R-E-S-P-E-C-T
CAPITOL CONNECTION
About a year ago, I took an informal poll of federal officials to get a reading on what they thought about firefighters. I heard all of the obligatory stuff—that firefighters are “courageous and unselfish.” But eventually, from almost every person with whom I spoke, I also heard words such as “uneducated,” “confused,” “racist,” and “uncooperative.” I heard firefighters described as “overweight, aging jocks,” as “Bubbas,” and in other unflattering terms.
What do firefighters think of federal officials? Well, at least you get to the point a bit quicker. An equally unscientific, informal poll turned up words such as “arrogant,” “out-of-touch,” “irrelevant,” “disrespectful,” “uncooperative,” and “condescending.”
There are some exceptions, of course. Several federal agencies—notably the US. Fire Administration (USFA); General Services Administration (GSA ); Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF); and U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC)—have strong, positive working relations w ith the fire service. But they are the exceptions.
The most common complaint firefighters have about federal officials? Again and again, 1 heard about the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) officials raging onto the scenes of hazardous-materials incidents and demanding command of the scene. In Oregon, firefighters bragged about handcuffing an EPA official who tried to take over.
My guess is that a properly conducted survey would demonstrate that, in general terms, there’s nowhere near enough respect going in either direction. Who cares? After all, isn’t the fire serv ice almost exclusively a local concern—funded, and even largely regulated, by state and local officials?
It matters for two reasons. First, it matters because many federal agencies do, in fact, relate to the fire service. Many agencies own, operate, and occupy buildings and deal with the fact that firefighters help design, adopt, and enforce codes for these buildings and respond to emergencies within them. Other federal agencies attempt to regulate the fire service — and, I am afraid, the operative word here is “attempt.” Then there arc the agencies—such as the USFA and the ATF—that try’ to support the fire service.
Second, it matters because the fire service occasionally flexes its muscles and can scare the hell out of Congress and the Administration. As some feds know, the fire service can be an enormous political asset or a worst nightmare.
SIX EXPECTATIONS OF THE FIRE SERVICE
Not long ago, I was asked to speak to the Federal Fire Forum —an informal group of about 100 federal employees engaged in some way with fire officials. I told them that based on my informal poll, the firefighters I know’ have the following six expectations of federal officials:
- Don’t whipsaw us. The EPA recently asked for public comments on tentatively approved halon alternatives. One of those alternatives appears to be a problem for the Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Whenever one agency says yes and another says no, that is “whipsawing,” and it undermines the federal government’s credibility.
- Deal in the real world. In the EPA’s regulations supporting SARA titles I and III, the fire service was given a detailed and rather elegant description of how the fire service will plan and train for hazardous-materials incidents. On paper, we have compliance. In reality, in many, many places it’s a joke. This problem relates directly to the following expectation.
- Don’t dump and run. Please, federal government, don’t tackle a problem, mess around with it a few’ years, declare victory, and dump it in the lap of the fire service. And please, no
- more unfunded mandates. More than anything, this seems to have built up the fire service’s resentment of federal agencies.
- We’re not looking for much money, but make each dollar count. No constituency group —from cops to farmers, artists, college students, housing advocates, and nurses—expects less from the federal government. Firefighters happily will take the surplus goods no one else wants. They’re good at making do with what they have.
The fire service looks at federally funded state emergency management agencies (SEMA) and gets angry. Local firefighters and cops — the folks who actually respond to hazards—rarely see a dime of federal emergency response money. They see SEMA grants, and they see red.
- Try to avoid boomerangs. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has developed some first-rate computerized modeling tools for fire protection engineers. Perhaps unavoidably, defense attorneys are using these tools to confuse juries in arson cases. The NIST did the right thing to create these tools and has offered to look at certifying users. Arson cases, however, are tough enough to prove, and firefighters find this awfully frustrating.
- Respect us, appreciate us. The most human of needs—R-E-S-P-E-C-T— is a very big item with firefighters. It should be. The cardinal rule, I tell federal officials, is “Don’t ignore the fire service.” The Department of Labor steadfastly has refused to discuss the definition of a volunteer under the wage and hour laws. Sure, it’s a big, messy issue, but the statute has many fire officials worried that the modest payments some volunteers receive may violate federal law.
And so, the relationship between the fire service and federal agencies isn’t terribly good, yet it is important in many ways. What can be done? The fire service needs to become considerably more sophisticated about the federal government and federal law, and federal officials need to respect — and work with —the fire service *
