Every fire department has some system for disciplining its members, and most departments would define their system as progressive. Progressive discipline is a policy of dealing with an employee's unwanted behavior through education and retraining, giving an employee the opportunity to learn from his or her mistakes and improve performance.

While many departments understand the concept of progressive discipline, and many even have written guidelines for such a policy, few departments find their systems effective. Supervisors either are unable or unwilling to use the system, department members don't know who is ultimately in charge of discipline issues or what constitutes a rule infraction, and lower-level officers often are making decisions in discipline cases that are far outside the scope of their knowledge and abilities.

The results of an ineffective progressive discipline system are the same as those from having none: Departments spend thousands of dollars on lawsuits and grievances involving discipline, and department morale suffers. The irony is that fire departments already possess the tools to handle their discipline “emergencies” but don't recognize them.

Use what you know

The problems that many departments face in their current discipline systems are strikingly similar to the problems that plagued fire departments on emergency incident scenes prior to widespread adoption of the Incident Command System. Before ICS, firefighters were unsure of whom to report to, lower-level officers who couldn't see the big picture were making command decisions that were more harmful than helpful, and freelancing was causing firefighter injuries and deaths — not to mention huge liabilities for fire departments in court.

ICS centers on the concept that all emergency incidents have similar underlying components. First of all, everyone must understand how the system works. ICS must be taught, practiced and reviewed. Secondly, everyone must report to only one person. Each individual must have only the amount of responsibility that they can reasonably manage, and the structure of command must expand when individuals are overwhelmed or the situation requires it. Finally, the smaller incidents require fewer resources but as incidents grow in complexity, the command structure must expand with it.

The first step in adapting an ICS-based discipline program is to clarify the rules of the game. While many departments have written standard operating procedures for emergency incidents, many don't think to create a similar document for other issues. If your department does not have any form of written SOPs that can be amended regarding discipline, you can generate a separate policy statement that's issued to all individuals. It's important that the information is written, disseminated to all members, and trained on so that no employee can claim he or she didn't know the rules or procedures.

Written guides for discipline should include a list of rules that all members must follow, separate job descriptions or guides based on rank to cover the different responsibilities of each position, and formal procedures for how to report and investigate a violation. Some departments find it helpful to flesh out the list of rules by assigning discipline for each violation before an incident occurs. For example, the rule that all employees must arrive for work on time would include the prescription that the first time someone is late, he or she receives a written warning, the second time a suspension and the third time termination. Clarifying the rules and the repercussions up front eliminates employees' claims that they didn't know the rules or the ramifications, which can be useful in court arguments. Additionally, having preplanned for each rule violation ensures that personal politics won't play a role in disciplining individuals, also a popular allegation by employees fighting discipline in court.

The benefit of separating job descriptions and rules is that nuances of different ranks can be addressed more specifically. Everyone must be at work on time, but possibly only drivers need to have truck maintenance guidelines detailed. The list of rules and repercussions would be unwieldy if every issue of performance was listed. As comparison, state and federal governments use their constitutions to identify universal issues and legislative acts to further detail laws of importance. The Bill of Rights would be unreadable if it tried to cover tax laws in detail.

The procedure for reporting discipline issues and rule violations also should be detailed and disseminated. Everyone should know how the process works. There should be confidentiality in individual discipline issues but no secrecy about the process itself. While every incident of discipline will require a slightly different response, the structure should always be the same. A rule violation should be reported to one person, then investigated and then acted on. No rule violation should be reported and then fall through the cracks of the system. Just as ICS ensures reports on the fireground are acted on appropriately, so should reports of rule violations.

Singular command

Just telling firefighters to read a document won't effectively train them on your rules. Training needs to be scenario-based and repeated so that everyone, particularly officers, knows what to do when a situation arises. We use assessment centers and hands-on training for fire emergencies; the same training techniques should be used for discipline issues.

An ICS discipline method uses the model of singular command. One person or position in your department should oversee the process of discipline. Having one person in command of a discipline system involves determining who in your organization has the best “view” of the organization to make such decisions. A line officer who knows nothing about the legal implications of sexual harassment shouldn't be the decision-maker in such a situation. A top-level chief should be the commander on all discipline decisions. Just as on an incident scene the commander receives reports from all sectors to determine the emergency strategy, the commander in a discipline system can gather all the facts and determine the best corrective action to take.

Assigning these responsibilities to someone higher up in the administration avoids the tunnel vision that occurs when discipline is handled at the station or battalion level. Imagine that an engine company sees signs of flashover at a building fire and reports it to the incident commander. The commander may assign them to lay the hose lines to put the fire out, delegating the responsibility. The commander also may notice that the company is surrounded by fire and should pull out. While not as dramatic, the commander on a discipline case can offer the same benefit of perspective.

There are several benefits to pulling discipline out of the stations and into a central command post. The big-money lawsuits over discipline generally are around issues such as sexual harassment, and department administrators are held responsible for situations they “knew or should have known” about. How can an administration know about these larger workplace-environment issues if they're handled at the station or battalion level? Additionally, every department anecdotally talks of employees who transfer from one supervisor to another to avoid responsibility on the job or to certain supervisors who are pushovers. Having one person oversee discipline ensures problem employees don't slip through the cracks by transferring around the department. Finally, many departments suffer from complaints that their system is unfair to one race, gender or rank. How can the chief know if discipline is being handed out fairly if he or she has no oversight of the process?

While the person overseeing discipline will certainly have to delegate much of the work relating to discipline, he or she will remain “in command” of the situation at hand. Just as on a fireground the incident commander can expand ICS to sector off an incident that has grown too big, the commander in a discipline case can call in others to help manage the incident. This commander, however, should have final say on any act of discipline.

Just as one person oversees the discipline process, everyone on the department should know exactly where to report rule violations. In this day and age, all officers should be trained to handle not just emergency operations but personnel management issues so that your command structure for emergencies can be used for discipline as well. Lieutenants report to captains, captains to battalion chiefs and on up the chain of command until the chief in charge of discipline has been notified.

Notably, an avenue to handle issues when a supervisor has committed the violation must be in place so that officers can't block access to discipline for those below them. Additionally, in cases where sexual harassment or hazing are an issue, firefighters must be able to report the violation to someone they feel comfortable with. This can remain consistent with a discipline process by allowing firefighters to report a rule violation to any officer, for example. By law, avenues for reporting sexual harassment to outside agencies, such as to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, should be a part of the information disseminated about how your discipline process works.

Once a rule violation has been reported, action should be swift and appropriate. Countless stories of discipline gone wrong have centered on delayed response. Just as we strive for quick emergency response, discipline is most effective when timely. Having a structured system in place for handling discipline and detailing the repercussions for rule violations in advance will allow a department to handle discipline in appropriate time frames.

Compare and contrast

Practically, what does an ICS-based discipline system look like? Let's examine some scenarios to see how different discipline issues would be handled. Department A has no written procedure for discipline. Captains are expected to handle discipline in their own stations. Department B has an ICS-based discipline procedure with written rules, job descriptions and procedures for handling discipline.

An example of a “dumpster fire” discipline issue would be a firefighter reporting to work late. In Department A, two firefighters are late to work at two separate stations. At Station 1, the captain runs a tight ship and assigns the late firefighter to the night watch for a month and responsibility to cook the nightly meal each shift. The firefighter is a woman who is new to the department and feels that she's being singled out to cook because of her gender. At Station 2, the captain has a more relaxed set of standards and asks off-going firefighters to hold over for the late firefighter. This firefighter is chronically late, and the firefighters from the other shift are tired of covering but feel pressure to from the captain. No discipline is ever handed to the late firefighter at Station 2.

This department has set up several problems in the way it's handling discipline. First of all, a staff morale issue is developing at Station 2. In addition, a sexual harassment issue could be argued given that the female firefighter was treated differently than a male firefighter for the same behavior. Finally, the essential issue of firefighters being late isn't addressed adequately at either station.

Department B would handle the situation very differently. The captains at both stations would notify their superior officers. Those officers would in turn notify the chief in charge of discipline. The chief would look in the performance files for both firefighters and notice that the firefighter at Station 2 is routinely late. That firefighter would have received lower levels of discipline already for being late, and the chief could start the process to fire that employee for excessive absenteeism, starting with a short suspension. Additionally, the chief could issue the order that the firefighter at Station 1, who had never been late before, be issued a verbal warning to notify her that further tardiness would initiate higher levels of discipline.

Department B in this scenario has identified an employee with excessive absenteeism and laid solid legal groundwork for firing him. In addition it has avoided a sexual harassment lawsuit by applying the same discipline system to both firefighters, even though one firefighter was further along in the discipline system than the other. Finally, while all discipline action should remain confidential, eventually the firefighters in Department B will see the firefighter with excessive absenteeism fired and morale won't suffer for an unaddressed problem.

Three-alarm problem

While this “dumpster fire” scenario clearly shows differences in the way each department handles discipline, fire departments prove themselves on the big fires, so let's look at a “three-alarm fire” discipline scenario. A firefighter at Station 1 in Department A approaches her captain stating that three weeks ago a male firefighter asked her on a date. She agreed, but after the first date decided she didn't want to date someone at work. She says that she told the firefighter she didn't want to see him off the job anymore. Since that time she has found pornographic images in her locker and heard rumors from other firefighters about sex that supposedly happened on that date.

The captain decides to approach to male firefighter and ask him for his side of the story. The male firefighter denies everything, but after being approached by the captain he begins a campaign of ignoring and not cooperating with the female firefighter on incident scenes. The captain decides that it is a he said — she said situation and does nothing but try to avoid partnering the two firefighters on incident scenes. All the firefighters in the station notice the tension between the two firefighters, and at the next big fire the female firefighter is severely injured and claims that the male firefighter was negligent toward her safety.

Again this department has set up several problems due to the lack of a formal discipline program. The department faces morale issues because of the tension between the two firefighters. Additionally, the female firefighter has solid grounds to bring not only a sexual harassment lawsuit but also a fireground-negligence lawsuit. The department chief will likely first hear of her complaint in a court summons.

How would Department B handle the same “three-alarm fire”? First of all, the captain would immediately recognize the liability potential of this issue and contact his superior officer. The department extensively trained this captain to recognize potential sexual harassment cases and additionally provided him the confidence that he could pass this up the chain of command to receive help handling the situation. This captain likely feels relieved that he's not expected to handle the situation alone.

Upon hearing from the captain, the chief officer would separate the two firefighters, either through transfer or paid time-off. This officer would then notify the incident commander who is in charge of discipline for this department. The IC would immediately recognize the potential liability to the department and call in many resources, effectively expanding the Incident Command System to include at least the department's lawyers.

The personnel files of both firefighters would be examined, as would the statements taken from all people who may have knowledge of the situation. While the level of discipline handed out will depend on the outcome of that investigation, the fact that high-level officers are handling the situation means that the correct decision is more likely to be made. Furthermore, the chief officers who will be called to defend the decision in court will have been the officers to make the decision.

Limited liability

These situations illustrate how an ICS-based progressive discipline system could work. Every department has its own culture and personalities and would have to determine the best way to implement such a process in their environment. In this day and age of constant and promised litigation, however, every department should work to limit their liability.

No matter what discipline system the department chooses to use, it's the buy-in of the rank and file that will determine the effectiveness of the system. Using an ICS-based system enables fire departments to train their employees using a system they already understand and believe in. Why reinvent the wheel?

---

Jennifer Cornell is a captain with the Minneapolis Fire Department, where she has been since 1994. She has taught rookie schools for her department, is a fire science instructor at Hennepin Technical College and is a contract instructor with the National Fire Academy. Cornell has a bachelor's degree and a master's degree in labor policy from the University of Minnesota. She's one of the founders of the Minnesota Women Firefighters' Association.