Firefighters Strike.......Again
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 591
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Somerset
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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...
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...
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 591
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For the record, here are the pay scales:
Firefighters' Pay Scales 2003 (includes unresolved pay rise)
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
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.
Firefighters' Pay Scales 2003 (includes unresolved pay rise)
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
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.
Last edited by Scud-U-Like; 8th Aug 2004 at 12:52.
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.
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.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Longton, Lancs, UK
Age: 80
Posts: 1,527
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
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
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
Last edited by jindabyne; 8th Aug 2004 at 13:14.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
that are running this country. Runway 31, I value highly your contribution to this thread. Good luck...
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
that are running this country. Runway 31, I value highly your contribution to this thread. Good luck...
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Somerset
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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...
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...
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.....
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: North of the border
Age: 71
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Last edited by Runway 31; 8th Aug 2004 at 19:44.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: North of the border
Age: 71
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: North of the border
Age: 71
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
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
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Longton, Lancs, UK
Age: 80
Posts: 1,527
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
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!!
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!!
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: North of the border
Age: 71
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Preston
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Longton, Lancs, UK
Age: 80
Posts: 1,527
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
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!
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!
Last edited by jindabyne; 9th Aug 2004 at 13:34.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: North of the border
Age: 71
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 591
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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?
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?
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: North of the border
Age: 71
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 591
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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."
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."