Firefighters Strike.......Again

[PPRuNeUser0172]

After reading an article in one of the better newspapers today, it appears our friends in the FBU are having a ballot in the next few weeks, with a view to striking in September. Apparently, a force of 11500 will be required to man the fire tenders and Op Fiasco looks to be revived.

The Army will be hit for approx 7000 troops with the RAF/RN providing the remainder. Oh well its a good job that we aren't too busy at the moment and we have loads of spare people on the ground to deal with this??????

I really don't understand their problem, (can someone please fill me in???) they earn good money for what they do, and once again, many junior ranks are going to find themselves being quasi-firefigters on less money than the firefighters are ALREADY on!

This absolutely stinks, I can only hope that the members of the FBU will appreciate just how much this will hurt the armed forces and will realise that no one really gives a toss about their "cause".



:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
DS

[empty pockets]

This latest dispute is apparently concerned with bank holiday working. The FBU wants firefighters to continue with restricted working hours on 8 public holidays, whereas the government [quite rightly] wants them to work a normal shift since they are being paid double time and getting an additional day's holiday as time in lieu.

The FBU has stalled 2 pay rises totalling 7.7% in the past 8 months, and is now calling for a strike because they baulk at the idea of going to work on double pay. I sincerely hope that the British public shows no sympathy with their 'cause' this time around.

[tokentotty]

With people lining up to be firefighters can't we just sack all the whinging ones and start again. We'd probably have to cover fewer days for them to be trained up than we would if they keep striking!

Although I respect what they do for a living, there is such a thing as supply and demand. When you require few academic qualifications for job and there are plenty of people who want to do it....

[D-IFF_ident]

Good luck chaps


http://www.modoracle.com/?page=http://www.modoracle.com/news/detail.h2f?id=5996

That Mr Hoon hey? You gotta luv him - he's so funny...

[JessTheDog]

If industrial action will put lives and property at risk then....

1. Remove the right to industrial action from firefighters. Can be done through prerogative powes, surely?

2. Get a court injunction to decalre any such strike illegal.

...or let's just use the armed forces, bunch of mugs that they are, shall we?

[xPinger]

Well, here we go again!

Just in case there are any whingeing firemen reading this - do you realise the unbelievable amount of pain and grief this causes the Armed Forces? Several Ships Companies in the RN have been either recalled from leave or had their summer leave cancelled to start training for Op Fresco 2 (not officially called that yet!). Presumably this is the same for the other two Services as most bases/units are on summer leave in August. I'm quite sure the firemen wouldn't stand for this, so why do they expect us to do so for them.

They had very little support within the Armed Forces last time, although apparently had a fair bit of support from the general public. I sincerely hope they realise that this has worn very thin indeed, especially given that they're arguing over doing a normal day's work on a Bank Holiday, whilst being paid double time and getting the day back as a day in lieu. Presumably they'll need the time to count their new fatter pay packets!

They should be brought in line with other emergency services, lose their right to strike, and have to settle for whaterver pay award their employers deem fit to give them - how does 2.7% grab them? No, didn't think so!

Rant over.

[Slotback]

Let's hope that the good men and women of the Armed Forces don't have to put out the fires caused by a hijacked aircraft crashing. Crashing because they weren't able to do their primary job and intercept it early, or assist in providing security at airports etc. The ones left in the country that is!

Got to go and prepare to work this weekend, looking forward to the extra pay and time off...oh forgot that doesn't apply to us. The FBU is nothing more than a group of unrealistic, money grabbing, lazy idiots who do nothing to serve the firefighting profession.

[Grimweasel]

Employers in Avon are said to be the first in th UK to fully accept the fire brigades pay increase rather than more strikes!!

Maybe that will be the catalyst for the rest of the country??

[JessTheDog]

This could be interesting....if the local authorities settle independently, then it is egg on the face of fat Prezza and completely undermines a national strike. I read (somewhere) that Scotland may also accept the proposed deal.

Might get that holiday after all!

[Runway 31]

A gang of "arrogant, lying. bullying immoral cowards and thieves" is how one FBU negotiator described a group of Labour councillors after they had deliberately and maliciously thwarted any chance of a settlement to the long standing fire dispute. Another described their wrecking tactics as the "most blatant piece of political interference" he had seen in his life. Less caustic but equally revealing is the statement by one of the Local Authority negotiators, "They (the FBU) held up to their part of the agreement and we have let them down on ours". Pat Watters, leader of the Scottish Employers group, went on to say, "I'm not putting any fault on the trade unions in this particular case. I criticised them in the past but I am not today".

Strong words from three people who witnessed the extraordinary events at a meeting which should have served to rubber-stamp an agreement which had been hammered out between the FBU and Local Government Employers. After many months of negotiations, all the sticking points had been resolved and the way seemed clear to release the 3.5% pay rise that had been owed to the firefighters since last November. Now, that agreement has been wrecked and, with no immediate prospects of further negotiations, another round of fire strikes seems inevitable. This situation clearly warrants a public explanation. The way in which this breakdown came about demands a public enquiry.

Mondays NJC meeting was intended to finalise many months of intensive discussions between the two sides. That was, however, until the gang of "arrogant, lying, bullying, immoral cowards and thieves" decided to gate-crash the party. This group of London councillors previously had nothing to do with the National Joint Council, nothing to do with the talks and nothing to with the Fire Service. Their arrival was so unexpected that extra seating had to be hurriedly brought in and there was barely room for the unions representatives. Bill Gillespie of the Employers said, "I'm particularly annoyed that nine out of the thirteen people who voted against the deal, I had never seen before at negotiations." It is even reported that one of the so-called 'wreckers' asked who they ( the FBU ) were. Clearly, whoever these mewcenaries were, they were not the kind of well-informed experts that the public might expect to be making such important decisions on their behalf. It could even be asked if they knew enough to make a decision on their own, or if they had to be told how to vote by someone else.

The Local Government Association have since issued a statement explaining that the Employers side were 'fully represented' at this particular meeting to "ensure that the views of all fire authorities were properly represented across the country". This concern for the democratic process is commendable but it does beg the question as to why this was not considered necessary during the long months of negotiations leading up to this agreement. It might also be asked, how can an all-London group of councillors be said to represent fire authorities 'across the country'. As to who authorised this group of Labour councillors to attend the NJC meeting unannounced, when and why, the LGA spokesperson could offer no answer but instead claimed that such questions were irrelevant. The real issue was about what work firefighters should undertake on public holidays. It was because the FBU suddenly changed their minds at Mondays meeting that the agreement failed. How fortunate that some shadowy but nameless individual had the foresight to round up a group of spare Labour councillors..........just in case.

We are indeed fortunate in this country, to have such public-spirited officials and politicians. Modest as well; too modest perhaps. Such public benefactors should step forward and receive full credit for their actions. Modesty does not always become a politician. It has been suggested that Minister Nick Raynsford, New Labours very own Salacious Crum, used fiscal blackmail to force the Labour councillors to do his dirty work for him. It has also been alleged that Sir Sandy Bruce-Lockhart chairman of the Local Government Association, had a hand in this murky affair. However, they are just minor players, with no real authority off their own to initiate a deception of this magnitude. Mr Prescott says it is nonsense to suggest that the Government had intervened but, then again, he told us that the Bain Review was independent. Like Bart Simpson, Tony Blair will also deny any responsibility when he finally returns to this planet. Yet someone, somewhere, has maliciously perverted the course of legitimate negotiations with the clear intention of provoking a national fire strike. Whoever that person, or persons are, high or low, they are guilty of treason. They are the real 'arrogant, lying. bullying immoral cowards and thieves'. They must be removed from whatever office they hold.

If further proof were necessary that this has been a deliberate plot to prevent a long-overdue settlement to this dispute, consider the words of Peter Monk, deputy leader of Suffolk County Council and a member of the Employers negotiating team. "Councillors who have no detailed knowledge of the dispute were brought in to pack the meeting and scupper the deal. The Fire Brigades Union has a fair gripe. They were stitched up................all our hard work in trying to reach an agreement has come to an end through political spite". These are the words of an honorable man;. Now consider the words of Sir Sandy Bruce-Lockhart. He tries to justify what happened by claiming, "We were perfectly entitled to do what we did". This is the measure of the man and the deception. Mr Bruce-Lockhart, until you learn to differentiate between what you have the right to do and what is the right thing to do, you do not even qualify as a human being let alone aspire to high office.

The FBU officials have been told that there will be no further talks unless firefighters are balloted and vote for industrial action. They are actually being told that they must go on strike. At the same time, Mr Prescott's department is sanctimoniously warning that further strikes by the union will put lives and property at risk; they call the firefighters 'irresponsible. Talk about the pot calling the kettle. There is irrefutable evidence that firefighters are deliberately being goaded and manipulated into taking industrial action, yet Mr Prescott calls them irresponsible and boasts that the Government have not intervened. It would be irresponsible not to intervene. If the Deputy Prime Minister is not aware of what is going on beneath his very nose and what needs to be done about it, then he should resign now on the grounds of criminal incompetence.

Hopefully, firefighters will resist this blatant provocation. Even when battle is inevitable, it is always wise to choose for yourself when and where you will fight. Clearly, someone in the Government wants the FBU to fight now. Some sources suggest that Tony Blair is already standing in front of a mirror in the toilets at Number 10, practising his sincere look and piously rolling his eyes. He may even find some documents linking the FBU to Saddam Hussein while he is in there. What is certain is that he will have no qualms about the cost to other people while he is grinding the firefighters into submission. It might even stop people from asking awkward questions about Iraq. Then he could stride victoriously into the New Year and election time as the heroic commander-in-chief and patron saint of public morality. On the other hand, firefighters have waited long enough for their money, it might be worth waiting a few more months. It is a known mathematical fact that Mr Blair's concern for public safety varies inversely to the proximity of a general election and his own political safety.

However, as much as Mr Blair would like to bury all of our heads in the sand, he may find that this latest round of skulduggery is more than he even he can spin his way out of. Not that he will go first:. Other, lesser beings will sacrificed at the altar of his ego Messrs Prescott and Raynsford would certainly do well to start watching that vulnerable spot between their shoulder blades.

The noose is beginning to tighten. Now, they have sacked Councillor Christina Jebb, chairperson of the Employers side for speaking out about what really happened. In addition to testimony of FBU officials, more and more of their own negotiators are speaking out against what they see as duplicity. More and more fire authorities are expressing disappointment with the Governments underhanded dealings. Yet Mr Prescott cannot wait to call up the military and gleefully condemn the firefighters. Who was it who challenged the firefighters to 'talk not walk'. Well, now is the time for talking, Mr Prescott. Is it worth plunging the entire country into the perils of another fire strike over an issue so trivial as to whether firefighters should or should not carry out fire safety work on a handful of public holidays throughout the year. There need be no strike, not even a ballot. The Government can and must step in immediately to prevent this madness going any further

[jindabyne]

All very well Runway31, but none of that will alter the general opinion of firemen should you choose to strike - WHATEVER the reason. I have no regard for Blair, nor politicians at large, but I will have even less regard for firemen should you elect to strike.

My son is a paramedic. You will know what I mean.

[Runway 31]

I will start by stating that I appreciate greatly what is being asked of the armed forces but I still request that you consider all the fact just as I will require to do when coming to a decision as to how to vote. What ever you may think, the decisions being taking will not be taken lightly. I did not join the fire service to do anything other than save lives and the decision whether or not to withdraw my services is not one that I had ever envisaged being require to make again..

As the posters on various threads on the forum state, the time comes when you have to face up to to employers trying to walk all over you, especially when the want to do something just because they can. I still hope there is time to end this and even if the vote is for strike action, it does not mean that a strike must take place. Before this intervention on Monday I do not think that the vote would have been for a strike. Now a lot of people even moderates are very angry.

I and the rest of my colleagues have had to put up with a lot of uncertainty over the last 2 years and hoped that everything would hve been sorted out on Monday. The government made sure for what ever reason that the negotiations failed. The armed services should know how we feel as the cuts being proposed are all the thanks you get for what you have done over the last couple of years.

In reply to a few of the previous poster, I am quite happy to drill, carry out inspections in premises, fit smoke alarms in someones house or do what ever is asked of me on Christmas Day. By the way, contrary to what has been stated I do not receive any payment over my normal wages for working public holidays.
The Fire Brigades Union is writing to every Fire Authority telling them the union is balloting for industrial action. The move follows the wrecking of the pay talks.

The employers’ side of the joint meeting was flooded by London councillors – most of them Labour - to ensure a 13-10 vote against signing the deal. The vote was set to go 10-6 in favour of a deal until London councillors were sent in to scupper it.

The wrecking move was described by one senior employers’ representative as a “conspiracy”. The quote is contained in the Independent and is in line with the comments made by privately to the union by many councillors: “ ‘I very rarely subscribe to conspiracy theories, but this is no cock up, this is a conspiracy’.” (Independent, 3 August.)

Another newspaper report confirms the flooding tactic was used. Bill Gillespie from Northern Ireland had attended the crucial talks at the TUC the previous week and knew a deal had been reached.

“ Ulster Fire Authority chairman Bill Gillespie said: "We have been working for over a year, and have overcome obstacle after obstacle. I felt we had reached the end of the road and we should sign up. I'm extremely disappointed now.

"To be fair to the FBU they have played their part and met us half way." He added: "I'm particularly annoyed that nine out of the 13 people who voted against the deal I had never seen before at negotiations. It seems they were drafted in at the last minute."”

Source: Belfast Newsletter 3 August 2004

The agreement reached last week on Stage 2 and Stage 3 of the deal agreed last year would have led to pay awards of 3.5% backdated to last November and 4.2% from 1 July to be made. It also included all key elements of the Government’s modernisation agenda, which have been formally agreed by the union but now rejected by the employers. This includes the issue of bank holiday working.

Details of the moves to block a deal were put formally to the 29 employers’ representatives at the meeting by the union’s Assistant General Secretary Mike Fordham. They were openly challenged on 5 key moves used to block a deal:

*”Nick Raynsford warned the Local Government Executive last Wednesday that the £30 million transitional funding would be withheld if the deal was signed. Do any of you deny it?” No response.

* “The tactics included cancelling this meeting. Do any of you deny it?” No response.
* “The tactics included making the employers’ side inquorate so they could not sign the deal. Do any of you deny it?” No response.
* “They included being pressurised by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister not to backdate the 3.5% payments to November. Do any of you deny it?” No response.
* “The tactics included flooding the meeting with councillors sent in to block the deal. Do any of you deny it?” No response.

The meeting was then adjourned. During the adjournment the employers’ representatives left and notified the union afterwards.

FBU Assistant general secretary Mike Fordham said: “I put every point to them detailing the tactics to be used to block a deal and none of them denied it. They sat in silence and raised no objection.

“Their own side use the term conspiracy because that is what it was. They parachuted in councillors no one had ever seen before, none of whom had ever even sat on a fire authority.

“Many councillors are disgusted by what happened and are making their views very clear. The rest of the UK does not want to see a strike on their doorstep because of a Government inspired plan to wreck the talks.

“Scottish councillors are in open revolt. Northern Ireland councillors are in open revolt. Lib Dem councillors and councillors from other independent parties are in open revolt. An increasing number of councillors in England and Wales are in open revolt.

“Nick Raynsford is the guiding hand behind the moves to block this deal and forcing a confrontation. We were ready to sign the deal yesterday and instead we are being forced to ballot.

“We reached a deal last week and it was Government intervention that stopped it. If there had not been Government intervention a deal would have been reached yesterday.”

Who I would ask is wanting a strike to go ahead?.

[jindabyne]

So don't!!

My hanky needs changing now -----------

[Runway 31]

If only life was so easy

[FJJP]

Would someone please explain why we are pi**ing about with those rubbish 'Green Godesses'? Surely it is not beyond the wit of a few experienced people to find out how modern fire engines work and then use them to fight fires. These engines do not belong to the FBU - they belong to the taxpayers, and it seems to me that they should rightly and legitimately be used by Forces personnel...

[Runway 31]

I think you will find that the plans are to use them.

Careful now as the appliances are very powerful and I hate to think of the consequences of them being driven by someone, no matter how experienced at driving but with minimal training on the actual vehicles. One of these being driven at 60 mph up a busy main street by someone being put in such a position will surely lead to disaster.

Please also remember it is not the appliances which put out fires, cut people out of accident damaged vehicles, deal with chemical incidents etc, it is the people in them.

[cyclic_fondler]

I guess that they can't use the modern fire engines as everytime they were handed back to the fire fighters the appliances would have to me made u/s until all the systems were checked out.

When you use a hire car, you tend to mis treat it as it's not yours. You might run the engine ragged or wear out the brakes but you don't care and then hand the keys back to the next user.

You can't do that with a fire engine. You don't want to be given the keys back from the forces personnel and go straight out to a shout not knowing if the equipment will work or not!

But then again they shouldn't be going on strike and this is all down to the political spin doctors at number 10 calling the FBUs bluff, forcing them to go on strike and making the whole nation suffer so taking the heat off the bad press this goverment has been getting recently.

[Runway 31]

I agree that we should not be going on strike. I would however ask who is calling who,s bluff. Bluffing is a rather dangerous game and if not handled properly someone will suffer, the public. The FBU agreed to the employers wording which is now the sticking point. The employers did not like their own words and voted them down when the negotiations were finished. They then asked for an adjournment and walked out stating that they would only resume talks if it was a yes vote for strike action. It would appear that the government and the employers do not intend to settle and are intent on keeping this dispute going. You make up your own mind why.

The government see everyone as expendable as long as they get what thay want. No sacrifice is too great for them as long as they stay in power. It is not them however that are expected to make the sacrifices it is people like me and you that are thrust into whatever front line it is this time to make these sacrifices to satisfy some idealogical battle.

The government will not suffer as the spin doctors will ensure that teflon tony will not have any muck sticking to him. They will see that the blame for this sorry mess will lie with everyone else.

[WorkingHard]

Runway 31 - what is so special about an hgv painted red rather than one painted camouflage?
So that we all may understand the economics at work here please tell us what is the average GROSS pay of the lowliest fireman and what other taxabale or non taxable benefits exist. Is it true that you will be paid DOUBLE time for bank holiday working AND time off in lieu AND you dont want to work normally on those days? If it is not true tell us all the true picture IF YOU DARE

[Ali Barber]

Runway31 already said he does not get paid any different for working Christmas day. I think there are also insurance issues that prevented us from using the red machines last time.
I'm not normally a supporter of the FBU on this issue, indeed I suggested on another thread that the firemen should get sacked if they strike, like the USA did with their ATC. However, Runway31 comes across as a sensible sort of guy who is putting his life on the line just as much as the rest of us. His story of the Gov't stitching up the FBU also sounds worryingly believable.
With a handle like "Runway 31", are you part of the "normal" fire service and operating on the same terms and conditions, or do airport fire services employ people under a different scheme?

[Runway 31]

Working hard,

Driving an HGV vehicle camouflaged or otherwise at normal road speed is reasonably similar. The similarity ends when you are required to manouvere it at high speeds through busy traffic on congested roads.

Following a 2 week training course, on return to station brigade drivers carry out routine driving of appliances to make sure that they are very aware of how to handle them. They are then required to undergo emergency fire appliance driver training which trains them for driving at speed as you would while responding to emergencies.

Not all appliances are the same to drive at speed, weight variations, movement of the water in the tanks, the engine power, braking characteristics, weather conditions all go to making appliances different to handle. It's all very well being able to drive at speed but being able to stop is a different matter or thinking ahead as to what other motorist are going to do when they see you. When a car drives in front of you because they don't look in mirrors or can't hear you because they have the radio up full blast is quite exciting to say the least.

As to what firefighters are paid you can find that out very easily it is no secret. Getting into an argument regarding the wages of different professions is pointless as we all think that we deserve more. Who for example thinks that footballers or television personalities deserve the money they get..

An agreement was however signed in June 2003 giving a wage rise which we still have not received. Even when it is received a qualified firefighter will receive £25k annually which while being not bad leaves you struggling to pay the mortgage or even be able to get your feet on the housing market in the South East.

I do not know what you are alluding to in respect of taxable and non-taxable benefits. If you have anything specifically in mind please share it with me and I will be happy to provide the correct information.

With regards to payment for working public holidays, firefighter like everyone else required to work public holidays do so at premium rates. As to the work carried out on those days after the appliances and equipment are checked to ensure they are in working order we stand down. We still turn out as normal to fires and other calls for assistance, we also undertake any other tasks required. I am sure that other than personnel on active duty, even the armed forces treat public holidays differently for personnel required to work on those days. Do the forces go on exercise or whatever they do on every other day of the year, on Christmas or New Years Day, I do not think so.

Given all that I still hope the the respective negotiators on either side can get around the table and sort this out and are allowed to get on with it without anymore government interference.

Hi Ali,

The main issue regarding the use of the appliances is training as detailed in my last post. There may well also be insurance issues linked to this as if one was involved in an accident which was being driven by someone with limited training what liability issues does that throw up.

As I stated earlier the appliances do not put out fires, cut people out of cars etc it is the people in them.

As regards to the government inspired stitch up, the details have been in all the better newspapers for all to see. Indeed last weekend before Monday\'s meeting details were in some of the Sunday papers detailing the shenannigens to be expected..

As you asked, I am a member of a Local Government Fire Brigade not an Airport Authority one.

[jindabyne]

Ali

I agree that RW31 comes across as a reasoned sort of chap; and I have some sympathy with the firemen being given the present runaround. However, when their pay (even pre-payrise), working patterns and conditions are compared with most junior members of the armed forces and the paramedics, they win comfortably. And as for 'putting their life on the line' - well, OK, but how often -and again in comparison with the armed forces, police, and paramedics they are not extraordinary. With every respect, I think that line is a bit stretched.

So I repeat, their cause for striking yet again in so short a time is, in my view, entirely unjustifiable. At the end of the day it will be down to the ballot, ie individual choice. Government interference maybe, but at the end of the day it's their choice - and conscience.

Let us not be seduced by velvet tongues.

[Slotback]

The Armed Forces is different with regard to public hoildays. I have worked a number of public holidays and some of those were on exercise, maybe not Christmas or New Year but public holidays none the less.

And don't forget that not everyone gets paid a premium to work these days. We get paid the same rate regardless of day of the week, shift, public holiday and there is no such thing as overtime. It's in the job description when we signed up and we accept it, and we regularly modernise and change working practices. Sounds like we're the ones with something to complain about!!

[akula]

SACK THEM ALL
Firefighters are a bunch of lazy good for nothing malingerer's who want nothing more than an easy ride.

[JessTheDog]

This is a complicated argument different from the 40% demand of Fresco 1. It appears that the government desire a strike, for various reasons that probably include breaking the FBU and appearing tough in a pre-election year, and are actively engineering a collapse in talks. However, if a strike poses such risks to life and property (undoubtedly it does, despite the best efforts of military cover and the likelihood of firefighters crossing the picket lines to respond to serious accidents) then the government should obtain an injunction (or use prerogative powers) to rule the strike illegal. This would be too much for the remaining "brothers" that can still stomach New Labour, so it is easier to simply wheel out the troops once more.

The firefighters are in a very difficult position, as striking will make them public enemy no 1, with good reason! However, there is a glimmer of hope as various regions appear to be revolting against the Local Government Association by discussing separate and local agreements with the FBU. Hopefully, this will destroy the government's strategy to engineer a strike and kill the spectre of troops having to act as firefighters.

[Spotting Bad Guys]

Should the strikes go ahead, I wonder if the Green Goddess crews will have to deal with a similar number of mysteriously well-timed tyre and car fires, carefully placed in open ground, started within minutes of the strike officially commencing?

Don't tell me it didn't happen!

The Appliances are all owned by the local authorities - not the firefighters, so if it comes to it, why not use them? And any excuses that our drivers can't handle such a mighty piece of hardware is clearly bulls**t.

I used to have an enormous respect for the firefighters but there's ittle sympathy at SBG towers now!

SBG
:mad:

[Runway 31]

Thank you all for your views, I respect them all even the ones that I don't agree with.

I can asure you that this is all about destroying the FBU. It was made very clear yesterday morning on radio 4 where Councillor Coleman the Chair of the London Fire And Civil Defense Authority came out and stated that this was the governments stance and that he supported it fully. I have a recording of the interview and can forward it if required. At least he comes out and states his case allowing you to see who and what we are up against.

I do not however have any respect for anyone who comes out as the last poster did with the suggestion that firefighters stole cars and set them alight.

[ZH875]

From Runway 31I do not however have any respect for anyone who comes out as the last poster did with the suggestion that firefighters stole cars and set them alight.
And just where does SBG state or even infer that firefighters stole cars or even anything else.

And if pumping water is a requirement, then the old Green Goddess can equal most pumps. (as long as someone can supply it with water.)

[Maple 01]

No-one's suggesting car theft, however, oppos in the Liverpool area for Fresco 1 went to several suspicious incidents of burning tyres and cars- almost immediately the strike started. Perhaps it was the fairies?

Pretending it couldn’t' have happened undermines your credibility or perhaps you really think the FBU doesn’t contain any militants
prepared to risk lives

-Nick

[Spotting Bad Guys]

As stated, I didn't say/imply/infer that firefighters stole cars. What I did say is that across many regions during the first night of Fresco support there were a surprising amount of - shall we say 'conveniently' - well-timed fires, including: piles of tyres, oil drums filled with various materials, most of which produced oily black smoke (set for effect rather than the actual fire perhaps?), abandoned cars, and so on....

At the time, and with the background cast as it was, it was politically unacceptable to highlight these, and other incidents. Now, however...


SBG

[SpotterFC]

One of my colleagues was a Det Co for Fresco 1. The reason she was given for not using the civvy kit was that the FBU crews, on their return, would 'black' the trucks and refuse to use the equipment again since it had been used to 'break' the strike.

What say you to that RW31?

[WorkingHard]

Runway 31 still has not answered the specifics I posed. Come on be honest and straight and no politically correct answers or obfuscation this time. Do you get double time for bank holidays and time off in lieu and why dont you work normally on such days?

[mbga9pgf]

Runway, wingeing about completely satifactory pay and benefits will hold no weight as far as I am concerned. you already get paid far too much as a result of your out dated union. In reality, you get paid far more than most other emergency service organisations, yet only work 4 days on-shift, during which, if it is at night, will spend that time in bed.

By demanding extra funds, you are depleting the same pot that the armed forces also draw from, and instead of it going to essential new kit for the fire service, it goes into your pockets.

How many of you guys hold second jobs (perfectly legally I know but still recieving extra income)?

And in response to the party line you need danger money, pass a thought for our young squadies, who on 12 grand a year, get shot at in Basra to come home, not to wife and kids for leave, but some fire station because the FBU are having a little gripe with Tone and his motly crew. I am sorry; I am the last person to support the many of the views of this govt, however, I firmly believe despot organisations such as the FBU should have been left for the Knackers yard many years ago.

[Dogwatch]

Evening all, I am not a regular contributor to this forum, but I am ex RM and for the last 25 years I have been a Police Officer and the last 20 of them a Roads Policing (Traffic) Officer.

On a regular basis I see the professional work that they do in often very unpleasant conditions. normally at serious road accidents but also at chemical incidents and large industrial fires etc.

During the last couple of Fresco's I was an escort vehicle for Royal Navy and Army (Queens Royal Hussars) leading them out to the scene of their allocated incidents.

During the last lot, I did 3 14 hour night shifts, got turned out to a dustbin on fire, on one shift and nothing on the other two. Not exactly hard work and this was covering the largest council estate in europe.

I believe that a total of 4 % of their work is on emergency response, the majority of which is automatic fire alarms, rubbish fire and skips alight etc.

They need to modernise in their outlook and in the way that they are led by their union, they are there to protect life and property, they cant do that if they are on strike.

In order to balance the above I believe this government is the trickiest slipperiest shower ever to have been voted in in many a year.

[Runway 31]

Spotting bad guys

Should the strikes go ahead, I wonder if the Green Goddess crews will have to deal with a similar number of mysteriously well-timed tyre and car fires, carefully placed in open ground, started within minutes of the strike officially commencing?

What does it infer if it does not mean that firefighters started them?. Have you ever thought that the people that we deal with every day timed it to take maximum effect.

There were a lot of things that happened that were not broadcast mainly because it did not fit the governments idea of what they wanted broadcast.

Maple 01

I will say here and now that no firefighter will risk lives by starting a fire. I will however concede that we have militants but I do not consider for 1 minute that your suggestion is valid.

Working hard

I have already given my answer that we get paid premium rates of pay and a day in lieu. I personally because of my rank am not entitled to this and do not receive it. I still await your reply to the supposed taxable and non-taxable benefits we are supposed to get.

Spotter FC

Your friend may well have been told what you state, does not make it true though. I state again that they will be taken away this time for use by the armed forces if it gets to a strike.

mbga9pgf

I have not at anytime whinged about my pay. I mearly stated that an agreement was reached and signed in June 2003 that as John Prescott stated for all to hear in the commons " By 1st July 2004 firefighters will be on £25k. This has not happened.

With regards to what the other emergency services are paid, I cannot do anything about their conditions of service. It is up to them to do as they see fit to look after themselves. Suffice to say even after the wage agreement is paid in full a qualified firefighter will still be £5k per annum behind a policeman.

While firefighters work a rota system of 4 on and 4 off, 48 hours per week is worked. 2 x 10 hour day shifts and 2 x 14 hour nightshifts. While beds are available in fire stations we are able to stand down from 2330.

Funding for the fire service comes from the Council Tax, military funding comes from the treasury and is not affected by whatever is spent on the fire service.

Millions of people have more than one job. Whats your point. Look at your MP he will probably be taken in thousands from consultancies and directorships. How can they complain about someone else having a second job.

I have never mentioned anything on here regarding danger. All I will say is that the 2 firefighters buried last week in London are missed by there families every bit as much as by the families of your colleagues that have been killed by hostilities in Iraq. God bless them all.

[joe2812]

Im not exactly clued up on the details and statistics of this whole situation but theres a couple of general points i'd like to comment on.

Firstly, firefighters on £25k a year? Whilest the public recognise the work you do (when you are working) is dangerous, but £25k pa dangerous, when your other emergency services colleagues are on much lower wages?

Secondly, i don't see how the fire service can strike, expecting the Armed Forces to pick up the slack with their outdated equipment.
You say you joined the fire service to save lives, as i expect most firemen did, but you draw the line when you want money. Isn't that effectively putting a price on the lives of people, on the lives of the public you are employed to protect and help? At the end of the day your money, equipment etc comes from the taxpayer, if we're not getting the service, maybe our council tax bills should be a bit lower for a few months?

[Spotting Bad Guys]

RW31

Re-read my posts. Those personnel who served on, or were part of the supporting effort of FRESCO know that there were many fires started in the manner I and others described above. Inference? Who has most to gain from demonstrating a high call-out rate within minutes of the Armed Services' crews taking over? The fires were - in the main - carefully set and placed so as not to cause any risk to life. Are you trying to assert that there was a nationwide campaign by the arsonists and hooligans of Britain, timed to start the minute the Military crews took over? If that were the case, wouldn't the fires have been set with a little less care? Get real - if you can't see it for what it was, don't try to pull the wool over the eyes of those who stood in for the so called underpaid and overworked firefighter.


SBG

[Runway 31]

Yes Spotting I do believe that the neds and hooligans took advantage of the strike. The fire service had nothing to gain from these fires. I know that they happended as Strathclyde had one of the highest instances of them. All the persons who were apprehended here were non-brigade.

I think that we will just have to agree to disagree on this one.

[WorkingHard]

RW31 please specify what is the PREMIUM rate for bank holiday working. It could be anything from an additional 10% to 3 times. You really do seem very unwilling to put precise answers together. I asked for a list of "perks" so that we may all understand better, I have little idea what you get, as do most of us it seems. Perhaps an indication of the TRUE cost would be for you to provide the total personnel cost of a brigade and the number of personell (or full time equvalent) so that we can see a simple average per person, In any case why do you shy from facts about money?

[Runway 31]

Working hard, I have already stated that it is double time plus a day in lieu, which part of that don't you understand. It is also in the papers and on the telly. It is there for all to see its no secret.

Ask yourself why we when they are complaining they are not taking away time in lieu under the modernisation agenda. The reason being is that it is allocated as part of our annual leave whether you work bank holidays or not every member gets allocated 8 days towards their annual leave allocation for public holiday working time in lieu. If they took it away it would put us under the statutory minimum holiday entitlement and they would have to allocate additional annual leave days to compensate.

As regards to the cost of the provision of the fire service, this varies across the country. I would suggest that you go speak to your local authority or go down to your local library and find the information for yourself. I think that you will find that compared to the other services provided by the authority we come out rather well. The Audit Commision year after year praise us as being the most efficient service provided and thats before any so called modernisation. In Strathclyde it is around 13p per person per day which considering the service provided is very reasonable.

[Scud-U-Like]

If the strikes happen this time around, there won't be any GGs trundling around. Everyone will be trained on and equipped with up-to-date red appliances. I was "fortunate" enough to be a red appliance commander last year, during Fresco . Not only was our red Dennis a very flexible bit of kit (and easier to operate than a GG), but we got all the call-outs. We weren't perfect, but we achieved what was asked of us. We had an experienced HGV driver, who our traffic police escorts praised for his deft handling of the vehicle. I never lost an opportunity to sound the audible warning insruments, to let the good folk (and firefighters) of *** know that it was pretty much business as usual.

The BARTS (Breathing Aparatus Rescue Teams) and RESTS (Rescue Equipment Support Teams) did an excellent job. If it worked last time, it will work again. In reality, I think the Government will impose a settlement and the strikes won't happen, but armed forces personnel are already set to lose time off, having to train for the eventuality.

The firefighters have lost any goodwill they had from the public and are very vulnerable to being royally shafted by the Government. In my opinion, they have no one to blame but themselves. They demanded a 40% pay hike and attempted to hold the Country to ransom, by going on strike. In the end, they accepted 16%, linked to modernisation, but are now dragging their feet over bank holiday terms. The FBU looks like a bad joke from the 1970s and is destined to go the way of all the other anachronistic trades unions.

[xPinger]

A few facts to clear up some of the issues - this information found readily available after about 5 minutes searching on the web...

RW31 stated that even after the pay deal agreed back in June 2003, a firefighter would be on £25k, and that this would be £5k less than the equivalent Police salary. Not strictly true as after the pay award, a fully qualified firefighter with 5 years in would be on £25,000. A Police Constable (outside of London) with 5 years in would be on £24,852 (source: www.Sussex.Police.uk) So that's broadly similar then...

What does differ is that the fireman will then not get a pay rise (other than annual pay award) until he reaches 15 years in, when his pay increases by a whopping £990 - then that's it. This assumes he isn't promoted to Leading Firefighter in the meantime. Meanwhile, the Constable continues to get an annual pay increase in addition to any pay award until he has done 12 years in, by which time he would be on £30,186 - so RW31 is partly correct in his statement, but it's not across the board.

That's not to say that I neccessarily agree with what RW31 is saying - if his argument about a conspiracy to foul the talks was entirely true, then why isn't it all over the papers? One article buried in the Independent doesn't exactly bolster the argument, and how many people in mainland UK read the Belfast Newsletter? If the FBU were whiter than white in this instance (which let's face it would be a first) then there are plenty of newspaper editors (particularly of the tabloid variety) just itching to give Tony and Fat Prezza a good kicking. Doesn't seem to have happened though, so I guess that either the journalists are a bit more sceptical about this conspiracy, or else there's been a monumental PR failure by the FBU to sell their side of the story.

My understanding was that the original agreement included a clause that firefighters would undertake whatever work was required of them (ie work a normal day) on public holidays, and it was only at the 11th hour that the FBU changed their mind, despite months of negotiaion. Is this true, or has the FBU always disputed the working conditions for public holidays?

As for the armed forces treating public holidays differently, I would not expect that your average squaddie in Basra (or Afghanistan or Sierra Leone or the Balkans etc., etc...) was stood down on Christmas day last year. There are also 8 public holidays in every year. Does RW31 think that the Royal Navy's Ships or the RAF's aircraft just stop whetever they are doing on, say, the August Bank Holiday? Of course not. Life goes on as normal. If the Armed Forces are required to work on a public holiday, then they get on and work, not for any extra pay, but in the knowledge that that day can be taken at some other time in the year (ie they get a day in lieu). Why do the Firefighters want to be treated differently?

If this strike goes ahead then it will seriously impact the armed forces - not just the operational commitments but the individuals who have to actually go and cover for the firefighters. You are asking other people to risk their lives for nothing more than an easy time for yourselves on 8 days of the year. The simplest way to resolve this would be for the FBU to seize the moral high ground by using the press to announce that they are dropping their claim to reduced working on public holidays, that the firefighters will work a normal shift and challenge the Government that they are ready to sign the deal as agreed with the employers.

Somehow I don't think that this will happen as I don't think we're being told the whole story by either side - RW31 is obviously biased, but many of his answers to direct questions are deliberately evasive. I know that he has finally answered the question about double time, but for most of his answers he talked about being paid "premium rates" - a typical Union ploy to be evasive and never own up to what is actually the truth until absolutely backed into a corner.

The real bottom line is that the Fire Service should be treated like every other part of the Emergency Services - no right to strike and they get what's given when it comes to pay awards. If RW31 is correct about his assertion that this conspiracy theory goes right to the top of Government, then it's not a huge leap to deduce that the real reason for forcing the firefighters back on strike is to allow the Government to force through legislation to bring this about - ie the fire service loses its right to strike for ever more. If you were a Politician, then isn't that worth one more round of strikes? The FBU needs to tread very carefully if they are to come out of this smelling of anything other than the manure rather than the roses...

[Scud-U-Like]

For the record, here are the pay scales:

Firefighters' Pay Scales 2003 (includes unresolved pay rise) (http://www.fbu.org.uk/pay/pay03/pay03_wtf.html)

I'm not sure it is worthwhile comparing the job of police officer with that of firefighter (though the firefighters would happily have you do so). Police officers have a far more stressful, intellectually stretching and high tempo role.

This is what the Independent Review of the Fire Service (or Bain Report) said on the subject of pay comparability:

We commissioned two comparability studies, from Hay Group and DLA MCG Consulting, to inform our considerations. Hay Group compared pay for Fire Service roles with pay for jobs of similar weight elsewhere in the economy using their standard systems. They also compared Fire Service pay with public sector pay generally. DLA MCG Consulting undertook a tailored study and compared Fire Service roles and their pay with other public sector jobs, hazardous industry jobs, and other firefighting and control jobs. They also looked at some of the wider features affecting pay. Both studies were based on up-to-date role descriptions, and so took account of any changes in firefighter jobs since 1977/78.

The comparisons by Hay Group revealed that the basic pay of representative roles up to sub-officer and fire control officer was generous by comparison with other roles of similar weight both in the public sector and in industry and services as a whole. The Fire Service advantage was even greater when holiday and pension benefits were taken into account.

It indicates that the Fire Service employees are remunerated above the median for jobs of a similar size, and those at the upper end of the pay range are remunerated around or above the upper quartile.

Independent Review of the Fire Service (http://www.irfs.org.uk/index.htm)

It is worth emphasizing that the type of job evaluation used in the Review (above) is the same as each job and specialisation in the armed forces undergoes every 5 years.

[pr00ne]

Jindabyne,

You say;

“However, when their pay (even pre-pay rise), working patterns and conditions are compared with most junior members of the armed forces and the paramedics, they win comfortably. “

Surely it is a fact , albeit a sad fact, that if you compare the pay of the most junior members of the armed forces to virtually ANY job apart from stacking supermarket shelves or part time cleaning you can make a similar case.

Not a defence of the FBU, just a sad reflection on what we pay our SAC’s and equivalents.

mbga9pgf.

What point are you making when you say

“How many of you guys hold second jobs (perfectly legally I know but still receiving extra income)?”

My brother is a senior manager in the West Country/South Midlands area, he employs large numbers of RAF staff on their 4 day and 6 day stand downs from THREE RAF bases (AT/AAR and rotary) in the neighbourhood.

[jindabyne]

Scud

Spot on!!

The Hay Group included in its study a comparison with the Paramedic Service. These people --

- Work the same 48-hour week; but they WORK throughout that period: no beds for them: and too bu**ered to take on a second job.

- Are FREQUENTLY first on the scene, facing all kinds of unpleasantness (Friday and Saturday nights especially); how often are firemen placed in harm's way?

- Work Bank Holidays without recompense; except at Xmas/New Year when they receive an extra £60 per 12-hour shift! Or a day off in lieu!

- Often have to work well beyond their shift time because of last minute callouts: no extra pay

- Have less promotion opportunity; and give or take a grand, will be on the same pay at 55 as they were at 25

- Have an intellectually more demanding job, have to demonstrate broad-spectrum social skills on a daily basis, are more 'widely and technically' qualified, and save life on a daily basis

- Are exposed to constant and far higher occupational stress, which is enduring

All for, on average across the UK, £3000 a year less! Crazy

RW 31 - your arguments ring EXCEEDINGLY hollow

[FJJP]

Akula, thank you for your valuable contribution to what was hitherto a sensible discussion. In the spirit of your post, I hope your house or car catches fire - then you might change your tune.

Having conducted an inquiry into an accident involving an RAF fire engine, I requested and was given a very comprehensive briefing and hands-on demo of the machine, including driving it and operating all of the machinery. I am under no illusion that it would be easy to train military people to operate modern engines; however, in a national emergency, I am sure the Forces could scrape up enough suitably qualified people to form a core of trainers in a fairly short space if time. I fully acknowledge the point about it being the people with highly specialist training to operate the special equipment, such as cutting gear, etc; however, if the case arises, there will be someone who can give it the best shot. The result may not be as good as that achieved by the professionals, but at least we can give Joe Public a fighting chance.

But I hope it doesn't come to that. I am well aware that there is a hidden agenda behind all the shenanegans, and I sincerely hope that something is leaked soon that will show just what a bunch of :mad: that are running this country. Runway 31, I value highly your contribution to this thread. Good luck...

[xPinger]

Scud,

Yes, I quite agree - the Police work far harder, have more stress on a day-to-day basis, don't whinge nearly as much as the Firefighters and don't (can't!) go on strike.

It was RW31 who first brought up the comparison and initially I was sceptical about his claims of a £5k difference between the Fire Service and Police. I went to look around and found that after 5 years in, there is no disparity worth mentioning (well, actually there is a slight difference at present as the Firemen don't yet receive the new pay award - it's still in dispute, but it is to be backdated whenever an agreement is finally reached). The source you quote for Fire Service rates of pay is from the FBU's website, but only up to the pay award of last November (not yet implemented) and doesn't include the award of June this year (likewise), which is the one I stumbled across and which gives the figure of £25k for a Fire Fighter after 5 years service (assuming fully qualified). This was the figure bandied around by some of the Politicians and FBU officials as being the agreed value of a Fire Fighter (well, OK, the FBU only came down to this figure after climbing down from their initial crazy figure of £30k). You can find the figures at www.fireservice.co.uk which is an independent website operated by several Firefighters off their own backs.

Just thought I'd clear that up - I don't support another strike in the slightest as it will severely disadvantage far more members of the Armed Forces than just those who happen to go off to fight fires (although they obviously get the really sh**y end of a sh** stick). As I've said before, I think they should not have the right to strike at all, and if they continue in their current vein may soon find themselves in that position anyway - I'm sure that His Toniness and Fat Prezza are angling for this anyway...

Watch this space - just because Parliament are on their summer recess and His Toniness is off sunning himself in Tuscany (or wherever he's gone this year for his free holiday) doesn't mean that the wheels of Government don't keep grinding on. I'm sure the Labour Party hierarchy are itching for a good scrap come the autumn and it will certainly boost their re-election campaign if they can break the FBU in the run up to a General Election.

As I've challenged RW31 before - you state that you don't want to go on strike and that you joined the Fire Service in the first place to save lives, so fine, take a moral stance, do the right thing and categorically state here and now that you're going to vote against industrial action and then go out and persuade your fellow Firefighters to do the same - bet you can't! If you're right about this being one big conspiracy to engineer another strike, then aren't you aiding and abetting that by voting for a strike? Double standards me thinks...

[BEagle]

No - as there's nothing really important going on right now, the slimy $hit is actually holidaying in the Caribbean. I guess Tuscany is a bit beneath him these days.....

[Runway 31]

Xpinger,

Thank you for your contribution. I have already stated that the forces on active duty do not get public holidays. I think we should also acknowledge that no other profession is any where near as difficult as being in the armed forces and I have tried to be as fair as I could in my postings. If anyone thinks that I am being evasive in any of my answers, I am trying to be as open and honest as possible.

Just for the record I will not be supporting the calls for a strike, on this occasion and I did not on the last occasion either.

What is quite problamatic however is the small detail that the employers have stated that they will not meet with us unless there is a yes vote in the ballot. Where does that leave the firefighters. There is a groundswell of opinion within the service to get our leadership to offer on a public forum to work normally on a public holiday. This will cause the employers a great deal of difficulty as the are requiring any member of the service rostered to work on a public holiday to treat it the same as any other day. To save money however the service leaves only minimum levels of staff on duty. To ensure that all members work normally will require those normally given the day off, ie training staff, support staff, community safety personnel etc, to report for duty at double time rates. It is estimated that this will add an extra £30 million to the wage bill. Who thought this one through. Still as long as political dogma wins why worry.

Also the public holiday shambles was subject to negotiations and the form of wording was agreed by both sides on Tuesday 29 July in the TUC brokered negotiations.

The section in question with the wording proposed by the employers was as follows:

“Where the shift duty system at Section 4 Part A paragraph 7 continues to operate employees on the system should be allowed to take rest periods every night between midnight and 0700 and between 0700 and midnight on public holidays, other than on those occasions where they are required to respond to emergency calls, perform work arising from emergency calls or perform other essential activities that:
1) Arise from the Integrated Risk Management Plan,
2) Are within the employee’s role and responsibilities, and
3) Are appropriate during these hours.
These arrangements shall be the subject of consultation between the fire and rescue authority and recognized trade unions.”

Whether you like the negotiated wording or not this is what was agreed. On the Friday every outstanding item had been agreed and the employers and the FBU were to meet on Monday last to sign the agreement. The employers refused to sign their own proposal. We need answers to why.

What happened has been well reported, why it is not getting the attention it deserves is open to conjecture. As an example, I have provided below the transcript of a feature on the Today programme 0750 6 August:


Presenter: The woman who chairs the employers’ negotiating team has lost her position it seems, having a fall out with her colleagues in the Local Government Association. In a meeting with the Fire Brigades Union earlier this week, Christina Jebb, a Liberal Democrat, backed a proposal to settle the dispute but was outvoted by her own side. She said several councilors were brought into the meeting to oppose the deal.

[Plays clip from yesterday]

Christina Jebb: They don’t want a settlement. I don’t know why they don’t want a settlement but they obviously don’t want to get an agreement. Normally there would only have been 16 people there and there were 10 people there that had not attended the meeting previously and weren’t up to speed with the progress of the negotiations, and nor were they up to speed with the implications of their actions.

Presenter: Not so, according to John Ransford from the Local Government Association speaking shortly before Christina Jebb. He was adamant that the vote had not been rigged.

[Plays clip from yesterday]

JR: This meeting was called at very short notice – in the middle of August – so a lot of people are away on holiday so we had to ensure that those people would regularly have been there but were away for no fault of their own were substituted. Because the body meets so rarely in that form, a lot more people were involved than would normally be involved in an employers’ meeting.

Interviewer: Well I’m joined now by Brian Coleman, Leader of the London Fire Brigade authority. Also in the studio with us is John McGhee, the National Officer of the Fire Brigades Union. Brian Coleman, what is your understanding of this meeting?

BC: Well, John Ransford is talking a load of absolute nonsense because the LGA dismissed most of its representatives on the NJC, including myself in February. They tried a tactic last week of leaving the NJC the employers’ body inquorate. When that didn’t work, over the weekend they phoned any councillor who was available with a pulse to come in on Monday morning and vote down this deal. In the last 6 months the LGA has dismissed two chairmen of the NJC, half the membership and the entire LGA Fire Executive. The LGA is supposed to speak up for local government, instead they are just doing the Government’s bidding in this dispute.

Interviewer: Why, I mean what is going on?

BC: Well, two reasons, one the leadership of the LGA sees the quest for a knighthood, CBE’s and large allowances and secondly they are in hock with the Government’s agenda. Well that’s fine – I actually support the Government’s agenda, but let’s be open and honest.

Interviewer: Hold on, when you say the Government’s agenda, what are you suggesting that is?

BC: The Government and local politicians of all parties have a clear objective to defeat the FBU once and for all – that is said in semi-public meetings and certainly in endless private meetings over the last 18 months. I’ve heard it said by ministers – we all know that is the case – every time we get near – every time the moderate employers, if you like get near an agreement, whether it’s at the Connaught Rooms or last Monday, the guns are wheeled in to scupper any sort of deal.

Interviewer: John McGhee - What is your interpretation of what happened this week?

JM: Well, I think what happened this week was an outright disgrace. We had reached the final point of this dispute under the auspices of the General Secretary of the TUC and once again it was scuppered. And as Brian Coleman has said quite openly here, what seems to be going on behind the scenes and he is certainly privy to information that we wouldn’t be. Now, we have fought to defend the Fire Service for 20 years – over the Tory years and since this government came into power and we will continue to do that.

Presenter: We still have this difficulty about bank holiday working.

JM: Well this is not just bank holiday working. We agreed to a form of wording which the employers proposed to us themselves and again under the auspices of the General Secretary of the TUC, that provisional agreement was reached and we turned up on Monday expecting them to sign – we have already compromised on many many issues outside of the June 2003 agreement and it’s been a very difficult time for everybody inside of the Fire Service and it’s by far time that this was now over and that the 3.5% that’s owed to our members since November and the 4.2% since July is paid and let’s get on with providing the best service.

Interviewer: Well, I was going to say, the public will be worried whether or not it’s going to have a fire service this summer, isn’t it? It is extraordinary that this deal having been agreed still can’t be actually worked through and implemented.

JM: Yes I agree absolutely extraordinary – it has been worked through and it has been agreed and it should now be implemented and implementation of that will mean that the Fire Service will continue because that’s what our members want – I was a firefighter for 17 years and fought to make sure that when people called the Fire Service they got a fire engine there in the time they should and in the Audit Commission’s own words we have been providing one of the best and highest performing public services.

Interviewer: We haven’t got much time - do you think we are heading for a strike?

JM: I hope we’re not. I hope we’re not heading for a strike and I hope that the LGA will see sense and if the government wants to make an intervention they should and positively pay our members.

[jindabyne]

RW31

Any comment on the points noted in my last post?

[Runway 31]

Hi Jindabyne, you asked for my comments please note them below.

The Bain report was a politically motivated and now discredited report designed and commissioned solely to get across the government point of view in much the same way as Hutton and Butler. There was nothing in it that was new in the report as it was a pulling together of details and sound bites from previous reports on the fire service over the last twenty years such as Holroyd and “In the Line of Fire”. One mistake of the many that the FBU have committed was to have nothing to do with the report, a very foolish mistake, not that it would have altered its contents in any way.

With regards to paramedics I will not have a swipe at the role and capabilities of fellow professionals. Contrary to your posting I believe that a paramedic receives the same wages as a firefighter will once the new rates come into play. Their conditions of service and any changes that they aspire to is for them and their accredited representatives to attempt to achieve. I do not believe that it is responsible to try and drive wedges between personnel of the various agencies who are required to work together at the scene of an incident in order to render humanitarian services and restore normality.

We all in the emergency services are exposed to unpleasantness on a daily basis but in different ways. Firefighters on the scene of an incident are responsible for the safety of all persons within the inner cordon or hot zone and do not allow any other agency to enter. Except in extreme circumstance all casualties are removed from the inner cordon and taken to the outer cordon where they are handed over to the other agencies attending. This is the case whether it is an attendance in response to a fire, RTA, building collapse, terrorist action or whatever the likely scenario. The fire service is required to deal with the casualties at all times in the hazard zone so I think that we do know the stresses personal involvement can bring.

Given all that, I recognise that the ambulance service and police are required to handle all kinds of unpleasantness especially as you put it on a Friday and Saturday night. The effects of drinking, general lawlessness and anti-social behaviour affect us all in carrying out our duty and require a resolution which is again the responsibility of the government.

This lawlessness affects the fire service as well. Within my own brigade there have been 179 recorded acts of violence against fire crew this year ranging from verbal abuse to on 2 occasions firefighters being shot with air rifles. At every incident we attend, persons are involved in some way or another and even when we are rendering assistance, drink fuelled violence takes very careful handling using social skills to ensure peaceful resolution. It is worth remembering that 60% of fire deaths are linked to alcohol use.

In my Brigade 3 or 4 years ago we introduced extended first aid trauma management training to increase the skills of our personnel especially to respond to RTA’s and other non-fire related incidents involving trauma. This trauma management training was devised in co-operation with the consultant in emergency medicine in the Royal Infirmary in Glasgow. In addition to developing new skills in this area the Brigade invested heavily in procuring additional equipment needed to assist in the survival of casualties. All our personnel are trained in operating this equipment and the trauma management training is subject to on-going re-certification, verified by the Royal Infirmary personnel.

You might be interested to know as part of the modernisation agenda, because of the deficiencies in meeting attendance times by the ambulance service, it is proposed that the fire service co-respond or first respond to Category A medical emergencies. Category A emergencies are the most serious health emergencies where life is thought to be at risk. The first co-responding trial is proposed to start very soon in Tower Hamlets in London and will involve the fire brigade attending incidents where the ambulance service does not have the resources to attend. The training for the brigade personnel involved have been limited to being given a pamphlet to read and a video to watch so you can understand their concerns in being required to carry out such work. How the brigade will be able to handle seriously ill casualties with limited training and resources is very worrying for me.

I hope that this response goes some way to answering your query.

[Runway 31]

From Todays Guardian, I will let you decide.

I did not exceed my brief

Monday August 9, 2004
The Guardian

Sadly the Local Government Association leaders (Letters, August 7) seem to be suffering more memory lapses.

No "binding agreement" was reached with the FBU. The provisional settlement, reached after many weeks of sensitive negotiations, facilitated by the TUC was to be taken to the employers' side meeting on August 2 for consideration. A joint meeting with the union would follow when, hopefully, the agreement could be signed.

The deal that was on the table would have given the LGA everything it wanted, as confirmed by fire chiefs throughout the UK. So I did not exceed the association's wishes - unless, of course, they wished it to fail.

My role as chair of the national joint council negotiating body was to represent and act on behalf of local government in the whole country, rather than to be mandated to support a minority view from London.

On the World at One programme, I answered a straight question - about the way I had voted - with a straight answer. Is that wrong?

An unnecessary confrontation with the FBU has now been provoked, and the only possible explanation is that senior figures at the LGA do not want a settlement.

Cllr Christina Jebb

Former chair of employers' side in the fire service negotiations

[jindabyne]

RW31

Thank you for your comment. I will not counter your responses as this would uneccessarily narrow and deflect the debate.

However your reply is, to me, somewhat revealing. You would clearly make (or are) either a splendid politician or union leader. Your argument and phraseology suggests more than a passing experience in (or affiliation with) one or other of those disciplines; given your apparent disdain for the former, I suspect that the latter may apply.

Should I be correct, then your fullsome contribution to this thread is more than understandable!!

[Runway 31]

Jindabyne,

I am neither a politician, union leader or anything other than a fire brigade officer who happens to be a union member.

I do not consider that my replies are narrow I am just answering the questions posed. With regards to awareness whether of issues affecting the fire service, socially, politically or of whatever nature of what is going on around us, in this day in age it is a necessity. It is also a requirement of my post.

There are so many things happening in this country and around the world that people are not aware of. When they become aware apathy rules as unless it affects them personally they do not give a damn. Unfortunately issues usually affect everyone in some way eventually but by that time it is to late to do anything about it.

[stuk]

Jindabyne – I don’t see the point in your post at 1012. Are you saying that because the bloke is a professional, whether or not a dreaded trade unionist and therefore a not to be trusted lefty, and maybe knows the facts he should not put his views down? Perhaps we should restrict comments on this site to Akula and his well-informed opinions.
Having read through this thread I seem to find three main reasons for having a rant against the firemen.
Firstly they sleep, or rest on, night duty. Excuse me but don’t RAF stations let the ops support staff rest, or even lay down on camp beds or spare rooms in the mess whilst no night flying going off? Where is the safety eqpt squipper or MT driver during these hours or even your own station fire service?
Secondly they should be a 24 hour a day service like everyone else. I would say to the correspondent from ISK that up there they, along with every UK flying station, will have sqn aircraft plus crew and ground support personnel deployed to some very nasty and unpleasant places over Xmas and New Year plus the duty Sqn and support personnel. However, the MAJORITY of the station will be on a 2 week standown with only a skeleton staff. That’s how we worked with QRA and SAR. It certainly worked that way through Gulf One when I had Xmas and New year somewhere very sunny whilst the Wg Cdr scribbly next door had a very pleasant 2 weeks off. So everyone does, if possible, treat Public Holidays as different.
Finally they get paid enough already and probably much more than some other trades/professions who really deserve it. A close friend of mine is an RAF Sqn Ldr who has not been near an aeroplane in nearly 10 years. All his positions are of course "Flying Rlated". Would anyone like to compare, or even justify, his Flying Pay with that of the total pay of a nurse or junior doctor (on his 36/72 hour shift!) at our local hospital who will be treating him in casualty should he ever need their services.

[jindabyne]

RW31

Didn't say, or mean to imply, that your views are narrow. And thanks for satisfying my curiousity expressed in my last post. As I've previously mentioned, I have some sympathy with your present lot. But, and with full awareness of the present 'politics', I do not believe the firemen can claim any form of differentiation now, or previously, that warrants strike action. Indeed, I subscribe to the views expressed earlier on this thread that they, like other emergency organisations and the armed forces, should not have a strike option. That said, I do not condone any Govermental 'policy' that exploits that non-option.

So, whilst we might not agree on most points in this debate, I fully respect your views, and your right to air them freely. And I suspect you reciprocate.


stuk

That answer your point? Curiousity, dear chap - playful perhaps, but nothing sinister.

Didn't read Akula's bit - did he withdraw?

I think you'll find the 'rants', as you describe them, include other important issues in addition to sleep, public holidays and pay - the fundamental point over the right, or not, to strike action, and the consequences upon others of so doing, being one.

By the way, I was in the same position as your Sqn Ldr friend for a few years some time back. I was happy with the position then, but, hypocritically on my part, I now find it somewhat difficult to justify for those who haven't seen a cockpit in years, and never will. But that opens a different box, and the lid has been lifted on other threads.

I suspect you live round the corner!

[Runway 31]

Jindabyne,

Thanks for the reply and as you state I fully respect your views and your right to make them.

I will also state here and now that it would be my desire to have the right to strike withdrawn. Just like you I would however like to see something in place which would see exploitation of this removed.

We are all pawns of this or any other government who all use us for their own ends. What thanks have the forces got for their services, more cuts dressed up as modernisation being forced on them.

[Scud-U-Like]

Runway 31

It is one thing to dismiss the Bain Report as politically motivated and discredited, but I don't think you can so easily discount the conclusions of Hay Group and DLA MCG Consulting. They used standard private and public sector criteria to report on pay comparability and concluded firefighters were well rewarded for what they do. Are you going to suggest they too were out to get you?

[Runway 31]

Scud-u-Like

I am not suggesting that. What I will say in response to the conclusions is that while the report suggests we are comparably paid and I am not suggesting otherwise, from June 2005 we move from wage linkage with the upper quartile of manual worker to APTC linkage.

This in its self suggests that someone considers that the comparability banding was wrong.

[Scud-U-Like]

RW31

I'm afraid (apart from Army Physical Training Corps) I haven't a clue what APTC means.

What I do know, however, is that none of the measures used by Hay Group and DLA MGC sound like unfair comparators:

"Jobs of similar weight elsewhere in the economy"

"Public sector pay generally"

"Other public sector jobs, hazardous industry jobs, and other firefighting and control jobs."

[Runway 31]

Scud

Associate Professional and Technical