Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council presses safety, second‑job and oversight questions on proposed 48/96 pilot
Summary
After the fire department presentation, council members pressed presenters on fatigue management, second jobs, liability and local hiring; council directed staff to convene HR, risk and finance for review before a pilot.
Council members raised several operational and safety concerns after the fire department’s presentation on a potential 48/96 schedule. One council member asked about emergency availability if firefighters take secondary employment: "So if I go and I do 48, 96, and I go get me an extra job... how am I gonna if we have an emergency or catastrophe or disaster, we need these guys and they're on another job?" Staff and presenters said the department treats the fire department as primary duty and that systems exist to call personnel in during incidents.
Members also asked for data the presentation did not supply: inventory of second jobs, the percentage of firefighters living in the city, comparative attrition data and how many peer cities operate their own training academies. City staff and the chief agreed to provide anonymized HR reports on hires and departures, local-hire percentages, and contractual measures (training repayment clauses) to recoup training costs if employees depart early. Councilmembers repeatedly requested a short formal review period by HR, risk and finance before any pilot is launched.
