A response to Scott Mooney, Association President
The FUD factor - Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt. This is a marketing term well honed and used in the software industry. What does it really mean? Basically, it is when a large player either pre-announces a new offering or a big upgrade to its software lineup. The hope is that by doing so, it freezes potential customers from buying the competition's software that may be available NOW. By freezing the thinking of the decision makers of their target market, the competition loses the NOW sales and the FUD maker will pick up at least some of those stalled opportunities.
Successful FUD campaigns hope to gain mind share, gaining otherwise lost sales leading to better profit and market share.
These were the thoughts when I read Scott Mooney's Letter in the Laconia Daily Sun (1/25/07). My responses to his Letter are here (and no, I'm not going to comment on every part of it):
I would like to offer a letter noting the positive contributions of the dedicated employees of this town. Too often the citizens of Gilford pick up the paper and read letters from a select few residents that bash the Gilford town employees that serve them.
Perhaps Mr. Mooney is aware of the fact that extremely few people will write in on any given issue. Often times, it is because of a fear of repercussion or fear of "what will <put name here> think of me if they don't agree". The fact that some do write often says a couple of things:
- They are willing to take the brickbats that may come their way.
- They are committed to getting a different side of the argument out
Bashing? That is for the reader to decide. However, consider this - there does seem to be unhappiness by the writers. One can either dismiss them entirely as cranks, or perhaps see that perhaps there may be a nugget that should be considered, no matter the delivery?
Some individuals find it necessary to write letters for others to keep their own name clear for personal gain.
You say this as if it was a fact in evidence. Do you have such proof? Go ahead, name names! Otherwise, this is part of the FUD factor - by sowing distrust in the Letter writers, you seek to invalidate their argument. If you feel so sure of your assertion, name them!
However, if you cannot, retract the statement. If you state that something to the effect of "I cannot - privacy concerns" or some such dodge, we will treat that as just that. Not doing so invalidates your argument.
All the staff at Gilford Fire, Full time and Call go above and beyond serving our citizens 24 hours a day seven days a week. In 2006 the men and women of Gilford Fire participated in just over 5,000 hours of training to better protect and serve our community. Much of that time was on his or her personal time, time away from their families so they could better themselves to serve the town.
You have chosen this profession of your own free will. In doing so, there are certain requirements that you must meet, as many of us need to in our own professions. I will point out that many of us also need to keep our skills up. Much of which is also done on our own time as well as away from our families. For instance, I have been to such places as San Diego and Chicago (among others) to receive specialized training - my family stays home. Many of us spend much of our own money to do so as well. You are not alone in this regard.
That said, I am glad that the fire training is done in Gilford.
Ever since the Murphy report
Trying to tag me, sir? Let me remind you that the report that was given was commissioned by the Budget Committee Chair to, as he put it, stop the whining. A duly appointed sub-comittee was formed, tasked with reporting back to the BudComm on salaries. While I was part of the subcommittee, call the report what it is - "Gilford Town Positions Comparison With Respect to All NH Towns with Similar Populations"
And yes, I do admit, it is a rather long name to repeat over and over again.
on wages and benefits came out things have heated up with a select few.
A few...what?
What the citizens of Gilford do not realize, unless they did their own homework, is the towns we were compared to was like comparing apples to oranges.
Au contraire, mon frere! At the time of the presentation as well as a number of times afterwards, I made quite CLEAR that the Fire Department was the most difficult to compare BECAUSE of the differences.
In fact, this is the original wording from the report:
Please also note that Fire Department positions reported here must be reviewed carefully due to the myriad of ways that personnel can be compensated (volunteer, call, part time, full time) by type as well as pay type (hourly, salary, per call, lump sum).
To simply leave the impression (back to the FUD factor again) that I or the other members of the subcommittee have done otherwise is disingenuous and false. Heck, I believe you are doing exactly in your Letter what you accused the report (thus, me) in saying! Remember: pot, kettle.
*****click below to read the rest********************************************
Most of the towns we were compared to do not provide 24 hour coverage and do not have an ambulance service.
Which is why I included a chart (click here) showing the overall Fire Dept budgets for the compared towns. I don't think that it takes a tremendously high IQ to understand that a budget of $1 million plus (Gilford) is going to have services that a much lower budget of say, Pembroke at $210,328. Intelligent people can review that information and understand it.
What is trying to be done here is to switch the discussion from the actual wages paid on an individual basis to that of overall department services.
That dog don't hunt.
Three years ago the Board of Fire Engineers conducted a study on wages compared with towns that have the same services and staff structure as Gilford. It was determined that we were at the bottom of the list in every category. The Board of Engineers presented their findings with the selectmen and the selectman adjusted the department so that we were right in the middle of the wage scale. That’s where we remain today with towns performing the same services.
The report statistics have been up on GilfordGrok for over 4 months. Not one person from the Fire Department has questioned the number put there, not one. To do so, at the time that the Budgets will be voted upon, means what? The reader can decide for themselves. More on this later.
Why haven't you asked to put that study on line? The Town has a web site - put it up! I have said a number of times at the public BudComm meetings that the different departments have good stories to tell. If this study is as good as you say, make it public!
Put it up for public review! Let see what town and cities you used to compare Gilford to, let's see the assumptions and the calculations. Put it up for peer review.
Oh, I will point out this - because I put up ALL of the numbers I used and where they came from, I subjected the data to public scrutiny. Thus, the Fire Department numbers I put up were reviewed and were subjected to corrections by others. No, not someone from the Fire Department, but by another Town employee in another department pointed out a couple of my mistakes...and helped me correct them. I flagged them as such so that anyone else would know that I goofed.
No one from the Fire Department told me that the numbers were wrong.....
For the few people out there that like to bash us, please stop by the fire station, ask questions, see the equipment and how it works. Ask what we are going to do if your child is trapped in your house when it is on fire or how we are going to save your neighbors life when they have a heart attack, then form an opinion about your town employees and our budget requests.
I have said this before, and I will say it again - I do not believe that emotional appeals have a place in budgetary processes. While Mr. Mooney brings up real life scenarios, the intent, in my opinion, is to insert an emotional appeal into a budgetary process by appealing to the heartstrings of the general populace.
I never saw one member of the Budget Committee at our open house this past fall.
Really, not one? And why do you think this is so?
The sub-committee who represented the Fire Department went into the training room spent about two hours and left.
Frankly, being a working stiff, I had spent all the "available free time" I could muster to meet that afternoon. And I did stay later than I planned, as some of the Fire Dept people wanted to discuss why I didn't censor some of the posters to this 'Grok - especially the Deputy Chief who had a real problem with this post.
Side note: Frankly, I offered ANY ONE in the Fire Dept. the ability to put up an opposing view. No one has taken me up on it. Hey, you had your chance (to ring the bell again) to put your study up for the public to see! And to my knowledge, no one has bothered to make the effort to set up their own blog either.
Certainly, not you.
They never asked to see the station or equipment or were interested about how we operate. How can a group of people make decisions and not be educated as to what they represent?
No, Mr. Mooney, I see that you failed to mention that I met with Chief Hayes for an entire Friday afternoon a couple of weeks later to which Dale Dormody, the Deputy Chief, and Bill Akerly also attended. A number of items were discussed. I also had a couple / few phone calls with the Chief as well.
You also failed to note that I had requested the database records from your firehouse management system so that I could analyze them. Even though I was not given access to a copy of the records (HIPPA privacy concerns from the ambulance runs - something that could have been easily cut out - I know this for a fact as the RDBMS that it is written in is something I have used professionally for YEARS), I was given LOTS of reports.
Thus, I spent a lot of time educating myself as to how the Department worked. Don't make assertions that are not based in fact.
Again, FUD factor? Leaving out important facts fosters it.
