The latest skirmish in the on-going “who’s in charge” battle between police and fire (which I call police-fire wars) occurred Tuesday in Knox County, Tennessee where a Knox County Sheriff cited a firefighter for failing to move his apparatus at the scene of a vehicle accident.
The incident occurred on I-75 southbound. A Rural Metro engine was blocking the southbound lanes, and Knox County Sheriff’s Office Patrolman Terry Wright directed the driver, Matthew Clift, four times to move the vehicle. He was then cited for failure to obey a lawful order.
Knox County Sheriff Jimmy Jones and Rural/Metro Chief Jerry Harnish both said incidents like this are rare and declined to comment on the specifics beyond the fact they plan to meet soon to discuss it.
While admittedly these kinds of disputes are rare (I have roughly 20 such cases in my database), the fact they happen at all is a cause for concern in the day and age where everyone is “supposedly” trained and using in ICS.
One thing that particularly bothers me about these cases: police officers do not arrest or give tickets to each other at incident scenes for “failure to obey”. Can you imagine a patrolman giving his sergeant a ticket because the sergeant didn’t obey his order to move his vehicle? Now that would be a headline, wouldn’t it? Why do you suppose that is?
Somehow police officers are able to deal with the frustration of their fellow police officers not “obeying” them… it is only those “other” folks – firefighters, paramedics and “civilians” who get cited… And maybe that is the problem – to police officers we are nothing more than “civilians”… part of the great masses who are there to serve as the recipients of the officer’s services… Those who must obey.
I am sure the officer would say “hey, they have to respect the law… we all have to respect the law”. And he would be right. We do… ALL OF US… have to respect the law.
Back to ICS… My question in these cases remains – who was in charge. If the police officer was in charge, or was carrying out the commands of the IC, then the firefighter and his officer have some explaining to do. That is the end of the story barring some imminent safety threat that was evident to the firefighters but not to the police officer.
If the fire department was in charge –OR IF THERE WAS UNIFIED COMMAND AS THERE LIKELY SHOULD HAVE BEEN, and the police officer was acting outside the scope of his assigned duties as a responder then the ticket not only should be dismissed, the officer should be investigated and perhaps charged with interfering with a firefighter in the performance of his duties…. Because we all have to respect the law. All of us.
That is exactly what happened in Leadville, Colorado in 2010 when a deputy sheriff arrested a fire captain on an EMS run because he refused to leave the scene without seeing the patient. The charges were later dropped against the captain and the deputy was charged criminally with obstructing a firefighter. More on the Leadville case.
The police-fire wars problem can be solved quickly if police officers who arrest/interfere with firefighters at emergency scenes are themselves charged criminally with interfering with a firefighter. Just as a patrolman realizes he cannot issue a ticket to his sergeant (or another patrolman) because he didn’t obey the patrolman’s order to move his vehicle… the same thought process ought to apply with other emergency responders. We are on the same team!
This incident sounds like it could have all been aviod. If in fact the 2 agency represenitives, would have communicated with each other better.
Just a thought, If we trained Police officers on Fire Department SOP’s at accident, fire scenes, and trained Firefighter’s on Police SOP’s at accident / crime scenes. Not something very time consuming but enough so that everyone has a better understanding of how the agency operates. This may help elimniate the Police/Fire wars.
Get out your local, county, and state codes in advance and know, discuss, and clarify who is in charge at what kind of scene. Knowing who has jurisdiction and understanding it will keep you out of trouble almost every time. If the cop has jurisdiction, great. Tell him to take command. If you have jurisdiction, sounds like an obstruction complaint to me.
In California, the Law Enforcement Agency having jurisdiction has Authority over the scene, but then step back let the Firefighters
take care of the Incident; Fire, TC, Haz Mat, etc.
One of the biggest jokes in my professional career was taking ICS 300 and 400 with cops. In the 400 class, my group consisted of me and 5 officers from a nearby town. They freely admitted having little to no clue what they were doing, and were excited to have someone with a fire service/EMS background to carry them. “Oh, we’re all set now!” (I’ll never be merely 5 minutes early to an ICS class ever again.)
But hey, they were getting overtime to sit in air conditioning for 8 hours and a free meal, so not actually being able to apply the principles taught really didn’t bother them all that much.
I am interested in finding out the specifics on this one. Kevin and Mike offer some sound advice. If you are a command personnel, get to know your peers in the other disciplines, and what their objectives are in incidents, such as an MVA on a limited access highway or even primary state roads. Establish protocols and implement training for your supervisors and personnel.
I understand the frustration in this situation, but the truth be told, if an officer fails to obey an order of a sergeant or the ranking officer at the scene, then the officer is subject to administrative proceedings, which in some cases leads to termination. No, they do not get issued a ticket, but they are subject to discipline, which for the most part is not known to many outside the department. That discipline becomes a permanent mark on the officers record.
Cop on Cop confrontation is not so uncommon as one may think. I have heard of horror stories of county deputies attempting to arrest municipal officers during incidents, as well as other incidents involving various agencies with overlapping jurisdiction. They can be just as heated and embarrassing.
The answer to this on-going problem has to be worked out before a bell tips or a job comes over the MDT. Command personnel must work together to iron out objectives and have a clear understanding of the set objectives in the preplanning phase. ICS is the answer to many of the root causations. Other causes must be identified and handled by the disciplines so that we understand each other and recognize saving lives is a team effort.
As for BH, just so you don’t stereo type all cops, which works to alienate a police fire relationship, rather than harmonize it, I am a team leader for a state IMT, as well as a ICS NIMS instructor. I have performed duties as OSC and PSC, as well as IC, SAFETY, PIO, at quite a few major incidents. I have worked in these capacities at jet crashes, major fires, power plant explosions, train derailments, hazmat ops, floods, major traffic diversion ops, and many other incidents, as well as planned numerous large scale events. When I show up, it is the fire chiefs who breath a sigh relief, because I am there to carry them. When I attend a TTX or even training, I am always the one that everyone turns too. Not bad for a stupid donut eating, ticket writing black sheep of the family.
In my jurisdiction, I work hard to harmonize our relationship with eight different fire departments and two ambulance companies. I require my road sergeants and shift commanders to not just know ICS, but to use it. On major incidents I expect a Unified Command to be established and joint objectives to be identified. When it is not a UC, I expect them to provide technical advice to the IC and obey the IC wishes as though they were mine own. We do not have problems. I have it easy because I am a senior ranking commander, and I have a cop’s cop reputation. But my subordinates are learning and experiencing the success that this concept has, so that when they assume command positions, they will have the confidence to continue on with the concept.
The CDP’s motto says what we must all learn to do. “United We Stand……Together We Respond”.
Lets finds solutions and focus on our mission, savings lives and protecting property.
Thanks Bill
I agree – we have to find a way to cooperate. The challenge is how do we get there.
How do you as a senior law enforcement leader – get into the head of your younger officers as their temperature starts to boil when they sense their “orders” are not being complied with?
On our end – we have to understand – when the IC is a member of law enforcement we have to follow their orders – even if we disagree with them. The narrow exception is safety… which is the most often cited reason by fire/EMS for disobeying an order from a police officer… But even then we tend to focus solely on our own safety and not the hazard we may be creating to others by the traffic backup – which may endanger numerous other drivers.
The IC – fire or police or ideally both through unified command – has to balance the risks to responders with the risks to the public – and make a reasonable decision. Not everyone is going to agree – but we cannot allow the self-rightous among us (cops or fire/EMS) to veto or ignore the IC’s decision.
First off, it must be stated that Connecticut has laws governing who is in charge of specific incidents. To supplement this, our department policies and procedures are compliant with the statutes. This re-enforces to officers, who is in charge.
Second, I stress to road bosses and officers that our fire officers are well versed in our objectives and goals, and are trained to incorporate them into their decision making process. Third, in incidents that do not require a UC, I stress to the officers and supervisors, they are not in command nor hold a command role. I explain that they hold a status similar to a technical specialist who can provide advice to the decision maker. I stress to them in their situational awareness to consider scene safety in the aspect of firefighters and EMS being narrow focused technicians relying on them to keep them safe, while they perform their tasks. If they see something that is not right, or have a concern, send it up to the IC for consideration. The IC may not know of the situation, or may have other facts that are unknown to the officer or road boss It is imperative to re-enforce this because unlike firefighters, police officers are taught work individually to handle situations. They are taught to take control and demand compliance. Therefore it is imperative that they realize their role in a multi discipline response is in contradiction to the basic rule of policing. I stress that nothing except the most extreme situation should cause an officer actions to take away from the focus of the mission. The officers know that if a problem in the chain is identified, then it will be addressed at a later time. Again, this is an extremely hard concept for an officer to accept. But with training and re-enforcement, it can.
I also ensure that fire officers are trained in our aspect of a response and broaden their perspective of command to include our concerns. This is equally important.
This has been very effective. Many fire officers comment on how officers and supervisors arrive and ask, “What do you need” or “ Do you want…….” On the same note, many times the road boss will comment that the fire officer went out of his way to justify the need for road closure or truck positioning.
There have been incidents where a breakdown has occurred. But in the cold wash, the causations have been attributed to unique circumstances or to inexperience. These causations are quickly addressed.
Make no mistake, if you asked most of our officers to define the specific roles of a general staff, or the difference between a group or division distinction, they would not be able to answer. But they understand the unity of command, and their role in multi-discipline response.
Bill
You know what you said that struck me – when your officers arrive on scene they are trained to ask the firefighters “What do you need?”
If we could get all police officers to do that AND get firefighters to ask the exact same thing of police officers when we arrive on scene – it would go a long way toward solving the misunderstandings.
Chief I believe the issue here is (to say the least) that police officers everywhere think they are above the law. They treat other public servants, civilians – anyone they deem below them – as a problem. Therefore they choose to attempt to make an example of them. What usually happens is that it will be swept under the rug so as not to bring attention to the matter. Instead I believe it should be brought to the public forum to find out who is in charge of what. The ICS system would be great but cops think they run every show there is. Here in North Providence, RI it was once brought up that the patrolman should be sent to every call first as “first responders” to investigate and advise the FD if they are needed or not. That is what public service has come to, a fight over who is in charge, instead of working together. Someday I hope this will not take place any longer.
Werll said, and the point of ICS is great. Too many of both professions don't know it.