I Should Have Been A Firefighter

[Mike Johnson]

Lee3 wrote: They are trying to. There are many qualified applicants.

I can't speak for everywhere. I know here in Ventura they announce the number of people who applied, but many of those don't actually meet the minimum requirements, which include about two years of paramedic training for a county job. Two years studying fire science, and proficiency in Spanish are preferred. So too is experience working as a fire fighter, perhaps in a seasonal job that pays $14/hour hacking chaparral in the outback and responding to brush fires.

So they give them written tests & physical tests & interview them & perform background checks. Then they hire the best, put them through the Fire Academy, and quite a few of them wash out within the first three or four years. They can't keep up physically, or they realize how hard it is to have a family when they're gone for 48 hours at a time. Or up to 21 days at a time, when there's a disaster. When a firefighter quits, that means the department wasted tens of thousands of dollars putting him or her through 16 weeks of fire academy, plus all the on-the-job training. So yes, they need lots of applicants. Any private sector job where they put new hires through four months of training is the same way.

As for pensions, I'm in favor of pension reform. But are firefighters overpaid? No.

[decay]

i'd have to say SOME cops/firefighters are overpaid - the ones who game the system to take advantage of loopholes & overtime, etc.

the ones who work tons of overtime in one year to make their retirement go up by a lot for the rest of their lives - that's not right, and it bankrupts budgets.

[RAMd®d]

the ones who work tons of overtime in one year to make their retirement go up by a lot for the rest of their lives - that's not right, and it bankrupts budgets.

First of all, if it's allowable, it's right. If there is tons of overtime, the municipality should *possibly* hire more people at straight time. Easy to judge, or in the Forum Experts case, misjudge; much harder to base opinion on actual fact.

Second, in most cases municipalities don't base retirement on overtime, just salary.


No, their paycheck does NOT equal $123K.

Exactly. These are the figures your job says they're "paying" you and you should be damn grateful, regardless of the crap they give you. This is not what you see on your check, savings account, or retirement.


There are many qualified applicants.

Really. You know this-- how?

Mike has listed much of the screening process. Many people who *feel* they're qualified don't make it through that process. And some don't make it through probation.

As Mike mentions, it's costly when someone quits or washes out. For that reason, some budgets are better served paying already qualified employees overtime.

And you clowns want to punish people willing to do the work. This sounds more like a "He/She makes more money than me!! Wahhhh!! Waaahhhhh!" bitch-fest.


Not Engineer vs. DoYouWantFriesWithThat...

POMTL, exactly!


Do they save more in value than they cost in dollars?

That begs the question- what is the value of a home, and of human life, those who stand to lose it and those who step up to save it (potentially losing their own life)?


Anybody, in any work sector, who doesn't do the job they're supposed to do, is overpaid. But as we see in this thread, it's easy to paint with a wide brush, covering up details and accuracy.


I Should Have Been A Firefighter

That presupposes you could have been.

And have the balls.

[Lux Interior]

RAMd®d wrote:
First of all, if it's allowable, it's right.

I would have to disagree in general with that philosophy.

[Lux Interior]

SDGuy wrote:
No, their paycheck does NOT equal $123K. Those numbers include a calculated value for health care and leave time.

Yeah. The Navy always gave us helpful handouts letting us know how valuable all our benefits were. "Hey, you may only pull in $16k before taxes, but your room (loud, uncomfortable with several roommates), medical (not used a lot since you're young & healthy) and food (if you can call it that) come out to about, oh, $195k a year! You are getting a GOOD deal!"

[mrbigstuff]

If there is tons of overtime, the municipality should *possibly* hire more people at straight time. Easy to judge, or in the Forum Experts case, misjudge; much harder to base opinion on actual fact.

ah, that is where the beauty of our health care system comes into play - and some politics. as it is so expensive to pay for health care benefits of any employee, the city managers, mayors and financial directors feel that it is "less expensive" to allow the overtime hours with existing employees than hire additional and pay for their benefits as well.

[freeradical]

California Prison Guards


:rant:

[Bill in NC]

It's not the paychecks, but the pensions that are killing muni budgets.

I suspect soon now some type of PBGC will be created to bailout public (city, state) pension funds, using the same rules now in place for private pensions.

It's going to hurt when those who retired at 55 find their maximum pension is limited to about $35,000, IIRC (see current PBGC rules)

[C(-)ris]

Bill in NC wrote:
It's not the paychecks, but the pensions that are killing muni budgets.

I suspect soon now some type of PBGC will be created to bailout public (city, state) pension funds, using the same rules now in place for private pensions.

It's going to hurt when those who retired at 55 find their maximum pension is limited to about $35,000, IIRC (see current PBGC rules)

I'm not sure how I feel about that. On the one hand, they are getting ridiculous pensions at the expense of the taxpayers. On the other hand, they were promised these pensions and earned them following all the rules and it seems completely wrong to take away what they have earned.

[Mike Johnson]

C(-)ris wrote:
I'm not sure how I feel about that. On the one hand, they are getting ridiculous pensions at the expense of the taxpayers. On the other hand, they were promised these pensions and earned them following all the rules and it seems completely wrong to take away what they have earned.

I agree. But look at the Bell scandal; would it be completely wrong to base their pension on what their salary was before it was doubled in their last year?

As I mentioned, I live in Ventura. Two of the Bell employees that are hoping to get gigantic pensions once worked for the city of Ventura. Bell Police Chief Randy Adams spent twenty years working for the Ventura PD. At Bell, his salary as Police Chief was $200,000. Before retiring, they upped it to $457,000, so his pension will be $400,000. And because he spent most of his career in Ventura, Ventura will be on the hook for 60% of his inflated pension. Our own police chief makes $200,000 per year, but we'll be paying $240,000 out to somebody who quit as Assistant Chief.

On the other hand, there are millions of Americans who agreed to work for less money in return for a better pension. Reducing their benefits is just plain wrong.