The Falcon Fire Protection District board took no further action at the Jan. 6 meeting regarding the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission complaints filed with the board by John Scorsine and Alex Donnell. Both men have now filed formal complaints, alleging age discrimination, with the EEOC.Alex Donnell speaks out“We have moved forward to protect our rights under the statutes and have filed with EEOC. That does not preclude us from still being in talks to work on the correct solution for what has transpired,” Donnell said.For Donnell, the situation started when he was instructed to take the physical fitness test to remain as a department member in good standing. “That’s not how the member’s manual reads, so we were being instructed to violate the member’s manual by taking the test,” he said.”The (physical fitness test) was a series of physical strength tests and endurance tests put together by a couple of the career staff as an exercise regime and that was also put into a testing format for incoming career firefighters.”But it was never scientifically proven [to be a valid test], and it actually helped exclude females. There are no female firefighters or emergency medical technicians on the roster. This test wrongfully excluded potential and well-certified female firefighters and EMTs.”Donnell said he would like to see the district open up the volunteer ranks. “People don’t necessarily want to be firefighters or EMTs but still want to volunteer in their community and can fulfill different roles within the fire district,” he said.The FFPD has been a “rotating door” for many volunteers, who receive their certifications and leave the department, Donnell said.”We have not requested and have not attracted the true volunteer. It’s not that the true volunteer is not out there. It’s that some of the things Falcon has done in the past have driven them elsewhere.”John Scorsine speaks outScorsine said he filed a formal complaint with the EEOC, and the solution is simple:
- “The board needs to remove the misinformation and misconceptions concerning the fitness test and explain to everyone that this complaint, when it was initially filed, was proper and that the test was improperly devised and ill-executed.
- “The board needs to say that the people who have interpreted our test results as somehow being substandard and endangering either ourselves, our colleagues or the community are totally misconstruing and totally false in their representation.
- “The retaliatory environment needs to come to an end, and the board and management need to make a statement that retaliation for people exercising their rights will not be tolerated at any level.
- “There needs to be a recognition that the chief (Trent Harwig) had a bona fide requirement in July for a volunteer lieutenant. By the selection process in the personnel manual, I was the No. 1 candidate. The chief, even in July, said it was his intent to promote both (Nadeau and Scorsine) of us.
“When the ill-fated fitness test was executed and I filed the complaint, now suddenly, I’m either not qualified or the position no longer exists.”Scorsine said he first learned of the fitness test by e-mail about a week before the test was to be administered on a Sunday about six months ago. He asked for documentation on the test, but found there was nothing in writing.The test was a variant of two parts of the Candidates Physical Assessment Test, a test developed by the International Association of Fire Fighters, Scorsine said.Scorsine, Alex Donnell, Tom Resha and Dave Nadeau were told the pass/fail standard was 5 minutes, Scorsine said. “We asked, ‘How did you come up with that,'” he said. “And they said, “We’ve run X number of people through it and we took their average time and added 30 seconds to it.”Scorsine questioned the validity of the standard as it relates to job performance, but still they had to sign a statement defining the 5-minute pass/fail standard, he said.”The manual does not require this test, nor has it ever been required previously for a promotion,” Scorsine said. “And then it became a requirement on that Sunday,” the day of the test.”My only interests are to continue to serve the community and to make sure the department is operating in a legal and ethical manner,” Scorsine said.He also confirmed rumors that he is a member of the Ellicott Fire Protection District as well.”I live in the Falcon district but I’m nine miles from the Falcon station. I’m also nine miles from the Ellicott station,” he said. “Since I’m the furthest west of the Ellicott people and the furthest east of the Falcon people, my desire is to provide a more timely response when we’re waiting for equipment from either district. I have a full complement of EMS equipment in my vehicle, so I’m able to assist.”Scorsine said Harwig is aware of his dual membership and that Harwig wrote him a letter acknowledging it. Harwig confirmed his statement.
Harwig weighs inFFPD Chief Trent Harwig said that the district’s policy manual has had a requirement for an annual physical assessment test to be a member in good standing since 2005. He said they used the same test for two purposes:
- as an entry-level test for new volunteers with the requirement that they complete the test in five minutes
- as the annual physical assessment test that must be completed but with no time requirement
“We had several entry-level people that were taking that test and were scheduled to take that test that day. There were several members who had not [taken the test], John and Alex being a couple of them,” Harwig said. “So, they were also invited to come down that day since it was going to be set up for the outside (new) people coming in to take their physical assessment test.”As was usual for the entry-level test, the new people were asked to sign a form including a hold-harmless agreement, a statement that the test must be completed in five minutes and a place to note before and after vital signs, Harwig said.”For whatever reason, the individuals conducting the test that day just handed the same paper out to everybody,” Harwig said.”Every current member that’s ever taken that test since 2005 knows that they’re not being held to the five-minute standard, and they know they’re not going to sign a hold-harmless agreement in a department that they’re already a member of because that doesn’t make sense.”Harwig said the current members were told to cross out the hold-harmless part of the form. “Then, they completed the test, which they all did, and they all knew their times,” he said.”A few days later, we were told that they had an EEOC complaint because at their age they were held to a five-minute standard.”Harwig said it easily could have been resolved if they would have asked about the 5-minute issue. He added that the members were aware the 5 minutes did not apply to them because they had taken the test multiple times.”We were asking them to take the test because their names were on the list for promotion,” he said. “In order for me to even consider the list for promotions, I need to ensure that you’re a member in good standing.”As a result of the controversy, the board has adopted the CPAT for new people and suspended any annual physical assessment for existing members.”No harm was intended. I’m sorry it happened. We did everything that we can to rectify it,” Harwig said. “We suspended the test for ongoing members, and we’re evaluating what we want to offer instead.”Harwig mentioned the possibility of sending members to Memorial Hospital for an occupational evaluation test or contracting with physician-based companies that do on-site cardiovascular and pulmonary tests. In either case, the information would only go to the member and not to the district.”Basically, we just want to make something available to everybody so that they know the job is not going to kill them,” he said.
