Firemen Strike

[Yozzer]

25 Sept 13 between 1200 - 1600.

Just what the military need nowadays :ugh:

Wonder who has been joed with filling the gaps.

[Wrathmonk]

Don't think the military get involved anymore.

Google throws up all sorts of results abouts non-union firefighters, private companies etc filling the job, such as (for example)

The London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority entered into an interim contract in November 2012 with Securitas Security Service (UK) Ltd for the provision of Emergency Fire Crew Capability Services (EFCC) in the event of strike action.

[TomJoad]

Better hope your house ain't on fire where G4S have the contract ;)

[gr4techie]

It's on some regional fire service websites, that they are willing to pay civvie volunteers £150 a day!! To stand in during a strike as emergency fire crew.

https://atsv7.wcn.co.uk/search_engine/jobs.cgi?owner=5042197&ownertype=fair&jcode=1353902&posting_code=264&language=

A doff my cap to the fire brigade union though, at least they stand upto being shafted by the gov't and are trying to stop their service deteriorate.

[Just This Once...]

Based on a 5 day week that £150 it is only the equivalent of £39k PA. Not exactly rock-star wages.

[The Helpful Stacker]

Based on a 5 day week that £150 it is only the equivalent of £39k PA. Not exactly rock-star wages.

Eh? £39k PA is a very good wage. Its £16k more than the NQ nurses who work in A&E with me get paid.

3 years of university, completing a minimum of 2,300 hours of placements and 2,300 hours of academic study to become a registered nurse for a starting wage £6k less than a fire fighter, sorry if my heart doesn't bleed a little for them.

Yes, yes, I know. No one forced us to do it etc...

[Wensleydale]

Tell them to go to blazes!:}

[GrahamO]

A doff my cap to the fire brigade union though, at least they stand upto being shafted by the gov't and are trying to stop their service deteriorate.

1. They are just looking to receive a pension which is twice the value of that which their payments should get them i.e. we the taxpayers have to fund.

2. They want to receive it when they stop working rather than doing what everyone else does - work until (at least) 60 and then receive that pension. Nobody says they have to be fireman once they cannot meet the fitness requirements. They can continue their second jobs for the last decade.

3. They want to be be paid to have staff levels at night even though the workload is only one third of the daytime workload, or should I say they want to sleep and get paid two thirds of the time.

Yes, its all about the service deteriorating and nothing to do with wanting the gravy train to continue.

There are far more dangerous occupations in the UK as the firemen are well trained and don't die very often.More folks probably die working on building sites these days. papers were comparing them with the police or military which you guys should be up in arms about. Fireman are trained to not give their lives .

Its us taxpayers who are getting shafted by the fireman.

[Wensleydale]

To be fair to the unions (and I am not fair to them very often), they only want what their employer has already agreed to in the past. We plan for our retirement based upon what we expect to have from our occupational pensions, and if this changes for the worse towards the end of our careers then we could be facing an old age of poverty.

From my point of view, Gordon Brown was stupid enough to arrange my PAS pension to be quite lucrative and having retired I am living to an agreeable standard without having to have taken out additional pension savings, or having to seek additional employment. I would not wish a sudden fall in expectation at a late point in a career on anyone. However, if new pension arrangements only affect future recruits then that is fair. (I do not want to get into an argument about the future military pension changes - I am not affected -yet).

[Courtney Mil]

I do have to agree with your position there, Wensleydale. Change someone's pension expectatins when it's too late to do much about it is neither reasonable nor morally supportable. This has nothing to do with how good or bad their pension agreement was, not anything to do with what anyone else's pay or future expectations may be. It's what they were contracted to expect, that needs to be honoured. Same as the AFPS needs to be.

[The B Word]

There will be a large amount of a small cadre of our people being f***ed about by Cuthbert, Dibble and Grubs's actions (they know who they are). We have had to accept a pay freeze and a new pension with retirement of 60; so why can't the firemen!

Apparently, we're all in it together! Unless you're an MP or a firefighter!

Not happy....:mad:

[Just This Once...]

Does this 'all in it together' stuff mean that when the private sector eventually takes-off again my salary will rocket with it…??

[mopardave]

Well, I suppose it had to happen.....the cheap shots have started. I have the utmost respect for those of you who've served our country (I flunked OASC Biggin Hill twice, so didn't have what it takes.)........but come on gents, don't believe all you read in the Daily Mail! Take it from me, as a serving firefighter of 27 years service, I am devastated that we're here again. I voted against strike action because I know we'll never win! When people sign up to a pension scheme, it really should be honoured. I'm fully aware of this countries economic woes.......but let's remember what's happened.......this country is bankrupt because of profligate politicians. These idiots squander money knowing full well, they'll never be held to account. I don't need to site examples because that would take too long........we all know where the money's gone. Just so you know, we had a 3 year pay freeze and then a 1% pay rise. Our pension contributions have gone up considerably and will no longer keep pace with inflation. No, I'm not asking for sympathy.....I wouldn't get it.....people are losing their jobs left, right and centre........and that is tragic for all concerned. What I am asking, is that maybe some of you aren't so quick to judge.
Thanks to Gr4techie, Wensleydale, Courtney Mil, and of course Smudgesmith for at least considering the other side.
Nonetheless.......best wishes to you all.
Dave
PS For what it's worth, I don't have 2 jobs.

[Al R]

What about those in the military who served, as recently as the early/mid 70s, when there WAS no pension? Change happens, life changes - sometimes for the better (I assume the fire service didn't complain when the pension changed for the better when times were good?), sometimes for the worse - unions, rightly, fight for change in the form of improvement. But sometimes, change is unavoidable if we don't want our kids to be working until age 75. but we talk about change. In 1992 and 2004, the firefighters pension scheme was mooted for change and firefighters did quite well out of it - in 2004, many folk working within the more general employment field were allowed to be members, whereas previously, they weren't.

Under the pension arrangements of 2004, a firefighter with just 25 years' or more service could retire at age 50 with no actuarial reduction. A full pension was also paid to anyone with 30 years service and anyone who retired before "April 2013 aged 50 or older with 25 or more years service" was to be considered exempt from this change. So this isn't change that has been done on the hoof. This was planned as far back as 1992, and these changes were cemented and agreed as recently as 2004. It seems that despite accepting the changes then, now that the trigger has passed (April) the firefighters union is now simply wanting to have its cake and eat it. Political agenda, anyone?

Many people bang on about the government being to blame.. but the cost at stake here dwarfs any political skullduggery. Has anyone considered the biggest change - greater life expectancy? The cost of the existing firefighters scheme in 2004 was 37.5% of pensionable pay over a typical career. This represented an increase (erm, 'change') of nearly 8% over the estimate of 34.75% which was estimated to be the case in 1998, and was largely attributable to the increase in life expectancy. This affects ALL pensions, not just the firefighters. Who do they expect to fund this? The pot of money isn't limitless. Mopardave, I respect the work you do, as do we all. But when you say that when people sign up to something, it "really should be honoured", does that extend to the agreement which the firefighters union decided to ignore in April, once it was triggered?

Edit:

Anyway.. change!

Armed forces leaders the best in Britain at managing change (http://www.hrreview.co.uk/hr-news/hr-strategy-practice/armed-forces-leaders-the-best-in-britain-at-managing-change/40167)

[davejb]

Quite right mate.

Given that much of the developed world went down the toilet financially it's hard to see that we can blame our politicians especially for doing what everyone else's commissars were up to anyhow - but on principle I think politicians ought to be kicked anyway.

Hitting the public sector pay, conditions and pensions has been an easy fix for the government, and as has been pointed out when the private sector booms again the public sector won't enjoy a similar upswing in fortunes.

What I will NEVER understand is how, when the focus of attention moves from one group to another, eg from hammering the troops to having a pop at the CS, or nurses, teachers (!), firemen, whoever stops being whipped joins in to condemn the new target group.

I doubt the strike will have any effect, but good luck.
Dave

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

Thanks for the link Al R, a true enlightenment. Clearly Orion Partners, a management consultancy, know their stuff and probably explains why the MoD is stuffed full of the chiselling buggers. If there were prizes for expanding little substance into many words, they must be near the top. Remind me how the big badge head sheds have saved us from remaining a credible 1st rate military Nation.

Sorry, I have to agree that an agreement is an agreement, no matter how artificially generously it was made. Change it for the not yet ins by all means; they have a choice. The poor buggers that served to the promise don't.

[mopardave]

Thanks for that davejb.

Al R.......not sure what the improvements to the pension were.....they must have passed me by. It would appear that you are some kind of financial advisor so your grasp of pension law is better than mine.....but I suspect my insight into the day to day realities of being a firefighter are better than yours. I agree.....some things have to change.......you're pushing at an open door. What I don't like is when those that pay into the system are the first to get kicked.....whether they are soldiers, firefighters, nurses.........whoever. I am aware that anomalies exist with forces pensions.......and that's not right. It was fine back in the eighties, when our pension scheme was in surplus, for local authorities to build schools and roads with the money.......but now that things aren't so good, let's look for an easy target eh. I think anyone who signed up to a pension arrangement should have it honoured.......otherwise it's not worth the paper it's written on. I, personally am at odds with the FBU.......whilst I'm a member, I'm not really a unionist.......agreed, there has to be change.....but you cannot seriously deny that this and previous governments have squandered, and continue to squander countless billions.....so shall we just forget about that? Change needs to come at all levels. Some of us are well aware we have a good job......not a particularly well paid one, but it's one I love. I would also love for those that knock us, to come and see what happens when we get our nastier jobs. And before you say it, I know my job doesn't compare to that of a young squaddie who's seeing his mates blown to bits and it is a national disgrace that our armed forces personnel are treated the way they are........my son is a former Royal Engineer.....so it's not me that has to change.......it's the shameful politicians that have squandered this countries wealth.

[mopardave]

appreciated G B Z..........succinctly put!:ok: Maybe Al R needs to look elsewhere for his scapegoats?
Best
Mopardave

[Courtney Mil]

The "what about the..." argument isn't the issue here. Just because we of the Armed Forces are having our pension arrangements systematically erroded doesn't mean it's right. And it is certaily not an argument for doing it to anyone else. Yes, the story behind each case is to be considered, but "we're getting stuffed and we can't do anything about it" doesn't make right for others to suffer the same fate.

By all means offer new conditions and pensions to people joining today, but taking pension rights away from those that have already been earning them... ...sorry, it's not right.

These are people that have earned their pensions through good service - either saving lives or defending our freedom (just two examples, I know). Let's spend more money on giving money, houses, education, healthcare and human rights to people that have never contributed anything to the country instead. Really?

[The B Word]

Mopardave

Unfortunately, those that voted for Industrial Action fell straight into the trap set by the socialist left that runs the union. The union will now use it against the nasty centre-right Coalition Govt and the firemen that voted yes will be trapped in the middle.

Do the 46% that bothered to vote 'yes' (of which they had 78% of the cast vote) have my respect? - no. Do firefighters in general have my respect for their chosen profession? - yes, of course they do.

As for others saying "at least they stand up to the government" - well the military don't have that option; it's either put up, shove off or try not to turn up to work and go to prison! (alright, a little over simplified).

I don't like the fact that all of our public sector and state pensions are going to the right in age, I don't like the fact that loads of taxpayers cash gets spent on international aid/doley bums/international health tourists/european buffoonary/public sector red-tape/etc...etc... But striking about it is an outmoded and unhelpful act in my opinion - gone are the days of the Tolpuddle Martyrs.

Sadly, I fear we're seeing the end of the Fire Service as we know it - this will give the ConDems all the ammunition that they need to slay this 46 headed beast. As I said before, the 46% have just played into the hands of the great left/right divide and I fear that they will reap what they sowed.

B Word

[mopardave]

Courtney Mil.........I didn't want to touch on the point you make about those who've never contributed.......I didn't want to be accused of anything unsavoury. Let's face it, people are queuing up to be offended about SOMETHING these days! But you are quite right..........for fear of repeating myself, the politicians who play god with our lives and the nations finances are an unmitigated disgrace. Uncontrolled immigration........Health tourists.........a benefits system that is out of control.........projects that go massively over budget......the list, tragically, is endless! Firefighters or forces pensions, in the grand scheme of things don't even figure. Tell me Al R............why should it be that pensioners and benefit claimants should benefit from a year on year rise of 5.4%? If we truly were all feeling the pain together, you'd have no complaints from me.......I'd just suck up and deal with it! "In it together".......really? I would truly love DC to come and justify that statement to me.......face to face! And while he was at it, he could come help me perform cpr on someone vomiting, defacating and urinating all over me as happened a couple of weeks ago! This country is wrotten to the core.
But, despite the politicians.....I know we have the finest armed forces in the world.......respect to you all gents! :ok:

[Al R]

GBZ

I thought the link would raise either a smile.. or a rifle into the aim. :ok:

I guess that in 2004, an agreement was reached. But as soon as the agreement reached the startline (April) and as soon as the new wave of management had reached the top of the pile and those with sufficient seniority to push it through back in 2004 had all retired, the union decided to take action. At best, it should not have agreed to it in 2004.. or be reminded of the terms it agreed to then.

I am not a union basher, but I see the economic data coming through, data that has nothing to do with so called fat cats and politicians, and I feel sorry for my kids. I don't want to condemn them to financial and economic hell (I made my kids start pensions and investments when they were 15 - they hated me) but at what point do we stop and see the bigger picture? If we honour the agreements, we are sticking our heads in the sand. I'd love to stand by the agreement and I despise the systemic corruption and bastardisation of everything that we all emotionally and financially paid into, but we have to be realistic.

Dave,

Scapegoats? There are no scapegoats, only victims. I can think of one victim on the A14 during the last firefighters strike, but that's another story. The victims here though can either be us, or they can be our kids. You want to find someone to blame? Ok, how about Brown and Blair for flooding the market with cheap credit to fund political promises that were unaffordable (for gods sake, we were issuing debt, to pay for the interest on loans taken out to pay for loans..), blame stupid, moronic and greedy people taking second mortgages for a new telly, a holiday and a second car, blame greedy b'stards in the city, blame the EU.. take your pick, what does it matter? You are the infantry in a greater political battle, the pbf has NEVER won in the short term.. you'll be used by the legislators or the unions, thats the sad part.

Courtney,

Agreed. I want my money going into pensions, schools, hospitals - we have to bring the debt under manageable limits first though. Will we? Nope.. absolutely no way. But we have to be healthier than the next country, THATS the battle. That's what we are trying to do. If we don't, then we can kiss goodbye to what little good that IS left.

[batboy1970]

GrahamO that is a shocker of a post........ You should hang your head. FFs are trained not to give their life ?? Who is ?? Unfortunately when they do give their life it's usually searching a widow makers furnace for a geet like you. FFs have not had a pay increase for 5 yrs and the risks they will take at the drop of a hat is incredible. You seriously need to get a reality check on what FFs do and have to endure on a daily basis.

[Courtney Mil]

Yeah, I see that too, Al R

[Al R]

Mate,

Exactly this time next month, we'll see what next years military pension increase will be. 5.4%? I wish. I don't expect David Cameron or Bob Crow to be puked over either. ;)

Tell me Al R............why should it be that pensioners and benefit claimants should benefit from a year on year rise of 5.4%? If we truly were all feeling the pain together, you'd have no complaints from me.......I'd just suck up and deal with it! "In it together".......really? I would truly love DC to come and justify that statement to me.......face to face! And while he was at it, he could come help me perform cpr on someone vomiting, defacating and urinating all over me as happened a couple of weeks ago! This country is wrotten to the core.
But, despite the politicians.....I know we have the finest armed forces in the world.......respect to you all gents!

[mopardave]

B word........you must have been ear wigging at my fire station........because you have just virtually stated almost word for word, what I've told my colleagues!!!! It's madness.......I have to be careful here, but I've had a few people say to me......"we can't go down without a fight" and "remember the miners"..........dear god! We are pawns in a high stakes game. I told those of my colleagues that voted for a strike that they are playing a game of Russian roulette where they no which chamber the bullet is in........but they're gonna pull the trigger anyway!
Truly.......I'm embarrassed and it breaks my heart! Like most decent people in the public sector.......I just want to get on with my bloody job!

[mopardave]

Al R........I was referring to the state old age pension and benefit claimants............not those in receipt of occupational pensions.

[mopardave]

Al R.............I actually agree with everything you said there. I see the data too. I may only be a firefighter, but I truly DO understand this countries woes..........as for Blair and "no more boom or bust" Brown.......give me strength! How about announcing to the world that you're going to off load a big chunk of the nations gold reserves.......and then wonder why the price dives in anticipation! I think we need to think the unthinkable.......but everyone must be prepared to take the pain. If I see one more advert for pay day loans, or foxy bingo, I'll scream!

Dave


GBZ

I thought the link would raise either a smile.. or a rifle into the aim. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

I guess that in 2004, an agreement was reached. But as soon as the agreement reached the startline (April) and as soon as the new wave of management had reached the top of the pile and those with sufficient seniority to push it through back in 2004 had all retired, the union decided to take action. At best, it should not have agreed to it in 2004.. or be reminded of the terms it agreed to then.

I am not a union basher, but I see the economic data coming through, data that has nothing to do with so called fat cats and politicians, and I feel sorry for my kids. I don't want to condemn them to financial and economic hell (I made my kids start pensions and investments when they were 15 - they hated me) but at what point do we stop and see the bigger picture? If we honour the agreements, we are sticking our heads in the sand. I'd love to stand by the agreement and I despise the systemic corruption and bastardisation of everything that we all emotionally and financially paid into, but we have to be realistic.

Dave,

Scapegoats? There are no scapegoats, only victims. I can think of one victim on the A14 during the last firefighters strike, but that's another story. The victims here though can either be us, or they can be our kids. You want to find someone to blame? Ok, how about Brown and Blair for flooding the market with cheap credit to fund political promises that were unaffordable (for gods sake, we were issuing debt, to pay for the interest on loans taken out to pay for loans..), blame stupid, moronic and greedy people taking second mortgages for a new telly, a holiday and a second car, blame greedy b'stards in the city, blame the EU.. take your pick, what does it matter? You are the infantry in a greater political battle, the pbf has NEVER won in the short term.. you'll be used by the legislators or the unions, thats the sad part.

Courtney,

Agreed. I want my money going into pensions, schools, hospitals - we have to bring the debt under manageable limits first though. Will we? Nope.. absolutely no way. But we have to be healthier than the next country, THATS the battle. That's what we are trying to do. If we don't, then we can kiss goodbye to what little good that IS left.

[mopardave]

Thanks Batboy 1970..........I chose to ignore graham o's post. Not worth the effort!:ugh:

[Al R]

but everyone must be prepared to take the pain

Dave,

I hear what you're saying. The question is, will Matt Wrack? On top of a salary of £69,835, your General Secretary also has an annual pension contribution of £45,889 paid from your pockets. Did you know that?

[VinRouge]

AlR, if they want to make it fairer for younger generations, why do they keep on raising the state pension for those with grandfather rights? The state pension is the biggest part of the dwp budget.

A more sensible option would have been rationed NHs treatment for the over 75s, seeing as this demographic costs the state over 70% of the 500 billion NHs budget. Callous? Sick of hearing about tough times, tough measures, whilst the debt I will be paying until my mid 70s state retirement age keeps growing to pay for preserved benefits of others who bltantly never paid enough into the system.

[Party Animal]

batboy1970,

FFs have not had a pay increase for 5 yrs.

Really?

The rest of the public sector had a pay freeze of 2 years according to the government, which was actually 2 years and 364 days, i.e, 3 years for the rest of us. We then had a 1% pay rise.

Are you honestly saying that the FF have maintained exactly the same pay since 2008?

[Al R]

Vr,

I am not going to defend state policy, I don't agree with much of it. Some from this parish will have worked with Tim Garden. His wife (Baroness Garden in her own right) addressed the Lib Dem conference this week and made more sense than most of them put together. But the reality is, as we start to come off QE especially, we have no money. I know the message is over egged, but the only way to get more is to borrow more (and thats what got us into this mess) or have fracking come good in an unimaginable way. The state pension age will continue to shuffle to the right, AFPS15 WILL come under further unsustainable pressure. There is no fair.

Do I think we should pay for those who have nursed us and protected us in their old age, and not waves of economic refugees, funded by the legions of angst filled, hand wringing, self loathing wets that seem to permeate Westminster? Of course I think we should revise our national priorities, absolutely, and I agree with your points about the NHS to an extent; we have become obsessed with extending life (the cynic in me thinks that it is the self perpetuating justification to justify cutbacks) but not the independent quality of it. The info that is only now coming out about how Germany, in effect, got rid of Silvio Berlusconi when he mooted the idea of Italy leaving the Euro, reminds me just how fragile this whole house of cards is.

[BATCO]

Picking up a loose thread here....

I note the comments about our profligate politicians with some amusement. I doubt that any prospective parliamentary candidate hitting the hustings with proposals for spending cuts large enough to have saved the situation would have ever seen the inside of the House of Commons.

Vote for Batco!

[mopardave]

Al R.........yes, I knew that. And, as I said, I have my own issues with the FBU........but I need to be careful. Suffice to say, I feel like the meat in the sandwich!!!!!:)

You might be able to help me here.......I can't embed a quote into my reply. Where it should say "quote", it says "reply". Anyone got any ideas.

[mopardave]

Party Animal

I think it was a 3 year pay freeze actually. I say "I think" because we got 1% last year.......and dare I say it, but 1% is pretty insignificant, so I've not noticed a meaningful rise in my pay for a long time. I believe the chief fire officers jumped the gun and our pay freeze started a year before the rest of the public sector........but if I'm wrong, feel free to correct me gents.

Dave

[Laarbruch72]

Either way we argue it, it's not a military problem, as mentioned on page one the days of military regulars manning green goddesses are long gone and a range of private companies now cover strikes with decent equipment and better training, thank goodness.

[Just This Once...]

But we are providing people for this Op, so it has become a military problem.

[Laarbruch72]

Are we? I genuinely didn't know, can you provide a link?

[Just This Once...]

Look on Dii, read a bulletin or speak to anyone in ATC, Fire or Ops.

[BEagle]

TG8, I hear......

The fireies really are taking the p*$$......

[Laarbruch72]

TG8 don't have the firemen to cover the major UK bases to start with, (haven't for some years), and most current RAF airfields are now covered by a combination of DFS and RAF. Many of the (few) regular RAF firemen that are left are busy covering the more dangerous RAF airfields overseas on deployment.
I can't see the RAF being able or equipped to help in any operations in any meaningful way. Besides this is officially a MAC provision these days and as far as I know there is no MAC request in at present from the Govt, so any bulletin, or conversations with ATC and Ops are moot. At best they'll be a prep notice just in case.

[Just This Once...]

Laarbruch, if you didn't think my answer would be truthful then why did you ask? Feel free to read the Op Order tomorrow if you want to check, but please don't suggest I am making this up when you have no good reason to do so.

Sometimes people are just a little bit rude.

BEags, yep the TG8 guys are not happy. It didn't help that the news came direct from their trade sponsor and bypassed the normal chain of command.

[GrahamO]

FFs are trained not to give their life ?? Who is ??

My point poorly made is that the firefighters have the utter cheek to compare themselves to the armed forces. They have far too high an opinion of themselves. They are not even remotely close.

You need to look at the stats on how many firemen have lost their lives in the last decade. You will probably be surprised to find that it is staggeringly low - thankfully, so any argument about them risking their lives repeatedly is complete nonsense. My brother in law has just retired on full pension, aged 50. And in the 32 years in the service across three brigades he has never had a colleague die in his brigades. Its a myth that long ago ceased that firefighters dive into burning buildings to rescue people. It rarely happens these days as buildings are safer, less flammable, and have better fir prevention systems. And they only go in when they are at little or no risk to themselves.

Sure, accidents happen but more people die on building sites than firemen.

[mopardave]

I'd be embarrassed to compare myself to our servicemen.....I never have! :ugh:I'll get my coat!

[Lima Juliet]

Laarbruch72

I'm with JTO on this one. Thanks to the selfish action of the FBU and their brothers/sisters they have just knackered my weekend and a select few of my colleagues - still I'll still be there, as is expected of me. My pension will still be slipped to be paid at 60 from 2015 and I have had only 1% as a payrise since Apr 10.

Sympathy? It comes between sh!t and syphilis...

LJ

[Courtney Mil]

LJ, I'd be happy to stand your weekend duty if you can persuade them to let me.

[Laarbruch72]

please don't suggest I am making this up when you have no good reason to do so.

I'm not suggesting so, I'm sorry if you read it that way. I was just looking to clarify where the MoD pictures the RAF fire cover coming from, there genuinely seems to be literally none left to draw on, in my experience anyway. I thought you might know something I didn't, I retired last year.

I'm with both you and Leon in having little sypathy for the FBU by the way.

[gr4techie]

Laarbruch72

I'm with JTO on this one. Thanks to the selfish action of the FBU and their brothers/sisters they have just knackered my weekend and a select few of my colleagues - still I'll still be there, as is expected of me. My pension will still be slipped to be paid at 60 from 2015 and I have had only 1% as a payrise since Apr 10.

Sympathy? It comes between sh!t and syphilis...

Leon, the difference between you and the FBU is... You moan and whinge about your pension and pay problems on some small internet forum. While the FBU do something about it.

I believe we in the raf are paid to work weekends.

[Lima Juliet]

Courtney - a very kind offer old chap, thank you. :ok:

GR4techie - I believe that your "paid to work weekends" is not entirely correct. Most in the RAF get 15% X-factor in their pay to allow for the embuggerance of being told to work the odd weekend, however, I do not. Furthermore if everyone was told to work 7 days a week for an extended period then I suspect within 18-24 months there would not be an Armed Forces left - not a strike, but everyone would PVR and leave! Furthermore, most of us did not join the military to cover for Fire Services, G4S and other such revent disruptions. So a call to arms for armed operations over extended periods is very different to filling capability gaps for others' shortfalls. :ok:

LJ

[Lima Juliet]

PS. I don't believe there is anything I can do about my pension changes (except moan and whinge!). I can't strike as I would eventually be Court Martialled and go to prison. I don't want to resign as I am proud of my job and don't want to leave. However, I don't like the pension change and pay freeze and so I am entitled to "moan and whinge" if I want!

[gr4techie]

Leon, yes you are entitled to moan and whinge and with the shafting we get I don't blame you.

If the govt had to choose between making cuts with us or with the fire service. We are the softer option. The stiff FBU opposition and the hassle it causes may make the govt think twice about cutting the fire service.

Rather than be angry at the fire service, you should be angry at the politicians.

[glad rag]

I do have to agree with your position there, Wensleydale. Change someone's pension expectatins when it's too late to do much about it is neither reasonable nor morally supportable. This has nothing to do with how good or bad their pension agreement was, not anything to do with what anyone else's pay or future expectations may be. It's what they were contracted to expect, that needs to be honoured. Same as the AFPS needs to be.

Yes, Courtney you totally correct and if I may be so bold, you speak for quite a lot of people.,

[Al R]

Rather than be angry at the fire service, you should be angry at the politicians.
I agree, but we can't get angry at the decision making now.. rather, we should be angry at the decision making then? We spent our way into debt, we decimated our retained wealth, we put the country onto AMEX.. we allowed ourselves to become prone to this type of financial disaster. A promise is a promise, yes. But is a promise made in genuine good faith only as valid as the ability to support it? Or do we then all become impoverished slaves in the real world to a principle? If you were married to the wrong person, if you didn't love your wife or husband, would you continue with the charade because you once promised, in all sincerity and with the best of intentions, to love honour and obey until death us do part? In defence of the government of the time, before writing a prescription, we must know the symptoms of the disease being treated.. and at the time, we weren't ill. Well, we may have been, we were certainly suffering from suffocation caused by putting our heads in the sand.

I don't mind Unions, I am not a rabid right winger, but you only have to look at Matt Wrack's agenda as far back as 2006 to assess where he's coming from on this. He probably still thinks that we all have the right to retire at age 50 on a full pension, he probably still thinks that his members have the automatic right to spend 25 or so years at work and then be supported by my kids for the next 35 years as they lurch towards an uncertain retirement age of 70 something. He is an anachronism and yes, he is employed to be a mouthpiece for those who fund his £45k pension contribution, but he also has the duty to tell them what the reality is.

Matt Wrack: ?Firefighters are ready for a struggle over pensions? (http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art/7993/Matt+Wrack%3A+%E2%80%98Firefighters+are+ready+for+a+struggle +over+pensions%E2%80%99)

The FBU has done fantastic work in holding the state to account recently (and in particular the Government Actuarial Dept in how it calculated commuted sums at retirement) but Brother Matt, or whatever he calls himself, is using this issue as nothing more than the means to (ahem) fan the flames with his tub thumping hyperbole. The TUC echelon will sagely and tacitly allow him some rope, after all, the more senior and level headed Brothers in the rear will always need some spunky and rabid attack dog to lead the assault and generate a response from the enemy dug in. He says he doesn't 'relish a fight', of course he does - he just isn't honest enough to concede the point. He just wants to throw mud in the water and see which way Miliband flops; his members are nothing more than pawns in a battle which might see him elevated within the TUC if/when Miliband the Moribund gets shoved for either not being enough of a union patsy or being too much of a union patsy.

Steve Webb is the current pensions minister and he seems to be, generally, very well regarded.. he doesn't seem to have a personal agenda and he is insightful and considered. He spoke this week about the future of the state pension and over the past 12 months he has slowly been introducing the idea that we will be moving away from the idea of as flat rate benefit, and slowly shuffle towards something based on insured employer and personal contributions - and a state benefit that won't be defined until 10 years or so from anticipated retirement. Our state pension might well be awarded on retirement to match a target income and be based on a 'smoothing' determined by trustee discretion and actuarial methodology. In particular, he likes the Danish system. Defined Ambition pensions, fluctuating annuity pensions.. this terminology will become second nature to those in their 20s, 30s and 40s, and longevity risk will play as big a part of the financial planning landscape as inflation/investment/moral hazard/currency etc risk does now.

This pension battle is a hastily dusted off contingency, just as somewhere within the bowels of Main Building, we probably have a mouldy military contingency for restoring harmony, culture and happiness to the Americas when they all realise they need us again. But instead of recognising that our times have changed, Matt Wrack just wants to blindly turn the clock back. And that isn't good for anyone.

[CoffmanStarter]

Leon ...

Got to have a pic posted of you dangling your hose from the front seat this weekend :ok:

That's Fire Hose before you reply Courtney :}

Coff.

[gr4techie]

Al R...

You may be correct that we spent our way into debt.

But the reality is, that is how economies work, they are debt based.

Thats how financial institutions make their profits. If you look at a £10 note you'll see it says "Promise to pay the bearer". Thats because the £ is based on debt and is not backed up by anything physical like gold or oil. If everyone was to do a run to the bank and ask for all their savings in £ notes the bank would not have enough to give everyone, as it loans out more than it has.

The economies are that ridiculous that when the US Government needs more money, it phones up the privately owned Federal Reserve, there is nothing federal about it and it has a reserve of nothing. It's a clever marketing name, like Fedex.
The Federal Reserve then puts some paper into a printer and makes $ bills out of thin air and LENDS them to the US Govt with interest!

Despite what "call me Dave" says. He doesn't stand a chance of getting us out of debt. It'll never happen on a currency backed up by nothing. And the UK's interest payments exceed the Uk's income. Call me Dave uses the national debt as a political pawn, something he can use to pretend he is doing something.

[Al R]

I agree, to an extent. But there is a difference between spending wisely and not spending wisely. And when you see countries like Australia which has 30% of the debt to GDP ratio that we have, and sits on billions of tons of valuable minerals and natural resources.. which position would you prefer to be in? We can't even get village fracking established and we have very little to offer in the way of manufacturing - no wonder we fought so hard to have the financial transaction tax killed off before it was born. We won't get rid of our debt.. of course we won't, if we did we'd be in a different kind of trouble. But what we have to do is make ourselves look a diligent and attractive proposition relative to the next country, and the next, and the EEA/Eurozone.

Europe financial transaction tax hits legal wall - FT.com (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b0a6c7a8-19fd-11e3-93e8-00144feab7de.html#axzz2fMi2xYux)

[Courtney Mil]

That's Fire Hose before you reply Courtney

I knew that, Coff!

I still would have posted rudeness if you hadn't stopped me.

[sitigeltfel]

This is bad enough (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24111259)

...but this is appalling...

Results in Scotland were worse than the UK average, with only a third of staff in Strathclyde meeting the standard.

A danger to themselves, and the public they are supposed to be protecting!

[gr4techie]

To be fair, what is the percentage of RAF who failed the fitness test?

There's porky bloaters who should put the pie down, in all walks of life.

*Edit= Plus statistics can be misleading.... The article said only a third of staff in Strathclyde met the standard.
But it doesn't say what that standard was?
The standard could be quite high (I know a pass on the Royal Marine bleeptest is level 11) and those that failed, could just have only just failed and therefore be still reasonably fit compared to the rest of the population?

But it does prove the point that they should not be still working in their 60's.

[glad rag]

I'm sorry but this thread should be limited to those actually affected, ie those in the UK.

gr EX French expat!!

[mopardave]

I did my fitness test yesterday........note to self.......don't do the test on your first day back from 2 weeks leave! But I passed.......as I do every 6 months.......and as do the VAST majority of my colleagues. I'm not saying which brigade I'm from, but let's just say it is one of the very top performers (in every single category). Our management takes a robust view on fitness among other things!!!! Can I ask a question though gents.......and it is out of curiosity only.......but do the armed forces contribute to their pension or is it non contributory?

[Laarbruch72]

Our management takes a robust view on fitness among other things!!!!

Well done them.


Can I ask a question though gents.......and it is out of curiosity only.......but do the armed forces contribute to their pension or is it non contributory?

Non contributory, strictly speaking. But of course that doesn't tell the complete story, you naughty man.

[mopardave]

Laarbruch...........you're dead right........well done them indeed! I have no truck with the 2 individuals I know who fail repeatedly......they are both on improvement plans, but I have zero sympathy for them.......I'm 49 and can pass. They're younger and can't........aaaaaaaaaaargh!

The question about the pension wasn't meant to be mischievous.........honest guv'nor! But in case you didn't know, I pay 13% of my salary. I'm not grumbling by the way. I have no problem with you guys having a non contributory scheme though.........I don't look over the wall at others, with envy to be honest. Each to their own.

[The B Word]

Morpardave

Allegedly our pension is non-contributary, but then on the other hand the MoD are quick to point out how much it is worth in the amusing Armed Forces Benefits Calculator.

This tries to tell Armed Forces Personnel what a great deal they are on by pointing out that they get such things as "free" gym membership (in reality this is in the MOD's interest to keep us fit), "free" dental care (in reality we need to be dentally fit or our teeth will blow out with large aircraft pressure changes), "free" medical care (in reality we need aircrew medicals to be able to do the job they want us to do), etc...

The Armed Forces Pay Review Body take into account our non-contributary pension in their pay award. So overall, it's all a bit of a con!

You can pay additional contributions to boost it and quite a few do.

Finally, if you were to draw comparisons between Armed Forces and Emergency Service pay, then I believe that a Rating/Private/Leading Airraftsman is paid less than their Emergency Service counterpart - which would indicate that the Armed Forces Pension is actually a compulsory contribution!

The B Word

[The B Word]

PS. Here is a link to the pay comparison article by the BBC BBC News - How well are police officers paid? (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-12678661)

It's a bit old, but shows how Armed Forces pay is lower.

Now, I've no axe to grind over this with Emergency Service colleagues as our terms and conditions are vastly different. Furthermore, I don't begrudge your ability to strike; it is a legal right for you guys. However, there are many things that are legal that I don't agree with either!

In fact, I'm such a staunch believer that unions do more harm than good and are an outdated form of employee representation in the workplace, that I would never join a union if I were able. I believe they are mostly champagne socialists living off the subs of hard-pressed workers for their own gains and lining their pockets.

I much prefer the Police Federation's methods of protest marching and significant lobbying of the senior management than physical strike action. When people strike, the biggest losers are the strikers as they stand to damage their reputation within the organisation and also do not get paid (which means the families suffer).

The B Word :ok:

PPS. Here is the Armed Forces Benefits Calc as well Armed Forces Benefits & Pension Calculator (http://www.mod-abc.co.uk/WizTrsDisclaimer.aspx)

[ShotOne]

"...unions an outdated form of representation in the workplace" -compared to what? The big public "service" unions are clearly going to play whatever cards they can in their members interests. Whether the wider public will be prepared to pay up when their own pensions are so much less generous is another debate. But we shouldnt let the rights and wrongs of this argument lead to blasting unions in general.

[Once A Brat]

Morpeth Dave........

I believe that our pensions are classed as non-contributory, BUT (and it is a big but) the Armed Forces Pay Review Board (AFPRB) declared about 15 years ago that military pay is abated by about 11% compared to the civilian comparator used in order to fund the Armed Forces Pension Scheme(s).............this is why people being booted out, no longer lose their pensions, because they effectively have made contributions!!!

hope thats clear.

[Wander00]

How is it that striking firemen are shown leaving the fire station in their fire fighting kit. Surely if they are on strike, they are not on "duty" and thus should not be in "uniform". Good on the employer (Surrey I think) who decided if they did not work a whole shift they do not get paid for that day.

[gr4techie]

Good on the employer (Surrey I think) who decided if they did not work a whole shift they do not get paid for that day.

This is SOP. But it's never bothered them as other unions provide donations or food parcels to keep the strikers going. Solidarity and what not.

[clicker]

The B Word,

One of the reasons that the police don't strike is because, like the armed forces, they can't.

That said some 20 odd years ago the civil workers in the police service were called to strike by Unison (or what ever they were then).

In the control room I worked in, no-one stopped worked that day because we felt providing a 999 response was more important. One person however did report sick.

[smujsmith]

The B Word #66,

Thanks for that link, it does highlight the pay rate that servicemen sacrifice for their "non contributory" pensions. As I see that, at entry level the serviceman's pay is around £6000 a year down on a fireman's pay. Around 40% of the annual remuneration? That being so I doubt that many of the emergency services have a great deal to gripe about by comparison. Never mind me though, I still struggle with the thought of someone earning more than £25K a year at SNCO level in the RAF.

Smudge

[Thomas coupling]

Just my tenpennethworth:
Having seen Firecrews in action for 14 years, when I was acting as CP for a police air support unit engaged in 24/7 HEMS at the same time; I would like to add my support to their cause.
It's already been said that when someone signs up for the (low paid) job to start with, they do it predominently because of its standing in the community (akin to teachers/nurses/police). Money is not top of the list. If the employer offers them x,y and Z then it should be honoured - full stop. Uniquely for firepersons, theirs is much much more demanding physically and surely no-one can expect a 55 yr old fireman to act like a 25 or 35 yr old in this regard???
The fly in the ointment is that secondary duties are few and far between and so they can't simply fall back to a second line job.
Above all else - having arrived at hundreds of RTC's, disaster sites, et al minutes after the call has gone out, it is always the fire teams that are there already absorbing the full on blunt force, in your face disaster of bodies and pain.....and it is the same people there at the end removing the last corpse and clearing up the wreckage and personal belongings of Mr and Mrs Smith and their three children in their people carrier on the M4 in fog.
They are subject to enormous physical and psychological trauma during that time frame and yet they NEVER EVER complain. They get on with it as a co-ordinated and well organised team.
Now is the time for US (as recipients of their service in the past in some shape or form) to support them in something which is a fundamnetal right for nearly everyone in this forum reading this - their PENSION. Nothing more, nothing less.

Wait for the day to come when the MoD have to work to 65 - then we will see sparks fly, won't we?

[Jumping_Jack]

Wait for the day to come when the MoD have to work to 65 - then we will see sparks fly, won't we?

You won't have to wait long, the new terms of service to be introduced with the 2015 pension scheme will have us all in the Armed Forces to 60.

[dmanton300]

PS. Here is a link to the pay comparison article by the BBC BBC News - How well are police officers paid? (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-12678661)



I much prefer the Police Federation's methods of protest marching and significant lobbying of the senior management than physical strike action.
Which is precisely why Police officers are ignored and walked all over again and again, because raised voices and peaceful marches is all they DO have, and government and management know it. Throughout my police service I struggle to think of a single thing the Fed fought for that they won. Other than a shiny new HQ at Leatherhead!

[The B Word]

Nope, still no bleeding heart here...

Have a look at http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/www.communities.gov.uk/documents/fire/doc/newfirefighters.doc

This details NFPS 2006, which they are striking about - yes, a pension that was introduced SEVEN years ago.

From what I read, I see that they accrue at 1/60th of final salary. If they make age 55 they can have a pension which would be 25% acturalily reduced, or make it to 60 and get the lot. If they don't make 55, they still get a pension at age 65 - just like most people. If they fail their fitness test due to ill health and not being too fat and lardy they get a disability pension - depending on whether they can work or not depends on the Tier of their disability pension.

Sounds familiar? Yup its a variation on the military pension that most earn on this Military Aircrew forum.

As for Unions, so just remind me how many successful strikes have there been in the late 20th Century? The Miner's Strike and the British Leyland strikes didn't work out so well for the workforce or the companies did they?:ugh:

Make no bones, the Firemen will probably reap what they sow. It's a shame really as most firemen are normally salt of the earth types and decent people. Sadly, looking at public support they are getting this massively wrong.

The B Word

[glad rag]

I struggle to understand why people cannot see exactly what is wrong with the governments actions here.

I would also like to point out that if they succeed where do you think they will stop?

Or more to the point, what minority demographic will be next.

Ex forces personnel? Whats to stop them eh, what's to stop them? :ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:

[Al R]

I imagine, knowing exactly who has key custody to lots of rather large armouries. :ok:

[glad rag]

You need to get out more.

[Lima Juliet]

Al R

Well said, Sir...:D:D:D

Glad Rag, do you really think there is some sort of conspiracy? Have you got your tinfoil hat on and are you sitting in your Faraday's Cage? I'll let you into a secret...

...We can't afford all of the public-sector pensions that previous Governments (red and blue) have signed us up for.

LJ :cool:

[iRaven]

I've got to agree with the naysayers here. Much as I don't like to admit it, the public sector merry-go-round of full pensions at 55 when most people live into their 80s have got to stop, the ConDems are right on this one.

I hope that both sides can find a little wriggle room for the FBU and Govt to save face and then everyone can calm down. I think the deal on the table is pretty fair and I don't want my kids and grand-kids paying mahoosive amounts of tax to pay for mine and the majority of the public sector workers a higher than average earnings pension (combined SERPS and Public Sector Scheme).

My advice to Mr FBU, get a small consession and quit whilst you're ahead.

iRaven

[glad rag]

Al R

Well said, Sir...:D:D:D

Glad Rag, do you really think there is some sort of conspiracy? Have you got your tinfoil hat on and are you sitting in your Faraday's Cage? I'll let you into a secret...

...We can't afford all of the public-sector pensions that previous Governments (red and blue) have signed us up for.

LJ :cool:



Tell Ya what.

You offer to waive your pension/pension rights then come back and gloat about it.

OK.

Waiting.....

[Al R]

Glad rag,

No one is gloating.

Thanks for the advice.

[Lima Juliet]

Glad Rag

The Govt are very kindly 'adjusting' my pension for me in 2015 in the name of affordability, so no gloating or waiving required. Like others, I don't like it, but I understand why it has happened because AFPS05 was too generous when the one-eyed financial genius was squandering our cash during an economic boom.

LJ

PS. I don't believe anyone is being asked to waive their pension, are they? :confused:

[iRaven]

You offer to waive your pension/pension rights then come back and gloat about it.

Crikey, GR, are you really 52?

[mopardave]

Just my tenpennethworth:
Having seen Firecrews in action for 14 years, when I was acting as CP for a police air support unit engaged in 24/7 HEMS at the same time; I would like to add my support to their cause.
It's already been said that when someone signs up for the (low paid) job to start with, they do it predominently because of its standing in the community (akin to teachers/nurses/police). Money is not top of the list. If the employer offers them x,y and Z then it should be honoured - full stop. Uniquely for firepersons, theirs is much much more demanding physically and surely no-one can expect a 55 yr old fireman to act like a 25 or 35 yr old in this regard???
The fly in the ointment is that secondary duties are few and far between and so they can't simply fall back to a second line job.
Above all else - having arrived at hundreds of RTC's, disaster sites, et al minutes after the call has gone out, it is always the fire teams that are there already absorbing the full on blunt force, in your face disaster of bodies and pain.....and it is the same people there at the end removing the last corpse and clearing up the wreckage and personal belongings of Mr and Mrs Smith and their three children in their people carrier on the M4 in fog.
They are subject to enormous physical and psychological trauma during that time frame and yet they NEVER EVER complain. They get on with it as a co-ordinated and well organised team.
Now is the time for US (as recipients of their service in the past in some shape or form) to support them in something which is a fundamnetal right for nearly everyone in this forum reading this - their PENSION. Nothing more, nothing less.

Wait for the day to come when the MoD have to work to 65 - then we will see sparks fly, won't we?
http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/statusicon/user_offline.gif http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/buttons/report.gif (http://www.pprune.org/report.php?p=8067440)

Thomas Coupling............wow! Many thanks for your comments..........I really couldn't articulate it better myself! I've been to my fair share of messy jobs (and the odd major civil disturbance!) over the last quarter of a century.....I've seen some real tough nut firefighters on the verge of tears at what we've had to deal with, but we just crack on and keep ourselves sane with our traditionally black sense of humour! Like any organisation, you get good and bad, but I don't "recognise" some of the stereotypical descriptions of firefighters that I've seen on here or in the press. I'm saddened by some of the comments I've read on here.......and I'll tell you why.......because the vast majority of firefighters, myself included, have the utmost respect for the men and women of our armed forces. We don't look over the wall at the perks other people get.......because, let's face it, we all have a choice when we apply for a job don't we........if you don't like the terms, don't join! Fortunately, for me, retirement is fast approaching........but it doesn't stop me feeling sorry (and extremely self conscious) for those of my colleagues, who now find themselves working in a physically demanding job for an additional 10 years. And I'll say it again.......it's ok to squander the nations wealth, but apparently not ok to play fair with people who do the right thing. And yes, strike action is extreme, and rarely if ever successful, but some of my colleagues really are being asked to swallow a bitter pill!!!
Best
mopardave

[mopardave]

oh lord..........what happened there!:ugh: