Knock this stuff off!

[caffpm]

For the sake of professional courtesy, I will refrain from posting the name of the agency of the involved. I am taking a personal interest in this topic.

I recently was told a story that while an individual was trying out for a fire entity this season, they were subjected to a number of “tests” by the crew members and supervisors.

These “tests” included depriving them of water on breaks, forced runs to the point of vomiting and passing out and weighted hill climbs with a mouthful of water that was supposed to “simulate being in smoke and how hard it is to breath”

In their words, this crew bragged “we have a reputation for being a tough crew and we have to make sure you can keep up.”

I sent an email to a couple colleagues with the National Strength and Conditioning Association. The NSCA describes itself as “the worldwide authority on strength and conditioning, we support and disseminate research-based knowledge and its practical application to improve athletic performance and fitness.” It’s website is at http://nsca-lift.org/Home/

Neither Dr. Todd Miller, author of the NSCA’s “Guide to Test’s and Assessments” or Dr.William J. Cramer of UConn and the winner of the NSCA’s Lifetime Achievement Award. (His resume can be found at http://www.education.uconn.edu/direc...ails.cfm?id=44) not only were they not familiar with this technique and to paraphrase, ‘it serves no useful purpose…such activity borders on the reckless and reprehensible.’

I as a mere paramedic was astonished that in this day of so many free, world class resources on strength and conditioning, that we have “professional” firefighters subjecting day one candidates to contrived “fitness” regimens. The IAFF has exceptional, job specific, peer fitness programs available to all fire agencies that are validated, peer reviewed and follow established industry standards.

This synthetic, childish, and likely punitive “crew standard” lacks even a basic connection to science or reality and would be torn to shreds by anybody with even a rudimentary understanding of athletic conditioning! An attorney would have a field day with this type of incident!

To say nothing of the risks of heat injuries, rhabdomyolysis, aspiration pneumonia, orthopedic injury or DEATH!

Unless you have better accreditation than NSCA et al, I pray to God that you will share this with your people, knock it off and be smart!

If your goal is to legitimately train and condition, find a real standard and do it the right way!

If your goal is to screw with the new person, and we’ve all done it, find another way but this kind of made up game is going to cost a life, cost people their careers & I don’t think THAT is the reputation you want for your crew.

[ajohansson]

Those sound like stories from the late 70's and early 80's from the crew I was on. Albeit I wasn't on until the 90's I heard of stories like that from former crew members that were now captains and Bcs on the district. Putting people into near renal failure. Sucking on a rock to help with thirst, no water on pt hikes etc. I actually had one of those old schoolers detail as our sup and he was educated by our captains that wasnt going to fly.

[rgt-N127Z]

I'm from outside the firefighting community, so I don't have any exposure to the crew experience, but I was saddened by this story of recruit abuse. After I first read it, I expected a flood of outraged messages in support of this position, but I was disappointed. So I'll write my piece in support:
Let's call a spade a spade- this is hazing, and it's unacceptable in college fraternities, marching bands, military academies and public service organizations. Thank you, caffpm, for your courageous words condemning this adolescent behavior.

[P-6]

I've seen and heard of so called hazing, more prevalent early in my 35 yr career, but never this bad. I'm confident this is a rare thing in the modern fire service. But, as in all areas of our society, there are those incidents you hear about when all you can do is shake your head and ask; Did that really happen? And hopefully if you do confirm it you are responsible enough to shed light on the darker side of the profession. As for the lack of outrage, I'm certain that is due to the high fire activity presently occurring. February would have shown more interest.

[bcjack]

This kind of c**p is unacceptable anywhere. I goes right along with the stories of racism and sexism, and the lawsuit settlements that result from these moronic and assinine behaviors that are reported regularly on such sites as Firehouse.com.

This kind of macho bull**** needs to be dealt with harshly (termination, including loss of any pension benefits) whenever it is discovered and proven to be factual. No "counseling", no "rehab", no written reprimands, just plain old "You don't work here anymore, and you forfeit your pension and all associated benefits".

[milehighbar]

I appreiciate this coming forward. I would like to hear more specifics. I am trying to figure out how this unacceptable behavior is resolved, how applicants can be warned and how this crap stops unless the individuals and or crews/modules who do this are identifed.

Spade is a spade.

[abercrombie]

Feel free to email Ab with details on any of this if you don't feel comfortable going through your chain-of-command and I'll see if we can help out. On the other hand, PM milehighbar if you'd rather, with details.

[firefish]

This type of behavior is abhorrent, but telling. 20 years ago, while attending a 'management development' class, one of the group exercises revolved around having several individuals involved in incorrect/illegal activity within the service and as the supervisors who found out about it, dealing with the issue both on the individual level and for the agency as a whole. In the small group, it was decided that the folks who committed the 'crimes' be outed so that everyone else knew what had happened, would understand it was unacceptable, and that serious consequences would follow repeat offenses by anyone repeating the offenses. When we exposed our plan to prevent future occurrences, the vast majority of folks in the class were absolutely shocked that we wanted to out the culprits within the organization. They felt any and all mention and activity revolving around serious incidents that included criminal activity within the department should be kept confidential and 'on the down low'. Now I was shocked, but it seems that majority rules in these types of events. The agency, it seems, would rather let the rumor mill sculpt the story rather than truth. It is still like that to this day. I think this is one of the reasons things like this continue. The truth never really gets out there, so the rumors are allowed to continue being fed by the activity that some people really have never learned is unacceptable. If no one is ever forced to take responsibility for their actions publicly, do they ever actually do it privately?