vfd]

I know that in Montreal, a very high percentage of the firefighters are also volunteers in the suburbs where they live.

Our union doesn't have a problem with it, and even our employer is ok with it (ie: fighting a fire in the suburb where you are a volunteer is a valid reason to be late for or absent for your shift).

I'm not a two-hatter, but thats only because I live in Montreal, but were I to move to the suburbs, I would definetly offer my services to help my community.

Pat

[its_me]

Not to fan the flames and not sure if it has already been said ( almost everything has been said about this topic ) but here we go. I was POC for 10 years before becoming a career fire fighter now for 10 years. While visiting the guys in the POC department the guys where complaining that one of the guys got hurt (thru his back out or something like that) and was being compensated at the fire department rate and not his salary from his full time job. The Fire Chief was very surprised as he believed and had told us all many times that we would be compensated at the salary of our full time job. When the smoke cleared comp won and the guy lost a lot of money. The Fire Chief adjusted his yearly payout but he still was short. If you get hurt fighting a fire or responding to an emergency call on your POC job then you are not able to use your sick days from your full time job. You may think that two hatting is your business but it could cost you and your family the life style you now enjoy. Just ask Tim Lee.

Just my 2 cents

[infernobuster]

Unless you know Tim personally .. dragging his name through mud isnt a very good choice personally or professionally.

He had a tough fight on his hands since day one .. i may or may not agree with some of his choices of action, but hes definately gone through plenty.

[its_me]

I never said that I agreed or disagreed with Tim's choices. The fact is that being a two hatter ended up costing him much. That being said your point is well taken.

[dentedhead]

Unless you know Tim personally .. dragging his name through mud isnt a very good choice personally or professionally.

He had a tough fight on his hands since day one .. i may or may not agree with some of his choices of action, but hes definately gone through plenty.

Tim Lees plight is a matter of public record.In referencing him in a related opinion hardly constitutes dragging his name through mud.

I have seen members call members worse on this site.

Dentedhead

[smoke286]

I'm an industrial firefighter volunteering in a Rescue (not fd) organization...

And in Quebec we've got different unions...

Indeed you do

[smoke286]

Unless you know Tim personally .. dragging his name through mud isnt a very good choice personally or professionally.

He had a tough fight on his hands since day one .. i may or may not agree with some of his choices of action, but hes definately gone through plenty.

Are you refering to Mr Lee? If so I am intimately familiar with the case, and with the outcome, The man got what he deserved, in my opinion he went into it in as a crusade to try and break the union.

[Peter402]

Two hatters......I see no problem. Two hatters provide excelent and valuable knowledge...Not only for the volunteer side but to the paid side as well.
As for the argument of having them step aside for a young ff to get experiance.....set him up with the two hatter in a buddy system so he can learn, why make him step aside when he can show the way...No I am not a two hatter, the only paid people in the SES are Office admin who should volunteer cause they have no idea what we the volunteers do.

[PUMP31]

If you live in a small community and your fortunate enough to have one or two available to help out I think its a great asset I for one learned a lot over the years from the so called two hatters

[PFD023]

The fire service is about just that....providing an important service to a community. With due respect, I think alot of folks are forgetting that it's about serving your community first....if you got the skills and are willing to commit, I really don't care how many hats you are wearing.

[dentedhead]

The fire service is about just that....providing an important service to a community. With due respect, I think alot of folks are forgetting that it's about serving your community first....if you got the skills and are willing to commit, I really don't care how many hats you are wearing.

There are a ton of "Important services" that you can provide to your community by volunteering, without breaking a constitution that you swore an obligation to.

Dentedhead

[oldboot]

The fire service is about just that....providing an important service to a community. With due respect, I think alot of folks are forgetting that it's about serving your community first....if you got the skills and are willing to commit, I really don't care how many hats you are wearing.
I hate to disagree with you but my family comes first before my community, and since I earn my living as a fulltime FF I will not jeopardize my career “and my paycheck that my family counts on” to serve the community I live in!
Fulltime FF in Ontario have been told not to two hat by their unions!
If you are caught doing it, be prepared to live with the ramifications!
Do you really believe that the Job that we all love so much is worth the gamble?

Oldboot

[smoke286]

You are wasting your breath oldboot

[DFC]

There are a ton of "Important services" that you can provide to your community by volunteering, without breaking a constitution that you swore an obligation to.

Dentedhead
I'm A IAFF member and I didn't swear to anything with them. If you want to volunteer on your off time then its no ones busness but your own. Just remember that is if you get hurt off the job you may be on your own when it comes to work place disability.
Some comunities rely on volunteer FF to ensure their safety. If your on the job and you can give them some support then my hat goes off to you ......

[btrl8thannvr]

I'm not a firefighter...yet. I'm not from a small town either, however I do understand the feeling of serving and protecting your community. In the balance however, I would never do anything that would jeopardize my family, or my dream job. My personal feeling is I'd like to be able to do both, but I need to surrender that personal desire to serve my community and be satisfied that I'm protecting someone else's community.

-btrl8thannvr

[DCCHam]

With the pages and pages of threads on "two-hatting"...I've yet to see anyone make a viable argument on why it's such a big deal in the fire service. I can see the union's point of view with guys that vollunteer in the same area that they work in. It's hard for a union to fight for you to get OT when you're going out and doing the same job for nothing, but every other excuse I've read seems kinda lame. Saying about how that if they get hurt they'll loose income.....what do you think the rest of us do? We're all covered under insurance and risk the same losses if injured.

I find it funny though how the 'two-hatter' debate only seems to exist in the fire service. It doesn't seem to come into play in any other profession except firefighting. We have dozens of paramedics and police officers in this province that volunteer their time fighting fires. We also have 100's of police officers in this province that get paid for private policing, such as security jobs for bars, concerts, parties, armoured car companies, etc.....but you never hear any flak about them "two-hatting". :dontknow:

[smoke286]

I'm A IAFF member and I didn't swear to anything with them. If you want to volunteer on your off time then its no ones busness but your own

Actually, if you are a member of the IAFF you are bound by its Constitution and By-Laws that say you cannot belong to a "rival" organization. In Canada labour law says that unionized enviroments are closed shops. Therefore you must remain a member in good standing in order keep your job.

So I would advise you to be more circumspect when you announce its "no ones business" If the wrong person is listening you may have a lot of questions to answer.

[oldboot]

I'm A IAFF member and I didn't swear to anything with them. If you want to volunteer on your off time then its no ones busness but your own. Just remember that is if you get hurt off the job you may be on your own when it comes to work place disability.
Some comunities rely on volunteer FF to ensure their safety. If your on the job and you can give them some support then my hat goes off to you ......
Realllllly……and what local FF union did you get sworn into?

[dentedhead]

I'm A IAFF member and I didn't swear to anything with them. If you want to volunteer on your off time then its no ones busness but your own. Just remember that is if you get hurt off the job you may be on your own when it comes to work place disability.
Some comunities rely on volunteer FF to ensure their safety. If your on the job and you can give them some support then my hat goes off to you ......

Dont remember put your right hand over your left breast and repeat after me.....with that bit about constitution and abiding by it,

Dentedhead

[dentedhead]

With the pages and pages of threads on "two-hatting"...I've yet to see anyone make a viable argument on why it's such a big deal in the fire service. I can see the union's point of view with guys that vollunteer in the same area that they work in. It's hard for a union to fight for you to get OT when you're going out and doing the same job for nothing, but every other excuse I've read seems kinda lame. Saying about how that if they get hurt they'll loose income.....what do you think the rest of us do? We're all covered under insurance and risk the same losses if injured.

I find it funny though how the 'two-hatter' debate only seems to exist in the fire service. It doesn't seem to come into play in any other profession except firefighting. We have dozens of paramedics and police officers in this province that volunteer their time fighting fires. We also have 100's of police officers in this province that get paid for private policing, such as security jobs for bars, concerts, parties, armoured car companies, etc.....but you never hear any flak about them "two-hatting". :dontknow:

The difference is that if we get hurt two hatting we are not covered by our insurance with our employer or at the rate of pay we should be from what I understand, plus combined with the fact we were two hatting we could get tossed by our union.

A bunch of paramedics I worked with in TO also worked P/T in the GTA for other municipalities.A few got hurt.It near bankrupted a couple of them because they were not hurt at their primary employer so to bad so sad.Thats one of several reasons why I never worked nor do I work PT in EMS,that and the fact that PT is saving the employer from having to hire FT.

Dont kid yourself about the police, they are making a ton of cash much of it tax free on these paid duties.They have contacts that call them and they are also fed it when someone calls the station for policing at a private function.

The police services act and most departments are very specific about what a copper can and cant do PT.As per the PSA they need chiefs approval for any PT job they want to do and from what I am told very few get approved.

You say you have seen no viable arguement or is it you chose not to see a viable arguement.

Dentedhead

[DFC]

Actually, if you are a member of the IAFF you are bound by its Constitution and By-Laws that say you cannot belong to a "rival" organization. In Canada labour law says that unionized enviroments are closed shops. Therefore you must remain a member in good standing in order keep your job.

So I would advise you to be more circumspect when you announce its "no ones business" If the wrong person is listening you may have a lot of questions to answer.

Then your argument is that a volunteer department is a rival organisation ?
Most volunteer departments started out that way and will most likley always stay that way due to demographics and municipal budgets. I fail to see how they are a threat to a career departments members without getting on the paranoid train.
As for your own business, it is not your unions busisness to tell you what volunteer groups you can belong to. I suport my union and its members , but I would draw the line when and if they decide to attack any members who suport a local volunteer hall.

[DFC]

Dont remember put your right hand over your left breast and repeat after me.....with that bit about constitution and abiding by it,

Dentedhead
I must have been stuck on the part about how much they will be taking out of my monthly pay when they where doing that part? O well , MY Bad.

[ABFF37]

I must have been stuck on the part about how much they will be taking out of my monthly pay when they where doing that part? O well , MY Bad.

Extremely small price to pay for the many things that the IAFF does for its members. From assistance with contract negotiations, to lobbying to establish health benefits that will impact members for years to come, or looking after the families of firefighters that have made the ultimate sacrifice in the line of duty by working with the federal governemnt to set up a National Public Safety Officer Compensation (PSOC) program...

I will gladly give the IAFF the contributions that they need to make the lives of all members safer, healthier, and happier.

AB

[DFC]

Extremely small price to pay for the many things that the IAFF does for its members. From assistance with contract negotiations, to lobbying to establish health benefits that will impact members for years to come, or looking after the families of firefighters that have made the ultimate sacrifice in the line of duty by working with the federal governemnt to set up a National Public Safety Officer Compensation (PSOC) program...

I will gladly give the IAFF the contributions that they need to make the lives of all members safer, healthier, and happier.

AB
AB we are having a bit of fun here. Don't read into to much...... I appreciate all the good that the IAFF does for it members.

[DCCHam]

So are you guys (career FF) covered if you get hurt playing a recreational sport?....how about a car accident, or an accident at home?

I understand that it's a rule with your unions and you can't risk your job by breaking it.....I just think in some cases it's a silly rule to begin with. I'm a professional canadian sailor (career).....but there's no rules anywhere that state that I can't go sailing, or even working on another ship, for another company, when I'm on my own time. And I'm still covered under my company's insurance (or the insuarnce of the company that I'm working for) should I get hurt.

[irsqyu]

And I'm still covered under my company's insurance (or the insuarnce of the company that I'm working for) should I get hurt.

I think that's the key, I know on our job if you get hurt part-timing(any, not just FF'ing) you will not be covered by our insurance. I would bet that is the case with most career departments. I doubt if many Volunteer/POC departments are going to have insurance to cover your full time wage.

[wilderness]

I hear the IAFF doesn't want you to be double hatters, because you would come to work tired if you were in your home town fighting a house fire, and this would put your bretheren at risk.....
its bullsh*t, now lets look at the fulltime departments that have a 24 hour shift... if you have a few fires on a shift, you become tired and stressed from the lack of sleep.... So if the IAFF is concerned for the safety of its firefighters it should look at the 24 hour shift.... anyone of those guys coming home from a tough day, could fall asleep and cause a crash and kill himself and potentially others....
There is several factors why the IAFF doesn't want it's members to be double hatters, they should rethink their line of thinking, the UNION has to much strength, i do agree you need a strong union but, they must allow there guys to do what they want, on there own time, get the guys to sign a waver or something if they're concerned... and ask for proof of insurance.

[DCCHam]

I think that's the key, I know on our job if you get hurt part-timing(any, not just FF'ing) you will not be covered by our insurance. I would bet that is the case with most career departments. I doubt if many Volunteer/POC departments are going to have insurance to cover your full time wage.

We do....or else most of us wouldn't be doing it either. I make the same (if not more) then most of these guys do as career FF's. So I'm risking just as much....except I don't have a union telling me what I can and can't do in my own time.

Like I said, I can see why they don't do it where they'd risk loosing their jobs, I just don't agree with a union (or anyone else for that matter) telling folks what they can and can't do on their off hours.

[BCFFFV]

So are you guys (career FF) covered if you get hurt playing a recreational sport?....how about a car accident, or an accident at home?

I understand that it's a rule with your unions and you can't risk your job by breaking it.....I just think in some cases it's a silly rule to begin with. I'm a professional canadian sailor (career).....but there's no rules anywhere that state that I can't go sailing, or even working on another ship, for another company, when I'm on my own time. And I'm still covered under my company's insurance (or the insuarnce of the company that I'm working for) should I get hurt.


Coverage varies depending on each union or employers group insurance plan. If I break my leg skiing I would be covered by members working for me after my sick time/holidays if needed run out. That is just how the local I belong to does things. We are a pretty big dept. so we can do that. Some dept's have short term or long term disability coverage. However, if I had a career ending injury where I could never return to work we would be in trouble right now as we have no Long Term Disability plan. But that's from Skiing etc.....If guys were getting hurt doing something like working for another Fire Dept. the union would not be too happy about it.

[smoke286]

Then your argument is that a volunteer department is a rival organisation ?


Listen pal, I don't have an arguement, I simply abide by the constitution I swore to uphold when I became a member. You don't want to it doesn't bother me, but if it bothers someone else you may find yourself unemployed, is it worth it?

[smoke286]

I hear the IAFF doesn't want you to be double hatters, because you would come to work tired if you were in your home town fighting a house fire, and this would put your brethren at risk.....

Actually the IAFF doesn't want its members becoming volunteers because some parts of North America operate like a circus, and career fire fighters, who should know better spend their spare time volunteering (and in some truly retarded cases LIVING in a volunteer fire station) that is also served by another IAFF local, who are having trouble with management because every time they look for something the powers that be threaten to get more volunteers and do away with career positions. these other IAFF locals complain to the International and get a resolution passed, banning volunteering. Thats how democracies work.

Whats bullshit if you don't mind me saying is harming their union brothers careers and endangering their livelihood because certain individuals are so lame they don't have any life outside a firehall.

[firefighter316]

I understand and agree with the IAFF's postition regarding those issue's smoke, but then they should be concentrating on those dept.'s and issue's and not going after every two hatter out there. This is going to blow up in their face. There is a huge push on right now to get volunteers to pressure their MP's to create a law protecting two-hatters. Keep in mind, volunteers far outnumber career guys, and the MP's really like to get re-elected.

[bestcoast]

You are wasting your breath oldboot

Tell me about it smoke...:banghead: ....geez people, lets move on. These are the rules of our union. Whether you agree with them or not doesn't really matter at the end of the day. My union doesn't want me Two-hatting SO I DON'T...........simple really.......BC.........

[oldboot]

I must have been stuck on the part about how much they will be taking out of my monthly pay when they where doing that part? O well , MY Bad.
No offence, but do you even belong to a local?
If so where?
How much are you paying in dues that seemed to bother you so much?
In your past posts you said you had time in the military and from what I could see you were trying to get on as a fire prevention guy in London just a few months ago.
So were you able to get on anywhere?



Does anyone smell a troll?

[bestcoast]

There is a huge push on right now to get volunteers to pressure their MP's to create a law protecting two-hatters.

Good luck with that one.....:rolleyes: ........BC....................

[BCFFFV]

Tell me about it smoke...:banghead: ....geez people, lets move on. These are the rules of our union. Whether you agree with them or not doesn't really matter at the end of the day. My union doesn't want me Two-hatting SO I DON'T...........simple really.......BC.........


Good point.....my goodness.....This whole thing is blown way out of proportion. Most dept's have more than enough people that can sign up and volunteer without needing career Firefighters to join.

[ABFF37]

Tell me about it smoke...:banghead: ....geez people, lets move on. These are the rules of our union. Whether you agree with them or not doesn't really matter at the end of the day. My union doesn't want me Two-hatting SO I DON'T...........simple really.......BC.........

YES! I agree...

The IAFF isn't out there on a daily baisis looking for double hatters to harass. With the exception of a few extreme cases, the IAFF does allow its members to do as they wish. As has been pointed out, really the only issue that gets them up in arms is union members volunteering in another department that has a career/IAFF union compliment...or guys volunteering on days off within the same composite department that they are employed with.

Too many people seem to think that the IAFF is the boogyman that polices their members on their days off. The reality is that unless you are doing something that you fundamentally should not be doing, and decide to willfully ignore the constition of the union which you swore to uphold, you will have NO problems. I can only think of a handful of times this two hatter issue has really been an issue. And these few times it was a very extreme case, and often one in which the member was cautioned several times before anything serious ever came of it.


AB

[smoke286]

I understand and agree with the IAFF's postition regarding those issue's smoke, but then they should be concentrating on those dept.'s and issue's and not going after every two hatter out there .\

I don't disagree with you, however this is what we are stuck with at the moment, as I said before, for better or worse this is a democracy and majority rules.

Also keep in mind the intolerance and intransigence of a few created this problem, not volunteers or the majority of IAFF members who would never dream of doing something so patently wrong.

[kriand]

Does anyone smell a troll?

I was thinking the same thing, however lets give him the benefit of the doubt........or at least the opprotunity to prove himself.:shakehands:

[DCCHam]

YES! I agree...

The IAFF isn't out there on a daily baisis looking for double hatters to harass. With the exception of a few extreme cases, the IAFF does allow its members to do as they wish. As has been pointed out, really the only issue that gets them up in arms is union members volunteering in another department that has a career/IAFF union compliment...or guys volunteering on days off within the same composite department that they are employed with.

Too many people seem to think that the IAFF is the boogyman that polices their members on their days off. The reality is that unless you are doing something that you fundamentally should not be doing, and decide to willfully ignore the constition of the union which you swore to uphold, you will have NO problems. I can only think of a handful of times this two hatter issue has really been an issue. And these few times it was a very extreme case, and often one in which the member was cautioned several times before anything serious ever came of it.


AB

Thanks AB, that's the exact answer that I was looking for. Well said, I totally agree!

[oldboot]

YES! I agree...

The IAFF isn't out there on a daily baisis looking for double hatters to harass. With the exception of a few extreme cases, the IAFF does allow its members to do as they wish. As has been pointed out, really the only issue that gets them up in arms is union members volunteering in another department that has a career/IAFF union compliment...or guys volunteering on days off within the same composite department that they are employed with.

Too many people seem to think that the IAFF is the boogyman that polices their members on their days off. The reality is that unless you are doing something that you fundamentally should not be doing, and decide to willfully ignore the constition of the union which you swore to uphold, you will have NO problems. I can only think of a handful of times this two hatter issue has really been an issue. And these few times it was a very extreme case, and often one in which the member was cautioned several times before anything serious ever came of it.


AB
You nailed it brother!:wink:

[irsqyu]

YES! I agree...

The IAFF isn't out there on a daily baisis looking for double hatters to harass. With the exception of a few extreme cases, the IAFF does allow its members to do as they wish. As has been pointed out, really the only issue that gets them up in arms is union members volunteering in another department that has a career/IAFF union compliment...or guys volunteering on days off within the same composite department that they are employed with.

Too many people seem to think that the IAFF is the boogyman that polices their members on their days off. The reality is that unless you are doing something that you fundamentally should not be doing, and decide to willfully ignore the constition of the union which you swore to uphold, you will have NO problems. I can only think of a handful of times this two hatter issue has really been an issue. And these few times it was a very extreme case, and often one in which the member was cautioned several times before anything serious ever came of it.


AB

Yes I also believe you have nailed it. Perhaps that will be the end of this debate.:hmmmm2:

[DFC]

No offence, but do you even belong to a local?
If so where?
How much are you paying in dues that seemed to bother you so much?
In your past posts you said you had time in the military and from what I could see you were trying to get on as a fire prevention guy in London just a few months ago.
So were you able to get on anywhere?



Does anyone smell a troll?
I don't know what troll means but I'm sure I wouldn't like it!
As for getting hired on with a department, yes I did. I spent twenty years in the service as a FF and I 'm new to this union stuff. Aparantly there are some radical types who feel a need to attack any and all who opose whatever the union says. ( TROLL ? )
I will suport my union and its members , but I will not comprimise my principals and suport the attack of any FF who chooses to suport his local volunteer department.

[kriand]

I don't know what troll means but I'm sure I wouldn't like it!
As for getting hired on with a department, yes I did.
I love being a firefighter, I don't yet like being told by a union "troll" like you what I can and can't do on my own time!
What I pay and or who I work for are none of your bussness. Its folks like yourself who make it didficult for guys who want to continue suporting their local volunteers dificult for fear they will be attacked.
I spent a lot of years in the mititary and I have always respected peoples opinion and right to be free to assoiciate with who they want (good or bad.)

I will abide by my collective agreement and suport my union local as long as they don't ask me to trash a brother who chooses to suport his comunity volunteer FF. I still have some prinipals that I won't comprimise for the sake of a union.......

I was thinking the same thing, however lets give him the benefit of the doubt........or at least the opprotunity to prove himself.:shakehands:

Ok you had your chance......Your right Old Boot, Troll thru & thru:ciao:

[gfd31]

What a thread!

If I may pose a scenario:

You are a fulltime ff member of IAFF.
You live in a rural town just outside of your municipaity/city that provides your paycheck.
Your kids best friend, and maybe even yours, live next door or across the street.
Its 2 a.m. the house is on fire. Everyone is still inside. You have a volunteer department that provides fire protection to your "living" community. It's been two or three minutes since you noticed the smoke/fire and you don't yet hear the sirens.

What do you do?


P.S. There is a book called "Medal of Valor Firefighters" by Michael L. Middleton published by The McGraw-Hill Companies in 2003 in the U.S.A.
Read some of those stories, then answer the above question.

[irsqyu]

What a thread!

If I may pose a scenario:

You are a fulltime ff member of IAFF.
You live in a rural town just outside of your municipaity/city that provides your paycheck.
Your kids best friend, and maybe even yours, live next door or across the street.
Its 2 a.m. the house is on fire. Everyone is still inside. You have a volunteer department that provides fire protection to your "living" community. It's been two or three minutes since you noticed the smoke/fire and you don't yet hear the sirens.

What do you do?


P.S. There is a book called "Medal of Valor Firefighters" by Michael L. Middleton published by The McGraw-Hill Companies in 2003 in the U.S.A.
Read some of those stories, then answer the above question.

Firstly, call 911, then as any off-duty firefighter, medic or police officer would do, do your best to rescue the occupants within your limitations.

[irsqyu]

I don't know what troll means but I'm sure I wouldn't like it!
As for getting hired on with a department, yes I did. I spent twenty years in the service as a FF and I 'm new to this union stuff. Aparantly there are some radical types who feel a need to attack any and all who opose whatever the union says. ( TROLL ? )
I will suport my union and its members , but I will not comprimise my principals and suport the attack of any FF who chooses to suport his local volunteer department.

DFC, go back and read ABFF37's last response, read it a couple of times, if you live out in the boonies and belong to the local volly group, no one really cares. If the department you are on as volly is composite with a paid component or if you are on the same payroll as your full time department (Hamilton, Ottawa are like this) or any paid department, then it is not right.

[dentedhead]

I don't know what troll means but I'm sure I wouldn't like it!
As for getting hired on with a department, yes I did. I spent twenty years in the service as a FF and I 'm new to this union stuff. Aparantly there are some radical types who feel a need to attack any and all who opose whatever the union says. ( TROLL ? )
I will suport my union and its members , but I will not comprimise my principals and suport the attack of any FF who chooses to suport his local volunteer department.

A troll is someone who participates in forums with sole purpose of baiting,stirring the pot with contrary or extreme views or statements with no proof and is generally disruptive.

Not to be confused with someone having opposing views or even taking a devils advocate stance.That is the beauty of debate.

There are several trolls that frequent this site.If you read enough posts they become pretty evident.For what its worth I dont think that you are being a troll, just stubborn and chosing not to look at all the info.

Dentedhead

[dentedhead]

[quote=gfd31]What a thread!

If I may pose a scenario:

You are a fulltime ff member of IAFF.
You live in a rural town just outside of your municipaity/city that provides your paycheck.
Your kids best friend, and maybe even yours, live next door or across the street.
Its 2 a.m. the house is on fire. Everyone is still inside. You have a volunteer department that provides fire protection to your "living" community. It's been two or three minutes since you noticed the smoke/fire and you don't yet hear the sirens.

What do you do?


Oh boy here come the whatifs,the ones that have absolutley no bearing on the discussion at hand.Dont make me pull out the doctor plumber without borders reference.

Your scenario while being quite contrived could occur anywhere.It could and has happened in Etobicoke or Brampton or Fenlon Falls for that matter.There was a similar incident recently involving an off duty 3888 member....he got a medal I believe.

Call 911 try to help as best you can given the circumstances.

This scenario has the square root of FA to do with the two hatter debate.I would be acting of my own volition and not under the auspices of an FD, POC or municipal or under the constraints of a union.I would be acting at that time as a private citizen trying to help, or conversely I could stand idly by and watch if I choose to.


Dentedhead

[kriand]

Oh boy here come the whatifs,the ones that have absolutley no bearing on the discussion at hand.Dont make me pull out the doctor plumber without borders reference.

Your scenario while being quite contrived could occur anywhere.It could and has happened in Etobicoke or Brampton or Fenlon Falls for that matter.There was a similar incident recently involving an off duty 3888 member....he got a medal I believe.

Call 911 try to help as best you can given the circumstances.

This scenario has the square root of FA to do with the two hatter debate.I would be acting of my own volition and not under the auspices of an FD, POC or municipal or under the constraints of a union.I would be acting at that time as a private citizen trying to help, or conversely I could stand idly by and watch if I choose to.


Dentedhead[/quote]

:five:( i love these)

Well put.... once again DH.
This scenario played out for one of our members in his home town.
Yes ,this is a good question to be put out there, BUT not in the 2 hatter thread

[smoke286]

What a thread!

If I may pose a scenario:

You are a fulltime ff member of IAFF.
You live in a rural town just outside of your municipaity/city that provides your paycheck.
Your kids best friend, and maybe even yours, live next door or across the street.
Its 2 a.m. the house is on fire. Everyone is still inside. You have a volunteer department that provides fire protection to your "living" community. It's been two or three minutes since you noticed the smoke/fire and you don't yet hear the sirens.

What do you do?


P.S. There is a book called "Medal of Valor Firefighters" by Michael L. Middleton published by The McGraw-Hill Companies in 2003 in the U.S.A.
Read some of those stories, then answer the above question.

One would think that a fire fighter would do the same thing as he would do if he lived in downtown Toronto, Do you have a point?

[gfd31]

One would think that a fire fighter would do the same thing as he would do if he lived in downtown Toronto, Do you have a point?


My point (as Devils Advocate) after reading this thread:

Half of the talk has to do with getting injured, or hurt and losing pay.
I think every single firefighter (with a few exceptions maybe) would do his (or her) absolute best, even putting himself (herself) at great risk to save friends, neighbours or for that fact even complete strangers.

So now, every ff is very well trained and would NEVER enter a hazardous atmosphere without PPE.

Except in this case. To me it seems to run a parallel path.

Yes you would be doing it as a citizen, but why could you not also do it as a vollie?

I agree with the arguments about taking full time jobs, or even dropping full time to save money for volunteers. That is not right.

So if you put yourself at risk, saved someone and got a medal as a citizen, what happens if you do the same as a vollie ff? You get fired?

Sorry, I just see something skewed about the whole picture. Just my opinion.

[gfd31]

This scenario has the square root of FA to do with the two hatter debate.I would be acting of my own volition and not under the auspices of an FD, POC or municipal or under the constraints of a union.I would be acting at that time as a private citizen trying to help, or conversely I could stand idly by and watch if I choose to.


Dentedhead[/QUOTE]

"If I choose to" Exactly!

Then why can't a fulltime ff "Choose" to be a vollie.

You can't have it both ways.

[ABFF37]

"If I choose to" Exactly!

Then why can't a fulltime ff "Choose" to be a vollie.

You can't have it both ways.

What.................?

AB:confused:

[irsqyu]

DFC, go back and read ABFF37's last response, read it a couple of times, if you live out in the boonies and belong to the local volly group, no one really cares. If the department you are on as volly is composite with a paid component or if you are on the same payroll as your full time department (Hamilton, Ottawa are like this) or any paid department, then it is not right.

Gfd31, I know I am quoting myself, but read above and take a look at what ABFF37 said earlier, if you live in a small rural area and there are no tie ins with a career department such as composite etc, fill your boots

[dentedhead]

This scenario has the square root of FA to do with the two hatter debate.I would be acting of my own volition and not under the auspices of an FD, POC or municipal or under the constraints of a union.I would be acting at that time as a private citizen trying to help, or conversely I could stand idly by and watch if I choose to.


Dentedhead

"If I choose to" Exactly!

Then why can't a fulltime ff "Choose" to be a vollie.

You can't have it both ways.[/quote]

How exactly does my choosing to enter or not enter a burning building while off duty with no PPE come remotely close to even scratching the surface of the IAFFs position on twohatting?

A FT FF who choses to volly has made his decision regardless of the consequences to him or his family.More power to him.

I have made my stance on it quite clear, why dont you go look it up and get back to me.I think you will find it varies from the party line however I maintain I dont and wont do it as long as my association asks that I refrain from two hatting.

Speaking of trolls ay carrumba!!

Dentedhead

[DFC]

A troll is someone who participates in forums with sole purpose of baiting,stirring the pot with contrary or extreme views or statements with no proof and is generally disruptive.

Not to be confused with someone having opposing views or even taking a devils advocate stance.That is the beauty of debate.

There are several trolls that frequent this site.If you read enough posts they become pretty evident.For what its worth I dont think that you are being a troll, just stubborn and chosing not to look at all the info.

Dentedhead
I really gotta start reading up on my computer lingo........
And I prefer to be called an opinionated bastard rather than stuborn.

[FLASHOVER05]

Uh what's the question????

Sorry I think this is another one of those posts moving astray.....

[BCFFFV]

What a thread!

If I may pose a scenario:

You are a fulltime ff member of IAFF.
You live in a rural town just outside of your municipaity/city that provides your paycheck.
Your kids best friend, and maybe even yours, live next door or across the street.
Its 2 a.m. the house is on fire. Everyone is still inside. You have a volunteer department that provides fire protection to your "living" community. It's been two or three minutes since you noticed the smoke/fire and you don't yet hear the sirens.

What do you do?




P.S. There is a book called "Medal of Valor Firefighters" by Michael L. Middleton published by The McGraw-Hill Companies in 2003 in the U.S.A.
Read some of those stories, then answer the above question.



If my neighbors house was on fire for 3 minutes it wouldn't make much of a difference anyway if I had a 4 minute drive to a firehall and another 3-4 minutes back to my neighbors house in a fire truck making it 10+ minutes that the house was on fire.

[Scuba]

Why can't we alll live happily together???

irsyqu as nice as AB's post sounds - it's not the case at this end of the world.

http://www.canada.com/ottawa/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=de38336e-7303-4f79-bd78-21619eef650a&p=2

[smoke286]

The Ontario Fire Marshall in no way supercedes Collective Agreements or Constitutions.

Ottawa is one of the places where two-hatting is a serious problem

[irsqyu]

Why can't we alll live happily together???

irsyqu as nice as AB's post sounds - it's not the case at this end of the world.

DFC, go back and read ABFF37's last response, read it a couple of times, if you live out in the boonies and belong to the local volly group, no one really cares. If the department you are on as volly is composite with a paid component or if you are on the same payroll as your full time department (Hamilton, Ottawa are like this) or any paid department, then it is not right.

Scuba, as you see, I wrote earlier, Hamilton and Ottawa are two of the areas with a unique situation regarding full time firefighters working part time or volunteering with the same employer:dontknow:

[bcfire]

[FONT=Comic Sans MS]Scuba, as you see, I wrote earlier, Hamilton and Ottawa are two of the areas with a unique situation regarding full time firefighters working part time or volunteering with the same employer
I have to agree, it would be ludicrous for any person to work for their employer for pay and then do the same work for the same employer on their days off for free.

[Scuba]

The problem isn't with guys wanting to volunteer within the city. Read the link I posted - those are departments that are not part of the city of Ottawa. They are volunteers that aren't on the cities payroll - yet the heavy is still being laid on them.

[bestcoast]

Where's FC with that picture of a giant lock!!!!!.....:banghead: ..........BC............

[dentedhead]

Where's FC with that picture of a giant lock!!!!!.....:banghead: ..........BC............


I was wondering that myself about 17:00 yesterday.It has remained civil so far and is of course heading to the inevitable stalemate and lack of interest.

Only to be resurected in 90 days!!:secruity:

Dentedhead

[kriand]

Where's FC with that picture of a giant lock!!!!!.....:banghead: ..........BC............

It's sunday......he's probably working on a rival website for free today .:motz:

:vroam:

[Scuba]

It's sunday......he's probably working on a rival website for free today .:motz:

:vroam:

....and it would be his day off....so unlike some he can do what he wants when not on the clock :p

[North_of_60]

Actually, if you are a member of the IAFF you are bound by its Constitution and By-Laws that say you cannot belong to a "rival" organization. In Canada labour law says that unionized enviroments are closed shops. Therefore you must remain a member in good standing in order keep your job.



OTTAWA CITIZEN:Article - Fire Marshal alarmed at loss of volunteers, page 1 -"For two years, Mr. Moyle has been calling for legislation in Ontario to protect double-hatters from dismissal; every other province and territory, except Newfoundland, has such a law"

I swear that I am NOT trying to stir the pot, but I do have a question...

Is it true that every province except Ontario and Newfoundland have laws that protect two hatters?

Something to think about if you are someone who is a member of the IAFF and wants to be a volly as well, instead of thumbing your nose at that arcticle in the constitution and risking your job, why not get elected to the union executive and work to have the constitution changed at a vote.

Stay Safe,

North of 60

[BCFFFV]

I haven't heard about such a law in B.C.

[smoke286]

I am not aware of any province in Canada that has a law that particularly addresses the issue of two hatters. Which of coursae is not to say such a law does not exist.

[dentedhead]

OTTAWA CITIZEN:Article - Fire Marshal alarmed at loss of volunteers, page 1 -"For two years, Mr. Moyle has been calling for legislation in Ontario to protect double-hatters from dismissal; every other province and territory, except Newfoundland, has such a law"

I swear that I am NOT trying to stir the pot, but I do have a question...

Is it true that every province except Ontario and Newfoundland have laws that protect two hatters?

Something to think about if you are someone who is a member of the IAFF and wants to be a volly as well, instead of thumbing your nose at that arcticle in the constitution and risking your job, why not get elected to the union executive and work to have the constitution changed at a vote.

Stay Safe,

North of 60

Dont forget Mr Moyle is now retired.

He was also the king of the two hatters.

Dentedhead

[bestcoast]

No law out here protecting Two-hatters and there shouldn't be....................BC................

[Scuba]

...so it's ok for a union to tell you can and can't do, but not for the elected government?

[bestcoast]

...so it's ok for a union to tell you can and can't do, but not for the elected government?

:rolleyes:......all I said is I don't see the need for a law. Give it a rest already................

[smoke286]

...so it's ok for a union to tell you can and can't do, but not for the elected government?


Sure, one is something you agree to abide by when you become a member, the other is imposed on you by a government that has little understanding of the real issue, as with many here.

[Scuba]

Sure, one is something you agree to abide by when you become a member, the other is imposed on you by a government that has little understanding of the real issue, as with many here.
It's ok Smoke I'm sure if you read a bit more instead of flying off the handle as soon as something is said you'd grasp the issues. :p

[bestcoast]

by a government that has little understanding of the real issue, as with many here.

We should just stick with what you said in one of your other posts smoke. The don't waste your breath one. That's all we seem to be doing in this thread...........BC............

[Scuba]

gawd... you keep coming back for more BC I thought you were gonna give it a rest?

...so if you're not suppose to work for a rival organization how can it be justified that you are funding one by paying taxes? Shouldn't it be against the rules to live anywhere where you would be supporting such a job stealing, rest taking, dangerous group? I mean... in all fairness... that's just about as real a concern as it is if you're volunteering in a hall... at least then you might get some of your money back :p (this post is of course in total humor...)

[its_me]

I think that sometimes we miss the start and jump to the finish. We join and start unions to have strength in numbers and to move our ideas or needs forward. That might be money or health and safety and many other issues. When you join a large number of people together from all over north america you have to have some rules and guidelines and you also agree to move issues forward as a group. At some point and time enough IAFF members where concerned or threatened by thier goverment (give us what we want or we will get volunteers to do it for less)that they implemented a clause in the IAFF constitution to protect "ALL" IAFF brothers and sisters. If there wasn't any threat from untrusting goverments I believe this issue would go away. As long as one brother or sister has there job threaten we all will stand behind them. Just my two cents.

[bestcoast]

gawd... you keep coming back for more BC I thought you were gonna give it a rest?



Actually it was more of a request for you....but I know once that anti-IAFF hat is on its hard for you to take off.....;) ................BC...........

[North_of_60]

Thanks BCFFFV, Smoke, Denthead and Bestcoast for the info.

I am pretty sure that there isn't a law here in Nunavut, but it also really isn't an issue here -- No two communities are connected by road (and there is only one Composite Department in the Territory)

North of 60

[bestcoast]

[quote=North_of_60]Thanks BCFFFV, Smoke, Denthead and Bestcoast for the info.

[quote]

No problem. How's the new job going???................BC..................

[Scuba]

Actually it was more of a request for you....but I know once that anti-IAFF hat is on its hard for you to take off.....;) ................BC...........

lol anti iaff? Come on man... take the blinders off. One issue with the iaff's overall policy.... besides that I really could care less.

Now... shoooo go back to your own forum... or are you a double hatter now? :p

[bestcoast]

besides that I really could care less.



Ok scuba, you just keep telling yourself that......:rolleyes:............BC.............

[smoke286]

lol anti iaff? Come on man... take the blinders off. One issue with the iaff's overall policy.... besides that I really could care less.

Now... shoooo go back to your own forum... or are you a double hatter now? :p

You should re-read some of your posts if you do not think you come across as being anti-IAFF and anti-union in general. You may not mean them to be but they certainly come across that way

[its_me]

Full timers are always getting fingers pointed at them for trying to protect their jobs and accused of creating an unsafe work environment for areas losing their two hatters. I work for a municipality that amalgamated almost 10 years ago in Ontario. We became a composite department by name but are still run as two separate departments. Like most growing cities we have outgrown our boundaries and now have large residential areas with many more to come just outside the urban(full time) response area. Most of these areas would be 4-7 min responses for full-time responses and are at least 15 min responses from the volunteers halls(Paid on Call). We have offered to have a joint response protocol with the Paid on Call to these areas without any success. This would provide the quickest response and when enough paid on call members where there to safely take command we would stay if required or return to our urban halls as this would be their call. They would still get the call and the money and the citizens get the best response. They see this as a threat to their job and will not allow this to happen and have been very successful in lobbing council to ensure we do not respond outside our area. How is that safe for anyone?????

[gfd31]

Full timers are always getting fingers pointed at them for trying to protect their jobs and accused of creating an unsafe work environment for areas losing their two hatters. I work for a municipality that amalgamated almost 10 years ago in Ontario. We became a composite department by name but are still run as two separate departments. Like most growing cities we have outgrown our boundaries and now have large residential areas with many more to come just outside the urban(full time) response area. Most of these areas would be 4-7 min responses for full-time responses and are at least 15 min responses from the volunteers halls(Paid on Call). We have offered to have a joint response protocol with the Paid on Call to these areas without any success. This would provide the quickest response and when enough paid on call members where there to safely take command we would stay if required or return to our urban halls as this would be their call. They would still get the call and the money and the citizens get the best response. They see this as a threat to their job and will not allow this to happen and have been very successful in lobbing council to ensure we do not respond outside our area. How is that safe for anyone?????


Here Here! Whatever happened to the old saying from theThree Musketeers "All for One and One for All" ? We are all brothers and sisters are we not ? Full, POC or strictly vollie.

[123fire123]

Flashpoint: Union stand on volunteers doesn’t hold water
Written by Peter Sells

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms lists several fundamental freedoms, among them the freedom of association. This freedom is a human right and a concept in constitutional law based on the premise that adults are entitled, as individuals, to choose their associates, lawfully and in good faith, for whatever purpose they see fit, without interference from other individuals or agencies. Freedom of association has been exercised many times in our history when workers sought to organize for the purpose of collective bargaining. This is a good thing and the principle is a pillar of our society. But this is not the only meaning of freedom of association. Canadians are also free to do with their time, efforts and skills as they see fit. How, then, is it right to seek to restrict full-time firefighters from the noble donation of their time and expertise to their home communities as volunteer firefighters?

International, provincial and local firefighters’ unions have done exactly that in their efforts to impede their members from volunteering in their hometowns. In some cases, these so-called two hatters have been forced to resign from their hometown fire departments. Here are some of the arguments put forward in support of the unions’ positions and brief, logical counterpoints to each argument.

Having volunteer firefighters on staff prevents municipalities from hiring career firefighters, affecting firefighter safety. Staffing a fire department is not one size fits all, rather each community has its own needs and its own budget. A full-time department is not necessarily the best model for each community nor is it economically feasible for many towns. Let’s take a hypothetical town of 30,000 people served by 10 full-time firefighters during the day (five at a time on 12-hour shifts, when volunteers are typically less available to respond) augmented by 32 volunteers. For a fire outside the duty time of the full-time staff, the fire ground would be staffed by as many of the 32 volunteers as are available. If we were to insist that the town would be better served by a full career model, then the town would likely be able to afford about one firefighter per thousand people, or 30 firefighters total. Let’s be generous and give it 32 firefighters, or eight per shift. Now, the daytime staffing has increased a bit but there is no backup or reserve. We now have only eight personnel available at any time, 24/7. Factor in vacations, sick time and other absences and then tell me whether we have achieved a safer fire ground staffing level than the volunteer or composite models would allow.

Full-time firefighters who also volunteer in their hometowns will be sleep deprived or too tired for their full-time duty after responding. Sure, it’s possible that firefighters who respond to volunteer calls will be tired the next day but no more tired than a firefighter with a new baby or a sick toddler. Regardless, there’s a simple solution that might appease both sides: simply restrict a volunteer’s duty in the hours leading up to a full-time shift. It is very interesting to note that arguments about sleep deprivation were dismissed or minimized by the unions in the move to 24-hour shifts. The sleep-deprivation argument would appear more genuine if there were restrictions on other activities but is a union going to tell its members they can’t play hockey between shifts, or run their own businesses. Of course not. That would be imposing on the freedom of association of the members.

Compensation claims for work-related diseases will create jurisdictional issues. This is easily resolved by pro-rating such claims based on a cumulative ratio of duty hours between the full-time and volunteer employers. This solution is not only a resolution of the argument, it’s a fair arrangement that makes the hometown department responsible for its share of the claim. This approach could also apply when a firefighter changes employers, going from one full-time department to another. If the compensation claim argument is valid, then why is it OK for a firefighter to leave one department and go to another? Perhaps it is because the union has no power to prevent such a personal career decision, or that there is no political leverage to be wielded against a neighbouring full-time department.

So let’s put these arguments aside, since none of them holds up to logical analyses anyway. It is the mandate of the unions to encourage full-time employment wherever possible and safe working conditions in all cases. It is the responsibility of the municipalities to provide the best fire-protection model possible. These two mandates may not always be in synch but it is always the fundamental right of individual firefighters to make their own choice. The heart and history of the fire service is in volunteerism and service to the community.

I am certain that many readers will not agree with my position on this issue and I respect their freedom to disagree and encourage their feedback. In writing this piece, which has been brewing inside me for many years, I have exercised my fundamental freedoms of thought, belief, opinion and expression as guaranteed in the Charter. Therefore, I would expect any feedback to respect those freedoms.

District Chief Peter Sells writes, speaks and consults on fire service management and professional development across North America and internationally. He holds a B.Sc. from the University of Toronto and an MBA from the University of Windsor. He sits on the advisory councils of the Ontario Fire College and the Institution of Fire Engineers Canada Branch.

[dentedhead]

Yup!!

Im sure one of the brothers from TO will be sure to weigh and tell us of DC Sells credibility and staunch defense of his statements at union meetings.

That and the eloquent rebuttal from 3888s president.

Dentedhead

[jeffhubb]

Yup!!

Im sure one of the brothers from TO will be sure to weigh and tell us of DC Sells credibility and staunch defense of his statements at union meetings.

That and the eloquent rebuttal from 3888s president.

Dentedhead

For those who might not be aware Scott Marks is the President of Local 3888

January 16, 2008

To the Editor:

I read with interest the opinions of Peter Sells on unions and their stance on volunteer fire fighters. Of particular interest to me was his opinion that the union stance is an apparent infringement on the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. As President of the Toronto Fire Fighters, the Local he is affiliated with, I would like to offer my response in regard to his rights and responsibilities as a member of our union.

To begin, I would like to offer that we correct the misnomer of volunteers. The two hat fire fighters in question are paid, on-call part-time fire fighters. There is nothing voluntary or necessarily noble in their cause. This is commerce in its base form; supplying a service for a fee.

The second misconception is that the union is some third party entity dictating their will. The union is the collective will of the fire fighters that make up that jurisdiction. In other words when Brother Sells speaks of the union he is speaking of himself. It is not a separate entity. As President I am not entitled to any more votes than anyone else. If I want to espouse my opinions at a meeting I remove myself from the chair and speak on the floor, side by side with members like Brother Sells.

The final issue here is the question on whether the union is restricting Brother Sells or any other member in their freedom to associate. This is patently incorrect. What our members have set, through the democratic process of their respective constitutions, are the rules to maintain membership in their organization. There is a fundamental difference in saying our members are restricted in who they can join or saying, to maintain your membership in our organization you must adhere to our rules. Members that do not wish to adhere to our rules make a choice to serve one organization over another. Our members have decided that it is in their interest, for a myriad of reasons that this rule be in their constitution.

Although the Canadian Charter of Freedoms allows for freedom of association, the laws of the country dictate that certain organizations are illegal or restricted. People of this country make a choice; if they want to be members in those organizations, than they cannot be citizens of Canada.

A union constitution works in the same manner. The union decisions have no impact on any other aspect in your life, only on your membership in our organization.

What is interesting is that Brother Sells wraps himself in the flag of the Charter, while ignoring the democratic process that the charter protects. Our union, like all others, has a process for constitutional change. It is a democratic process that Brother Sells has never availed to use. I cannot recall Brother Sells being present at a meeting for constitutional changes and he has certainly never offered this change up to his membership to debate and vote on. What Brother Sells really wants is for legislation to change our constitution. He wants to deny our members the democratic right of self determination. His idea of democracy and freedom is different than mine; I believe fire fighters should have the freedom to democratically set their rules, not have a minority will invoked through government legislation.

[FLASHOVER05]

I have begun to realize that through articles written, and the posts of my co-members on firehall. That this is a never ending battle, there are some truths to each side's comments, and as a member of this site, for which I don't serve either a volunteer or Career service, I stand to make this comment, free from either end, that comment's written by DC Sells are way out of line, he didn't have a right to comment, simply because of his relationship with the fire service, the IAFF and the member for which it represents. While some of his comments hold water, his contract is clear and consice that he must not engage in firefighting activities within another jurisdiction that employs another "Brother".

Maybe in another lifetime the IAFF organization will come to some agreement or understanding with Firefighting associations, however until that happens I won't hold my breathe

[irsqyu]

District Chief Peter Sells writes, speaks and consults on fire service management and professional development across North America and internationally. He holds a B.Sc. from the University of Toronto and an MBA from the University of Windsor. He sits on the advisory councils of the Ontario Fire College and the Institution of Fire Engineers Canada Branch.

It appears as Bro. Sells is using the TFS and the IAFF as a base as he collects all his wallpaper. IMHO he will probably be moving on to bigger and better things in the future.

[fire16]

A topic of which I am glad does not affect us at this time. If it should come to pass, I am sure I will have been long departed.
There were several unions here in AB that were at odds with each other some yrs ago, (pretty sure it was not two hatter stuff ) so I wrote to the Pres of the Ab Fire Chiefs Assn, asking for clarification. Do not remember the answer, but my reply was: Are we not all here to help the citizens of our community, period. Put aside all the beauracratic BS, rescue/save citizens, protect property, look after my own safety, stop loss, no matter what it takes. Several different "enttities" trying to achieve the same goal from opposite ends of the stick. My "freedom of expression".

[itsnotahobby]

It appears that brother Sells has a little bit of a conflicting interest on this point. He has no problem accepting all of the benefits that come with his union membership for example his excellent pay and great benefits. Where I see his conflict is in the fact that he accepts all of the rewards his union has secured for him as his right by way of membership in our association, but feels that our rights as abiding members of that same association should be trampled on.

Brother Marks brings up an excellent point that I firmly believe in, do not comment or complain about something that you do nothing about. If you can't bring yourself to make it to monthly association meetings then don't complain about your association, period. If brother Sells truly cared about this issue and was so passionate about it then why did he not take the necessary steps to attempt to change this?

...Are we not all here to help the citizens of our community, period. Put aside all the beauracratic BS, rescue/save citizens, protect property, look after my own safety, stop loss, no matter what it takes. Several different "enttities" trying to achieve the same goal from opposite ends of the stick. My "freedom of expression".

The IAFF is not trying to stop anyone, it is not an attack on volunteer firefighters. It is simply affirming the right to uphold the rules that have been laid out to govern itself. If you wish to be a member of an organization, you should follow the rules of that organization. If for whatever reason you wish to change the rules by which you are governed then do so, that is your democratic right as a dues paying member.

[PellattFire]

For those who might not be aware Scott Marks is the President of Local 3888

January 16, 2008

To the Editor:

I read with interest the opinions of Peter Sells on unions and their stance on volunteer fire fighters. Of particular interest to me was his opinion that the union stance is an apparent infringement on the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. As President of the Toronto Fire Fighters, the Local he is affiliated with, I would like to offer my response in regard to his rights and responsibilities as a member of our union.

To begin, I would like to offer that we correct the misnomer of volunteers. The two hat fire fighters in question are paid, on-call part-time fire fighters. There is nothing voluntary or necessarily noble in their cause. This is commerce in its base form; supplying a service for a fee.

The second misconception is that the union is some third party entity dictating their will. The union is the collective will of the fire fighters that make up that jurisdiction. In other words when Brother Sells speaks of the union he is speaking of himself. It is not a separate entity. As President I am not entitled to any more votes than anyone else. If I want to espouse my opinions at a meeting I remove myself from the chair and speak on the floor, side by side with members like Brother Sells.

The final issue here is the question on whether the union is restricting Brother Sells or any other member in their freedom to associate. This is patently incorrect. What our members have set, through the democratic process of their respective constitutions, are the rules to maintain membership in their organization. There is a fundamental difference in saying our members are restricted in who they can join or saying, to maintain your membership in our organization you must adhere to our rules. Members that do not wish to adhere to our rules make a choice to serve one organization over another. Our members have decided that it is in their interest, for a myriad of reasons that this rule be in their constitution.

Although the Canadian Charter of Freedoms allows for freedom of association, the laws of the country dictate that certain organizations are illegal or restricted. People of this country make a choice; if they want to be members in those organizations, than they cannot be citizens of Canada.

A union constitution works in the same manner. The union decisions have no impact on any other aspect in your life, only on your membership in our organization.

What is interesting is that Brother Sells wraps himself in the flag of the Charter, while ignoring the democratic process that the charter protects. Our union, like all others, has a process for constitutional change. It is a democratic process that Brother Sells has never availed to use. I cannot recall Brother Sells being present at a meeting for constitutional changes and he has certainly never offered this change up to his membership to debate and vote on. What Brother Sells really wants is for legislation to change our constitution. He wants to deny our members the democratic right of self determination. His idea of democracy and freedom is different than mine; I believe fire fighters should have the freedom to democratically set their rules, not have a minority will invoked through government legislation.
I find myself liking this Mr.Sells position even more after reading Mr. Marks reply.
Scott Marks while eloquent to be sure dances around a few issues in that reply and while he attempts to belittle Mr. Sells argument he does little to actually challenge it's thesis.

There is one area he can't argue and that is that in order to be a part of the IAFF you must agree to the IAFF's position on the two hatter issue.
So simply saying that it is OK for anyone to challenge it democratically when they have specifically said you have to agree that two hatting is bad before they will even let you in the door is hypocritical in my opinion.
So they tell you you must accept the constitution as law in order to join.
The constitution says you can't two hat.
How many two hatters do you think get into the union?
If they do get in they are already under the gun for lying when they accepted the constitution. Then if they wish to change it they are up against all the other IAFF members who by definition have stated they are against two hatters. The deck is somewhat stacked against them.
I will give an analogy,
Let's say there is a guy who doesn't like unions.
He decides to set-up shop and form an "association" for his employees.
This association has at the base of it's constitution that there can be no union employees at this work site.
All people who get a job at this place must be an association member and must take a pledge that says they will not ever entertain union membership.
They can vote to change the association after becoming employed though.
There is an air of disgust for unions that develops in this workplace over time and most of the employees are paid well and treated fairly so that there is no real push for the majority to have a union.
The janitors have it really bad though and they have been passed up for promotion after promotion and they haven't had a raise for 10 years.
They have realized that they no longer agree with the "association" constitution but their numbers are so small that they will never get it changed.
Who is there to protect them?
The Canadian Charter of Rights and freedoms.
The "associations" constitution is at odds with the Charter and must be amended or ignored because it contradicts strongly held Canadian values that say you must be free to associate with whoever you feel.
It doesn't say "If most of the people you work with say it's okay".
The reason that no one can take the powers of the Charter and assign them to themselves is for this very reason.
I agree with Mr. Sells,
The constitution that governs this country is our country's not the IAFF's when Mr. Scott says the IAFF constitution is similar he forgets that the constitution of the IAFF is subservient to the Canadian one and while it can be voted against by it's members it already has been voted against by Canadians in my opinion when they limited free association of it's members.
There are lots of unfair things in this country though and unless there is political will to move this forward and take on a union publicly it won't really be addressed.

As I have stated before this angle on the two hatter issue has strong merit and I would love to see it taken on but there are very few people who are willing to give up their dream job and risk angering their union in order to fight this all the way.

The IAFF has a pile of money ready to fight any challenge to it in court.
How many fire fighters or small communities are willing to step up against that?

[oldboot]

I will give an analogy,
Let's say there is a guy who doesn't like unions.
He decides to set-up shop and form an "association" for his employees.
This association has at the base of it's constitution that there can be no union employees at this work site.
All people who get a job at this place must be an association member and must take a pledge that says they will not ever entertain union membership.

Let me get this strait,
You form an association for all the employees, which is another word for a union.
And this association prohibits membership in a union.
I think you just made your own association, alliance, society, organization, group or whatever you want to call it illegal.
You my friend have all the makings of a Chief!

[PellattFire]

Let me get this strait,
You form an association for all the employees, which is another word for a union.
And this association prohibits membership in a union.
I think you just made your own association, alliance, society, organization, group or whatever you want to call it illegal.
You my friend have all the makings of a Chief!
I was a member of an "employee association" as an 18 year old welder that was set-up by the employer as a way to get out of union organization of his workforce.
There was no right to strike in that association.
There are different types of association and the one I was reffereing to in my post was very different than what the IAFF or any other organization would probably accept as a union.
In my post he was locking out trade unions by forcing membership in a specific association that forbade them.

With this clarification in mind please feel free to debate my post but I would appreciate if you would quit with the insults,
You my friend have all the makings of a Chief!

I have more respect for you than to return the insult.

[dentedhead]

I was a member of an "employee association" as an 18 year old welder that was set-up by the employer as a way to get out of union organization of his workforce.
There was no right to strike in that association.
There are different types of association and the one I was reffereing to in my post was very different than what the IAFF or any other organization would probably accept as a union.
In my post he was locking out trade unions by forcing membership in a specific association that forbade them.

With this clarification in mind please feel free to debate my post but I would appreciate if you would quit with the insults,


I have more respect for you than to return the insult.


So union busting is okay?

Being told not to break a constitution you accepted as employment isnt?

An employer cannot remove the right to strike.Only an essential service agreement, clause in a contract or legisltive act such as the ones firefighters, police and nurses work under.Non union workers are free to strike if they wish.They may not have the same protections as a unionized worker but if they want to go that route they can.

The ability is there to change the constitution,however that would require those who feel the two hatter clause is wrong to stand up and request it

The only ones I hear complaining about it are those who are not members.

Dentedhead

[oldboot]

I was a member of an "employee association" as an 18 year old welder that was set-up by the employer as a way to get out of union organization of his workforce.
There was no right to strike in that association.
There are different types of association and the one I was reffereing to in my post was very different than what the IAFF or any other organization would probably accept as a union.
In my post he was locking out trade unions by forcing membership in a specific association that forbade them.

With this clarification in mind please feel free to debate my post but I would appreciate if you would quit with the insults,


I have more respect for you than to return the insult.Sorry for the insult, I will retract it.
"You don't have what it takes to be Chief!"
Is that better?

[PellattFire]

So union busting is okay?

Being told not to break a constitution you accepted as employment isnt?

An employer cannot remove the right to strike.Only an essential service agreement, clause in a contract or legisltive act such as the ones firefighters, police and nurses work under.Non union workers are free to strike if they wish.They may not have the same protections as a unionized worker but if they want to go that route they can.

The ability is there to change the constitution,however that would require those who feel the two hatter clause is wrong to stand up and request it

The only ones I hear complaining about it are those who are not members.

Dentedhead
Please see the first part of my argument,
So simply saying that it is OK for anyone to challenge it democratically when they have specifically said you have to agree that two hatting is bad before they will even let you in the door is hypocritical in my opinion.
So they tell you you must accept the constitution as law in order to join.
The constitution says you can't two hat.
How many two hatters do you think get into the union?
If they do get in they are already under the gun for lying when they accepted the constitution. Then if they wish to change it they are up against all the other IAFF members who by definition have stated they are against two hatters. The deck is somewhat stacked against them.

I never said union busting was okay.
In fact I never said I agreed with my employers actions at all because I didn't agree with it.
I was just giving an example that might let some IAFF members see the other side of the fence.
If an employer can't use this to lock out a union why should the IAFF be able to use it to mandate a specific rule that goes against a charter right.
My opinion is that they can't legally but are doing so because they hold too much power to be challenged and they continue this by not accepting people into their ranks who feel differently.

The rule my employer mandated stayed for a long time.
Illegal or not he used the rules to keep people from becoming part of the association who would choose to fight to change it.

You can't have it both ways and claim the high moral ground on this issue.

Here is what the loop perpetuated by the IAFF looks like to me.
-You can't be my brother unless you agree that two hatting is bad and say so in your oath.
-There is no issue because everyone who is a member of our union agrees with us on no two hatting.
-Because we only allow people who disapprove of two hatting there is no real danger of the matter going anywhere within the union ranks or we can mention their oath at meetings and ask them if they wish to go against that oath."
-Welcome to the IAFF are you ready to take your oath?

[PellattFire]

Sorry for the insult, I will retract it.
"You don't have what it takes to be Chief!"
Is that better?
I'd love to discuss the issue at hand with you.
Feel free to comment on it at any time.

[FFGrump]

Here is the loop that I see problems with.
"You can't be my brother unless you agree that two hatting is bad and say so in your oath"
"There is no issue because everyone who is a member of our union agrees with us on no two hatting"
"Because we only allow people who disaprove of two hatting there is no real danger of the matter going anywhere within the union ranks or we can mention their oath at meetings and ask them if they wish to go against that oath."
"Welcome to the IAFF are you ready to take your oath?"

Well that quote certainly shows that you have absolutely no clue about how the IAFF operates. Where did you even come up with that? Certainly wasn't how I took my oath.

[PellattFire]

Well that quote certainly shows that you have absolutely no clue about how the IAFF operates. Where did you even come up with that? Certainly wasn't how I took my oath.
I re-read that after your post and it does look like I was quoting the oath.
Sorry for that.
I was trying to portray the chain of events that leads to perpetuating the two hatter rule at the IAFF.

Again, sorry if that reads as if it is a quote.
I will adjust the post accordingly.

[kriand]

Pellat'

How does the IAFF and the two hatter issue affect your department?

I'm aware of the issues around the area that I live/work , but I'm not familiar with your area of the Province.

Perhaps you could share that.

[PellattFire]

Pellat'

How does the IAFF and the two hatter issue affect your department?

I'm aware of the issues around the area that I live/work , but I'm not familiar with your area of the Province.

Perhaps you could share that.
I was on a composite department before and so it became of interest to me then.
I don't have a direct issue with it currently that effects my department but I've seen it's effects on other departments and frankly it is something that seems to smolder through the whole firefighting community and pop up to burn a few people every once in a while because it never gets dealt with to many peoples satisfaction.

[oldboot]

I'd love to discuss the issue at hand with you.
Feel free to comment on it at any time.I have no desire to discuss this issue with you; as you have in your past posts made it very clear you are anti union. I am sure whatever I say will not change or enlighten your opinion of the IAFF

This issue does not affect you or your department and from what I have seen never will, and yet you like to come on here and post a topic that you know is going to get a response from a IAFF member.

I am a proud member of IAFF and am glad to have my union represent me, something you will never have to worry about!
Nuff said!

[PellattFire]

I have no desire to discuss this issue with you; as you have in your past posts made it very clear you are anti union. I am sure whatever I say will not change or enlighten your opinion of the IAFF
I am not anti-union and I would hope you don't wish to change my opinion of the IAFF overall. I support them in everything else they do as an organization and I have no ill will to the organization as a whole.
I just disagree with their stance on one issue.
Because I do not agree with you on this one issue I am labelled a union hater.
If this is the way this issue would be dealt with at a weekly meeting if it were brought up by someone who is a member, you have proven my point.

This issue does not affect you or your department and from what I have seen never will, and yet you like to come on here and post a topic that you know is going to get a response from a IAFF member.
As I firefighter it effects me.
As this is posted in the volly section I see that you understand that something not directly related to how we do things now or in our organization can effect us later so it is important to know what is going on and sometimes discuss issues.

I am a proud member of IAFF and am glad to have my union represent me, something you will never have to worry about!
Nuff said!
No, I won't worry about being part of the union.
I am too old to go that route. I would be a proud member though as I have much respect for them as an organization. I just don't agree with them on this particular issue.

From your tone with me I might ruffle a few feathers in your hall though as I am not one to be bullied into keeping quiet.
I hope I am wrong on that though and you would openly discuss any issue a fellow brother brought forward even if you disagree with his position on it.

[TruckCo11]

I have more respect for you than to return the insult.


You took that as an insult? Wow, you guys sure are sensitive up there. Does everybody have to walk on eggshells?


I just don't agree with them on this particular issue.

Why don't you explore the issue just a bit, there is plenty of info out there about. Take a look at resolution 43, out of suburban DC.
I'm only answering from a perspective this side of the border, but since the IAFF includes me, and Canadians, it is a common issue with common goals.
The purpose of stopping guys from volunteering is to keep IAFF members from sticking it to other IAFF members. PG County Maryland is where a lot of this nonsense happens. Guys get off from work in DC, then drive to a volunteer station in PG County that has career IAFF members working at some level in it. They fill spots on rigs that could have other IAFF members hired into, or filled by overtime.
Since the purpose of a labor union is to protect the wages, hours, and working conditions of it's paying members, that's what the IAFF is doing. The IAFF, along with myself would rather have guaranteed professional staffing on rigs, something that can't be guaranteed with a volunteer department.

Since these guys are filling spots on rigs for free, it also hinders their locals ability to negotiate raises, benefits, or any other cost to help make life a little bit more affordable. How would you feel, if someone came into your job, and took work away from you for free?
Well, that's what's going on in some places. The IAFF is just trying to look out for it's members everywhere.

I don't really see what the big deal is here, anyhow. I know plenty of volunteer departments that won't let it's members belong to another department. How is that any different? Here's a clue; it isn't any different. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a firefighter to only be a member of one department. How can you serve two masters? Particularly if your department expects, or counts on you to be available for recall duty, etc...

The purpose here is not punish volunteer departments, it's to protect IAFF members. It's really a small expectation for the many benefits the IAFF membership brings with it. I have had some issues with the policy in the past, but only in how it impacts with EMS. From what I understand, commercial EMS isn't as large of a deal up there.
In any event, it's up to the individual locals to enforce this policy. If you're that set in stone against the policy, it's really very simple; don't belong to the IAFF. Resign your membership. Canada's a free country, right? Make use of your freedom.

[PellattFire]

You took that as an insult? Wow, you guys sure are sensitive up there. Does everybody have to walk on eggshells?
Unless I am mistaken it was intended as an insult.
So I responded as expected but with respect.

Why don't you explore the issue just a bit, there is plenty of info out there about. Take a look at resolution 43, out of suburban DC.
I'm only answering from a perspective this side of the border, but since the IAFF includes me, and Canadians, it is a common issue with common goals.
The purpose of stopping guys from volunteering is to keep IAFF members from sticking it to other IAFF members. PG County Maryland is where a lot of this nonsense happens. Guys get off from work in DC, then drive to a volunteer station in PG County that has career IAFF members working at some level in it. They fill spots on rigs that could have other IAFF members hired into, or filled by overtime.
Since the purpose of a labor union is to protect the wages, hours, and working conditions of it's paying members, that's what the IAFF is doing. The IAFF, along with myself would rather have guaranteed professional staffing on rigs, something that can't be guaranteed with a volunteer department.

Since these guys are filling spots on rigs for free, it also hinders their locals ability to negotiate raises, benefits, or any other cost to help make life a little bit more affordable. How would you feel, if someone came into your job, and took work away from you for free?
Well, that's what's going on in some places. The IAFF is just trying to look out for it's members everywhere.

I don't really see what the big deal is here, anyhow. I know plenty of volunteer departments that won't let it's members belong to another department. How is that any different? Here's a clue; it isn't any different. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a firefighter to only be a member of one department. How can you serve two masters? Particularly if your department expects, or counts on you to be available for recall duty, etc...

The purpose here is not punish volunteer departments, it's to protect IAFF members. It's really a small expectation for the many benefits the IAFF membership brings with it. I have had some issues with the policy in the past, but only in how it impacts with EMS. From what I understand, commercial EMS isn't as large of a deal up there.
In any event, it's up to the individual locals to enforce this policy. If you're that set in stone against the policy, it's really very simple; don't belong to the IAFF. Resign your membership. Canada's a free country, right? Make use of your freedom.
I agree with the intent of the IAFF regarding Double hatting but I disagree with the result in some cases and I disagree with the heavy handed manner in which it has been administered in some instances.
I am not convinced that the IAFF is in the best position to decide which municipalities are able to afford new full time firefighters and even if they were it is not their place legally to force that upon them.
It is indeed a tough position as I see the tough spot these double hatters might put the union in on a composite department.
The whole issue is so vague though that it could be used on a non paying non composite department and that would not be acceptable to me.
I guess I am just not comfortable with The IAFF being able to dictate a municipalities budget like this.
I can see the issue but I just don't agree with the tactic in this case as it is open to abuse.
The collective bargaining is the time to bring up issues such as over time and more full time FF.
I agree that two hatting could make this difficult but there are lots of things that could do that and it does not make outlawing two hatting right or legal when it comes to a constitutional position.

As for volunteer departments mandating members not belonging to other departments, I haven't ever heard of this and at one point I was on three departments. I am also doing some training(non paid) for another department next week.
All this was supported by my chief and I was actually asked by him to do the training in another department next week for mutual aid benefit.

[TruckCo11]

Unless I am mistaken it was intended as an insult.
So I responded as expected but with respect.

You should go to some of the sports forums I go to. It's all perspective, I guess, regarding insults. Better not ever sit at the kitchen table here, during a shift change.


I am not convinced that the IAFF is in the best position to decide which municipalities are able to afford new full time firefighters and even if they were it is not their place legally to force that upon them.


They're not forcing anything on anybody, other than IAFF members. The places where this issue is at the forefront, it's IAFF members taking spots on rigs that would have to be filled by either volunteers, or overtime firemen. The IAFF is trying to keep guys from taking money from other guys for free. The IAFF is the best at deciding what's best for IAFF members. They're not dictating to municipalities what or how many firefighters to hire. They are concerned about what happens to those members oncer they're hired.


I agree that two hatting could make this difficult but there are lots of things that could do that and it does not make outlawing two hatting right or legal when it comes to a constitutional position.

I don't know about in Canada, but I do know that here, there is no constitutional right to be a firefighter. As such, no constitutional rights are violated by this clause. Besides, if a department can tell me where to live, I see nothing wrong with them telling me not to belong to another department.

Incidentally, my department has a policy against being a member of another department, separate to what the IAFF has in place. Outside of special teams incidents, we haven't had a recall in 17 years.



As for volunteer departments mandating members not belonging to other departments, I haven't ever heard of this and at one point I was on three departments.

There are at least two departments west of me, all volunteer, that have this policy in place.



Don't over complicate the issue. The IAFF is not dictating to cities anything about budget or hiring policies. They are only worried about wages, hours, and working conditions of it's current members, who pay dues.

[itsnotahobby]

PellattFire, you didn't think you'd get through this thread without hearing from me did you? First let me say I feel like you and I have done this dance before. Second you're probably the only one on here I'll seriously discuss this with as you have well thought out intelligent arguments. And finally you're wrong.

...I agree with the intent of the IAFF regarding Double hatting but I disagree with the result in some cases and I disagree with the heavy handed manner in which it has been administered in some instances.

If you agree with the intent then you can understand why this rule is here. So if you agree what results do you disagree with? And what is the heavy handed manner? That a member who directly violates this article and continues to can be charged by the union? How is this heavy handed? What would you see the local do? Give the member a stern talking to, and ask them politely not to do something they've obviously decided to do anyway?

I am not convinced that the IAFF is in the best position to decide which municipalities are able to afford new full time firefighters and even if they were it is not their place legally to force that upon them.

Tell me one time that a municipality was 'forced' to hire full time firefighters because of the local asserting its rights to enforce its constitution? If a municipality was in such dire straits that the only members it could get to volunteer were two-hatters, then that municipality should seriously look at their model of fire service delivery and adjust it accordingly.

It is indeed a tough position as I see the tough spot these double hatters might put the union in on a composite department.
The whole issue is so vague though that it could be used on a non paying non composite department and that would not be acceptable to me.
I guess I am just not comfortable with The IAFF being able to dictate a municipalities budget like this.

This is where our problems lies with primarily. In this instance tell me one other union that would allow this to happen. What do you think the UAW would do to Ford if they decided to bring in workers at a fraction of the cost of the members on the line to assemble cars?
As well there are municipalities out there with the tax base and call volume to support some type of composite system, so to allow two-hatters in these instances would be counter productive.

I can see the issue but I just don't agree with the tactic in this case as it is open to abuse.
The collective bargaining is the time to bring up issues such as over time and more full time FF.
I agree that two hatting could make this difficult but there are lots of things that could do that and it does not make outlawing two hatting right or legal when it comes to a constitutional position.

Again what are the tactics that you don't agree with? An association following its constitution and governing bylaws and applying them?
Remember this is an attack on volunteer firefighters. This is an association asserting its right to apply its rules fairly and equitably to its members across the board.

[Pumpone]

Hey guys I think the horse moved!, No sorry it was just the vultures feasting on the dead dead dead horse!

[PellattFire]

You should go to some of the sports forums I go to. It's all perspective, I guess, regarding insults. Better not ever sit at the kitchen table here, during a shift change.

Fair enough, I'll let oldboot tell me how much he loves the Leafs later.:)



They're not forcing anything on anybody, other than IAFF members. The places where this issue is at the forefront, it's IAFF members taking spots on rigs that would have to be filled by either volunteers, or overtime firemen. The IAFF is trying to keep guys from taking money from other guys for free. The IAFF is the best at deciding what's best for IAFF members. They're not dictating to municipalities what or how many firefighters to hire. They are concerned about what happens to those members oncer they're hired.
They are doing their best force the city to lose it's current crop of free FF so the IAFF and the local have a better position to bargain from.


I don't know about in Canada, but I do know that here, there is no constitutional right to be a firefighter. As such, no constitutional rights are violated by this clause. Besides, if a department can tell me where to live, I see nothing wrong with them telling me not to belong to another department.

In Canada it is very similar to the US and there is a right to associate.
If you want to see how this relates please read Mr. Peter Sells a few pages back. I don't wish to re-type it.

Don't over complicate the issue. The IAFF is not dictating to cities anything about budget or hiring policies. They are only worried about wages, hours, and working conditions of it's current members, who pay dues.
I hope I am not but the fact is some of it's members feel they are not being treated fairly or we would not be talking about this.
Two hatters are all IAFF members until being forced out or forced to quit the other department.

And it'snotahobby,
PellattFire, you didn't think you'd get through this thread without hearing from me did you? First let me say I feel like you and I have done this dance before. Second you're probably the only one on here I'll seriously discuss this with as you have well thought out intelligent arguments. And finally you're wrong.

No I didn't.
Yes we have.
The respect is mutual.
Surprisingly I disagree on the last one but I am to tired to take you on tonight.:)
I'll try and tackle it tomorrow at lunch or before work.
I just stepped in here myself but I seem to have an army of IAFF badges all with a different opinion than mine.
Fair enough though I would expect anyone that is a union member to feel strongly about this.

[itsnotahobby]

Hey guys I think the horse moved!, No sorry it was just the vultures feasting on the dead dead dead horse!

It may be dead to you but it affects us every day. So I think this is pretty relevant. As well if you don't want to be part of an intellectual discussion and contribute, keep hunting and pecking away and produce some more unwitty and unoriginal hack comments.

[itsnotahobby]

And it'snotahobby,

No I didn't.
Yes we have.
The respect is mutual.
Surprisingly I disagree on the last one but I am to tired to take you on tonight.:)
I'll try and tackle it tomorrow at lunch or before work.
I just stepped in here myself but I seem to have an army of IAFF badges all with a different opinion than mine.
Fair enough though I would expect anyone that is a union member to feel strongly about this.

LMAO, I await your response with abated breath!;)

[Pumpone]

It may be dead to you but it affects us every day. So I think this is pretty relevant. As well if you don't want to be part of an intellectual discussion and contribute, keep hunting and pecking away and produce some more unwitty and unoriginal hack comments.

First off how do you know that this does not affect me? Secondly do a search on here about two hatters and see how many threads and off topic rants there are on here. And did not fire code devise a series of warnings not so long ago for threads like these? Unwitty and unoriginal they may be but true none the less. So I will sit back down and watch this thread go on and on and on until it is locked, and in a couple of months someone else will bring it back to life.

[itsnotahobby]

First off how do you know that this does not affect me? Secondly do a search on here about two hatters and see how many threads and off topic rants there are on here.
If this affected you, you would think that you would have an interest in it. Instead of searching, have a look at the name of this thread, seems like a pretty good place to discuss it.

[Goose651]

In England the volunteers are in the same union as the career firefighters. So when it can to the wage increase they all spoke with one voice. Could it work here?

[Pumpone]

If this affected you, you would think that you would have an interest in it. Instead of searching, have a look at the name of this thread, seems like a pretty good place to discuss it.

Just because I choose not to sit here and run my mouth off does not mean I am not interested in the subject nor does it mean that it does not affect me. And really whatever you say on here will not change the stance of the IAFF. If you really are that motivated to do something about it take 10 mins away from your computer and do something about it in real life. And by the way, that was a very weak answer to the orignal question that I asked you. When you make such a strong statement that something does not affect someone back it up with facts.

[braidjansen]

Perhaps I am ill informed but it seems to me that the issue is one of coercion.

Ontario's labour law, in fact the labour law across the country, clearly states that all employees have the right to freely choose whether or not they wish to belong to a union. Yet, if I am not mistaken, a volunteer firefighter joining a full time department often has no choice but to join the union since in many municipalities, contracts state that only members of the union may be employed as firefighters, dispatchers,etc. If this is the case, to say that an individual has the right to refuse to join the union is a little disingenuous since to refusing to join the union places one's job at risk.

The Rand formula clearly states that every employee has the right to refuse to join a union so long as they continue to pay union dues since even an employee who is not part of the union benefits from the union's activities. Now I am not a double hatter. I am a volunteer but I have no intention of joining a full time department. But if I were to do so, would I have the option of opting out of the union so as to not put myself in conflict with the union's constitution and continue on as a volunteer? It would seem to me that that would be the honourable thing to do. But I suspect that such an option would not be available to me should I at some point decide to leave my current full time job and join a full time department.

This whole debate is really a tragedy. Volunteer firefighters make up between 60 - 80% (depending on who you are talking to) of the province's firefighters. Yet the IAFF has alienated them through its policy (to my mind at least) of identifying volunteer departments as competitive organisations. I think that the unions in the UK and Europe have the right idea. All firefighters require representation. It's a shame that the IAFF has not only refused to step up to the plate, but effectively driven a huge wedge between vollys and full timers. I think that we have far more in common than simple issues of pay and wages. Volunteer firefighters who work for municipalities who are seeking to run fire departments on the cheap desperately need someone to be willing to speak up for them. It's a pity that the IAFF is not willing to do it.

[irsqyu]

This discussion is getting more ridiculous all the time, those of you bashing the IAFF should just continue working where you are now and continue serving your community as a volunteer or part time firefighter. Problem solved! So if you don't really know what the IAFF is all about, stop the bashing.

I am nearing retirement after over 30 years as a career firefighter, I have always enjoyed the best of equipment, great benefits, great pension and the hard work of the Union with issues such as Presumptive Legislation which BTW you also are a part of thanks in part to the IAFF.
I would say that I could speak for 99% of career firefighters belonging to the IAFF and I believe no one would speak badly of our Assosciation.

Again as I have pointed out before, usually the IAFF turns a blind eye to a member being a volly in a small rural town which will probably never have a career department.

The issue is an IAFF Brother belonging to a Composite department which employs IAFF Brothers and Sisters!

If you guys keep pushing this to a head, the brothers may not even be able to volunteer in their smaller rural hometown

[PellattFire]

Perhaps I am ill informed but it seems to me that the issue is one of coercion...........................

My thoughts exactly but explained more clearly than I have been able to.

The position a new rookie firefighter is in after he is offered a job he/she has worked towards his whole life is not a position of strength in standing up for his/her beliefs regarding political issues within the industry.
They have fought their way ahead of possibly 500 other people to be offered a position that they are in no position to refuse even if they are forced to join a union they disagree with on some levels.

This is where right to associate comes in.
itsnotahobby will tell you about separate unions that were formed in Ontario at one time to address this but eventually they went back to the IAFF.
I think it would take an individual with balls/ovaries the size of a quint to take a stand like that at a time when they are risking being able to recoup the costs of education and possibly being labelled a Sh!t disturber by both management and Union so as never to be offered a position again.

I have no idea who is ever going to be in a position to challenge this in the courts though.

I understand what the union is up against at bargaining time with some two hatter using departments. It is a small issue though when you consider the fact that they are ignoring the rights of the individual to associate with any person or organization they choose regardless of any constitution that says different.
That constitution is not legally binding if it limits rights already afforded to a citizen by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
I also think that if challenged using the charter the IAFF will lose.

I would rather see a more amicable solution put forward by the IAFF.
This my way or the highway stuff has worked to this point but look at the rift it has created.

I would like to see a new position from the IAFF with a formula for gauging the ability of a department/municipality to afford full time FF.
Then rather than having FF become adversaries if they mediated the issue on an individual basis with the municipality and the full timers and the volunteers with all parties having representation.

Target the municipalities that are obviously abusing the system and try to negotiate a solution without targeting FF at all.

Another option would be to ask Volunteers to be part of the IAFF.
I can't see that one getting off the ground though.
The numbers would drastically change how the organization works and would probably not serve the existing membership as well as the current model.

Two organizations under the same parent organization would probably be able to work this out amicably though.

Maybe someone should organize a Canadian union for FF with a volunteer arm and a full time arm with common goals and interests but based on the core values of the IAFF which I believe to be solid and in everyone's interest?

Solicit membership from all Canadian Fire Departments and offer to be an option for any FF who finds current positions by the IAFF on two hatting unacceptable.

[PellattFire]

This discussion is getting more ridiculous all the time, those of you bashing the IAFF should just continue working where you are now and continue serving your community as a volunteer or part time firefighter. Problem solved! So if you don't really know what the IAFF is all about, stop the bashing.
I haven't seen anyone bash any organization.
Reasoned debate should never include two things,
1)bashing
2)people telling other people they shouldn't talk about something

If you guys keep pushing this to a head, the brothers may not even be able to volunteer in their smaller rural hometown
That is always a possibility but it could also go the other way and the whole issue gets removed by a court decision that says the two hatter stance by the IAFF is in contravention of the rights afforded to the FF by the charter.

I would be willing to see it taken to that level if for no other reason than to finally put the issue to bed and have some solid rules in place.

[braidjansen]

I've been lurking on this forum for some time and have hesitated to get involved due to the heat of the rhetoric. It seems to me that there is far too much yelling and not enough talking taking place when it comes to this issue. This goes to my point regarding the wedge that the union's position has driven between the volunteer community and full timers. At the end of the day the two groups have a great deal in common. All firefighters need support and we should work together to make the job safer for all of us.

I think that most volunteer firefighters, especially those of us from municipalities just outside the GTA's urban fringe, realise the the day is coming when our fire departments will begin to transition to full time organisations. It won't happen overnight and I suspect that there will be volunteers in my particular town for remainder of my working life. But I suspect that my son will not have the same opportunity to serve as I have. It will be a sad day when it happens but that is progress. In the meantime I ask that we all, full time and volunteer, treat each other with respect. There are times when both sides of this debate have lacked that particular quality.

I personally support the right of all individuals to work where they wish and I support the right of full time firefighters to serve as volunteers. While I am not a double hatter I do understand what it means to be a volunteer firefighter in a town that cannot afford to lose a single trained individual for any reason. I understand the union's concerns but I think that it is a wrong headed policy that ultimately distracts us from what is important. All firefighters deserve the same working conditions and while I do not expect to make a living wage as a volunteer (the very root of this issue I suppose), I do expect that I will receive the same equipment and (were possible) comparable training as my full time brothers. I believe that the IAFF has a role to play in this fight. The fact that it refuses to do so makes me very sad

[kriand]

I haven't seen anyone bash any organization.
Reasoned debate should never include two things,
1)bashing
2)people telling other people they shouldn't talk about something

That is always a possibility but it could also go the other way and the whole issue gets removed by a court decision that says the two hatter stance by the IAFF is in contravention of the rights afforded to the FF by the charter.

I would be willing to see it taken to that level if for no other reason than to finally put the issue to bed and have some solid rules in place.

If you don't agree with what is in the IAFF"s constitution,(which you are not a member and no intention of being a member), then it seems to me that you constantly post about their way of doing business, which in your words you don't agree with, then is that not considered bashing??

[itsnotahobby]

Just because I choose not to sit here and run my mouth off does not mean I am not interested in the subject nor does it mean that it does not affect me. And really whatever you say on here will not change the stance of the IAFF. If you really are that motivated to do something about it take 10 mins away from your computer and do something about it in real life. And by the way, that was a very weak answer to the orignal question that I asked you. When you make such a strong statement that something does not affect someone back it up with facts.

Have you actually read any of my posts? If you have what would give you any kind of idea that I want this changed. What original question, I've reread your posts multiple times?

[itsnotahobby]

In England the volunteers are in the same union as the career firefighters. So when it can to the wage increase they all spoke with one voice. Could it work here?

Definitions of volunteer on the Web:

* tell voluntarily; "He volunteered the information"
* (military) a person who freely enlists for service
* agree freely; "She volunteered to drive the old lady home"; "I offered to help with the dishes but the hostess would not hear of it"
* a person who performs voluntary work
* do volunteer work
* unpaid: without payment; "the soup kitchen was run primarily by unpaid helpers"; "a volunteer fire department"

Why would a labour union want to accept into its ranks something that goes against the very essence of why it was established in the first place. I have a very hard time as it is knowing that the CLC has allowed the organization of various volunteer departments across the province by the likes of the United Steelworkers. As it stands now because of the work that the IAFF does through lobbying and educating politicians volunteers inevitably stand to gain anyway.
I'll say it again this is not the IAFF against the volunteer. This is the IAFF enforcing the rules that it has laid out to govern the organization.

[PellattFire]

If you don't agree with what is in the IAFF"s constitution,(which you are not a member and no intention of being a member), then it seems to me that you constantly post about their way of doing business, which in your words you don't agree with, then is that not considered bashing??
This thread is about two hatters.
The Two Hatter issue is an issue because it is in contravention of the IAFF's constitution.
I disagree with this constitution on only one point.

an analogy for you,
I disagree with my wife on issues and we discuss them.
I am not bashing her by stating my side of the argument.
I am saying I disagree with her opinion on the issue at hand.
Just like this thread discussion can last a long time but if it ends with a better understanding of the others position we are all better off.

I'm not married to the IAFF but I think I can discuss it's policies without bashing it.
If I get out of line please tell me.
If you would like to tell me when I am wrong also please do.
I value any IAFF member for their knowledge regarding this issue.
As your members say you are on the inside and understand the IAFF better than I ever could.
Please tell me what points of my arguments are wrong.
I would like nothing better than for this issue to be resolved to the satisfaction of everyone involved.
If we can't do that here at least we better understand why the other thinks the way they do.

[itsnotahobby]

My thoughts exactly but explained more clearly than I have been able to.

The position a new rookie firefighter is in after he is offered a job he/she has worked towards his whole life is not a position of strength in standing up for his/her beliefs regarding political issues within the industry.
They have fought their way ahead of possibly 500 other people to be offered a position that they are in no position to refuse even if they are forced to join a union they disagree with on some levels.

This is where right to associate comes in.
itsnotahobby will tell you about separate unions that were formed in Ontario at one time to address this but eventually they went back to the IAFF.
I think it would take an individual with balls/ovaries the size of a quint to take a stand like that at a time when they are risking being able to recoup the costs of education and possibly being labelled a Sh!t disturber by both management and Union so as never to be offered a position again.

I have no idea who is ever going to be in a position to challenge this in the courts though.

I understand what the union is up against at bargaining time with some two hatter using departments. It is a small issue though when you consider the fact that they are ignoring the rights of the individual to associate with any person or organization they choose regardless of any constitution that says different.
That constitution is not legally binding if it limits rights already afforded to a citizen by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
I also think that if challenged using the charter the IAFF will lose.

I would rather see a more amicable solution put forward by the IAFF.
This my way or the highway stuff has worked to this point but look at the rift it has created.

I would like to see a new position from the IAFF with a formula for gauging the ability of a department/municipality to afford full time FF.
Then rather than having FF become adversaries if they mediated the issue on an individual basis with the municipality and the full timers and the volunteers with all parties having representation.

Target the municipalities that are obviously abusing the system and try to negotiate a solution without targeting FF at all.

Another option would be to ask Volunteers to be part of the IAFF.
I can't see that one getting off the ground though.
The numbers would drastically change how the organization works and would probably not serve the existing membership as well as the current model.

Two organizations under the same parent organization would probably be able to work this out amicably though.

Maybe someone should organize a Canadian union for FF with a volunteer arm and a full time arm with common goals and interests but based on the core values of the IAFF which I believe to be solid and in everyone's interest?

Solicit membership from all Canadian Fire Departments and offer to be an option for any FF who finds current positions by the IAFF on two hatting unacceptable.

I and most of my brothers have no problem listening to differing points of view, especially as it pertains to the association. Of course there are some who don't want to hear anything against current practice, but this is the same in any organization. This happens every shift, a debate starts up regarding something to do with the association, whether it be policies or who is in charge. The problem I have as well as the majority of others is when others blatantly disregard the rules for there own selfish reasons. Why do I say selfish, because when you are looking at a composite department you are putting yourself above the brothers in that local that you are two-hatting with.
And why is it the IAFFs problem to find a solution here? We have a solution you will not two-hat. Maybe the solution should lie with the volunteer department that excepts these firefighters on. Why don't they stop the headache and not take them? Again list out some examples of departments that have fallen apart due to the union forcing a two-hatter to resign.
Let me pose another question. Why is it do you think that most municipalities now tell new hires that they can not volunteer in another municipality as a full time employee? And I guarantee you that it has nothing to do with 'coercion' by the IAFF.

[PellattFire]

Why would a labour union want to accept into its ranks something that goes against the very essence of why it was established in the first place. I have a very hard time as it is knowing that the CLC has allowed the organization of various volunteer departments across the province by the likes of the United Steelworkers. As it stands now because of the work that the IAFF does through lobbying and educating politicians volunteers inevitably stand to gain anyway.
I'll say it again this is not the IAFF against the volunteer. This is the IAFF enforcing the rules that it has laid out to govern the organization.
At the risk of side tracking this thread, I have learned from you and other union members that it is not about the money for the most part.
It is about safety and respect and working conditions.
These are areas of concern we share with our IAFF brothers.
While I am in a 100% no fee/honorarium/anything department, most volunteer departments are now POC departments and could use some wage bargaining power as well.
As I stated before it would not be in the current IAFF members best interest to bring in volunteers.
I respect that.
It could possibly be in all FF interest to form a parent organization(IAFF?) and then two sister organizations (IAFFF & IAVFF??) one for full timers and one for Volly/POC FF all under one organization.
This would force us all to sit down and hammer out a resolution to this issue and others that benefits every FF.

[Pumpone]

What original question, I've reread your posts multiple times?

You posted "it may be dead to you but it affects us every day". The question was how do you know it doesn't affect me?

[irsqyu]

At the risk of side tracking this thread, I have learned from you and other union members that it is not about the money for the most part.
It is about safety and respect and working conditions.
These are areas of concern we share with our IAFF brothers.
While I am in a 100% no fee/honorarium/anything department, most volunteer departments are now POC departments and could use some wage bargaining power as well.
As I stated before it would not be in the current IAFF members best interest to bring in volunteers.
I respect that.
It could possibly be in all FF interest to form a parent organization(IAFF?) and then two sister organizations (IAFFF & IAVFF??) one for full timers and one for Volly/POC FF all under one organization.
This would force us all to sit down and hammer out a resolution to this issue and others that benefits every FF.


Maybe you should take a look at this group, they are already representing the volunteer division of the Hamilton Fire Department.
Google "CLAC" for the main page
Here is the GHVFA page
http://www.clac.ca/information/offices/showLoc.asp?loc=911

[PellattFire]

Maybe you should take a look at this group, they are already representing the volunteer division of the Hamilton Fire Department.
Google "CLAC" for the main page
Here is the GHVFA page
http://www.clac.ca/information/offices/showLoc.asp?loc=911

I see they are not affiliated with any other FF representing union.

I was saying that in order to resolve this issue and keep others that pop up from becoming problems some form of affiliation at a union level between full timers and vollies would be beneficial.
I think it's great that Hamilton has representation but I don't think it is going to work towards resolving the issue we are discussing in this thread.

[PellattFire]

Maybe you should take a look at this group, they are already representing the volunteer division of the Hamilton Fire Department.
Google "CLAC" for the main page
Here is the GHVFA page
http://www.clac.ca/information/offices/showLoc.asp?loc=911

From that local I was reading this (http://www.clac.ca/information/offices/LocArt.asp?an=130) and cought this quote:
The formation of this association came in response to pressures put on us to join an international association of firefighters, the same association which had publicly stated their intent to see us disbanded at any cost.
Was the IAFF opened up to Hamilton Vollies?

[twenty2go]

I am just curious, it seems a lot of people here, have a great interest in this debate who in their own words are not, or do not plan on becoming IAFF members. What do you hope to gain from this, if it ever was challenged and overturned by the government. It has been reported in here numerous times that small rural depts. are not the issue. The depts. at issue either have FT or perhaps should have. Do people think that if somehow, this was overturned, there would be a mass exodus, of FT firefighters becoming POC. I highly doubt it. Should the oath that you take when you become a member, not kinda be like the one when you get married. You have sworn, in both cases to do your best to be honest and true, and uphold your end of the deal. Two hatting almost seems the same as cheating on your spouse. Like I said I 'm wondeing what it is your hoping for, eveytime this issue is brought up, again, and again, and again...

[PellattFire]

I am just curious, it seems a lot of people here, have a great interest in this debate who in their own words are not, or do not plan on becoming IAFF members. What do you hope to gain from this, if it ever was challenged and overturned by the government. It has been reported in here numerous times that small rural depts. are not the issue. The depts. at issue either have FT or perhaps should have. Do people think that if somehow, this was overturned, there would be a mass exodus, of FT firefighters becoming POC. I highly doubt it. Should the oath that you take when you become a member, not kinda be like the one when you get married. You have sworn, in both cases to do your best to be honest and true, and uphold your end of the deal. Two hatting almost seems the same as cheating on your spouse. Like I said I 'm wondeing what it is your hoping for, eveytime this issue is brought up, again, and again, and again...
For me I would like to see a fair resolution to it that is in line with our countries Charter of rights and freedoms.
As a FF I don't see myself as belonging to a camp of Full timers or a camp of vollies.
Just a FF and as such I would like to see this resolved for the good of the service as a whole.
As far as the oath goes,
You can't legally ask someone to do something that it is against the charter and hold them to it.
This isn't two people coming to a mutual agreement like a marriage.

This is a Union that holds the ability to get the job you have been dreaming about and training for all your life in the palm of their hands and in order to keep it you must agree to an oath or your not in.
In this one area of discussion I think that that is a bit much to ask and then say well you agreed to it so you have to follow it.
Can you say, shot gun wedding.

[dentedhead]

For me I would like to see a fair resolution to it that is in line with our countries Charter of rights and freedoms.
As a FF I don't see myself as belonging to a camp of Full timers or a camp of vollies.
Just a FF and as such I would like to see this resolved for the good of the service as a whole.
As far as the oath goes,
You can't legally ask someone to do something that it is against the charter and hold them to it.
This isn't two people coming to a mutual agreement like a marriage.

This is a Union that holds the ability to get the job you have been dreaming about and training for all your life in the palm of their hands and in order to keep it you must agree to an oath or your not in.
In this one area of discussion I think that that is a bit much to ask and then say well you agreed to it so you have to follow it.
Can you say, shot gun wedding.

Pellattfire, you are about the only non IAFF member weighing in on this subject. Why is it such an issue for you? You have stated several times it does not affect you.

You seem to refer to the COR fairly often. Would you be so kind as to point out the section of the charter that is being abused.

It is not a shotgun marriage.It is a mutually agreed upon decision between an adult and an orginization.

I know you dislike it when guys say you dont understand the issue.While you seem to have a firm grip on it, either you dont wish to accept the circumstance where the 2H clause does apply or you are confusing the true meaning of the two hatter clause.

Dentedhead

[PellattFire]

Pellattfire, you are about the only non IAFF member weighing in on this subject. Why is it such an issue for you? You have stated several times it does not affect you.
As stated previously it effects us all when there is a rift between groups that generally have a common goal in mind.
You seem to refer to the COR fairly often. Would you be so kind as to point out the section of the charter that is being abused.
That would be section 2d. and the Rand Formula.
Freedom to associate also implies the freedom not to associate or choose different association.

It is not a shotgun marriage.It is a mutually agreed upon decision between an adult and an orginization.

Where all the power resides with one side of the two parties there is no way to decide if the agreement is mutual or coerced through fear of not having a career in the fire service.
Wouldn't you agree?

[kriand]

:banghead::banghead::banghead:

Pellet..........

You seem more hung up wanting to change something that doesn't affect you.
Many people , on both sides of this issue have expressed their opinions on the matter. Some Locals take a harsher stance than others on the issue. Again , it affects different locals in different areas differently.

I don't have the time right now , but do a search for Ted Arnott MPP and his bid to have it resolved. If this truly is a great concern of yours , and not just trying to stir the pot in here, then follow the correct steps.

[PellattFire]

Rightly said Dents! Follow union rules everything will be okay. It's pretty clear cut. when/if the rules change then (yeah I know, not likely in the near future) then union members can do whatever they like. Other people who don't belong to Unions aren't getting the concept. The rules are written quite clearly follow them or risk being terminated. Not a hard concept to grasp. I am employed by one of the largest government unions in Ontario, and if I don't follow the rules and get caught breaching whatever it may be.....
it's most likely bye bye time. Not something I'm willing to risk, or have a nice wage/pension to thrown away for. For some who are willing to risk that. Well I'm not going to comment on that as we have numerous double hatters here, and at my hall. Thats their personal decision. I am not trying to beat a dead horse here which seems to be happening as someone doesn't understand Union rules.
I understand the rules I just don't believe this particular one is right or even legally binding to the individual given what I have stated previously.

If the union rule said you couldn't be a mason or a rotary club member it would be the same issue for me.

I understand your frustration with discussing this but just because I am not in a position to be directly effected does not make me wrong.
It also does not preclude me from having an opinion on the subject at hand and a reason to discuss it.

[kriand]

To put it another way.......I don't believe in certain religious beliefs. Am I going to go to their membership/congregation or whatever they're called, and continually spout off MY opinons because I don't think its right or fair , even tho I know that I will never be a part of that church?

You made your opinion well know . Now it appears that you keep coming back looking for a fight.


I understand the rules I just don't believe this particular one is right or even legally binding to the individual given what I have stated previously.

If the union rule said you couldn't be a mason or a rotary club member it would be the same issue for me.

I understand your frustration with discussing this but just because I am not in a position to be directly effected does not make me wrong.
It also does not preclude me from having an opinion on the subject at hand and a reason to discuss it.

[PellattFire]

To put it another way.......I don't believe in certain religious beliefs. Am I going to go to their membership/congregation or whatever they're called, and continually spout off MY opinons because I don't think its right or fair , even tho I know that I will never be a part of that church?

You made your opinion well know . Now it appears that you keep coming back looking for a fight.

I'm sorry,
Was this posted in the union forum or are you a 2hatter?
As I understand the rules this "church" is for all to discuss in unless otherwise directed by the site owner or admins.
I am not looking for a fight at all.
I am not the one trying to shut someone up here.
I didn't start the thread.
I am simply responding to posts, some of them specifically directed at me(like this one).
If you do not wish me to respond to a post it is less likely I will if you don't use my nick in yours.

Yes I have an opinion on this and I am truly sorry you don't agree with it but I would not expect you to just keep quiet if you had an opinion on a volunteer issue you wanted to post.

I have no ill will towards you or any other IAFF member.
We disagree on one issue that I know of but that issue is obviously one you are passionate about.
I am sorry about that but I don't feel the need to keep quiet because of that.

[wilderness]

Here's a new twist.. Maybe the IAFF should retract there claws, and allow its members to belong to a small department say under 3000 people... this way there not in the way of anyone becoming fulltime

[irsqyu]

Yes I have an opinion on this and I am truly sorry you don't agree with it but I would not expect you to just keep quiet if you had an opinion on a volunteer issue you wanted to post.


I think you will find that Kriand, myself, as well as a large number of posters here were volunteers prior to becoming a career firefighter. You are talking here to a lot of people who HAVE seen both sides of the situation personally and are able to make fully educated comments.

[irsqyu]

Here's a new twist.. Maybe the IAFF should retract there claws, and allow its members to belong to a small department say under 3000 people... this way there not in the way of anyone becoming fulltime
I think this has been said many, many times so far, a blind eye is being turned to this situation. Where the backs get up is when a IAFF firefighter volunteers for a composite department that employs IAFF members.(such as Orangeville)
I believe that if this gets pushed to the limit, chances are this will be more strictly enforced within our Association.
Watch what you wish for!

[PellattFire]

I think you will find that Kriand, myself, as well as a large number of posters here were volunteers prior to becoming a career firefighter. You are talking here to a lot of people who HAVE seen both sides of the situation personally and are able to make fully educated comments.
And knowing that now, I value your input to the discussion even more.

I am not saying you should keep quiet or your opinions have no weight.
In my replies and posts I am only saying,
I disagree with your take on this and this is why....

Sometimes when you are inside an issue your views can change or if not change they become validated by the new experience.
It may be because you are personally effected now and have a larger stake in the outcome.
That does not mean that others outside your experience do not have valid arguments that should be heard.

[kriand]

I'm sorry,
Was this posted in the union forum or are you a 2hatter?
.

Yes I am. And like IRSQYU and several others have posted, we have seen both sides of the argument. As a 2 hatter , I know where I stand in my own beliefs as well as my Locals position as well my Hometown Dept.
There are several 2 hatters within our Local and for the most part,that I'm aware of, belong to non IAFF depts as 2 hatters. No harm , no foul.

I guess you could compare it to going 20 km over the speed limit. Some cops will nail you , some will give a warning, some will turn that blind eye.
Not every clause in the constitution is strictly enforced by every local. they will deal with their own local issues and problems as they see fit.

Perhaps there is a Local Iaff Dept in your area that has pissed you off. But, like anything else, you can't paint everyone with the same brush.
Do I necessarily agree with everything in the constitution?? Maybe not , but I know how to play within it.

[PellattFire]

Perhaps there is a Local Iaff Dept in your area that has pissed you off. But, like anything else, you can't paint everyone with the same brush.

Not at all.
There is an IAFF local right next to us but I have never had cause to have any complaints with the union at all.
Some of my best friends are members there.
Thanks for clarifying the rest of my question as well.

[kriand]

Not at all.
There is an IAFF local right next to us but I have never had cause to have any complaints with the union at all.
Some of my best friends are members there.
Thanks for clarifying the rest of my question as well.

NP. Itjust appears that you have a more personal involvement in this issue than just an opinion.

[lwiltenb]

I have been following this issue for some time and i'd like to make a few observations. To put my comments into perspective for you, I'm a volunteer/POC/non-full time FF with no ambition to seek full time FF employment.

1. This issue does affect me as a vol. FF. Our station has had two very valuable members who still live in town get on full time on 24 hour shifts have to hand their pagers in due to the union rules. I agree with the comments that the union must enforce its own rules and the like. This is to answer the question asked about how this "union" issue affects volunteer FF's. Not knocking the union rules as they were established by their membership, just answering the question. This is why many non-union and non-management folk like myself are interested.

2. Unfortunately, the IAFF and the OPFFA in Ontario are the only game in town. Sure, if I was a licensed skilled trade worker I would probably have to work through a given union (e.g. IBEW) in a particular area, but there are other areas of the province not significantly "patrolled" (for lack of better word) by the union so I could seek employment directly with individuals/companies. There can be significant competition for many jobs, depending on the particular trade, but the competition for a full time FF job in Ontario is many, many, MANY times greater, so when you land one you will do mostly anything to take it. The law of supply and demand works in the IAFF and OPFFA's favour - sign the union card or lose out on your job, with a slim chance of getting another chance. This is the only way in which one could argue that the "rules of association" could be challenged. It's a selection of all or nothing. I doubt that this is system was by design, but then again I'm not familiar with the evolution of labour in the firefighting business in North America over the last 100 years.

The most unfortunate part is that there is no consistency within the IAFF/OPFFA locals with respect to the "turning the blind eye." That is also something that frustrates me so, and probably even more with union members. Some consistency in this area would certainly help everyone understand which way this issue is headed.

[firemandunne]

I agree with you on that but they will never allow it. I plan to "two hat" until people who aren't two hatters make this such an issue, that the IAFF forces all of us "two hatters" to quit. When that happens, there will be an opening at my volunteer hall, not my full time station.

[itsnotahobby]

I agree with you on that but they will never allow it. I plan to "two hat" until people who aren't two hatters make this such an issue, that the IAFF forces all of us "two hatters" to quit. When that happens, there will be an opening at my volunteer hall, not my full time station.

I'll make it an issue, could you please quit scab? And by the way, why don't you PM me with your real name, fire department and fire department ID, I'd love to pass your name on to Jim Lee so we can make it an issue.

[twenty2go]

I agree with you on that but they will never allow it. I plan to "two hat" until people who aren't two hatters make this such an issue, that the IAFF forces all of us "two hatters" to quit. When that happens, there will be an opening at my volunteer hall, not my full time station.

Many people, before you and I, have worked very very hard to insure YOU and I have decent work environments and exceptional benefits for us, and our families. Many of us have come from POC backgrounds, but YOU decided to accept the offer of employment, so like many others, YOU should help the people, that spend their time helping YOU and your family.

[FLASHOVER05]

I'd like to know how this issue affects officers?

I have seen many Chief's and Captains Doubling as Officers for POC or Volunteer departments.

Does this issue pertain to them as well?

This is a serious question.... Never heard it brought up before

[irsqyu]

Does this issue pertain to them as well?

Certainly does.
This has been said dozens of times before, if an IAFF member volunteers in a small rural department usually a blind eye is turned. If an IAFF member volunteers in a composite department that employs IAFF members then that is a major issue. Why can no one understand this?:hmmmm:

[PFD023]

Certainly does.
Why can no one understand this?:hmmmm:


same reason why sooo many ask questions that they can easily find answers either within existing forums or elsewhere on the web.....but ask them anyways....same folks who usually can't understand why they haven't been hired full time yet after many attempts....and usually blame the "system"....same folks who don't do their homework before they speak...this thread has had many intelligent points of view expressed....some are well thought out....others seem to firing off the top of their head without reviewing previous posts....sorry for the rant guys.....my head hurts this morning....I work in an unionized environment but I'm non union. As a supervisor it's not my position to tell the unionized folks what is "fair or not fair" to them under their union rules/collective agreement. I may have an opinion and discuss that opinion with other non unionized folks....but they decided and agreed to as a collective group is their own business....not mine....I don't pay dues. It seems as though 99% of the guys/gals in here who are IAFF have absolutely no issue with their "rules".....you may have an opinion on 2 hatting if you are non IAFF....but please don't try to stir the pot.....get on full time....join the IAFF and then you can have a say....until then?????

[irsqyu]

I apologize for generalizing, obviously there are a few that do understand:top:

[Roadwarrior]

This has been said dozens of times before, if an IAFF member volunteers in a small rural department usually a blind eye is turned. If an IAFF member volunteers in a composite department that employs IAFF members then that is a major issue. Why can no one understand this?[/FONT]

Because no one (to my knowledge) has ever said it as as clearly and concisely as you just did. Thanks for the clarification irsqyu....:top:

[FLASHOVER05]

The reason I posted is in other types of industry, union members are employees, employers are management and often are not part of the Unions as a conflict then exists, I take it then that the officers are part of the membership and do not speak on behalf of their respective municipalities or townships, that is the Mayor or respective committees jobs to do.

Does that make any sense?

[irsqyu]

The reason I posted is in other types of industry, union members are employees, employers are management and often are not part of the Unions as a conflict then exists, I take it then that the officers are part of the membership and do not speak on behalf of their respective municipalities or townships, that is the Mayor or respective committees jobs to do.

Does that make any sense?

In Canada the majority of the Officers are part of the IAFF in most cases with the exception of the Chief and Deputies. There is the odd depatment where the Platoon Chief is excluded but that is the exception. District Chiefs are usually in the Union!

[FLASHOVER05]

Thanks! That's what I wanted to know

[itsnotahobby]

same reason why sooo many ask questions that they can easily find answers either within existing forums or elsewhere on the web.....but ask them anyways....same folks who usually can't understand why they haven't been hired full time yet after many attempts....and usually blame the "system"....same folks who don't do their homework before they speak...this thread has had many intelligent points of view expressed....some are well thought out....others seem to firing off the top of their head without reviewing previous posts....sorry for the rant guys.....my head hurts this morning....I work in an unionized environment but I'm non union. As a supervisor it's not my position to tell the unionized folks what is "fair or not fair" to them under their union rules/collective agreement. I may have an opinion and discuss that opinion with other non unionized folks....but they decided and agreed to as a collective group is their own business....not mine....I don't pay dues. It seems as though 99% of the guys/gals in here who are IAFF have absolutely no issue with their "rules".....you may have an opinion on 2 hatting if you are non IAFF....but please don't try to stir the pot.....get on full time....join the IAFF and then you can have a say....until then?????

There is no problem with discussing an issue, its healthy, and many times is the catalyst for change. Whether you are a paying member or not should not matter, as long as you respect the association and the rules that govern it. The problem is with those who want to criticize or chastise a constitution or stance by an association that does not effect them.

Many people who post on this topic have no direct connection with it in the first place. They come across with opinions and views that are irrelevant as they are not directly involved with the issue. And I say irrelevant because they are not seeking information on the topic, they are posting a position that is not based in fact. What do I mean, well the only reason for anyone to come out against this would be if somehow the union rule was affecting public safety. I would ask anyone out there to show me any direct evidence where the IAFF enforcing their rules has done anything to affect public safety.

And you are right on with your statement;
It seems as though 99% of the guys/gals in here who are IAFF have absolutely no issue with their "rules" This is true as it is a small number that are doing it. Most of the members that are are doing so, are doing so in small rural departments, and while this still goes against the intent of the rule it is usually over looked. Is this right, in my opinion no, but it is not that great an issue as that of members doing so in composite departments or vol departments that are big enough for some form of career staff but make do getting by without.

So if people want to ask questions or want to discuss this topic I think its great, just don't be so smug as to think you have the right to criticize the IAFF or OPFFA for their stance.

[kriand]

I work in an unionized environment but I'm non union. As a supervisor it's not my position to tell the unionized folks what is "fair or not fair" to them under their union rules/collective agreement. I may have an opinion and discuss that opinion with other non unionized folks....but they decided and agreed to as a collective group is their own business....not mine....I don't pay dues. It seems as though 99% of the guys/gals in here who are IAFF have absolutely no issue with their "rules".....you may have an opinion on 2 hatting if you are non IAFF....but please don't try to stir the pot.....get on full time....join the IAFF and then you can have a say....until then?????

FINALLY........someone who gets it.........

[nocomment]

same reason why sooo many ask questions that they can easily find answers either within existing forums or elsewhere on the web.....but ask them anyways....same folks who usually can't understand why they haven't been hired full time yet after many attempts....and usually blame the "system"....same folks who don't do their homework before they speak...this thread has had many intelligent points of view expressed....some are well thought out....others seem to firing off the top of their head without reviewing previous posts....sorry for the rant guys.....my head hurts this morning....I work in an unionized environment but I'm non union. As a supervisor it's not my position to tell the unionized folks what is "fair or not fair" to them under their union rules/collective agreement. I may have an opinion and discuss that opinion with other non unionized folks....but they decided and agreed to as a collective group is their own business....not mine....I don't pay dues. It seems as though 99% of the guys/gals in here who are IAFF have absolutely no issue with their "rules".....you may have an opinion on 2 hatting if you are non IAFF....but please don't try to stir the pot.....get on full time....join the IAFF and then you can have a say....until then?????
I'll second that kriand. Well said PFD023.

[cranky]

Our department is composite, but not union, most of the full time guys are officers on the volunteer side. I am also not from Ontario where this issue seems to get the most attention and creates the most problem, on this thread anyway. I can see why the IAFF would not want their members volunteering in a composite department (only makes sense) I can see them not wanting their members to volunteer in a large department that has the potential to become a paid department (again only makes sense) I am also glad they turn a blind eye to those volunteering in a small department/community, it is getting harder and harded to find volunteers let alone fully trained and qualified fire fighters. These small communities don't have a chance to have a full time or even composite department because the tax base is just not there to afford it. That being said I hope that those who can help small rural departments continue to do so. I also know that those most opposed to 2 hatting would not drive by a house fire in the country and not offer to help the small, under manned(?) personed(?) (still struggling with that PC thing) rural fire department as they try to save someones home. We all joined our respective departments Career, POC, volunteer to do the same thing, play with fire and drive them big shiny trucks.

[itsnotahobby]

Our department is composite, but not union, most of the full time guys are officers on the volunteer side. I am also not from Ontario where this issue seems to get the most attention and creates the most problem, on this thread anyway. I can see why the IAFF would not want their members volunteering in a composite department (only makes sense) I can see them not wanting their members to volunteer in a large department that has the potential to become a paid department (again only makes sense) I am also glad they turn a blind eye to those volunteering in a small department/community, it is getting harder and harded to find volunteers let alone fully trained and qualified fire fighters. These small communities don't have a chance to have a full time or even composite department because the tax base is just not there to afford it. That being said I hope that those who can help small rural departments continue to do so. I also know that those most opposed to 2 hatting would not drive by a house fire in the country and not offer to help the small, under manned(?) personed(?) (still struggling with that PC thing) rural fire department as they try to save someones home. We all joined our respective departments Career, POC, volunteer to do the same thing, play with fire and drive them big shiny trucks.

It gets so much attention in Ontario as we have the largest number of full timers.

[firemandunne]

I'll make it an issue, could you please quit scab? And by the way, why don't you PM me with your real name, fire department and fire department ID, I'd love to pass your name on to Jim Lee so we can make it an issue.

Little touchy are we??? Where I volunteer there is not a chance in a hundred years of them ever hiring full time guys. I never jeopordize the safety of my full time brothers by running volunteer calls the night before a shift. (Which is more then I can say for the guys that drywall all day then come in exausted and wheel the truck all night.) As far as I am concerned, if I am not taking a job away from anyone.....what I do in my own time is my affair. Forgive me for wanting to protect my neighbors.

[itsnotahobby]

Little touchy are we??? Where I volunteer there is not a chance in a hundred years of them ever hiring full time guys. I never jeopordize the safety of my full time brothers by running volunteer calls the night before a shift. (Which is more then I can say for the guys that drywall all day then come in exausted and wheel the truck all night.) As far as I am concerned, if I am not taking a job away from anyone.....what I do in my own time is my affair. Forgive me for wanting to protect my neighbors.

Very noble. As long as you think its right to pick and choose which rules you follow, who am I to say anything.

Constitution aside, I can't uderstand why in this day and age with all of the kowledge that we have regarding job related cancers, why someone would insist on putting themselves at a higher risk. I'm sure you face enough working your regular shift, so why add to that risk?

[irsqyu]

Little touchy are we??? Where I volunteer there is not a chance in a hundred years of them ever hiring full time guys. I never jeopordize the safety of my full time brothers by running volunteer calls the night before a shift. (Which is more then I can say for the guys that drywall all day then come in exausted and wheel the truck all night.) As far as I am concerned, if I am not taking a job away from anyone.....what I do in my own time is my affair. Forgive me for wanting to protect my neighbors.

You are volunteering for a small depatment that will probably never see career firefighters. I know it is against the constitution, but I personally don't mind and most won't.
What I don't understand is why don't you just quietly go about your business and not make a big deal about it here. It's called discretion!

Again as most are finally starting to understand, the big problem is IAFF firefighters working for Composite departments employing career IAFF firefighters.
Are you intentionally trying to stir things up! You will also find that some here are more hard core in their stance, but that's their perogative. Like I said a little discretion would work well here!

[firemandunne]

Very noble. As long as you think its right to pick and choose which rules you follow, who am I to say anything.

Constitution aside, I can't uderstand why in this day and age with all of the kowledge that we have regarding job related cancers, why someone would insist on putting themselves at a higher risk. I'm sure you face enough working your regular shift, so why add to that risk?

I think about that everytime the tones go off. I have already gone through cancer treatment once. (job related) I guess when I feel I am not making a difference out there anymore....I'll quit.

[itsnotahobby]

I think about that everytime the tones go off. I have already gone through cancer treatment once. (job related) I guess when I feel I am not making a difference out there anymore....I'll quit.

I don't think that I'd want to take the chance. Getting bit once would be enough for me, I think I'd be limiting my chances.

[firemandunne]

I don't think that I'd want to take the chance. Getting bit once would be enough for me, I think I'd be limiting my chances.

You sound like my wife. You are probably right though.

[itsnotahobby]

You sound like my wife. You are probably right though.

Why do I hear that so often, the sound like my wife part not the you are probably right? Could be my constant nagging and whinny tone I suppose!;)

[firemandunne]

Why do I hear that so often? Could be my constant nagging and whinny tone I suppose!;)

Stay safe Bro!!

[sammy]

Well said!!!!!

Sammy
You are volunteering for a small depatment that will probably never see career firefighters. I know it is against the constitution, but I personally don't mind and most won't.
What I don't understand is why don't you just quietly go about your business and not make a big deal about it here. It's called discretion!

Again as most are finally starting to understand, the big problem is IAFF firefighters working for Composite departments employing career IAFF firefighters.
Are you intentionally trying to stir things up! You will also find that some here are more hard core in their stance, but that's their perogative. Like I said a little discretion would work well here!

[Profire]

I just don't see how you can serve two masters, pick a side.

[Whitewater_419]

I just don't see how you can serve two masters, pick a side.

Well gee, that's easy. How many people, Firefighters included, have more than one job ? (I.e. two masters).

At the end of it, a firefighter's duty is to protect lives and property - Whether you do it for a big dept during the day and a small community on your off-hours, the duty is the same.

Heaven knows that in many communities, even attracting on-call FF's is tough enough without restricting what others do on *their own* time.

[DFCSmash]

Damn. damn, damn! Will this horse never stay dead?
DIE DIE DIE vile thread!

There, is that honest enough for ya?

[bcfire]

Certainly does.
This has been said dozens of times before, if an IAFF member volunteers in a small rural department usually a blind eye is turned. If an IAFF member volunteers in a composite department that employs IAFF members then that is a major issue. Why can no one understand this?:hmmmm:


The crux of the whole issue,thank you .

[Whitewater_419]

Certainly does.
This has been said dozens of times before, if an IAFF member volunteers in a small rural department usually a blind eye is turned. If an IAFF member volunteers in a composite department that employs IAFF members then that is a major issue. Why can no one understand this?:hmmmm:


Now *that* I can certainly understand: While I am not a union fan overall, one has to respect them where they are the workplace force majeure. In a composite department, no full timers from other departments should be volunteering because that really is not only slapping the union guys in the face but *also* removing/reducing the possibility of another full-time job being created.

However, I get the feeling from some, both Canadian and American full time FF's that they feel full time FF's shouldn't be volunteering in any other hall *period*. I know my own department won't see full time FF's in the forseeable future: There just isn't the tax base for it: It's mathematically *impossible* to pay a full time FF, much less a whole crew x 5 (We have five halls)

I've seen a few two hatters with a perfectly reasonable approach, as well: Turn the pager off the night before reporting to duty at the full time hall.

[bunkergear]

Two hatters. Well if that is an issue, then what about the guys that have jobs on the side like fencing, building decks, roofing, and so on. Don't know where you want me stop but I will there. It is not the only job this stuff happens at. What about the guy that builds houses for a company, then on the weekends does odd jobs ( roofing, drywalling, etc.) This subject should burried and burry the shovel. Where would most communities be with out the two hatters. Would you as a chief not want some of these guys on your dept.? I know I would for the knowledge and skill. Towns are screaming for vollies and I think it's great somebody wants to carry on what they have started. I'm a two hatter, and absolutley know-one has a problem with it on my dept. I will do this until I'm asked to leave or it is my time to go. Which is going to be along time from now. Just my two cents, and I brought alot of pennies!!!!!

[fireguy9]

Two hatters. Well if that is an issue, then what about the guys that have jobs on the side like fencing, building decks, roofing, and so on. Don't know where you want me stop but I will there. It is not the only job this stuff happens at. What about the guy that builds houses for a company, then on the weekends does odd jobs ( roofing, drywalling, etc.) This subject should burried and burry the shovel. Where would most communities be with out the two hatters. Would you as a chief not want some of these guys on your dept.? I know I would for the knowledge and skill. Towns are screaming for vollies and I think it's great somebody wants to carry on what they have started. I'm a two hatter, and absolutley know-one has a problem with it on my dept. I will do this until I'm asked to leave or it is my time to go. Which is going to be along time from now. Just my two cents, and I brought alot of pennies!!!!!

This issue will never die until full time FF are not two hatting!

Were talking about FF not roofing etc. Its in the constitution which you swore in with when becoming a member. Where would communities be, is not our problem. Full time FF do not 2 hat. Was at the most recent labour seminar and the association and IAFF is huge on this. Pressure is being put on the locals to seek out those and deal with them.
Coming on here and saying your a two hatter is stirring the pot,, and until your identified, so be it,, but obviously your not a great supporter of your own union. Does your own local president know your a two hatter????
Always bad apples and uneducated members in the association that just dont get it. and your obviously one of them!!!!!!!

[itsnotahobby]

Two hatters. Well if that is an issue, then what about the guys that have jobs on the side like fencing, building decks, roofing, and so on. Don't know where you want me stop but I will there. It is not the only job this stuff happens at. What about the guy that builds houses for a company, then on the weekends does odd jobs ( roofing, drywalling, etc.) This subject should burried and burry the shovel. Where would most communities be with out the two hatters. Would you as a chief not want some of these guys on your dept.? I know I would for the knowledge and skill. Towns are screaming for vollies and I think it's great somebody wants to carry on what they have started. I'm a two hatter, and absolutley know-one has a problem with it on my dept. I will do this until I'm asked to leave or it is my time to go. Which is going to be along time from now. Just my two cents, and I brought alot of pennies!!!!!

Wow, proud to be a scab.

By the way if no one cares PM me with your name, employee number and department, I'd be happy to pass the information along to the district vice president for you!

[hosemonkey84]

Question, could be dumb, but anyways.....

I work as an industrial ff, non unionized job (never will be) we have ex-ARFF's that come and do contract work, if there was a current ff that came to work as a contract ff would this be looked down upon. This is a non- IAFF firefighter position.

[squadgoon]

Problem with that is most of these cats seem to be vollies or wannabes with an opinion.

Wow, proud to be a scab.

By the way if no one cares PM me with your name, employee number and department, I'd be happy to pass the information along to the district vice president for you!

[DFCSmash]

I gave my opinion. It is that this horse is way too dead to keep beating.

Yep, I'm a vollie. 24 years this month. I'm well past my wannabe stage, and have been since before I joined my vollie department.

You want my .02 on career firefighters on Volunteer/POC departments? Here it is: Many of you could be valuable additions. Many of you could be allies. Some of you are a danger to whatever department you are on, and some of you are vile cancerous deadly bile in a vollie hall or possibly wherever you are serving. Don't like that? Tough. The truth hurts sometimes.

Two hatters working in ANY composite hall is just plain wrong. A firefighter that won't live in the city that pays him/her quite nicely, and moves to a small community where Composite won't be considered let alone full time should have their choice. Just don't show up with too big an ego or attitude, or you'll get your ass handed to you. Just like your full time hall.

Here's a thought for the IAFF, and the likes of squadgoon, fireguy9 and itsnoyahobby, brainwashed by the high principles. Organize those POC departments. It's all about safety and fair recompense right? More dues paying members, right? There's your chance. But until you tell your IAFF membership that they can't do construction, or cabinet making, or electrical trade work, or plumbing, or what effing ever, don't climb up on your horse and tell members of any community what they can or can't do on their days off.

I've done my best to stay civil through however many pages of this tripe there have been, and really feel this thread should be killed for the troll baiting POS it is. But since it won't effing die, there's MY opinion. Like it or not. But it's honest.

[PellattFire]

Thank you for putting that so clearly.
My thoughts exactly.
When the thread started I wouldn't have agreed on the composite hall being a no go for two hatters but my opinion changed, not from the angry vitriol of certain members.
It was those who thought it better to reason instead of one line and insult.

As for the continuation of this thread?

[hosemonkey84]

Horses can talk!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I got to get out to the family farm more often!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Roadwarrior]

....ditto.....

.......and for those of you who have never experienced the realities of a volunteer department, I'd be more that happy to host you for a day. Just be sure to bring your gear.....you may be needed.

[FireNuke]

I'm a two hatter,

You are???? Didn't realize we switched to the IAFF.

[Profire]

I gave my opinion. It is that this horse is way too dead to keep beating.

Yep, I'm a vollie. 24 years this month. I'm well past my wannabe stage, and have been since before I joined my vollie department.

You want my .02 on career firefighters on Volunteer/POC departments? Here it is: Many of you could be valuable additions. Many of you could be allies. Some of you are a danger to whatever department you are on, and some of you are vile cancerous deadly bile in a vollie hall or possibly wherever you are serving. Don't like that? Tough. The truth hurts sometimes.

Two hatters working in ANY composite hall is just plain wrong. A firefighter that won't live in the city that pays him/her quite nicely, and moves to a small community where Composite won't be considered let alone full time should have their choice. Just don't show up with too big an ego or attitude, or you'll get your ass handed to you. Just like your full time hall.

Here's a thought for the IAFF, and the likes of squadgoon, fireguy9 and itsnoyahobby, brainwashed by the high principles. Organize those POC departments. It's all about safety and fair recompense right? More dues paying members, right? There's your chance. But until you tell your IAFF membership that they can't do construction, or cabinet making, or electrical trade work, or plumbing, or what effing ever, don't climb up on your horse and tell members of any community what they can or can't do on their days off.

I've done my best to stay civil through however many pages of this tripe there have been, and really feel this thread should be killed for the troll baiting POS it is. But since it won't effing die, there's MY opinion. Like it or not. But it's honest.

You are indeed entitled to your opinion, the fact that it has no basis in reality does not pertain to your right to state it.

[bunkergear]

You are???? Didn't realize we switched to the IAFF.

I'm not on the IAFF side of it. As you do know, but still a two hatter. I guess it all depends on how you want to split the pea! We are considered a brigade so maybe that's where I'm wrong in saying that I'am one. Still doesn't change how I feel on the subject!! Thanks for correcting me if I'm wrong!

[DFCSmash]

You are indeed entitled to your opinion, the fact that it has no basis in reality does not pertain to your right to state it.

Right back at you Profire. Don't like what I have to say? Get stuffed. I don't much care.

Just remember; Not all professionals are paid. Not all paid are professional.
Check your mirror.

[Hawkwind]

Right back at you Profire. Don't like what I have to say? Get stuffed. I don't much care.

Just remember; Not all professionals are paid. Not all paid are professional.
Check your mirror.




whoa! pass the joint. That doesn't skim the surface, thats deeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan