Let's answer this question succinctly: no.
The story talks about how a firefighter is still driving fire trucks for the Seattle Fire Department despite being arrested for DUI three times, the latest of which occurred in March of this year. Although a judge has ordered the man to install an ignition interlock system on his personal vehicle, there have been no restrictions placed upon his on-duty driving either by the courts or SFD, largely because he has not violated any departmental policies while on duty.
But once you read the article, you discover that the man has never been convicted of DUI. His current case is still pending, and an arrest two years ago resulted in a guilty plea for reckless driving, which is not the same as a DUI. What's more, his first arrest for DUI came back in 1994 in Shoreline - which was two decades ago and several years before he was hired by SFD. And that charge was reduced to first degree negligent driving, which again is not a DUI.
It's true that a judge ordered the ignition interlock device based on his two previous arrests. But he also released the firefighter on $25,000 bond, and he continues to drive a fire truck for the city of Seattle. So, to recount: the fireman is not a "convicted repeat drunk driver" like the headline states. He has two driving offenses on his record, but they are considered lesser crimes by many. Plus, the thrust of the article implies that people cannot separate their work behavior from their off-duty behavior successfully. Its fair to assume that trained emergency response personnel, for example other firefighters, would detect on the job drinking.
So can we relax the hype and not throw away a talented and well trained fire fighter?