Template

I WOULD HAVE JOINED THE FORUM IN MOUTHING OFF BUT ITS A HEATED SUBJECT WITH ME AND I CANT SAY TOO MUCH ON THE ISSUE. I JUST FINISHED READING LEANING TO THE RIGHT AND WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW YOU SHOULD ATTEND THE UP AND COMING CIVIL SERVICE HEARINGS, YOU WOULD BE SUPRISED HOW MUCH THE PUBLIC DOESN'T KNOW ABOUT THE SITUATION. YOUR SUPPORT WOULD BE APPRECIATED AT THE HEARINGS. THANK YOU,

I am not surprised at all. There was never any doubt that there is more to the story than what we are being told. In my opinion, the deciding factor in this case is whether or not the firefighters acted in a manner that was consitent with a "generally accepted standard" or could be considered the generally accepted standard. If managment/leadership/the boss ever allowed anyone to remove anything worth 1 cent from the scene of an accident, then the generally accepted standard has been established. Management is accountable for what they do and what they fail to do. If you have no complaint by the owner of the equipment...then there is no complaint! The absolute most that should have happened is that everyone should have been required to return whatever they took from the scene, or pay the value of that equipment. The policy re-clarified and preventative steps taken to insure everyone understood, (in written backup form) of what the policy is. Management should have been responsible for insuring that everything that was removed was documented and signed for, releasing the persons involved of any liability. Management creates, implements and enforces policies and procedures. The focus on this issue should have been on management and the enforcement of policies.

This is not simply my opinion but my experience working in management in the private sector. Had this occurred within the business that I manage, I would be under the gun by the Divisional office and the Human Resource Department, for allowing my people to do this and not establishing/enforcing a policy. My subordinates would be required to return or pay for what was taken and explained there was a miscommunication of policy by management. Management would bear the brunt of disciplinary action.

The bottom line is that if they have ever been allowed to remove even the slightest of things, say beer, perishable food etc. then they have sent a message to their staff that it is "a generally accepted standard". When the loot turns into something of greater value, the "generally accepted standard" still applies. If a policy exists and management did not enforce it...even once...then the policy is arguable. A management approved behavior is established, that circumvents the written policy. And that is the way things are done in the private sector. This incident is not a question of theft or wrongdoing although it may appear questionable to those on the outside. This is a question unequivocally about "Piss Poor Managment", beginning with the fire chief, moving upward through the ranks all the way to the mayor. This thing is taking too long to resolve and I suspect they are looking for a way out to save face.