• Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

State of California is broke

LongTimeListener said:
Well over half of the calls firefighters take don't involve fires but instead are 911 emergency calls. Beefing up ambulance patrols without sending a fire truck would reduce costs in a huge way.

Having firetrucks "chase an ambulance" is the dumbest thing ever.

Folks don't like the idea that firefighters are sleeping and eating on the job, so they essentially give them busy work.
 
Here in suburban DFW, I am often amazed at staffing policies re: emergency crews. If they're called out to a car wreck (or any incident for that matter) at a minimum BOTH an ambulance AND a fire truck will be on the scene. At a JV football game last fall, one of the kids fell awkwardly and dislocated his hip (ouch! right?) ... just down the way is a fire station. Sure enough, a few minutes later here came both an ambulance and a full-size fire truck. Now come on ... do we really need a crew of 4/6/8, plus both vehicles, to respond? Perhaps that's a wise protocol, because maybe you don't ever really know what you're going to be up against ... but a cynic might suggest such policies have other roots.
 
Here, we have a volunteer force and a siren to call firefighters in.
 
I think they should send fewer firefighters to accidents and instead let them stay at the stations and sell coffee. After all, they already have the logo for it.
 
TigerVols said:
I think they should send fewer firefighters to accidents and instead let them stay at the stations and sell coffee. After all, they already have the logo for it.

The logo is sweet, right?

You see the coffee cup in the middle of it, right? See the handle on it?
 
LongTimeListener said:
Uncle.Ruckus said:
poindexter said:
That dude is a hero. Never forget.

Again, the only way to fix the problem is to hire more people. Which will cost more, both short term and long term. Are you fine with that?

I am not sure about what's going on exactly in San Francisco, but some cities staff one more firefighter per rig than is required (and is practiced in other cities around the nation). Also there was a report awhile back that San Francisco has more trucks per capita than anywhere else. So the staffing levels and the need for overtime are not a given.

Well over half of the calls firefighters take don't involve fires but instead are 911 emergency calls. Beefing up ambulance patrols without sending a fire truck would reduce costs in a huge way.

I have always wondered. What is the number required on a truck?

But one political problem with closing firehouses is how politically unpopular it is. Everyone wants a fire house close to their house, just in case. The Dinkins administration once tried to close a firehouse during the Super Bowl to minimize neighborhood protests. Shortly thereafter there was a fire and Guiliani used it as a campaign issue.
 
YankeeFan said:
TigerVols said:
I think they should send fewer firefighters to accidents and instead let them stay at the stations and sell coffee. After all, they already have the logo for it.

The logo is sweet, right?

You see the coffee cup in the middle of it, right? See the handle on it?

Got to admit I had never noticed that until you mentioned it.
 
BART (SF subway system) strike causes massive havoc for commuters.

Chart lists average salaries. Median gross salary ranges from $80,504 in the lowest-paid union to $104,392 for the highest-paid.

http://www.contracostatimes.com/data/ci_23585525/bart-contract-proposals

One issue is that the agency wants to reduce the overtime (which can be up to 20 percent of gross pay). One way they want to do this is to end the practice of having a worker call in sick during the week on a "scheduled" day, then work a fifth day later in the week that is "unscheduled" and therefore paid at the OT rate.

Agency offering 2 percent raises for each of next four years. Unions want 23 percent total over the four years.
 
LongTimeListener said:
One issue is that the agency wants to reduce the overtime (which can be up to 20 percent of gross pay). One way they want to do this is to end the practice of having a worker call in sick during the week on a "scheduled" day, then work a fifth day later in the week that is "unscheduled" and therefore paid at the OT rate.

There is always a scam.


Football_Bat said:
I thought everyone was unemployed in California. That's what Rush was telling me.

Why the fork do you listen to Rush?
 
CalStrs (state teacher's pension fund) - $70 billion in the hole
Calpers - $58 billion

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-controller-pension-website-20141114-story.html
ByTheNumbers.sco.ca.gov
 

Latest posts

Back
Top