Enhancing Diversity in the Fire Service Doesn’t Mean Lowering Standards

It’s a speech I had given many times before: the welcoming speech given on the first day of a firefighter recruit academy. As I looked in the eyes of 25 young men and women who sat with anxious anticipation of what the next 15 weeks would bring, some stared back with fear; others gleamed with excitement and passion. I welcomed each of them to the fire service, but not to our fire department family, as this is reserved for those who demonstrate the physical and mental competencies of an entry-level firefighter.

A recent article in the New York Post that describes an excessively high failure rate for the latest FDNY recruit class caused me to reflect back on the many recruits I’ve welcomed to our ranks–and on the less fortunate to whom I’ve said thanks, but no thanks.

The current FDNY recruit class has a restricted enrollment; it’s limited to city EMTs and paramedics, which, based on their make-up, fulfills the mandate to employ more minorities. The frightening part of the article is not the excessively high failure rate (some of the recruits are considerably older), but rather the fact that the department was potentially directed to lower the physical and academic requirements of the academy. Trying to fill our ranks with a membership that represents our community, or with individuals who carry a certain level of expertise (e.g., lateral firefighters, paramedics) is nothing new, nor is it something any of us should frown upon. Yet we must never lose sight of the importance of the minimum requirements we set forth for the positions within our organization.

In 2003, I was hired as an outsider to serve as the chief of training for a moderately sized paid department that, at the time, was in the process of hiring a number of new firefighters. During one of my first meetings with the rank-and-file members, I opened up the floor for questions and comments related to the department’s training program. It wasn’t long before the longstanding frustrations of the department rose to the surface. A loud voice from the back the room said, “Chief, all we want is for the recruits to be capable of catching a hydrant before they graduate the academy.”

Shocked as you might imagine by such a simple request, I quickly vowed to the members that every recruit would, without question, be competent and capable of catching a hydrant upon graduation. Hearing additional challenges that they had faced with recruits in years past, I took it a step further. I promised them that any recruit who walked across the stage at graduation would have my full support, and that no one would cross that stage not having met or exceeded the department’s minimum standards.

I made that promise because our members deserved nothing less. Their expectations were that the man or woman who rode beside them, stood behind them, or led them during late-night battles MUST be competent, physically capable and willing to perform the task at hand. When quantity overshadows quality within our ranks, we begin to destroy the foundation of our safety and success.

Firefighters are without question a select breed, a breed not limited to a specific ethnicity, gender or education level. It’s a breed of impassioned individuals driven by a singular mission–to serve and to protect. When we seek to initiate new members into our ranks, it is this passion, this dedication, that we must strive to maintain.

As a firefighter reading the New York Post article, I became incredibly frustrated by what appears to be a destructive directive imposed by an ill-informed outsider on what many of us would call a model organization. Yet I understand that backlash toward the decision-makers and the candidates won’t solve anything.

The next time your department welcomes a recruit academy, ask yourself this: Do our public officials and the citizens we serve truly understand the duties and responsibilities of a firefighter? If questioned, are we prepared to defend our methodologies against the strictest national standards and recognized best practices? Can we effectively demonstrate and document the efforts we have made to recruit, employ and retain qualified candidates of all genders, ethnic backgrounds, etc.? And equally such, can we prove that the physical standards we’ve imposed upon those who seek to become members of our organization are fair and equal to all?

Equality is a two-way street and we must never lose sight of the fact that it is our responsibility to develop and maintain training practices and minimum standards that support the same.