Recruitment / Retention

[abercrombie]

From theysaid 5/20/08:

Re: recruitment / retention

I'll try to be discrete... On the Forest that I work for (initials L.P.) decisions and actions at the Forest Supervisor level are creating a work environment that is driving away Firefighters.

Example: Home to Work Vehicle Usage (AD-728) requests for Duty Officers are still under review. The Forest Supervisor is using her discretionary authority to determine if it is in her interest to have Duty Officers or Fire resources respond to after hours incidents. There will be a group assembled to determine if she even has a need for Duty Officers at all. The requests from her line officers (District Rangers) are falling on opinionated and deaf ears. Fire Staff recommendations are being scrutinized, minimized, and muted.

What this type of environment is doing is driving away the high level professionals that have a desire to serve the public to the best of their ability.
Why would a Firefighter want to work for an employer that does not fight fire?
Tenured Firefighters and Fire Managers are disgusted at the lack of support and disregard for professional input. Up and coming employees are looking at this example as a warning sign that says "Watch out!... mismanagement ahead!"

Should Forests operate independently on fire suppression and fire organizational decisions?
It seems like there should be some sort of consistency within a Region.
Wasn't that the intent of Randy Moore's policy in the first place?

What tha---

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

from theysaid 5/14/08; found an earlier one... Ab.

Re: Retention Group

How about if someone created a system to receive input from the firefighters?
How about evaluating and responding to the needs of the field going personnel?

Those two ideas might be a good place to start if someone wanted to retain a workforce or improve a work environment. It seems that even with the creation of the Retention Group in Region 5 we are under "Ops Normal". Management IS determining what the field needs... through personal bias and assumption.

On my Forest, the Forest Supervisor has taken over 3 months to determine if keeping after hours I.A. fires small is in the interest of the govt. -- As if there is a difference at 18:00.
So now a Forest Implementation Strategy for Duty Officer Vehicle Use has been established. Duty Officers must financially justify and articulate exactly how providing oversight and responses to after hours incidents will save the Forest money. What was the 3 month study with the Implementation Plan for? The Implementation plan seems to justify the cause to me.

But still the Duty Officers have not heard a response from our applications, nor have we been granted the authority/permission to do the job that we need to do. It simply IS NOT A PRIORITY. This week predicts very warm, dry windy conditions a.k.a. Fire Season. I won't be responding after hours.

That is my choice, but what if a Duty Officer relied on public transportation to get to work?
I figure that the Forest Supervisors think Duty Officers are lucky to take a vehicle home at night.
I figure they are lucky if I will answer my phone after 18:00.

So retention and the work environment... Forest Supervisors that are not responsive to needs of the Firefighter workforce might have something to do with low Morale, poor Quality of Work Environment, and an overall lack of Job Satisfaction. (leading to a retention issues)

This is just one example of how mismanagement can negatively affect Fire Retention Issues that don't officially exist on our forest.

What tha---

[abercrombie]

from theysaid 5/21/08:

Dear "What tha --- ?"

The best thing you can do is utilize your voice as you are doing but also share it with those in a position to change things. I would suggest you contact Steve Lavagnino in Congressman Elton Gallegly's Solvang office at 805-686-2525.

Steve has met on several occasions with firefighters impacted by the nonsensical housing policy on the "LP" and Rep. Gallegly is engaged in that issue as well as the entire retention issue. We are hoping the Congressman will be able to make some fire house visits soon on the LP to chat with folks such as yourself.

I wish I had an answer for the "3 Amigas" i.e. Hernandez, Noiron & Wade-Evans. But put things in perspective. They are line officers without a clue about fire trying to set policy for fire. A recipe for disaster as we are seeing unfold in R5 and elsewhere. Hopefully the movement in Congress to consider getting the line officers out of the fire mix will gain momentum and in the near future you as well as all of our firefighters will enjoy fire policies based on sound fire department management principles and developed and implemented by those with some semblance of fire experience & expertise.

Casey

[abercrombie]

From theysaid 5/21:

To: What tha........?

Your post is one of hundreds of examples in today's agency why line officers
should not have anything to do with fire management. It is one of hundreds
of examples why the forest service should give up fire management. The
agency does not and will not support firefighters and the fire management
program and organization. There is no more forest service. The old forest
service "District Ranger" is no more. Sure, there are a few good L.O.'s,
but a very few and not enough to have a positive impact on the workings of
today's agency.

Too bad the agency won't give up the power and still wants to keep fire
management under its heavy hand. The public deserves much more than that.
I tell my firefighters that our job is public service. Our job is to
suppress fires to protect public lives, property, homes and communities and
that firefighter safety is priority number one! Over the decades forest
service firefighters have SAVED and protected thousands of public lives,
homes, and communities. Just think of all the fires you've been on over the
years. That is the importance and value of the federal wildland
firefighter. The public likes us even if the agency does not.

The public deserves a federal wildland fire department. I was at a burn
boss conference this past winter and I heard a agency Line Officer and and
an agency FMO give a talk on the management of fire use and wildland fires.
They related to us that they tell the public "You're on your own to
protect your homes and communities, we're not going to protect your home,
call your local fire protection district or FEMA for assistance." If I had
the authority to do so, I'd fire them both so fast it would make their head
spin!!!! That IS NOT public service. But that is what the agency has sunk
to. There is a lessons learned center, but the agency pays no attention to
it and learns nothing from it, the agency doesn't even make an attempt to
learn and improve. Our firefighters do, and they are the real public
servants. The public deserves better from the agency but I see no
improvements in the future. The forest service non-fire agency head elites
are in a leadership drain. There is no leadership, just quitters.

I will ALWAYS, as a forest service employee, protect and defend public life
and property to the best of my ability, and so will my suppression
resources. We will do it to the best of our ability and as safely as we
can. Our goal and priority is safe and aggressive initial attack to keep
fires small and less costly and to protect life and property and resources.
When it is time to conduct prescribed fire or fire use we will do so safely
and responsibly.

Federal wildland fire department as soon as possible. Come on forest
service administrative elites, If you're going to quit on fire, then lobby
to give us up to our own federal fire agency.

For all of us remember........."Whenever you think you're smarter than the
fire, you're in trouble."

Magruder Fingers

[abercrombie]

Sorry to drag the retention issue back onto the main stage, but I happen to think it is important.

I don’t believe those in the agencies who claim to be “working on the issues” are really giving us their best effort. Why do I say this?

Well first of all, the system needs a major overhaul (I think we all know that).

We still function as though it is 1955. In reality our “seasonal” work force isn’t. The 1039 is a complete abuse these days, more and more we work these people well in excess of 6 months or we do without and bring them on whenever their 1039 hours reset (in some cases late June or even July).

Every year for the past several years, it has been a race for me to get my crew on, trained and ready to fight fire before “fire season”. Usually we are already getting fires before the crew is ready to go, often before they have even reported to work.

The 1039 was intended to be used for LESS THAN 6 MONTHS employment of a recurring nature. The fact that these people are often working a minimum of 6 months, frequently using every last hour and then some, this should have been stopped by OPM years ago. It is clearly an abuse of the system and the 1039 was in fact adopted to prevent exactly the game we have now (it replaced the old 180 day appointments).

There is absolutely no reason not to hire these people on 13/13 career appointments at a minimum. Not only would this allow us to actually finish the work we need these people for, it is also morally the right thing to do, the government should not be acting like some slumlord skirting the fringes of the law. Federal law prohibits state, and local government as well as private business from doing what the Feds do. Anyone else that employs a person 40 hours a week for 6 months must provide benefits to that employee. Perhaps there are pockets around the nation where the fire season and fire related work load is only 3-4 months and makes the 1039 appropriate, but not anywhere I’ve been in the west. Maybe being able to work these employees 8 or 9 months when conditions were not extreme we could actually get some thinning and RX burning completed. At the very least it would help us fully utilize those 5,6,7+ year seasonal employees who hit that magic age 37 and suddenly become a knowledge base we can not promote in the organization.

The militia has its place, and just like a volunteer fire department when it works it's a great thing for the organization (community). However when it doesn’t work it is very bad for the organization. Those of you who are or have been volunteer firefighters will probably know exactly what I mean. When you have a program that shows 50 people on the roles available to respond but in reality only 5-10 are active it destroys the very thing they have signed up to support. Management (city council, WO/RO what have you) will point to those 50 bodies and say what’s the problem, you have plenty of resources. However management isn’t the one out at midnight trying to drive/pump, captain and operate the nozzle alone at a fire. I seem to recall comments from the RO/and WO about how the militia does a huge amount of work, again I think they are stuck in the 50s when district rangers responded to fires to do more than taking a peak at the fire.

These shortages in overhead are not just a short term thing either, it’s not like fixing everything next year will make the problems go away. When we start running 5 day modules, it means the overhead is tied to the module and can not go out and get training assignments so they will be ready to move up when its time. As more and more people start to top out in those GS6 and GS8 jobs it will make it that much harder for those below to move up and the bottle necks for crew boss, strike team leader and division supervisor will just get worse.

We hear that retention solutions must be budget neutral, why? The fire organization is a drop in the bucket to the rest of the government, 15 maybe 20,000 employees out of 1.7 million (not including the military). On top of that the average GS level of the fire organization is well below the average GS level of the government. According to OPM in 2005 GS 9.9 (almost 10, not 9 step 9) was the average grade held. While I do not have a similar figure for fire it is obviously well below that since our largest group of employees is at the GS 3-4 level. How much of an impact could improving pay for fire really be? Even a 50% pay increase (considerably higher than I think most are advocating) would keep this relatively small group of employees below the average base pay for government workers nationwide.

In 2004

78,000 people held GS3 and 4 positions government wide
389,000 people held positions at the GS5-8 level
575,000 were employed in the GS9-12 level (GS12 accounted for 227,000 of those)
364,000 held a GS13-15.

There were more GS14s in the government than all GS1-4 employees combined (99,000 vs 86,000).

The government employs 3-4 times as many GS15s than the fire organization of all 5 land management agencies combined (there were 61,000 GS15 employees in 2004)

Kind of ironically since it is the “average” government position GS10 (nearly 18,000) accounted for fewer positions than any other grade except for GS1 & 2 (which combined only account for 7000 positions).
Mission, now this part is a fantastic slap in the face. Talking to a recently graduated apprentice the regional “leadership” stated in a speech to the class that the USFS needs to refocus its mission. They were not hired to do the job of the guys on the big red trucks; they were hired to work in the forest. If they wanted to be firefighters they were in the wrong job. Ironically to me, if the mission were realistic the pay issue would largely go away. If our position descriptions were truthful we would be getting compensated for the job we were doing, not the job the agencies say we are doing.

It is claimed this “mission creep” is just a SoCal thing, funny their own Firestars proved that wrong (when it was working). The Shasta Trinity gave many of the southern forests a good run for “all risk” responses. I’m sure other northern forests would have as well if they had done better reporting. Funny thing with this job, we get to actually go to these “other” places that “prove” SoCal is an anomaly. I have yet to go to one and find the urban interface, affordable housing and “all risk” responses are not a concern to the crews there. I’ve talked to engine crews in Region 3 and Region 6 that only wish they had the support for the SCBA and medical equipment you find in R5. They need it, they respond to calls that require it but mentioning it is a good way to get the door slammed in their face. In some of the National Parks wildland crews cross staff rescue trucks, hazmat trucks and structure engines, but they don’t receive any additional compensation and are still “forestry techs”. Several of the National Park helitack crews have a strong “all risk” component doing as much search & rescue, medical evacuation and law enforcement work as they do fire, but they still operate with the same “National” helitack pd. A few weeks ago, there was a link to a nice story about a couple of Yosemite NP helitack guys getting a valor award. Not to take away from them, as they deserve the recognition, but activities like that happen many times each summer with NPS helitack crews in the larger parks.

If you look at the PDs for the 0081 firefighter series you'll see the difference. Firefighter (just plain sitting backwards firefighter, fighting fires and no other duties) rates a GS5, when medical or hazmat duties are added it goes up. First responder medical OR Hazmat first responder operations (both of which are appropriate to wildland firefighters where ever they work and required of USFS apprentices) rate a GS6, raising the medical requirement to Emergency Medical Technician raises the position to GS7. Instead of a temporary workforce based on the GS3 and 4 we should have a seasonal career organization based on GS6 or 7s. Captains in the 0081 series are rating as GS9s and 10s in many locations and having worked in both systems I know for a fact the wildland GS7 and GS8 captains have far more responsibility in the day to day operation of the organization.

How many higher level employees, AFEOs, Engineers, Captains, AFMOs are doing work at the GS9, 10, 11 levels they are not credited for in their PD? OPM can’t provide an appropriate GS grade for the position when 30-40% of our job is “other duties as assigned”.

So that is structure fire (which often also has a large wildland component, just ask the guys at Camp Pendleton or Ft Hunter Liggett).

Law Enforcement in the land management agencies now have GS9 positions as their primary operational position (frequently flown 5/7/9). These also receive special law enforcement pay rates pushing them well above a comparable fire GS9 position.

It couldn’t have anything to do with the fact these positions are in a job series specific to them now could it? I know for a fact that the land management agencies have more wildland firefighters than the Department of Defense has structure firefighters and also more than the land management agencies employ in law enforcement. The land management agencies don’t use the 0083 Police Officer series; they have a law enforcement series specific to land management agencies. How is it that the wildland firefighter doesn’t rate a series when there are many more?

How about some simple recognition, law enforcement in each of the agencies use their own badge, patch and vehicle marking unique to law enforcement. Why is it when fire tries to do something like this we are being divisive?

Some people call us whiners, say we knew we wouldn’t become rich, but it’s a lot more than that. I’m tired of feeling the need to encourage my subordinates to look elsewhere for a career. I’ve made my choices, but I can not in good faith encourage a temporary employee to make a career as a Federal wildland firefighter, I do all I can to get them training and experience so they can go work for CDF, or a city / county fire department. I would love to be able to tell young eager kids that yes; this is the place to make a career.

Thanks Casey, I appreciate all you do for my measly $10 a Pay Period.

Getting tired in R5 (no not Socal) and its only May.

[abercrombie]

from theysaid:

Kudos to 'Getting tired in R-5'. While I can't vouch for your numbers
(although they sound about right), as a 30+ year fed fire guy, I agree
wholeheartedly with your message. You hit the big nail squarely with the
big hammer. I've never heard/seen the whole fed fire picture summarized so
eloquently. Like the outfit, I wish it were otherwise. Unlike the outfit,
I do all I can for the folks coming up behind me, as I know plenty of my
compadres out there do. I think even we old salts are coming to realize
that's no longer enough. As a believer in the outfit and it's history as a
land management agency, I have not been a proponent for pulling Fire out,
but I am coming around. As you said so well, it isn't 1955 any more.

Old Boot

[abercrombie]

from theysaid:

We still have not been able to convince our "leadership-Forest Supervisor and her Deputy" that vehicle storage and local locations are a benefit to the agency. Even our Forest Engineers are affected. I just heard this from our Forest Engineer here on the Los Padres and thought others may find this as humorous as I did.

On Wednesday he got a report of a broken water piper flowing water across roads at Los Prietos. He was working a project in Piru Ca. He was instructed to drive the 33.5 miles from Piru to Ojai in a gov. vehicle, pick up his personal vehicle, drive to Goleta (S.O. where the Santa Barbara engineer vehicle sits) @ 50 miles, than drive this gov. vehicle to Los Prietos, @ 19 miles, to do the work. Once finished he could return to Goleta and drive his pov home. All this because our "leadership" feels that he would be benefiting himself by not using his personal vehicle (even during work hours). They are now in the process of creating another committee consisting of 2 line officers and 2 fire staff to chair the vehicle issue. How much labor and time we have spent on this issue is ridiculous. I think we should start another committee to study the cost and time spent on this one issue. Its a wonder we can ever get anything accomplished.

LM

[abercrombie]

Having known many forest service firefighters who worked for the outfit in
1955, the forest service as an agency, and its line officers, knew more
about fire and supported their firefighters a helluva lot more then, than
they do now.

Magruder Fingers

[abercrombie]

Getting tired in R5 (no not Socal) and its only May.

I would love to work for you!/ with you!

Very well stated! You have stated, again very well, something that I have been thanking about for along time. Retention, housing, pay, grade and a Wildland Firefighter series are issues that go beyond just R5, they affect us all, no matter the unit and regardless of the geographical area. Hiring issues, recruitment and ASC also affect us all. When we support organizations like FWFSA and NFFE , we can, all be slow at time, make changes. (My plug for Casey and crew, helping them keep up the great job they are doing!).

We still need to continue to support the young Firefighters coming up. Tell them the truth as we see it and prepare them to take on the role of leaders and “old salt Firefighters”. We need to be able to teach them how to take on the role of mentors and leaders. Pushing them to be the future of the fire organization. Be it in the Agencies as we know it now or in a combined national fire organization that the future may bring.

What we need to work toward is a firefighter that is trained, paid, supported and be recognized as a professional Wildland Firefighter.

On personal note, I would like to talk with you one on one, Ab can pass addresses back and forth, if you are willing.

Don Svetich

[abercrombie]

Getting tired,

I took some time and read your post. GREAT POST WITH GREAT INFORMATION!!! I fully support getting benefits to temps and pay raises. If we could have a budget that allowed that, I am sure it would be done.

Hopefully it ends up happening. I, as a now non firefighter, always voice my support to my fire shop and the districts. As one of the 5/7/9 LEO's I still know where i came from. I do deal with different things (1 shooting and 1 shots fired call/man with a gun call in 2 days) but I respect the hell out of the nomex wearers. They are my go to guys and gals if I need a little help, advice, or just a good place to drink coffee in the morning.

Guns n Hoses

[abercrombie]

from theysaid 5/20:

Re: recruitment / retention

I'll try to be discrete... On the Forest that I work for (initials L.P.) decisions and actions at the Forest Supervisor level are creating a work environment that is driving away Firefighters.

Example: Home to Work Vehicle Usage (AD-728) requests for Duty Officers are still under review. The Forest Supervisor is using her discretionary authority to determine if it is in her interest to have Duty Officers or Fire resources respond to after hours incidents. There will be a group assembled to determine if she even has a need for Duty Officers at all. The requests from her line officers (District Rangers) are falling on opinionated and deaf ears. Fire Staff recommendations are being scrutinized, minimized, and muted.

What this type of environment is doing is driving away the high level professionals that have a desire to serve the public to the best of their ability.
Why would a Firefighter want to work for an employer that does not fight fire?
Tenured Firefighters and Fire Managers are disgusted at the lack of support and disregard for professional input. Up and coming employees are looking at this example as a warning sign that says "Watch out!... mismanagement ahead!"

Should Forests operate independently on fire suppression and fire organizational decisions?
It seems like there should be some sort of consistency within a Region.
Wasn't that the intent of Randy Moore's policy in the first place?

What tha--- ?