Staffing vs Responding & the use of Stipends

As the volunteer fire service evolves, one of its challenges is the more efficient use of our most valuable resource, our firefighters. Today’s firefighters are expected to respond to calls, participate in training, and contribute to fundraising efforts. Considering these demands on our personnel, it may be time to rethink how we operate when providing emergency response. The current model in most communities is to alert the members of a call and see who responds. Once all responses are in, the fire company determines if it has enough resources to handle the situation. The good news is most situations can be handled by one piece of apparatus and four trained personnel. The bad news is often the members’ time is wasted in unnecessary response to ensure “a unit” hits the street. Unfortunately, we are also seeing (and tolerating) no response from fire companies. Possibly, as a result of too many unnecessary responses, members just stop showing up. 

Staffing

Staffing or “duty crews” of volunteer fire companies, while not a new concept, has not been the norm for many organizations. Apart from during special events and weather-related emergencies, most fire companies rely on “from-home response.” While the “responding” method has served us well in the past, in today’s fire environment we have learned that delayed response allows the fire to grow exponentially. Every fire company has a story of how a group of members were “hanging out,” a call came in and because they were there, that quick response made a huge difference. Another advantage of staffing is members are not required to live close to the fire station. Typically, to be an “active” member almost requires firefighters to live relatively close to the fire station so they can respond in a timely manner to make a truck. With a staffing system, it doesn’t matter where you live. You show up for your shift.

As stated previously, the fire itself has changed. Numerous studies have shown the fire grows faster today than it did 30 years ago. One Underwriters Laboratories (UL) study states 30 years ago you had up to 17 minutes to escape a burning building. Today, it can be less than a couple of minutes, yet most volunteer fire companies response objectives are designed for fires of decades ago and not for today’s needs. As fire grows faster, our response objectives must change to keep pace with fire growth. Just because this has been the way we have always done it does not mean we still have to do it that way. 

Advantages to Staffing the Firehouse

1. Staffing allows for a quick response. The faster the company gets out the door, the sooner they are able to intervene and begin to mitigate the situation. Staffed stations often respond in under a minute during the day and in less than two minutes at night. For unstaffed stations, depending on the location of the fire station to the first arriving members, it can take several minutes to arrive at the station, board the apparatus, and leave for the call. Time of day is also an important factor in response time, as different challenges can impede responding members and further delay the apparatus response. Companies that are staffing often discover the staffed unit arrives before another unstaffed unit(s) responds. 

2. Properly staffed crews ensure all needed positions are covered. Staffing only works if all seats are filled with the right people. This means you need a driver/operator, a qualified person in the officer’s seat, and at least two qualified interior firefighters. There are times when apparatus fails to respond because no driver responded or it is delayed waiting for a driver. The best trained crew is worthless if the truck does not respond.

3. Staffing eliminates the “dice roll.” For most companies, it used to be a “sure bet” that enough members would answer the call and one if not more apparatus would respond. Today, all bets are off. A call could come in at 2:00 PM on a Sunday, and 15 members show up. An hour later, a second call could come in, and three members show up. Many departments now have additional companies being dispatched to cover calls to increase the odds of an apparatus responding, because they cannot rely on the assumption that enough personnel will respond from their own membership or mutual aid companies. 

4. Staffing is better for today’s time stressed members. With staffing, members know when they are to serve, and the fixed schedule allows them to plan their time accordingly. In today’s world, many volunteers work full- and part-time jobs, making it difficult to be available for calls. And, when they are home, they are trying to catch up with their home life. Blocking out time to put in at the fire station may better fit their own and their families’ schedules.    

5. When a unit is staffed, you know it is going to respond, regardless of the type of call. Many volunteers pick and choose their calls. They may be too busy for an alarm system, but not for a building fire. As a fire company, we cannot depend on the whim of the membership to determine what calls are responded to; on the other hand, it is unrealistic to demand that they show up to every call. For example, while it is great to dispatch multiple units for an alarm system call, the reality is most alarm system calls require only one crew to investigate and determine that the actions required can be handled by the first-in crew. However, failure to respond to any call is not acceptable or excusable by saying, “Well, we are just volunteers.” When your company fails to respond, you need to address the cause and find solutions, not excuses. The public expects when they call for help, help responds. 

6. Successful in-station staffing programs provide structure. The on-duty group is assigned specific duties to be accomplished. These can be apparatus checks, cleaning duties, or training. It is important that regardless of what is being done, something is being done. Another aspect of successful programs is creating a unit cohesion. Having the same or mostly the same personnel on each shift allows everyone to work out who does what at an incident. 

Downsides to Staffing

1. Activity levels vary across shifts. In-station staffing can be quite tedious; even busy career fire stations have slow days. A mix of shifts can help break up the monotony. Though 24-hour staffing would be best, it may not be realistic for every fire company. Additionally, while having four firefighters on at a time is optimal, even two (if one is a driver) can make a difference at a call. Departments that launch staffing programs start small, with weekday evenings, weekend overnights, and a few hours during the day. 

2. Members may assume the station is staffed when it is not. Companies and members need to maintain and follow a “who’s on duty” list. Fire chiefs may want to appoint duty chiefs and/or duty officers to monitor staffing levels. Software and online staffing programs are available to keep stations updated with their on-duty staff; some of the National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS) software programs can track that data in real time as well.

3. Staffing time can encroach on training time. When staffing requires members to devote more time to the company than they would in a typical week, they could run out of available time for training and other activities. For example, other company events such as meetings and fundraisers could suffer. If your company decides to do staffing, it important to remember the on-duty crew cannot be tied up with other jobs; they need to be available for calls. 

4. Traditional “points” systems may need to be restructured. If your company uses any type of points system to measure activities and response to achieve or maintain membership, it would likely need to be adjusted to reflect staffing. If members are putting in more “in-station” time, that should count toward membership requirements. Also, because a staffing system requires less from-home response, that aspect would need adjusting as well. In-station staffing often requires a greater hourly commitment compared with from-home response. For example, if Member A does one 12-hour duty shift a week for 50 weeks, that equals 600 hours. If Member B responds from home and goes to three calls a week for 50 weeks, with each call lasting for one hour, that comes to 150 hours of time commitment. If you are using a measurement tool to track activity of members for eligibility for office or benefits, you will likely have to change how they are accrued. 

5. Resistance to change presents challenges to implementation. Staffing represents a different way of doing business than what most companies are used to. When you change the dynamics of your operation, there will be some members who feel left behind. Refusal to admit the world is changing has been the downfall of many organizations. A prevailing attitude is, “It is not what the fire company can do for me, but what can I do for the fire company.” Companies should prepare for this response and have communication plans in place to mitigate it. Though unanimous acceptance is unlikely, it should not be a deterrent to progress.

Creative Staffing Solutions 

There is no one perfect staffing solution. For many busy companies, it might make sense to try in-station staffing, but for less busy departments, a from-home response can work. From-home response can also work in areas in which many members live close by and can quickly respond to the station.  

1. From-home response using rotating shifts. This option does not require in-station staffing but still works toward ensuring a unit gets out, and it is best suited for areas that do not run many overnight calls. Under this system, members pledge (or are assigned) to respond to calls certain nights of the week. For example, Group A responds Mondays and Thursdays, Group B covers Tuesdays and Fridays, and Group C does Wednesdays and Saturdays, with Sundays rotating each week. If each response group has six members, only 18 members are required to work. Even if one or two members miss a call, you still have four responding. If more personnel are needed (for example, a “working fire”), the company could be dispatched for additional units, or the next-up personnel could be notified that they are needed to backfill the next unit, either from home or to report to the firehouse. To achieve maximum use of personnel, as many members who are able should be qualified to drive apparatus as well as be prepared to act as a company officer should that need arise as well.  

Fair distribution of night responses is essential, as members must share the burden of going to calls. Members who fail to respond or refuse to participate may need to rethink their commitment to the organization.   

2. Bunk-in/Live-in programs. These programs require sleeping and shower facilities, and many college towns and busy companies use this system to enhance evening and overnight response. Successful programs mix live-ins (those who live at the firehouse) with bunk-ins (those who are doing just an overnight shift). By using a mix of both versions, companies can reduce the ebb and flow of personnel. Over time, bunk-ins can migrate to become live-ins, and live-ins can become bunk-in members. 

3. College live-in programs. These programs are often transactional, offering a free room for running calls. When school is done, so are the students’ services. Though the volunteers are short term, the program fills a need, and if run correctly, it can provide a successful long-term solution to ongoing staffing problems. 

4. Residential live-in programs. These programs differ from other live-in programs in that they are offered to current members who may want to leave home but cannot yet afford to live on their own, or to members who may need a temporary place to live while they regroup their personal situations. The residencies are not meant to be permanent, and their success lies in keeping members from moving too far away from the fire station until they can find permanent housing in the area.  

While live-in programs offer many benefits to the fire companies and participants, “live-ins” should not be considered the firehouse “servants.” Their duties and responsibilities need to be well defined, and they also must know who their point of contact is for any issues that may arise concerning their obligations to the organization. 

Stipend Programs 

Paying volunteers is in some areas a controversial subject. At the same time, these programs are not uncommon in some parts of the country. Stipends are often used to enhance staffing and reward programs, for both in-station and from-home programs. All stipend programs are subject to taxes, and it is highly recommended you consult with a tax professional if you are considering any sort of stipend program. 

1. In-station stipend programs. These programs are very straightforward: personnel fulfill a predetermined shift and are rewarded monetarily. Stipend programs must meet specific federal tax, labor, and compensation regulations, such as the stipend being a non-hourly compensation. Payment must be based on shifts worked, not hours worked. Annual compensation must not exceed 20% of what a full-time firefighter would make. The stipend is intended to cover any expenses that might be taken by the individual, such as meals, travel, and other expenses. Stipends can be used to cover shifts on which timely response can be difficult or for times of the day when members are not available. Aside from possible tax implications, these programs present other challenges. Namely, once you begin to pay personnel, it is difficult to revert to the traditional response system. 

2. From-home stipend programs. An at-home stipend program operates like a “paid on call” system. Under this system, individuals receive a stipend to be available for calls from home, usually, but not always, at night. If no calls are dispatched, you still receive the stipend, and you are required to respond if a call comes in. As in any from-home response system, personnel must live close to the station in order to respond in a timely manner, and on-call members must respond or get their shifts covered.

Some companies use stipends as part of a “paid per call” system, in which all responders receive a set amount when they respond to a call. The stipend is accrued by month, quarter, or year, and then disbursed at the end of the allotted time period. The advantage of this system is that payouts are only for actual calls dispatched; this can be a cost-effective option for companies with a low call volume. However, it could quickly become expensive for a busy company, and the wide range of variables to anticipate make it difficult to budget for. Some downsides to this program include:

·       If the pay is too low, responders may not bother responding to lower priority calls, or calls occurring during adverse weather conditions, because the payout may not be judged worthy of their time. 

·       If the pay is high, it may bring out more members than usual for traditionally quick calls, such as alarm systems, but the turnout may be sparse for longer duration incidents since all calls carry the same monetary value. 

·       Regardless of the pay amount, there is no guarantee that responders will be available. If you have a daytime response problem due to a lack of available personnel, you still have a lack of personnel even when offering a stipend. 

3. Stipends as a reward. Fire companies have used reward programs for years to encourage membership participation and recognize training achievements, as well as in combination with annual service awards. These rewards are usually set amounts that are not linked to a specific time frame or that must meet established minimal requirements. These programs are often limited to a cash award under $600 to avoid possible tax implications. Instead of cash, some reward programs offer gift cards, gas cards, or another form of indirect monetary compensation, such as insurance coverage. As with other compensation programs, they may be subject to taxes and all persons receiving these awards need to be made aware of the possible tax liability. 

When major cities across colonial America established the volunteer fire service in the mid-18th century, they instituted a system that worked for them. But, in time, many of those early volunteer fire companies gave way to career fire departments, due to many of the same issues we are facing today. Unfortunately, many volunteer fire companies have failed to continue evolving, instead relying on an outdated response model developed in the mid- to late 20th century. If organizations want to survive and thrive, they must understand and acknowledge the unique needs the 21st century presents, and adapt to meet today’s challenges