Opinion: Raleigh is Studying Firefighter Schedules. It Should Be Implementing Staffing Plans.

Raleigh’s firefighters were recently asked to participate in a feasibility survey conducted by Matrix Consulting about a potential move to 12-hour shifts. Eighty-three firefighters were contacted. The survey itself focused almost entirely on whether a 12-hour model could work.

That focus has raised a fundamental question: how did a broad workforce review turn into a narrow discussion about 12-hour shifts?

When the Request for Proposal was initiated on October 7, 2025, the direction outlined for review was wide-ranging:

-Shift modification

-Reduction in working hours

-Appropriate staffing models

-Review of other public safety department schedules

-Consideration of a workforce policy revision

Notably, the original language did not specify a move to 12-hour shifts. Yet the survey firefighters received centered on the feasibility of that model. For many of us in operations, that disconnect has created confusion about whether all options are truly being evaluated or whether the conversation has already narrowed.

This matters because firefighters are not opposed to change. They are asking for the right change.

What Firefighters Actually Want

Following the RFP, Local 548 polled its membership. Two 12-hour shift options were presented internally. Not a single vote was cast in favor of either one.

That result is striking. In a profession where schedule changes are often debated vigorously, unanimous rejection is rare. The consistent message from the firefighters has not been “move to 12s.” It has been: reduce work hours and increase staffing.

Raleigh firefighters currently average a 56-hour work week. No other city department operates under that schedule. Across the country, many comparable departments are moving toward or have switched to shift structures that give firefighters a 42-hour weekly average while maintaining a 24 hour work model. That shift is being driven by recruitment, retention, and fatigue concerns. Its feasibility doesn't need a study; it is currently working and has worked for decades. 

There are practical ways to reduce hours: maintaining the current schedule while adding more days off, or implementing a fourth shift. But both require the same prerequisite—more staffing.

The Staffing Conversation That Keeps Getting Studied

This is where the discussion becomes less about schedules and more about priorities.

In 2020, the City hired Matrix Consulting to perform an Allocation Analysis, with fire department staffing as a central focus. The recommendation was clear: additional personnel were needed. In 2025, the Fire Master Plan echoed that same conclusion. However, daily staffing levels continue to operate below the standards set forth in those reports, leaving a gap between analysis and implementation.

This is not a new issue. It is a studied issue. And it is one that has now spanned seven budget cycles since the 2020 staffing study was delivered. Seven opportunities to implement recommendations. Seven chances to close the gap between what has been analyzed and what has been funded.

Instead, implementation has been slow or deferred while the same staffing needs continue to appear in study after study.

Meanwhile, firefighters continue to operate with three-person companies in a rapidly growing city. National standards and best practices point toward four-person staffing for safety and operational effectiveness. The gap between what has been recommended and what is funded remains a central concern.

A Broader Public Safety Context

Matrix Consulting’s recent work also found staffing shortages in Police, Emergency Communications, and the Office of the Fire Marshal. In other words, the fire department is not alone. Multiple public safety functions are operating below recommended staffing levels.

Yet the most visible current discussion centers on firefighter shift structure rather than staffing increases. For those inside the system, that emphasis can feel misaligned with the data already available.

What “Workforce Policy Revision” Means

Another phrase from the original proposal—“consider a workforce policy revision”—is broad by design. It can encompass schedules, hours, staffing models, and organizational structure. But any meaningful revision requires clarity, stakeholder involvement, and alignment with existing plans.

If the goal is to reduce burnout, for example, it is important to understand what drives burnout in the fire service. Long hours contribute, but so do hazardous conditions, high call volume, and operating with insufficient personnel. Addressing one factor without addressing the others may not produce the intended results.

The Central Questions for City Leaders

Raleigh is a growing city with increasing service demands. The City has commissioned multiple studies identifying staffing needs. Firefighters have provided consistent feedback about priorities: adequate daily staffing, reduced weekly hours, and safe company strength.

The policy questions now facing City leaders are straightforward:

Should staffing recommendations from existing studies be implemented instead of major schedule change that is only wanted by one councilor?

What is the short term plan and long-term plan to reach recommended daily staffing levels?

After seven budget cycles, what is the timeline for full implementation of the staffing recommendations already on the table?

These are not abstract questions. They affect recruitment, retention, response capability, and ultimately public safety.

Moving From Study to Action

Raleigh has invested in analysis. The next step is deciding which recommendations to implement and when. For firefighters, the concern is not that change is being discussed. It is that the conversation is focused on a solution that doesn’t match the primary problem.

Schedules can be adjusted. Policies can be revised. But without adequate staffing, those changes risk becoming cosmetic rather than structural.

As the City approaches another budget cycle, the discussion around firefighter schedules provides an opportunity to revisit a larger issue: aligning staffing levels with the expectations placed on a modern, growing city’s fire service. After multiple studies and seven budget cycles, the question is no longer whether the need exists. It is when the recommendations will finally move from paper to practice.

March 13th 2026 Update

Notably, the original language discussed by City Council did not specify a move to 12-hour shifts. However, the survey distributed to firefighters focused primarily on evaluating the feasibility of that model. For many of us working in operations, that difference has created confusion about whether all scheduling options are genuinely being considered or if the conversation has already been narrowed. You can review the amendment to the Matrix Consulting contract here, which reads very differently from how the proposal was initially described during the council meeting.  

Consider donating please

Your donation to the Raleigh Professional Firefighters Political Advocacy helps us fight for better safety and rights on the job. Every contribution significantly impacts our daily mission to serve and protect; specifically, these are being used for the Raleigh Political Victory Fund!