disability, such as a missing limb, if the person can perform all job related tasks as identified by the standards, the department cannot discriminate. No one is allowed to look at someone and make the decision that they cannot perform. The final consideration to this policy revolved around According to the law if the policy is implemented, then the agency has a “Light Duty.” light duty program. There cannot be subjective limitations placed on the program. The biggest violation of this comes from departments that only allow people injured on duty participate in the light duty program. If the program exists for one injury, it must exist for all injuries. The use of will lead to the department losing a discrimination lawsuit. In addition, the work “qualifiers” being done by someone on light duty must be standardized. Many use a position “Chief’s Aid” which is an identified job description. Without standardized tasks, someone may feel like they are being punished for their injury which will result in the department losing a discrimination lawsuit. These programs can be stopped at any time but cannot be stopped and started since it can give the perception of only being active for certain people. The next set of policies address OSHA mandates. The biggest of these includes the respiratory protection program. This program must be in line with OSHA CFR 1910.134 and ensure there are policies in place to provide adequate protection for members. The program must: have someone designated as the administrator, require medical determination of fitness to wear the SCBA, and specify when protection is required. The biggest problem in this section occurs when a department allows the members to remove SCBA during overhaul. Even with atmospheric monitoring, allowing someone to say it is ok to remove protective gear opens the department up to huge law suits and OSHA fines. The changes to materials found and hazards associated with those materials after they have burned have created extreme acute/chronic exposure problems. The next policy touched on the mandate for two-in, two-out. Federal law
disability, such as a missing limb, if the person can perform all job related tasks as identified by the standards, the department cannot discriminate. No one is allowed to look at someone and make the decision that they cannot perform. The final consideration to this policy revolved around “Light Duty.” According to the law if the policy is implemented, then the agency has a light duty program. There cannot be subjective limitations placed on the program. The biggest violation of this comes from departments that only allow people injured on duty participate in the light duty program. If the program exists for one injury, it must exist for all injuries. The use of “qualifiers” will lead to the department losing a discrimination lawsuit. In addition, the work being done by someone on light duty must be standardized. Many use a “Chief’s Aid” position which is an identified job description. Without standardized tasks, someone may feel like they are being punished for their injury which will result in the department losing a discrimination lawsuit. These programs can be stopped at any time but cannot be stopped and started since it can give the perception of only being active for certain people. The next set of policies address OSHA mandates. The biggest of these includes the respiratory protection program. This program must be in line with OSHA CFR 1910.134 and ensure there are policies in place to provide adequate protection for members. The program must: have someone designated as the administrator, require medical determination of fitness to wear the SCBA, and specify when protection is required. The biggest problem in this section occurs when a department allows the members to remove SCBA during overhaul. Even with atmospheric monitoring, allowing someone to say it is ok to remove protective gear opens the department up to huge law suits and OSHA fines. The changes to materials found and hazards associated with those materials after they have burned have created extreme acute/chronic exposure problems. The next policy touched on the mandate for two-in, two-out. Federal law
fire-department-instructor-conference-2012.docx