⚠️WHY CROSS-STAFFING IS BAD⚠️

Industry standards tell us, FIVE person crews are the most effective, with FOUR person crews being the happy medium. When THREE person crews are utilized, studies show time to completion of critical tasks are INCREASED, and the risk of injury to residents, visitors and our members INCREASES! Under the proposed budget, three of our firehouses will be potentially responding to house fires in non-hydrant areas (grey areas on map) with THREE personnel, INCREASING risk to those residents and our members. "Overall Scene Time: The FOUR-person crews completed the same number of fireground tasks (on average) 5.1 minutes FASTER — nearly 25 % — than the THREE-person crew." (Pg.52)"Time to Water on Fire: There was a 6% difference in the “water on fire time” between the three- and four-person crews." (Pg.52)"Hose Stretch Time: In comparing four-and five-person crews to two-and three-person crews collectively, the time difference to stretch a line was 76 seconds." (Pg.52)"Industry Standard Achieved: The “industry standard achieved” time started from the first engine arrival at the hydrant and ended when 15 firefighters were assembled on scene. An effective response force was assembled by the five-person crews three minutes faster than the four-person crews. According to study deployment protocol, the two- and three-person crews were UNABLE to assemble enough personnel to meet this standard." (Pg. 52) "Editions of NFPA 1500 recommended that the MINIMUM staffing level was FOUR firefighters responding on apparatus and at least four firefighters be assembled on scene before interior firefighting operations could be initiated at working structure fires. Research showed that FIVE firefighters is OPTIMAL for injury mitigation. When engine staffing levels increase to six firefighters or falls to THREE or FOUR firefighters, injuries INCREASE." (Pg. 27 Question 3)"The Dallas Fire Department Study shows that the MOST EFFICIENT staffing level of engine companies is FIVE firefighters. At the FIVE-person level, all tasks studied were performed at a 100% efficiency rating. After further analysis, when FOUR firefighters staff engine companies, efficiency DIMINISHES. Procedures such as advancing interior attack lines and searching and rescuing victims, are SACRIFICED at reduced levels of efficiency. However, when THREE firefighters staff first responding engine companies, efficiency ratings are REDUCED EVEN MORE." (Pg. 28 Question 4) "An analysis of 14 "critical tasks"—those undertaken when potential risks to building occupants and firefighters are greatest—found that THREE-member crews took almost 12 minutes LONGER than crews of FOUR, 21 minutes longer than crews of five, and 23 minutes longer than crews of six to complete all tasks. Four-person crews took nine minutes and 11 minutes longer than five- and six-member crews, respectively.""The research team also evaluated whether dispatching more three or four-member crews to a high rise fire—accomplished by sounding a higher initial alarm—would be as effective as sending a low first alarm contingent of engines and trucks staffed by more firefighters. They found that a "low-alarm response with crews of size four or five outperforms a high-alarm response with crew sizes smaller by one firefighter." ... See MoreSee Less

Message Page