Montana firefighter-paramedic fired over her Instagram content

[Wendell]

A former Evergreen Fire Rescue firefighter/paramedic has filed a wrongful termination claim alleging she was fired because of her gender and singled out by the department for her social media use. In her complaint filed Jan. 2 with the Montana Human Rights Bureau, Presley Pritchard alleged she also suffered multiple instances of sexual harassment during her nearly three-year career with Evergreen and was asked to take down social media posts showing her in workout and firefighter gear, while others in the department faced no such recourse. Pritchard, a 27-year-old influencer, promotes her fitness lifestyle to her 135,000 Instagram followers.
https://www.dailyinterlake.com/local_news/20200107/former_firefighterparamedic_files_claim_against_ev ergreen_fire__

(https://www.dailyinterlake.com/local_news/20200107/former_firefighterparamedic_files_claim_against_ev ergreen_fire__)

Not guilty.

[Yung]

I took a look at the person in question's instagram content. It reminded me of one of the models for Mr. Butler, who also has the image of a woman policeman out of LAPD? who wears her father's badge. I'm not going to bother searching for it and linking it here unless someone asks.

The article linked has a fair bit of detail about the actual grounds for termination and the current state of the complaint, sufficient enough to take the sensation out of the headline. Suffice to say appearance on social media is only part of it.

Mentally, I'd put this in the same set of powerpoint slides in my brain that cover the ongoing discussion of the historical differences in applicants to public emergency services, partially due to screening and hiring policies established by administrators who don't have entry-level experience. However, from where I'm sitting, the kind of young, strong, intelligent, and dedicated candidate of today who some folks here would advise not to enter service nowadays is also most likely going to take a few pictures of themselves in uniform doing uniform things with their cell phones and put it somewhere online where there's also pictures of them out-of-uniform doing out-of-uniform things.

At that point, a big part of the proof is in is the actual job performance. What did her co-workers think of her performance while she was actually on the job, aside from an occasional moment to take a picture? Was she a good firefighter-paramedic? The answers to those sort of things won't necessarily be reflected in the paperwork that comprises her being fired and lodging a complaint about it.

[farscott]

I read the article. While issues like this (and the oh-so-minor fact that no one wants to see pictures of me in skimpy clothing on Instagram) are why I do not use social media, I do believe the Ms. Pritchard will prevail in the legal system. Montana's Board of Labor says she was not fired for not meeting employer obligations and is eligible for unemployment compensation that the city has not paid, the city has and had no social media policy even after one was supposed to be developed, she has prima facie evidence of discrimination, and she has evidence of other firefighters using social media in a manner that can be seen as promoting violence as a solution of a political issue. CNN has also reached out to her per the comments on the story.

She may well have earned her termination, but policies exist for a reason -- to justify employer behavior and show termination was for a valid reason. I feel it will be an expensive lesson for the taxpayers of Evergreen, MT.

[Hambo]

I did a quick check to see if her department has a union, and it doesn't appear to based on this http://mscopff.org/?zone=/unionactive/view_article.cfm&HomeID=580522&page=MSFA

If that's the case, she is an at-will employee and subject to termination at any time. Unless she can prove she was fired solely for being a woman, she's out of luck.

Moral of the story: you need to fully understand the terms of your employment. Moral #2, social media is worse than a social disease.

[deflave]

Interesting article and thank you for posting.

Having been career law enforcement and also having resided in rural Montana for ten years of my life, I would assume the department is absolutely going to pay out. In my dealings with small town areas, the professionalism and consistency often drops to about zero. A lifetime spent in a sub 10K population does really weird things. Jealousy and infighting abounds even among the natives.

Throw in a native New Yorker with a set of bolt-ons that rises to Instagram fame... Yeah. I'm pretty sure there were some emotionally based decisions taking place during this process.

[GJM]

I know nothing about the particulars here, but in terms of employment law, Montana is a very pro employee state, and terminations are more difficult than in many other states.

[Hambo]

I know nothing about the particulars here, but in terms of employment law, Montana is a very pro employee state, and terminations are more difficult than in many other states.

I stand corrected. Termination for "good cause" is built into the process in Montana.

https://www.blr.com/HR-Employment/Performance-Termination/Termination-with-Discharge-in-Montana

[Crazy Dane]

Our (fire)departments social media policy says we cant post anything that represents or makes the department look bad. My interpretation of it, anyway. I'm not going to dig through her instagram account, mainly because I don't know how to, but the pics in the article of her in skimpy work out cloths and the obvious posing that appears to be on duty would be enough to get her in hot water here. We have a lot of the same types that post everything to social media and it seems as long as they play by the rules, everything is cool.

[snow white]

Shit, I'd light my house on fire just to get her through the front door.

[Nephrology]

Just my opinion, but when you put on a uniform for a public-facing job (especially one where you will work with people on the worst days of their lives), I think it's important to remember that it's no longer about you.

To the public, when they see you, they will see in you everyone else who has worn the same uniform. By the same token, the way they see you - online, on TV, in person - directly affects the way they view the next person who comes into their life wearing the same thing. Act accordingly.

It's fine (and normal) to have photos of yourself in uniform if you're proud of it, if those photos reflect positively (or at least not negatively) on the service that uniform represents. When it starts to become less about the uniform, and more about the "U," then it is worth reflecting on why you first put it on to begin with.

Per the article, this is not something this woman seemed to understand after multiple conversations with her employer, whom she represents each time she puts on that turn-out gear. I don't think her firing was unreasonable. She may have been a good paramedic, and probably is a perfectly nice lady, but if you feel your personal image (fit, sexy, Montana crossfitter) is more important than what people need when they dial 911 (a firefighter-paramedic who is there to help them), then it might be time to consider a different line of work.

[Hambo]

I checked out her IG, which is what she wants most anyway. Compared to a lot of shit, it's pretty tame. However, she did post photos in which her department name/logo was clearly visible.

Most noteworthy photo unrelated to her firing is of her wearing a Serpa with a cocked SIG legacy model in it. Evidently she's not into influencing gun safety.

[deflave]

Our (fire)departments social media policy says we cant post anything that represents or makes the department look bad. My interpretation of it, anyway. I'm not going to dig through her instagram account, mainly because I don't know how to, but the pics in the article of her in skimpy work out cloths and the obvious posing that appears to be on duty would be enough to get her in hot water here. We have a lot of the same types that post everything to social media and it seems as long as they play by the rules, everything is cool.

I scrolled through her images and there's nothing on there that isn't on every other 20 something firefighter's (or cop for that matter) instagram page. Male or female.

But just to be safe I'm going to check again. A few dozen times.

[deflave]

Just my opinion, but when you put on a uniform for a public-facing job (especially one where you will work with people on the worst days of their lives), I think it's important to remember that it's no longer about you.

To the public, when they see you, they will see in you everyone else who has worn the same uniform. By the same token, the way they see you - online, on TV, in person - directly affects the way they view the next person who comes into their life wearing the same thing. Act accordingly.

It's fine (and normal) to have photos of yourself in uniform if you're proud of it, if those photos reflect positively (or at least not negatively) on the service that uniform represents. When it starts to become less about the uniform, and more about the "U," then it is worth reflecting on why you first put it on to begin with.

Per the article, this is not something this woman seemed to understand after multiple conversations with her employer, whom she represents each time she puts on that turn-out gear. I don't think her firing was unreasonable. She may have been a good paramedic, and probably is a perfectly nice lady, but if you feel your personal image (fit, sexy, Montana crossfitter) is more important than what people need when they dial 911 (a firefighter-paramedic who is there to help them), then it might be time to consider a different line of work.

If being a douche is grounds for termination, this country gonna be real short on first-responders for a while. Grin...

[Rosco Benson]

Were it up to me, I'd fire her over her flag-motif workout attire. I don't mind....and rather like....our flag being properly depicted on patches and the like. I can even go for subdued color versions. But I'm annoyed by stylized USA flag-ish designs on the butt of person's garments or as folding chairs to sit on.


I recognize that most persons doing this are well meaning, probably patriotic, and don't give a hoot what I think. They are just ignorant and thoughtless. It is OUR FLAG, not a fashion accessory.


Rosco

[Nephrology]

If being a douche is grounds for termination, this country gonna be real short on first-responders for a while. Grin...

It's fine to be a douche. Most surgeons I know? Douchebags (sorry @Doc Glock). Are they good at what they do? Yes. Would I feel that way if they had an instagram page of them flexing in scrubs to sell surgical devices for Medtronic? Not so much.

[EPF]

Certainly a brave new world. My wife was one of the early females to fly the Apache for the Army. At the time it was the only combat arms job open to women. She spent her time in service trying very hard to show she could perform with the men and to down play her sex as a key characteristic. It was a difficult road for her but IMO the perseverance of her generation of young women paved the way for the more equal world we live in today.

My wife does not social media. Last year, I showed her an Instagram account of a young female Apache pilot who likes to post pictures of herself split screen in sexy bikinis/in the cockpit.

I’m not sure I have the words to explain my wife’s reaction. Apoplectic maybe? She refused to believe it was real for quite a while and then moved through all the stages of grief 😂. I’m not sure that my opinion matters on this but she felt betrayed. She believes that all of the plates of shit she ate to be seen as an equal were wasted. The goal of her and her peers was to be seen simply as Soldiers.

[JDD]

Just my opinion, but when you put on a uniform for a public-facing job (especially one where you will work with people on the worst days of their lives), I think it's important to remember that it's no longer about you.

To the public, when they see you, they will see in you everyone else who has worn the same uniform. By the same token, the way they see you - online, on TV, in person - directly affects the way they view the next person who comes into their life wearing the same thing. Act accordingly.

It's fine (and normal) to have photos of yourself in uniform if you're proud of it, if those photos reflect positively (or at least not negatively) on the service that uniform represents. When it starts to become less about the uniform, and more about the "U," then it is worth reflecting on why you first put it on to begin with.

Per the article, this is not something this woman seemed to understand after multiple conversations with her employer, whom she represents each time she puts on that turn-out gear. I don't think her firing was unreasonable. She may have been a good paramedic, and probably is a perfectly nice lady, but if you feel your personal image (fit, sexy, Montana crossfitter) is more important than what people need when they dial 911 (a firefighter-paramedic who is there to help them), then it might be time to consider a different line of work.

I agree with this in its entirety, however, if she can reasonably show that her behavior is not substantially different than her male peers... then her management is screwed up for singling her out.

Just because she is more attractive and widely followed than random male rookie firefighter schmuckatelli does not mean she is the one out of line. After all, how many fire departments have made one of those calendars where they pose wearing partial turnout gear in strategic ways (to raise money for teh cause)? It's a somewhat poor comparison, but the overall appearance right now, is that folks are pissed because she is better at it than they are. Management has not helped if they did not apply guidance across the board.

[blues]

Certainly a brave new world. My wife was one of the early females to fly the Apache for the Army. At the time it was the only combat arms job open to women. She spent her time in service trying very hard to show she could perform with the men and to down play her sex as a key characteristic. It was a difficult road for her but IMO the perseverance of her generation of young women paved the way for the more equal world we live in today.

My wife does not social media. Last year, I showed her an Instagram account of a young female Apache pilot who likes to post pictures of herself split screen in sexy bikinis/in the cockpit.

I’m not sure I have the words to explain my wife’s reaction. Apoplectic maybe? She refused to believe it was real for quite a while and then moved through all the stages of grief 😂. I’m not sure that my opinion matters on this but she felt betrayed. She believes that all of the plates of shit she ate to be seen as an equal were wasted. The goal of her and her peers was to be seen simply as Soldiers.

Bravo. I applaud your wife and her perspective.

And I also think that that point of view is common, (and rightfully so), among any group, that is trying to get their foot in the door and be taken seriously.

I've seen this in law enforcement along racial, religious, gender, sexuality lines and it makes perfect sense to me. When a particular sector of employment is or was not traditionally open to members of various "non-mainstream" groups, first you want to establish bona fides before trying to change the entire underlying culture.

Get respect by giving respect, and establish roots from which to grow. Just my opinion.

[Crazy Dane]

Just my opinion, but when you put on a uniform for a public-facing job (especially one where you will work with people on the worst days of their lives), I think it's important to remember that it's no longer about you.

To the public, when they see you, they will see in you everyone else who has worn the same uniform. By the same token, the way they see you - online, on TV, in person - directly affects the way they view the next person who comes into their life wearing the same thing. Act accordingly.

It's fine (and normal) to have photos of yourself in uniform if you're proud of it, if those photos reflect positively (or at least not negatively) on the service that uniform represents. When it starts to become less about the uniform, and more about the "U," then it is worth reflecting on why you first put it on to begin with.

Per the article, this is not something this woman seemed to understand after multiple conversations with her employer, whom she represents each time she puts on that turn-out gear. I don't think her firing was unreasonable. She may have been a good paramedic, and probably is a perfectly nice lady, but if you feel your personal image (fit, sexy, Montana crossfitter) is more important than what people need when they dial 911 (a firefighter-paramedic who is there to help them), then it might be time to consider a different line of work.

Have you been talking with my chief? This is it to a T.

We do have issued PT gear and its not a sports bra and spandex shorts. I went and looked our work out SOG states "no exposed midriff". In a house that is all male there has been some leeway to workout clothes but mixed company has to play by the rules. I'm not saying that they have the same rules but I can see where she pushed a/the line.

[Nephrology]

I agree with this in its entirety, however, if she can reasonably show that her behavior is not substantially different than her male peers... then her management is screwed up for singling her out.

Just because she is more attractive and widely followed than random male rookie firefighter schmuckatelli does not mean she is the one out of line. After all, how many fire departments have made one of those calendars where they pose wearing partial turnout gear in strategic ways (to raise money for teh cause)? It's a somewhat poor comparison, but the overall appearance right now, is that folks are pissed because she is better at it than they are. Management has not helped if they did not apply guidance across the board.

That's fair. I do agree that she probably got a lot more attention as an attractive woman than some random guy posting selfies from the back of the ambulance, and I do think she should be free to be whoever she wants to be outside of work. I also agree that a clear and consistent policy should have been established, and the Dept. screwed up by not making these rules apply across the board before they went after her.


Have you been talking with my chief? This is it to a T.

We do have issued PT gear and its not a sports bra and spandex shorts. I went and looked our work out SOG states "no exposed midriff". In a house that is all male there has been some leeway to workout clothes but mixed company has to play by the rules. I'm not saying that they have the same rules but I can see where she pushed a/the line.

One of the things I like the most about scrubs is that they very much level the playing field for everyone. Men and women wear the same unisex outfit of the same color and both sexes look equally unflattering in them.

One trend at my institution that I have noticed are that younger, more athletic men will tend to pick out a smaller scrub top size than their pants, fairly obviously to expose more of their biceps (100% of the time it is orthopedics or general surgical residents). It gets an eye roll out of me every time.

[BobLoblaw]

It's hard to feel sorry for "influencers" (a.k.a. narcissists) who experience bad things due to their "influencing." Believe or not, you can happily live your life and do your job without the "support" from people who actually just want to fuck you.

[jlw]

I did a quick check to see if her department has a union, and it doesn't appear to based on this http://mscopff.org/?zone=/unionactive/view_article.cfm&HomeID=580522&page=MSFA

If that's the case, she is an at-will employee and subject to termination at any time. Unless she can prove she was fired solely for being a woman, she's out of luck.

Moral of the story: you need to fully understand the terms of your employment. Moral #2, social media is worse than a social disease.

The lack of a union does not mean at-will. What determines whether or not she is at will is the personnel system and public employment laws under which she was hired.

[jlw]

She is alleging that male employees have posts on social media.

She is being accused of using her posts for personal gain.

There is a difference between posting a picture standing in front of a firetruck and posting a picture standing in front of a firetruck wearing a t-shirt that you are selling in an attempt to sell the t-shirts.

[RevolverRob]

Three unpopular opinions.

1) The women who worked hard to be seen as equals actually paved the way to allow women in the workplace to also be women. In other words, it's generally accepted that women can do the same jobs as men now. So, they no longer have to downplay their sex at all. It can be difficult for women who had to downplay and desexualize themselves for years, to recognize the contributions they made. It doesn't help that the younger crowd doesn't honor those contributions appropriately.

2) If you're going to show yourself in uniform/unit insignia/etc. You need to provide a professional appearance. This goes for women and men. There is no reason why in 2020, any city, any department, any employer should be without a comprehensive social media policy.

3) She's not really hot. She's fit and clearly strong and I suspect she is an excellent firefighter and paramedic (though apparently has questionable firearms safety standards). But she's not really hot, unless you're into girls who are potentially on anabolic steroids.

[Hambo]

The lack of a union does not mean at-will. What determines whether or not she is at will is the personnel system and public employment laws under which she was hired.

See my second post regarding employment in Montana.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Can she save my ass if I am on fire or having a heart attack? All I care about. Got an EKG yesterday and the tech giving it had a large religious tatoo on his arm that I could see. Not my religion - so what.

About the flag - during Viet Nam days - Abby Hoffman (or one of his crowd) appeared at a demonstration wearing an American Flag shirt. Folks were outraged. However, the next day, Roy Rogers had a special on TV and was wearing the same shirt type. It's a free country.

Here's for you pontificating academics (haha) - https://www.chronicle.com/interactives/20191205-Snow-SexAdjunct

Woman finds this is the only way to support herself when in grad school. Her mentor refuses to write recommendations. Any different from the trophy wives of rich guys, up to and including national leaders? Hmm?

[0ddl0t]

Who demands to be paid for light duty because you have a 6 week "no lifting" restriction following your elective cosmetic surgery?

[Maple Syrup Actual]

Three unpopular opinions.

1) The women who worked hard to be seen as equals actually paved the way to allow women in the workplace to also be women. In other words, it's generally accepted that women can do the same jobs as men now. So, they no longer have to downplay their sex at all. It can be difficult for women who had to downplay and desexualize themselves for years, to recognize the contributions they made. It doesn't help that the younger crowd doesn't honor those contributions appropriately.

2) If you're going to show yourself in uniform/unit insignia/etc. You need to provide a professional appearance. This goes for women and men. There is no reason why in 2020, any city, any department, any employer should be without a comprehensive social media policy.

3) She's not really hot. She's fit and clearly strong and I suspect she is an excellent firefighter and paramedic (though apparently has questionable firearms safety standards). But she's not really hot, unless you're into girls who are potentially on anabolic steroids.

Those opinions might be unpopular but I agree with you right down the line there.

[txdpd]

3) She's not really hot. She's fit and clearly strong and I suspect she is an excellent firefighter and paramedic (though apparently has questionable firearms safety standards). But she's not really hot, unless you're into girls who are potentially on anabolic steroids.

Funny I was going to say that if she’s serious about Instagram success, she’s going to have to start dropping some Anavar. If she’s on steroids, she’s not doing it right. That would be a lot easier with a real job since she’s probably making a couple hundred a month on IG.

She might get her job back. IME she can jump off a cliff. The kind of people that can’t knock some petty social media behavior to keep a real job, are the same ones that can’t shut up, follow simple orders and just do their jobs at critical incidents. Social media might have been the reason for termination but I doubt that’s why she was being looked at for termination.

[Tom Fineis]

Seasonal part time fire medic? Check.
Social media as personal income? Check.
Use of first responder status for credibility/relevance? Check.
Cringe worthy fire-hero quotes on IG? Check.
Missing work for cosmetic surgery? Check.

She doesn't want to do the job, she just wants to be associated with the job to feed her ego and her wallet. Big solid meh from me.

[EPF]

Three unpopular opinions.

1) The women who worked hard to be seen as equals actually paved the way to allow women in the workplace to also be women. In other words, it's generally accepted that women can do the same jobs as men now. So, they no longer have to downplay their sex at all. It can be difficult for women who had to downplay and desexualize themselves for years, to recognize the contributions they made. It doesn't help that the younger crowd doesn't honor those contributions appropriately. .

Of course this is true. With the slight caveat that military service is not a “workplace” in the normal sense. In the business of life and death, the only thing that matters is unit cohesion and its affect on performance. Kill or be killed. Logic says that may also apply to first responders but that’s not my lane.

But your basic principal is correct. Women have earned the right to be women. There is some very rich irony in the combat boot wearing, make up eschewing second wave feminists paving the way for third wave feminism.....which from what I can tell involves a rule that no woman is allowed to wear pants not for yoga to the grocery store.

I for one fully support the third yoga wave pant movement. Viva le revolution! 😎

[Poconnor]

I was told in the police academy that the two most common career enders were females and alcohol. I think we can add social media to that list. I don’t know anything about this woman beyond the newspaper article but I did notice she has at least four Instagram profiles. It looks like she is more interested in being an Instagram model than a firefighter. I can see her getting her job back but then getting fired again but the next time they will document it better

[jlw]

See my second post regarding employment in Montana.

That doesn't change the no union = at will statement, particularly pertaining to public employment.

I'll readily have the discussion, but I'm also cool with "never mind".

[Wise_A]

Montana's Board of Labor says she was not fired for not meeting employer obligations and is eligible for unemployment compensation that the city has not paid, the city has and had no social media policy even after one was supposed to be developed, she has prima facie evidence of discrimination, and she has evidence of other firefighters using social media in a manner that can be seen as promoting violence as a solution of a political issue. CNN has also reached out to her per the comments on the story.

She may well have earned her termination, but policies exist for a reason -- to justify employer behavior and show termination was for a valid reason. I feel it will be an expensive lesson for the taxpayers of Evergreen, MT.

She wasn't fired for the social media per se, she was fired because she made money by using municipal facilities/equipment in her commercial activity, which happened to be social media.


2) If you're going to show yourself in uniform/unit insignia/etc. You need to provide a professional appearance. This goes for women and men. There is no reason why in 2020, any city, any department, any employer should be without a comprehensive social media policy.

Agreed. My dad was a cop for decades, from bottom to top in a fairly decent-sized department. I think the earliest recollection I have of him on the job is going to a promotion ceremony--I wanna say Inspector. Whether he was in plainclothes or or in uniform, he was always fastidious in his appearance. Neat jacket-and-tie sets, suits, and never the slightest flaw in his uniform. And it was a real uniform--flat-top hat, brass buttons, blued pants and shirt, black shoes. I only think I saw him around the house with his uniform shirt unbuttoned maybe once, on 9/11, after a 12-hour day.

Nowadays, that same department is in disarray. There's almost nobody on anymore that was there when Dad was there, and he's only been retired 15 years. The uniform requirements devolved into BDU-style utilities, and now you have guys wearing a fucking t-shirt and single-color fatigue pants. Many have visible tattoos and beards, none of which were allowed previously. The policeman's hat has been replaced by a ball cap. To be clear, the old blues-and-brass is still available--and this is where I can understand the attitude--but if they're only going to start guys at $34k, t-shirts and caps is what you're gonna get.

As for the women, there are currently some verified ass-kickers--regular ladies, just competent, hard-working, brave professionals. And just like in Dad's day, there's also the set with hoop earrings and 2" nails that just embarrass the hell out of them.

And it's not just the police/fire/EMT set that could do with a return to professionalism. The same rot has affected all the civil services.

https://nypost.com/2019/12/17/education-official-tweets-anti-semitic-rant-about-jersey-city-shooting-rampage/

PS--She's still at her job.

[fixer]

Seasonal part time fire medic? Check.
Social media as personal income? Check.
Use of first responder status for credibility/relevance? Check.
Cringe worthy fire-hero quotes on IG? Check.
Missing work for cosmetic surgery? Check.

She doesn't want to do the job, she just wants to be associated with the job to feed her ego and her wallet. Big solid meh from me.

Bingo.

[LittleLebowski]

Seasonal part time fire medic? Check.
Social media as personal income? Check.
Use of first responder status for credibility/relevance? Check.
Cringe worthy fire-hero quotes on IG? Check.
Missing work for cosmetic surgery? Check.

She doesn't want to do the job, she just wants to be associated with the job to feed her ego and her wallet. Big solid meh from me.

That sums it up for me.

[mmc45414]

The kind of people that can’t knock some petty social media behavior to keep a real job, are the same ones that can’t shut up, follow simple orders and just do their jobs at critical incidents. Social media might have been the reason for termination but I doubt that’s why she was being looked at for termination.
Yes. But, IMO social media just speeds up the process. Before social media was so prevalent I know of TWO guys who wrote and had published actual hard copy books (can't delete those posts!!) that were thinly veiled criticisms of the companies they were STILL working for. I know at least one of them had some friends convinced they were fired unfairly instead of being fired for being stupid.

[Jhp147]

Seasonal part time fire medic? Check.
Social media as personal income? Check.
Use of first responder status for credibility/relevance? Check.
Cringe worthy fire-hero quotes on IG? Check.
Missing work for cosmetic surgery? Check.

She doesn't want to do the job, she just wants to be associated with the job to feed her ego and her wallet. Big solid meh from me.

I'm really glad someone said this. Sometimes these days it is so politically incorrect to question a female or other protected species that the truth gets buried and everyone sits around nodding their heads and agreeing to look woke and progressive. When I see folks being fire fighters and using their position to sell tee-shirts, nutritional supplements, workout plans, and the like, credibility goes to zero minus because MONEY generates "mis-remembering" who told you that you could do what to what extent. I'm done with these people and have no interest in fakes. I don't care what's fair, not fair, illegal, or not in the CBA. I know lots of fire fighters that have roofing, tiling, mowing, moving or whatever business on the side, but they didn't become fire fighters so they could do that and expect the FD to give them time off to sharpen mower blades.