Skip to content


Fire Pensions: Big Trouble in the UK (Part 2)

No comments

It seems that David Cameron and his Coalition partner, Nick Clegg, wish to give UK firefighters a drubbing in the latest pension dust-up.

Some Significant UK/NA Pension Differences

UK and North American firefighter pensions are roughly comparable up to a point but then significant differences emerge.  UK firefighters operate under a tiered benefit system: the FPS is now closed and firefighters hired after April 2006 are in the NFPS, but here is a major difference: they can opt out at anytime—initial or continued participation is not mandatory.  And, another extraordinary (or so it would seem to us) difference:  both the FPS and NFPS are pay-as-you-go.  There are no funds invested anywhere to generate market returns.  Current employee and employer contributions pay the benefits of current retirees.

Opt-Out

Anytime opt-out of a pay-as-you-go scheme would seem to create a situation where there was little margin for error or flexibility.  (The FBU points out that the number of members opting out in the Greater Manchester Pension Fund has increased by over 50% during the most recent year.) Those not happy with changes to the plan are free to walk and seek other alternatives.  Because there is no underlying investment strategy to create additional returns, the plan would be very vulnerable to the loss of active members.  Individual plan members, and by extension, the union that represents them, could have a considerable effect on the solvency of the fund.

Contribution and Accrual Rates

The FPS has an employee contribution rate of 11%, and the NFPS is 8.5%.  The coalition government wants to increase contribution rates by as much as 3.2% through 2014 and there is much discussion as to how this would occur and exactly who would be affected.  In a possible divide and conquer scenario, lower earners could see no rise while those in higher wage scales could see significant increases.

Accrual rates (the rate at which benefits are earned) are different for FPS (1/60th per year of service through 20 years and then increasing rates up to and after 30 years) and NFPS (1/60 per year) though the NFPS has a higher accrual cap of 75%.  There is some indication that the Coalition plan would remove these caps though it’s also doubtful that firefighters would be able to work long enough to receive an “enhanced” benefit, so cap removal may be largely “window-dressing.”  Accrual rates may also be changing to require a longer career in order to achieve the same level of benefit.

Current reporting in the British press shows the Government’s on-line benefit calculators indicating current workers paying more and working longer but receiving less upon retirement.

Salary Averaging

North American firefighters generally have a 3-year salary average and in some cases a simple final salary average when determining the pension benefit.  In the UK the current norm is final average but plans are afoot to change this to a career average where some of the salary points used in the average could be over 30-years old.  The rationale for the change is that final salary unfairly rewards those who gain promotion late in their career or who receive other salary boosts.

Benefit Linking and Inflation Adjustment

The Coalition Government has shown interest in linking occupational pensions with National old-age pensions where the combination of the two would equal a type of living wage.  Such a move diffuses the ability for unions to negotiate clearly over pension benefits as the two providers could then point to the other as the cause of future problems when the sum of both falls short of previous or expected income levels.

The Coalition government also proposes to change the inflation adjustment model from the Retail Price Index to the Consumer Price Index, which it is believed will result in lower increases.  Some of these changes have been made unilaterally outside of the collective bargaining framework and are the subject of continued litigation.

What’s Next?

The Fire Brigades Union has gone to great lengths to refute the Coalition points where their members are concerned.  They have provided documentation, from actuaries and others, suggesting that firefighter pension benefits are neither more lucrative nor less sustainable than private pension schemes and that the employee contribution rates are also comparable with the private sector.

UK firefighters are engaged in a long-term battle for pension survival.  The previous Labour government, supposedly union friendly, presided over the creation of the 2006 NFPS which resulted in a lower benefit for new hires.  Now, the current Coalition government would seem poised to deliver the coup-de-grace to public employee pension benefits over the dubious rationale of national deficit control.

It all comes to a head tomorrow, November 30, as millions of UK public sector workers, will show what they think of the Coalition’s plan for the future.

Stay tuned.

 

 

Fire Pensions: Big Trouble in the UK (Part 1)

No comments

United Kingdom public sector workers, including firefighters in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are engaged in a titanic national struggle with the “Coalition” government made up of the Conservative Party and Liberal Democrats. The Coalition is currently set on weakening pension benefits.

(These Liberal Democrats are not the ones your mother warned you about, but rather a political party that would be generally happy with a moderate conservative as their leader.  Think Nelson Rockefeller in Lady Thatcher’s pumps.)

The Coalition, led by David Cameron, is moving aggressively to re-design public pensions as a deficit reduction or “cost saving” measure on a national level.  It is a perfect storm with very real life implications.  We should be aware of what is taking place as bad news (and policy) travels fast, even across the Atlantic.  The Coalition argument is that retirement ages for current pension plans were created early in the 20th century when life expectancy was much lower.  They are aiming to change the pension fundamentals so that firefighters and other workers will work longer and often receive less when they eventually do retire, at a later age.

Their attack is centered largely on arguments of sustainability, fairness and employee contribution rates.  They say that the current arrangement cannot be maintained for the long run and that public pensions are more lucrative than their private counterparts.

North American Pensions

A quick take on what US and Canadian firefighters often have as a pension framework:

-  mandatory participation in a pension plan where the monies are invested and where the pension, once received, is subject to a cost-of-living-adjustment (COLA) to offset the effects of inflation

-  Retirement after a set number of years, some beginning with 20 years of service, though 25 may be more the norm and in some cases there is also a tandem age requirement of 50 or 55

(Thousands of US firefighters do not participate in Federal Social Security making their work pension the only source of guaranteed income.  Some Canadian pension plans are integrated with their federal benefit where reductions can occur after age 65.)

UK Pensions

In one of those perfectly understandable language differences that makes it all interesting and sometimes amusing, the UK equivalent of “plan” as in pension plan, is “scheme”, as in pension scheme.  There are basically three firefighter pension schemes in the UK:

-  Firefighter Pension Scheme (FPS) closed to new entry since 2006 with a retirement age of 55, (which could occasionally be lower)

-  New Firefighter Pension Scheme (NFPS) for all hired after 2006, with a retirement age of 60

-   Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) with a retirement age of 65

Tomorrow- Firefighter Pensions:  Big Trouble in the UK (Part 2)

Fukushima: Lessons Learned—Conclusion

No comments

A Level 7 Incident

After the explosion involving reactor facility 4, the decision was made to evacuate all “non-essential” personnel and 650 workers left the site, leaving just 70 to continue the stabilization work.

In addition to the three reactors, there was also concern that the spent fuel pools might be losing water thus allowing the fuel to overheat.  Additional fire apparatus and helicopters were used, without much effect, in an attempt to keep the pools full.  Eventually, concrete pumping trucks were flown in and used to maintain safe water levels though spent fuel was never in serious danger.

Despite the valiant efforts of plant workers,  the fuel in all three operating reactors was uncovered for significant amounts of time and melted as a result.  In some cases fuel rods were exposed early in the incident and eventually this occurred at all three reactors. The extremely high temperatures associated with the uncovered fuel contributed to the liberation of hydrogen gas which resulted in three separate explosions.  These explosions resulted in much of the area being highly contaminated from debris strewn around the site.

Over 100 plant worker received doses in excess of 10 rem and two received doses over 65 rem.  Capability to monitor plant or personnel radiation levels was lost early in the incident as the fixed system was either swept away in the tsunami or rendered inoperable because of the lack of power.  Contamination was widespread, including at the Emergency Response Center.  (Radiation levels were so high there that the windows had to be covered with lead.)

It is interesting to note that the only method to be successfully employed to inject water into the three failed reactors was using fire apparatus though this was ultimately ineffective and was hampered by pressure differentials and the inability to obtain a constant water supply.  In addition, radiation levels were high enough that apparatus was left to run unattended and at one point ran out of fuel.

The Fukushima disaster is run-through with irony.  The original bluff on which the plant is located was 35 meters high but was reduced to 10 meters in order to position the plant on bedrock to better withstand earthquakes and to reduce the cost of pumping seawater for cooling, thus making it vulnerable to a quake-induced tsunami.  A plant that produced massive amounts of electricity was undone when it lost that very power.  Key back-up systems were so intricately entwined with the systems that were designed to replace that the loss of one meant the loss of the other.

In the most highly regulated industry in the world, rules and procedures were necessarily discarded as humans fought to overcome design limitations and the effects of nature and physics.

Nature won, again.

 

 

Sources:

Institute of Nuclear Power Operations

New York Times

Wikipedia

INES

Fukushima: Lessons Learned (Part Four)

No comments

Explosions

As March 12th dawned the reactors continued out of control with the plant largely reliant on the built-in design safeguards to cope with surging pressures and temperatures.  There was a vital need for electricity so that operating parameters could be observed and maintained, if possible.  In addition, aligning valving for water injection or controlled release would require electricity or compressed air in many cases. Portable generators had been located and were arriving at the plant by barely passable roads as they were too heavy for helicopter transfer.

The first generator to arrive was positioned near Reactor 2.  A lengthy and nearly 1-ton electrical cable system was being hand positioned by 40 workers when a violent explosion occurred.  The cause was probably a build-up of hydrogen gas and the blast injured five workers and wrecked the cable and generator and other equipment being used in the cooling effort.  The area was strewn with highly radioactive debris.  Everyone was evacuated to the Emergency Response Center to re-group and for accountability.

Twenty-four hours into the incident all three active reactors were unstabilized and the effort to control them had suffered a serious setback.

On March 12 the decision was made to vent one of the reactors to the atmosphere as a way to create conditions favorable for fire apparatus to attempt to inject cooling water into the reactors in order to keep the fuel covered.  The high pressures in the containment system were above the fire pump discharge pressure capability making water injection impossible.  System pressures would have to be lowered in order to facilitate cooling. (At one point pressures were over twice the design limit of the container.) Venting was accomplished by an arduous and complicated process of aligning valves, some manually. It was done after close-by civilian evacuation and shelter-in-place farther from the plant was completed.

As previously mentioned, the quake and the tsunami had essentially destroyed the facility radiation monitoring capability.  In fact, personnel were forced to share dosimetry and to try to track exposure accordingly.  After the explosion and venting it became clear that parts of the facility were highly contaminated.

When teams were sent out to attempt to align valve systems for venting or cooling their work times were limited, in some cases to just 17 minutes, to keep exposure to acceptable emergency levels.  Volunteers were employed for the most hazardous work.  Several workers had already received over 10 rems and the radiation levels in some areas were as high as 16,000 mrems per hour.  Personal protective equipment (PPE) included the use of firefighter turnout gear and self-contained breathing apparatus.

Workers slept on the floor and rations were limited to biscuits and soup.  Control room workers were forced to wear PPE in the control room environment and some received significant exposures as the incident escalated.  (Some of the most severe exposures, up to 67.8 rem, were to control room workers and over 100 workers received exposures in excess of 10 rem.)

At 11AM on March 13th, about 63 hours into the incident, a second explosion occurred, again, from hydrogen being liberated, this time in Reactor 3.  The explosion damaged the fire apparatus being used in the operation to control containment pressure in Reactor 2.  It also spread more contaminated debris creating an environment where it was now unsafe to staff the remaining fire apparatus being used for coolant operations.  The engines were left to run unattended. In addition, there was a stop in operational activity as workers were again assembled in the Emergency Response Center for accountability.

Shortly after midnight on March 15th, there was yet another explosion in the Reactor 4 building.  Reactor 4 was not operational at the time of the event and it is thought that the explosion, probably hydrogen induced, was caused by a backflow of gas from shared piping coming from Reactor 3 when valves failed in the open position after the loss of electrical power.

Tomorrow:  Conclusion

Fukushima: Lessons Learned (Part Three)

1 comment

Flying Blind

The incoming tsunamis, much larger than planned for, had destroyed back-up electrical generation capability when the diesel generators were swamped and electrical switch gear wetted.  Electricity was vital in order to monitor the conditions within the reactor vessels and to take actions to prevent a catastrophic event.

Plant personnel were now faced with an extremely complex set of variables related to the requirement to control the heat associated with the nuclear fuel.  Water was used to control the temperature but the loss of electricity meant that the ability to replenish or circulate that water was severely hampered.  Monitoring the level of the water to ensure that fuel remained covered was difficult and spotty.  The heated water would eventually vaporize into steam creating escalating pressures in the vessels which could lead to an uncontrolled release of radioactive gases to the reactor containment structure.  Since the reactor vessel and containment structures had pressure limitations, failure to control rising pressures caused by escalating temperatures could also cause a catastrophic event.

Complete boiling off or loss of all water surrounding the fuel rods would result in their degradation, eventual melting and the potential release of very high amounts of radiation if the containment systems failed.

A potential also existed for the steam being created by high temperatures to react with zirconium in the vessel material to create large amounts of hydrogen, an extremely explosive gas. Such an explosion would also result in the release of radioactive gases and the potential dissemination of highly radioactive debris across a wide area.

These scenarios were true for each of the three operating reactors and there were concerns, as well, about the integrity of the stored spent fuel cooling systems.

Plant battery systems also failed because of flooding and grounding.  Critical temperatures and pressures were spiking.  Complicating an already complex scenario was the fact that the plant was effectively isolated and a much larger area was attempting to deal with its own overlapping emergencies.  Outside help, if it arrived at all, would be slow in coming.

Workers moved into an improvisation mindset as they attempted to control the reactors through “unorthodox” methods.  They were forced to rely on “creativity” and work experience as they derived solutions that were “unique” and completely outside of design guidance. They swept the administration building for design documents, plans and drawings and created a work center to brainstorm methods for injecting vital cooling water into the reactors. At one point they were reduced to scavenging auto and truck batteries and cables and bringing them to the control rooms in order to supply enough DC power to monitor reactor water levels.

They looked to fire control systems (stationary pumps and fire apparatus) as a means to inject water into the vessels to control temperature.  Neither scenario proved easy.  Of the three fire engines on site, one was damaged by the tsunami; another was blocked by an oil tank and a de-energized security gate, leaving just one for the initial attempt.

The tsunamis had strewn the site with debris, blown off manhole covers and generally created an extremely hazardous working area.  Building interiors were pitch black, often flooded and there was effectively no monitoring of radiation available.

Controlling reactor temperature and pressure would mean finding reliable water sources and successfully locating and manipulating a complicated series of valves using whatever was at hand. Water would have to be introduced and pressure controlled and released.  Crews would be learning as they went as they determined that key valves were either air or electrically activated and that they all must be operated properly in order to achieve the desired result.

Tomorrow:  Part Four, Explosions

Fukushima: Lessons Learned (Part Two)

No comments

Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant

The plant is located on the northeast coast of Japan about 120 miles from Tokyo.  It consists of six (6) GE-designed Boiling Water Reactors.  The steam energy from the boiling water is used to drive turbines which create electricity.  The steams cools and condenses back into water for re-use.  The 860-acre site is some 30 feet above sea level on a bluff overlooking the sea.

Construction planning for the site and reactors included consideration for protection against both earthquakes and tsunamis.  The tsunami from the 1960 Chilean earthquake that measured 10.2 feet when it came ashore nearby was used as a reference guide.

Breakwaters had been installed in the harbor to mitigate tsunami effects. (Many of the purpose built breakwaters were ineffective in the Tohoku quake and have even been implicated in worsening flooding in adjoining areas by re-directing the waves.) In 2002 the inundation protection level was increased to 18.7 feet when some back-up equipment was placed on higher ground. 

In addition, the plant was equipped with Emergency Diesel Generators (EDGs) in order to operate cooling systems for the reactors if AC power was lost. Control rooms for the reactors were created in paired groupings of 1 and 2, 3 and 4, 5 and 6.  They shared some common facilities and travel between the paired control rooms was easy.

The site also included storage for spent nuclear fuel utilizing dry cask storage and a separate area where fuel was stored in water-filled pools.

The severe shaking associated with the quake damaged the electrical infrastructure on-site and caused the collapse of electrical transmission towers.  It also exceeded the built-in vibration parameters and resulted in the three on-line reactors going into emergency mode with control rods fully inserted and effectively shutting down.  The diesel generators activated in order to allow for cooling to continue and to ensure that the fuel rods remained covered with adequate water. Any anomalies noticed in the reactor shutdowns were monitored and solved.  The heat produced in this mode was less than 10% of normal reactor operation but still enough to be of significant concern.

The quake struck at 1446 Japan time and the first of the tsunamis came ashore at 1527. These tsunamis, one over 45 feet high and well above any plant protection features, rolled over the harbor breakwaters and in and through the plant, inundating reactor buildings and flooding basements and other key areas.

The surging water knocked out all of the diesel generators except one, immersed electrical switch gear and panels causing shorting and grounding, and critically disabled the control rooms for the three operating reactors.

The ability to control the reactors began to degrade rapidly as AC and DC power faded and the control rooms, nerve centers for protecting the reactor cores, went completely dark.

Tomorrow:  Part Three, Flying Blind

 

Fukushima: Lessons Learned (Part One)

No comments

Today begins a five-part series on the events which unfolded at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant as workers tried to simultaneously stabilize three out-of-control reactors after the deadly earthquake.  Fukushima will surely stand as one of the most complex emergency events ever as technicians improvised solutions in an attempt to counteract the run-away physics created by a total loss of power within the facility.  Without electrical power they lost all systems used to monitor and control the temperature and pressure of the reactors, containment vessels and fuel.

This past March 11th at just before 3PM, the largest earthquake ever to strike Japan occurred 43 miles east of Tohoku in the ocean where the Pacific plate is sliding under the Japanese Island of Honshu.  The Tohoku mega-quake is the fourth or fifth largest quake on record at 9.0 and shifted the earth on its axis between 4 to 10 inches.  The stupendous amount of energy released in the earthquake which lasted over three minutes is estimated to be 600,000,000 times that of the atomic bomb detonated at Hiroshima.

At least 15,833 persons are confirmed dead and thousands more remain missing.  500,000 buildings were damaged or destroyed and significant parts of the infrastructure, including Sendai Airport were severely damaged.

The devastating quake and the chaos that it caused was in many cases dwarfed by the extraordinary damage coming from a series of seven tsunamis which struck in some places 30 to 45 minutes later.  These tsunamis ranged from 10 to 128 feet in height, inundating huge areas of land and literally wiping out entire towns and villages in their wake.  Satellite photos taken before and after the waves show the immense carnage.

In the hours after the quake and the tsunamis, the country was reeling as strong aftershocks continued to occur.  With utter devastation in evidence it could be said that the worst was over, but in one place it was just about to begin.

Tomorrow:  Part Two, Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant

Buckeye Bull’s Eye: Unions Score a (Defensive) Win

3 comments

It is a measure of our times when the hoopla over a very important union victory is really grounded in the fact that we managed to simply reclaim ground lost in a recent brazen attack on collective bargaining rights in a key state.

This week’s 61-39 vote to overturn the draconian Ohio anti-union bill championed by Governor Kasich and the Republican Presidential nominees is potential evidence of a “middle ground” electorate that could be an important component in future elections.

While hundreds of local governments are struggling to make ends meet, with some of them ankle deep in red ink, it appears that the electorate can still spot brazen over-reaching when they see it.

It is a crucial fact the Republican presidential nominees had (at least) a rhetorical hard-on in support of Ohio’s Senate bill 5.  They savaged Mitt Romney when he appeared to be “soft” on his support of the measure.  Romney “manned up” and was back in the worker slaying orgy, expressing “110 percent” support for the attempt to strip public employees of their rights.

Senate Bill 5 was classic, hard core Republican (and tea party) tactics to strike a death blow to an enemy when the time seemed perfectly right.  The enemy was (and is) middle class Americans even if they are seen first and foremost as members of unions.

The Tea Party Right has been ascendant in anti-worker political action and they have done well in pushing their agenda under the guise of the death of big government.  Union members have been on the retreat, if in an orderly manner, and the Ohio vote could be a sign that the retreat is about to end.

If you are a worker and not a union member and all decked out in your pretty tea party costume feeling horny for the end of worker’s rights, you would do well to remember that it is the union movement that keeps a constant upward pressure on worker pay.

You may hate unions (stupidly) but you should pray for and vote for them (fervently.)

Politics Afield: Brits Eat Young, Too.

No comments

Immigration is the current “hot tamale” in US politics with states passing restrictive legislation faster than Herman Cain can say “I reject all those charges.”

We hear so much about our “open” border that we think we own the issue and it’s nice to learn we don’t.  It’s also nice to realize that amidst all the cut throat political maneuvering here in the US that we are still just a colony where real political tit-for-tat is concerned.

David Cameron’s fraying Conservative/Liberal coalition government is being rocked again this week by a new “scandal”, involving the relaxation of border screening regulations in the UK.  The UK Border Agency,  with the agreement of  cabinet-level Home Secretary Theresa May, instituted a pilot program to speed up entry during the summer rush.  It deserves to be mentioned that no incidents, criminal or otherwise, have been identified as a result of the program.  In fact, the Guardian reports that the arrest rate increased by 10% as a result of the targeted approach.  It seems that no good deed goes unpunished.

The British Press seems to show an amazing and dogged capacity to take up an issue and flog it until it dominates all public discourse, which sometimes is a very good thing.  The MP spending scandal and the demise of Murdoch’s News of the World because of phone hacking are the most recent examples of their ability to markedly control Parliament through relentless coverage and reporting.

When you like the outcome, as in Cameron on the hot seat again, it’s hard not to cheer but this latest attack appears to have gone very much awry as May, the Home Secretary, has tactlessly blamed a senior civil servant for the alleged offenses and Labour appears to be piling on.  The long term results could be most unfortunate.

It’s reminiscent of the current situation here in the US where Representative Darrel Issa and Senator Chuck Grassley are conducting a scorched earth policy with the US Justice Department over the ATF’s “Operation Fast and Furious.”  Perhaps here such grand-standing  shenanigans are muted by the size of the federal enterprise.

But, here or there, the effects are the same–professional civil servants come to realize that at the end of the day they are nothing more than pawns in a political game, able to be sacrificed at the drop of a hat.  That may work as a political tactic at Westminster or on the Hill but it’s a rotten way to protect the public interest.

Go Along, Get Along

No comments

The New York Times reports this morning that the feds are finally charging some folks as the result of an amazing series of stories they completed back in 08 about fraud at the Long Island Railroad to the tune of $1 Billion, with a B.

They reported that “every career employee of the railroad was applying for and receiving disability benefits…)  (That’s every as in all.)

Now, a handful are under indictment including a couple of docs who were responsible for over 75% of the medical documentation for the false claims; a disability mill, they call it.

My two favorites are the guy “who has trouble gripping objects with his hands” who played golf 100 times in less than a year and also plays tennis several times a week and the other fellow who “suffers from severe and disabling pain” and went on a 400-mile bike ride around the state.

Nice work if you can get it.

What’s missing here is the fact that if the “disability” rate was really 100% than thousands of people, other than those on the gravy train, knew in some fashion about the scam but silence reined.

As always, the people who are REALLY injured in these schemes are the truly disabled and those who retire with a normal pension after a full career because their benefits are artificially held down by scammers.

Silence does have a cost.

Welcome to Turn Out.

1 comment

First, a hearty thanks to Bill Schumm, a.k.a. Firegeezer, and Mike Ward, Fossil Medic, for their support and nearly infinite patience over the past year as I learned the “blogging ropes.”

Turn Out: It’s a phrase we are familiar with.  It conjures up images of a dash for the rigs or a turning on to the street.  The masthead graphic calls up the rich history of firefighters turning out over the centuries well before steam, combustion engines or horses, even.  For us, it has come to mean both the act of responding as well as the gear we wear.

Of course, it means other things too: how many people voted (what was the turnout?), and being tossed out of the bar on your ear (We turned’em out.)  It also refers to a wide place in a highway where a vehicle can turn left or right.

So, in keeping with the various definitions, I will endeavor to provide some variety here, too.  We might even talk about an election along the way, and possibly even veer to the left (or the right.)  Being predictably unpredictable is much under-rated.

If you are joining me for the first time, I suppose the briefest of bios is necessary.  I became a volunteer in 1971 by employing the dubious tactic of lying about my age. (15) Later, I served as a career firefighter for 22 years and retired in 1998.  I also worked at the IAFF beginning in 1999.  I retired from there in 2010.

I have now blogged enough to figure out that generally speaking there is an accepted range of thought and views in our community and that if you get too far outside that range you will be called out.  I have on occasion been called a contrarian (a person with a preference for taking a position opposed to that of the majority)  There may be something to that.  (I have also been called just plain contrary.)

But, I also think the contrarian label is pinned on people who may be inclined to take a second or closer look at some of the ideas or positions we hold sacred, as in sacred cows.  The lack of tolerance for alternative views does not necessarily bode well for a profession where mistakes can be fatal, literally.  I guess being stodgy is the price we pay for protecting our grand tradition.

As I write these words I am  struck by the fact that out of all the images I could have chosen to illustrate the blog I went for the oldest, and by extension the most traditional, that I could find.  Perhaps that means I want things to be progressive except when it suits me to have them traditional.  If so, I am in good company with most of the firefighters I know.

Till next time.