In today's Republican-American there was an editorial regarding the Board of Alderman's recent 12-2 approval of a new contract for the Waterbury Fire Department.
http://www.rep-am.com/articles/2009/01/08/opinion/390286.txt
As I read, and reread this editorial, I couldn't help but feel hurt and angry at the treatment my "local" paper gives to "Waterbury's Bravest". While I can understand the editorials concerns about the cost of the contract, and their opinions about whether or not the contract was in the best interests of the city, I couldn't help but feeling that this particular piece was nothing more then a pathetic cheap shot.
What disgusted me the most about this editorial was the newspaper's opinion of the Waterbury Firefighters work conditions. Through their repeated use of quotes around the word work [...a longer "work" week...this "work" schedule...they "worked" 24 hours], the editorial board of the newspaper makes it very clear that they consider the Waterbury Firefighters nothing more then a bunch of lazy slobs who waste the taxpayers money.
"In fact, firefighters serve 24-hour shifts during which they prepare meals, play cards, sleep, gripe about their pay (average: $57,000) and working conditions, and yes, answer an average of one call a day."
While I cannot argue the validity of the newspapers claims regarding the activities that take place during a normal day in the Waterbury Fire Department, the tone of this article is one of unbridled arrogance and ignorance.
Firefighters, are by their very nature a unique breed. They rush into the buildings that everyone else is rushing out of. They put their lives on the line for the citizens of Waterbury, and while they may only answer one cal a day on average, during that one call they could encounter any number of situations, from a simple kitchen fire, to a fully engulfed three-story apartment building. As the city of Waterbury was sadly reminded in May of 2007, any call has the potential to be a firefighters last.
Regardless of what you think of unions, binding arbitration, the state oversight board that ran the city of Waterbury from 2001-2006, or the Board of Aldermen in Waterbury, our Firefighters, and Firefighters around the world, deserve a lot more respect. They do a job that I know full well I could not.
I'm pretty sure the members of the Republican-American's editorial board could not do their job either. Therefore, unless the editors of the Republican-American are ready to put on the gear and risk their necks pulling someone out of a burning building, they have no right to treat Waterbury's Bravest in such a crass and disgusting manner.
2 comments:
Let's not forget that Waterbury's 50-hour work week for firefighters is much longer than the 42 hours found in Bridgeport, Hartford, New Haven and Stamford, where the average pay is higher than in Waterbury. Let's also not forget that 50 hours at work is 50 hours AT WORK, no matter what you do while you're there. How many hours does the average office worker spend on personal phone calls, text messages, email, and office chit-chat? Those 50 hours the fire fighters spend at work is time not spent with their families, not spent at a sports arena, not spent anywhere except at work.
If a receptionist has a slow day and spend five hours sitting at the desk with nothing to do but read a book, do those five hours not count as having been at work? If a doctor is on call, taking a nap at the hospital while waiting for an emergency to happen, does that not count as being at work? If a police patrol officer gets through the day without encountering any emergencies or criminal activity, does that not count as being at work?
I honestly do not understand why the paper is so disrespectful of the work the fire department does.
Nicely done, Bryan. You've summed up what I've been hoping to write in a letter to the editor, but couldn't concisely.
Its unfortunate that this is the first and rarest of any in depth analysis the newspaper has done. They don't subject the other unions to the same scrutiny, and for some reason have a bias when they do anyway.
One can only wonder the motivation.
The cost of course is not politics, but divorces within the families of fire fighters who can't see their kids and enjoy life like every other worker.
The paper asserts they want second jobs - well how many others have second jobs? But the fiefighters can't choose to have a second job. They're tied up in their first job, whether they want to work one job or not.
Kudos to the mayor for sticking up for their families.
Jeers to Ralph Carpinella and the Rep-Am.
Post a Comment