Firefighters Strike.......Again
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Firefighters Strike.......Again
After reading an article in one of the better newspapers today, it appears our friends in the FBU are having a ballot in the next few weeks, with a view to striking in September. Apparently, a force of 11500 will be required to man the fire tenders and Op Fiasco looks to be revived.
The Army will be hit for approx 7000 troops with the RAF/RN providing the remainder. Oh well its a good job that we aren't too busy at the moment and we have loads of spare people on the ground to deal with this??????
I really don't understand their problem, (can someone please fill me in???) they earn good money for what they do, and once again, many junior ranks are going to find themselves being quasi-firefigters on less money than the firefighters are ALREADY on!
This absolutely stinks, I can only hope that the members of the FBU will appreciate just how much this will hurt the armed forces and will realise that no one really gives a toss about their "cause".
DS
The Army will be hit for approx 7000 troops with the RAF/RN providing the remainder. Oh well its a good job that we aren't too busy at the moment and we have loads of spare people on the ground to deal with this??????
I really don't understand their problem, (can someone please fill me in???) they earn good money for what they do, and once again, many junior ranks are going to find themselves being quasi-firefigters on less money than the firefighters are ALREADY on!
This absolutely stinks, I can only hope that the members of the FBU will appreciate just how much this will hurt the armed forces and will realise that no one really gives a toss about their "cause".
DS
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: chester/manchester/leeds
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This latest dispute is apparently concerned with bank holiday working. The FBU wants firefighters to continue with restricted working hours on 8 public holidays, whereas the government [quite rightly] wants them to work a normal shift since they are being paid double time and getting an additional day's holiday as time in lieu.
The FBU has stalled 2 pay rises totalling 7.7% in the past 8 months, and is now calling for a strike because they baulk at the idea of going to work on double pay. I sincerely hope that the British public shows no sympathy with their 'cause' this time around.
The FBU has stalled 2 pay rises totalling 7.7% in the past 8 months, and is now calling for a strike because they baulk at the idea of going to work on double pay. I sincerely hope that the British public shows no sympathy with their 'cause' this time around.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: West
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With people lining up to be firefighters can't we just sack all the whinging ones and start again. We'd probably have to cover fewer days for them to be trained up than we would if they keep striking!
Although I respect what they do for a living, there is such a thing as supply and demand. When you require few academic qualifications for job and there are plenty of people who want to do it....
Although I respect what they do for a living, there is such a thing as supply and demand. When you require few academic qualifications for job and there are plenty of people who want to do it....
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Far far away
Age: 53
Posts: 715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good luck chaps
http://www.modoracle.com/?page=http:...il.h2f?id=5996
That Mr Hoon hey? You gotta luv him - he's so funny...
http://www.modoracle.com/?page=http:...il.h2f?id=5996
That Mr Hoon hey? You gotta luv him - he's so funny...
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Up North
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If industrial action will put lives and property at risk then....
1. Remove the right to industrial action from firefighters. Can be done through prerogative powes, surely?
2. Get a court injunction to decalre any such strike illegal.
...or let's just use the armed forces, bunch of mugs that they are, shall we?
1. Remove the right to industrial action from firefighters. Can be done through prerogative powes, surely?
2. Get a court injunction to decalre any such strike illegal.
...or let's just use the armed forces, bunch of mugs that they are, shall we?
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Somerset
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Op Fresco... 2!
Well, here we go again!
Just in case there are any whingeing firemen reading this - do you realise the unbelievable amount of pain and grief this causes the Armed Forces? Several Ships Companies in the RN have been either recalled from leave or had their summer leave cancelled to start training for Op Fresco 2 (not officially called that yet!). Presumably this is the same for the other two Services as most bases/units are on summer leave in August. I'm quite sure the firemen wouldn't stand for this, so why do they expect us to do so for them.
They had very little support within the Armed Forces last time, although apparently had a fair bit of support from the general public. I sincerely hope they realise that this has worn very thin indeed, especially given that they're arguing over doing a normal day's work on a Bank Holiday, whilst being paid double time and getting the day back as a day in lieu. Presumably they'll need the time to count their new fatter pay packets!
They should be brought in line with other emergency services, lose their right to strike, and have to settle for whaterver pay award their employers deem fit to give them - how does 2.7% grab them? No, didn't think so!
Rant over.
Just in case there are any whingeing firemen reading this - do you realise the unbelievable amount of pain and grief this causes the Armed Forces? Several Ships Companies in the RN have been either recalled from leave or had their summer leave cancelled to start training for Op Fresco 2 (not officially called that yet!). Presumably this is the same for the other two Services as most bases/units are on summer leave in August. I'm quite sure the firemen wouldn't stand for this, so why do they expect us to do so for them.
They had very little support within the Armed Forces last time, although apparently had a fair bit of support from the general public. I sincerely hope they realise that this has worn very thin indeed, especially given that they're arguing over doing a normal day's work on a Bank Holiday, whilst being paid double time and getting the day back as a day in lieu. Presumably they'll need the time to count their new fatter pay packets!
They should be brought in line with other emergency services, lose their right to strike, and have to settle for whaterver pay award their employers deem fit to give them - how does 2.7% grab them? No, didn't think so!
Rant over.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's hope that the good men and women of the Armed Forces don't have to put out the fires caused by a hijacked aircraft crashing. Crashing because they weren't able to do their primary job and intercept it early, or assist in providing security at airports etc. The ones left in the country that is!
Got to go and prepare to work this weekend, looking forward to the extra pay and time off...oh forgot that doesn't apply to us. The FBU is nothing more than a group of unrealistic, money grabbing, lazy idiots who do nothing to serve the firefighting profession.
Got to go and prepare to work this weekend, looking forward to the extra pay and time off...oh forgot that doesn't apply to us. The FBU is nothing more than a group of unrealistic, money grabbing, lazy idiots who do nothing to serve the firefighting profession.
Employers in Avon are said to be the first in th UK to fully accept the fire brigades pay increase rather than more strikes!!
Maybe that will be the catalyst for the rest of the country??
Maybe that will be the catalyst for the rest of the country??
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Up North
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This could be interesting....if the local authorities settle independently, then it is egg on the face of fat Prezza and completely undermines a national strike. I read (somewhere) that Scotland may also accept the proposed deal.
Might get that holiday after all!
Might get that holiday after all!
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: North of the border
Age: 71
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A gang of "arrogant, lying. bullying immoral cowards and thieves" is how one FBU negotiator described a group of Labour councillors after they had deliberately and maliciously thwarted any chance of a settlement to the long standing fire dispute. Another described their wrecking tactics as the "most blatant piece of political interference" he had seen in his life. Less caustic but equally revealing is the statement by one of the Local Authority negotiators, "They (the FBU) held up to their part of the agreement and we have let them down on ours". Pat Watters, leader of the Scottish Employers group, went on to say, "I'm not putting any fault on the trade unions in this particular case. I criticised them in the past but I am not today".
Strong words from three people who witnessed the extraordinary events at a meeting which should have served to rubber-stamp an agreement which had been hammered out between the FBU and Local Government Employers. After many months of negotiations, all the sticking points had been resolved and the way seemed clear to release the 3.5% pay rise that had been owed to the firefighters since last November. Now, that agreement has been wrecked and, with no immediate prospects of further negotiations, another round of fire strikes seems inevitable. This situation clearly warrants a public explanation. The way in which this breakdown came about demands a public enquiry.
Mondays NJC meeting was intended to finalise many months of intensive discussions between the two sides. That was, however, until the gang of "arrogant, lying, bullying, immoral cowards and thieves" decided to gate-crash the party. This group of London councillors previously had nothing to do with the National Joint Council, nothing to do with the talks and nothing to with the Fire Service. Their arrival was so unexpected that extra seating had to be hurriedly brought in and there was barely room for the unions representatives. Bill Gillespie of the Employers said, "I'm particularly annoyed that nine out of the thirteen people who voted against the deal, I had never seen before at negotiations." It is even reported that one of the so-called 'wreckers' asked who they ( the FBU ) were. Clearly, whoever these mewcenaries were, they were not the kind of well-informed experts that the public might expect to be making such important decisions on their behalf. It could even be asked if they knew enough to make a decision on their own, or if they had to be told how to vote by someone else.
The Local Government Association have since issued a statement explaining that the Employers side were 'fully represented' at this particular meeting to "ensure that the views of all fire authorities were properly represented across the country". This concern for the democratic process is commendable but it does beg the question as to why this was not considered necessary during the long months of negotiations leading up to this agreement. It might also be asked, how can an all-London group of councillors be said to represent fire authorities 'across the country'. As to who authorised this group of Labour councillors to attend the NJC meeting unannounced, when and why, the LGA spokesperson could offer no answer but instead claimed that such questions were irrelevant. The real issue was about what work firefighters should undertake on public holidays. It was because the FBU suddenly changed their minds at Mondays meeting that the agreement failed. How fortunate that some shadowy but nameless individual had the foresight to round up a group of spare Labour councillors..........just in case.
We are indeed fortunate in this country, to have such public-spirited officials and politicians. Modest as well; too modest perhaps. Such public benefactors should step forward and receive full credit for their actions. Modesty does not always become a politician. It has been suggested that Minister Nick Raynsford, New Labours very own Salacious Crum, used fiscal blackmail to force the Labour councillors to do his dirty work for him. It has also been alleged that Sir Sandy Bruce-Lockhart chairman of the Local Government Association, had a hand in this murky affair. However, they are just minor players, with no real authority off their own to initiate a deception of this magnitude. Mr Prescott says it is nonsense to suggest that the Government had intervened but, then again, he told us that the Bain Review was independent. Like Bart Simpson, Tony Blair will also deny any responsibility when he finally returns to this planet. Yet someone, somewhere, has maliciously perverted the course of legitimate negotiations with the clear intention of provoking a national fire strike. Whoever that person, or persons are, high or low, they are guilty of treason. They are the real 'arrogant, lying. bullying immoral cowards and thieves'. They must be removed from whatever office they hold.
If further proof were necessary that this has been a deliberate plot to prevent a long-overdue settlement to this dispute, consider the words of Peter Monk, deputy leader of Suffolk County Council and a member of the Employers negotiating team. "Councillors who have no detailed knowledge of the dispute were brought in to pack the meeting and scupper the deal. The Fire Brigades Union has a fair gripe. They were stitched up................all our hard work in trying to reach an agreement has come to an end through political spite". These are the words of an honorable man;. Now consider the words of Sir Sandy Bruce-Lockhart. He tries to justify what happened by claiming, "We were perfectly entitled to do what we did". This is the measure of the man and the deception. Mr Bruce-Lockhart, until you learn to differentiate between what you have the right to do and what is the right thing to do, you do not even qualify as a human being let alone aspire to high office.
The FBU officials have been told that there will be no further talks unless firefighters are balloted and vote for industrial action. They are actually being told that they must go on strike. At the same time, Mr Prescott's department is sanctimoniously warning that further strikes by the union will put lives and property at risk; they call the firefighters 'irresponsible. Talk about the pot calling the kettle. There is irrefutable evidence that firefighters are deliberately being goaded and manipulated into taking industrial action, yet Mr Prescott calls them irresponsible and boasts that the Government have not intervened. It would be irresponsible not to intervene. If the Deputy Prime Minister is not aware of what is going on beneath his very nose and what needs to be done about it, then he should resign now on the grounds of criminal incompetence.
Hopefully, firefighters will resist this blatant provocation. Even when battle is inevitable, it is always wise to choose for yourself when and where you will fight. Clearly, someone in the Government wants the FBU to fight now. Some sources suggest that Tony Blair is already standing in front of a mirror in the toilets at Number 10, practising his sincere look and piously rolling his eyes. He may even find some documents linking the FBU to Saddam Hussein while he is in there. What is certain is that he will have no qualms about the cost to other people while he is grinding the firefighters into submission. It might even stop people from asking awkward questions about Iraq. Then he could stride victoriously into the New Year and election time as the heroic commander-in-chief and patron saint of public morality. On the other hand, firefighters have waited long enough for their money, it might be worth waiting a few more months. It is a known mathematical fact that Mr Blair's concern for public safety varies inversely to the proximity of a general election and his own political safety.
However, as much as Mr Blair would like to bury all of our heads in the sand, he may find that this latest round of skulduggery is more than he even he can spin his way out of. Not that he will go first:. Other, lesser beings will sacrificed at the altar of his ego Messrs Prescott and Raynsford would certainly do well to start watching that vulnerable spot between their shoulder blades.
The noose is beginning to tighten. Now, they have sacked Councillor Christina Jebb, chairperson of the Employers side for speaking out about what really happened. In addition to testimony of FBU officials, more and more of their own negotiators are speaking out against what they see as duplicity. More and more fire authorities are expressing disappointment with the Governments underhanded dealings. Yet Mr Prescott cannot wait to call up the military and gleefully condemn the firefighters. Who was it who challenged the firefighters to 'talk not walk'. Well, now is the time for talking, Mr Prescott. Is it worth plunging the entire country into the perils of another fire strike over an issue so trivial as to whether firefighters should or should not carry out fire safety work on a handful of public holidays throughout the year. There need be no strike, not even a ballot. The Government can and must step in immediately to prevent this madness going any further
Strong words from three people who witnessed the extraordinary events at a meeting which should have served to rubber-stamp an agreement which had been hammered out between the FBU and Local Government Employers. After many months of negotiations, all the sticking points had been resolved and the way seemed clear to release the 3.5% pay rise that had been owed to the firefighters since last November. Now, that agreement has been wrecked and, with no immediate prospects of further negotiations, another round of fire strikes seems inevitable. This situation clearly warrants a public explanation. The way in which this breakdown came about demands a public enquiry.
Mondays NJC meeting was intended to finalise many months of intensive discussions between the two sides. That was, however, until the gang of "arrogant, lying, bullying, immoral cowards and thieves" decided to gate-crash the party. This group of London councillors previously had nothing to do with the National Joint Council, nothing to do with the talks and nothing to with the Fire Service. Their arrival was so unexpected that extra seating had to be hurriedly brought in and there was barely room for the unions representatives. Bill Gillespie of the Employers said, "I'm particularly annoyed that nine out of the thirteen people who voted against the deal, I had never seen before at negotiations." It is even reported that one of the so-called 'wreckers' asked who they ( the FBU ) were. Clearly, whoever these mewcenaries were, they were not the kind of well-informed experts that the public might expect to be making such important decisions on their behalf. It could even be asked if they knew enough to make a decision on their own, or if they had to be told how to vote by someone else.
The Local Government Association have since issued a statement explaining that the Employers side were 'fully represented' at this particular meeting to "ensure that the views of all fire authorities were properly represented across the country". This concern for the democratic process is commendable but it does beg the question as to why this was not considered necessary during the long months of negotiations leading up to this agreement. It might also be asked, how can an all-London group of councillors be said to represent fire authorities 'across the country'. As to who authorised this group of Labour councillors to attend the NJC meeting unannounced, when and why, the LGA spokesperson could offer no answer but instead claimed that such questions were irrelevant. The real issue was about what work firefighters should undertake on public holidays. It was because the FBU suddenly changed their minds at Mondays meeting that the agreement failed. How fortunate that some shadowy but nameless individual had the foresight to round up a group of spare Labour councillors..........just in case.
We are indeed fortunate in this country, to have such public-spirited officials and politicians. Modest as well; too modest perhaps. Such public benefactors should step forward and receive full credit for their actions. Modesty does not always become a politician. It has been suggested that Minister Nick Raynsford, New Labours very own Salacious Crum, used fiscal blackmail to force the Labour councillors to do his dirty work for him. It has also been alleged that Sir Sandy Bruce-Lockhart chairman of the Local Government Association, had a hand in this murky affair. However, they are just minor players, with no real authority off their own to initiate a deception of this magnitude. Mr Prescott says it is nonsense to suggest that the Government had intervened but, then again, he told us that the Bain Review was independent. Like Bart Simpson, Tony Blair will also deny any responsibility when he finally returns to this planet. Yet someone, somewhere, has maliciously perverted the course of legitimate negotiations with the clear intention of provoking a national fire strike. Whoever that person, or persons are, high or low, they are guilty of treason. They are the real 'arrogant, lying. bullying immoral cowards and thieves'. They must be removed from whatever office they hold.
If further proof were necessary that this has been a deliberate plot to prevent a long-overdue settlement to this dispute, consider the words of Peter Monk, deputy leader of Suffolk County Council and a member of the Employers negotiating team. "Councillors who have no detailed knowledge of the dispute were brought in to pack the meeting and scupper the deal. The Fire Brigades Union has a fair gripe. They were stitched up................all our hard work in trying to reach an agreement has come to an end through political spite". These are the words of an honorable man;. Now consider the words of Sir Sandy Bruce-Lockhart. He tries to justify what happened by claiming, "We were perfectly entitled to do what we did". This is the measure of the man and the deception. Mr Bruce-Lockhart, until you learn to differentiate between what you have the right to do and what is the right thing to do, you do not even qualify as a human being let alone aspire to high office.
The FBU officials have been told that there will be no further talks unless firefighters are balloted and vote for industrial action. They are actually being told that they must go on strike. At the same time, Mr Prescott's department is sanctimoniously warning that further strikes by the union will put lives and property at risk; they call the firefighters 'irresponsible. Talk about the pot calling the kettle. There is irrefutable evidence that firefighters are deliberately being goaded and manipulated into taking industrial action, yet Mr Prescott calls them irresponsible and boasts that the Government have not intervened. It would be irresponsible not to intervene. If the Deputy Prime Minister is not aware of what is going on beneath his very nose and what needs to be done about it, then he should resign now on the grounds of criminal incompetence.
Hopefully, firefighters will resist this blatant provocation. Even when battle is inevitable, it is always wise to choose for yourself when and where you will fight. Clearly, someone in the Government wants the FBU to fight now. Some sources suggest that Tony Blair is already standing in front of a mirror in the toilets at Number 10, practising his sincere look and piously rolling his eyes. He may even find some documents linking the FBU to Saddam Hussein while he is in there. What is certain is that he will have no qualms about the cost to other people while he is grinding the firefighters into submission. It might even stop people from asking awkward questions about Iraq. Then he could stride victoriously into the New Year and election time as the heroic commander-in-chief and patron saint of public morality. On the other hand, firefighters have waited long enough for their money, it might be worth waiting a few more months. It is a known mathematical fact that Mr Blair's concern for public safety varies inversely to the proximity of a general election and his own political safety.
However, as much as Mr Blair would like to bury all of our heads in the sand, he may find that this latest round of skulduggery is more than he even he can spin his way out of. Not that he will go first:. Other, lesser beings will sacrificed at the altar of his ego Messrs Prescott and Raynsford would certainly do well to start watching that vulnerable spot between their shoulder blades.
The noose is beginning to tighten. Now, they have sacked Councillor Christina Jebb, chairperson of the Employers side for speaking out about what really happened. In addition to testimony of FBU officials, more and more of their own negotiators are speaking out against what they see as duplicity. More and more fire authorities are expressing disappointment with the Governments underhanded dealings. Yet Mr Prescott cannot wait to call up the military and gleefully condemn the firefighters. Who was it who challenged the firefighters to 'talk not walk'. Well, now is the time for talking, Mr Prescott. Is it worth plunging the entire country into the perils of another fire strike over an issue so trivial as to whether firefighters should or should not carry out fire safety work on a handful of public holidays throughout the year. There need be no strike, not even a ballot. The Government can and must step in immediately to prevent this madness going any further
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Longton, Lancs, UK
Age: 80
Posts: 1,527
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
All very well Runway31, but none of that will alter the general opinion of firemen should you choose to strike - WHATEVER the reason. I have no regard for Blair, nor politicians at large, but I will have even less regard for firemen should you elect to strike.
My son is a paramedic. You will know what I mean.
My son is a paramedic. You will know what I mean.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: North of the border
Age: 71
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I will start by stating that I appreciate greatly what is being asked of the armed forces but I still request that you consider all the fact just as I will require to do when coming to a decision as to how to vote. What ever you may think, the decisions being taking will not be taken lightly. I did not join the fire service to do anything other than save lives and the decision whether or not to withdraw my services is not one that I had ever envisaged being require to make again..
As the posters on various threads on the forum state, the time comes when you have to face up to to employers trying to walk all over you, especially when the want to do something just because they can. I still hope there is time to end this and even if the vote is for strike action, it does not mean that a strike must take place. Before this intervention on Monday I do not think that the vote would have been for a strike. Now a lot of people even moderates are very angry.
I and the rest of my colleagues have had to put up with a lot of uncertainty over the last 2 years and hoped that everything would hve been sorted out on Monday. The government made sure for what ever reason that the negotiations failed. The armed services should know how we feel as the cuts being proposed are all the thanks you get for what you have done over the last couple of years.
In reply to a few of the previous poster, I am quite happy to drill, carry out inspections in premises, fit smoke alarms in someones house or do what ever is asked of me on Christmas Day. By the way, contrary to what has been stated I do not receive any payment over my normal wages for working public holidays.
The Fire Brigades Union is writing to every Fire Authority telling them the union is balloting for industrial action. The move follows the wrecking of the pay talks.
The employers’ side of the joint meeting was flooded by London councillors – most of them Labour - to ensure a 13-10 vote against signing the deal. The vote was set to go 10-6 in favour of a deal until London councillors were sent in to scupper it.
The wrecking move was described by one senior employers’ representative as a “conspiracy”. The quote is contained in the Independent and is in line with the comments made by privately to the union by many councillors: “ ‘I very rarely subscribe to conspiracy theories, but this is no cock up, this is a conspiracy’.” (Independent, 3 August.)
Another newspaper report confirms the flooding tactic was used. Bill Gillespie from Northern Ireland had attended the crucial talks at the TUC the previous week and knew a deal had been reached.
“ Ulster Fire Authority chairman Bill Gillespie said: "We have been working for over a year, and have overcome obstacle after obstacle. I felt we had reached the end of the road and we should sign up. I'm extremely disappointed now.
"To be fair to the FBU they have played their part and met us half way." He added: "I'm particularly annoyed that nine out of the 13 people who voted against the deal I had never seen before at negotiations. It seems they were drafted in at the last minute."”
Source: Belfast Newsletter 3 August 2004
The agreement reached last week on Stage 2 and Stage 3 of the deal agreed last year would have led to pay awards of 3.5% backdated to last November and 4.2% from 1 July to be made. It also included all key elements of the Government’s modernisation agenda, which have been formally agreed by the union but now rejected by the employers. This includes the issue of bank holiday working.
Details of the moves to block a deal were put formally to the 29 employers’ representatives at the meeting by the union’s Assistant General Secretary Mike Fordham. They were openly challenged on 5 key moves used to block a deal:
*”Nick Raynsford warned the Local Government Executive last Wednesday that the £30 million transitional funding would be withheld if the deal was signed. Do any of you deny it?” No response.
* “The tactics included cancelling this meeting. Do any of you deny it?” No response.
* “The tactics included making the employers’ side inquorate so they could not sign the deal. Do any of you deny it?” No response.
* “They included being pressurised by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister not to backdate the 3.5% payments to November. Do any of you deny it?” No response.
* “The tactics included flooding the meeting with councillors sent in to block the deal. Do any of you deny it?” No response.
The meeting was then adjourned. During the adjournment the employers’ representatives left and notified the union afterwards.
FBU Assistant general secretary Mike Fordham said: “I put every point to them detailing the tactics to be used to block a deal and none of them denied it. They sat in silence and raised no objection.
“Their own side use the term conspiracy because that is what it was. They parachuted in councillors no one had ever seen before, none of whom had ever even sat on a fire authority.
“Many councillors are disgusted by what happened and are making their views very clear. The rest of the UK does not want to see a strike on their doorstep because of a Government inspired plan to wreck the talks.
“Scottish councillors are in open revolt. Northern Ireland councillors are in open revolt. Lib Dem councillors and councillors from other independent parties are in open revolt. An increasing number of councillors in England and Wales are in open revolt.
“Nick Raynsford is the guiding hand behind the moves to block this deal and forcing a confrontation. We were ready to sign the deal yesterday and instead we are being forced to ballot.
“We reached a deal last week and it was Government intervention that stopped it. If there had not been Government intervention a deal would have been reached yesterday.”
Who I would ask is wanting a strike to go ahead?.
As the posters on various threads on the forum state, the time comes when you have to face up to to employers trying to walk all over you, especially when the want to do something just because they can. I still hope there is time to end this and even if the vote is for strike action, it does not mean that a strike must take place. Before this intervention on Monday I do not think that the vote would have been for a strike. Now a lot of people even moderates are very angry.
I and the rest of my colleagues have had to put up with a lot of uncertainty over the last 2 years and hoped that everything would hve been sorted out on Monday. The government made sure for what ever reason that the negotiations failed. The armed services should know how we feel as the cuts being proposed are all the thanks you get for what you have done over the last couple of years.
In reply to a few of the previous poster, I am quite happy to drill, carry out inspections in premises, fit smoke alarms in someones house or do what ever is asked of me on Christmas Day. By the way, contrary to what has been stated I do not receive any payment over my normal wages for working public holidays.
The Fire Brigades Union is writing to every Fire Authority telling them the union is balloting for industrial action. The move follows the wrecking of the pay talks.
The employers’ side of the joint meeting was flooded by London councillors – most of them Labour - to ensure a 13-10 vote against signing the deal. The vote was set to go 10-6 in favour of a deal until London councillors were sent in to scupper it.
The wrecking move was described by one senior employers’ representative as a “conspiracy”. The quote is contained in the Independent and is in line with the comments made by privately to the union by many councillors: “ ‘I very rarely subscribe to conspiracy theories, but this is no cock up, this is a conspiracy’.” (Independent, 3 August.)
Another newspaper report confirms the flooding tactic was used. Bill Gillespie from Northern Ireland had attended the crucial talks at the TUC the previous week and knew a deal had been reached.
“ Ulster Fire Authority chairman Bill Gillespie said: "We have been working for over a year, and have overcome obstacle after obstacle. I felt we had reached the end of the road and we should sign up. I'm extremely disappointed now.
"To be fair to the FBU they have played their part and met us half way." He added: "I'm particularly annoyed that nine out of the 13 people who voted against the deal I had never seen before at negotiations. It seems they were drafted in at the last minute."”
Source: Belfast Newsletter 3 August 2004
The agreement reached last week on Stage 2 and Stage 3 of the deal agreed last year would have led to pay awards of 3.5% backdated to last November and 4.2% from 1 July to be made. It also included all key elements of the Government’s modernisation agenda, which have been formally agreed by the union but now rejected by the employers. This includes the issue of bank holiday working.
Details of the moves to block a deal were put formally to the 29 employers’ representatives at the meeting by the union’s Assistant General Secretary Mike Fordham. They were openly challenged on 5 key moves used to block a deal:
*”Nick Raynsford warned the Local Government Executive last Wednesday that the £30 million transitional funding would be withheld if the deal was signed. Do any of you deny it?” No response.
* “The tactics included cancelling this meeting. Do any of you deny it?” No response.
* “The tactics included making the employers’ side inquorate so they could not sign the deal. Do any of you deny it?” No response.
* “They included being pressurised by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister not to backdate the 3.5% payments to November. Do any of you deny it?” No response.
* “The tactics included flooding the meeting with councillors sent in to block the deal. Do any of you deny it?” No response.
The meeting was then adjourned. During the adjournment the employers’ representatives left and notified the union afterwards.
FBU Assistant general secretary Mike Fordham said: “I put every point to them detailing the tactics to be used to block a deal and none of them denied it. They sat in silence and raised no objection.
“Their own side use the term conspiracy because that is what it was. They parachuted in councillors no one had ever seen before, none of whom had ever even sat on a fire authority.
“Many councillors are disgusted by what happened and are making their views very clear. The rest of the UK does not want to see a strike on their doorstep because of a Government inspired plan to wreck the talks.
“Scottish councillors are in open revolt. Northern Ireland councillors are in open revolt. Lib Dem councillors and councillors from other independent parties are in open revolt. An increasing number of councillors in England and Wales are in open revolt.
“Nick Raynsford is the guiding hand behind the moves to block this deal and forcing a confrontation. We were ready to sign the deal yesterday and instead we are being forced to ballot.
“We reached a deal last week and it was Government intervention that stopped it. If there had not been Government intervention a deal would have been reached yesterday.”
Who I would ask is wanting a strike to go ahead?.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would someone please explain why we are pi**ing about with those rubbish 'Green Godesses'? Surely it is not beyond the wit of a few experienced people to find out how modern fire engines work and then use them to fight fires. These engines do not belong to the FBU - they belong to the taxpayers, and it seems to me that they should rightly and legitimately be used by Forces personnel...
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: North of the border
Age: 71
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you will find that the plans are to use them.
Careful now as the appliances are very powerful and I hate to think of the consequences of them being driven by someone, no matter how experienced at driving but with minimal training on the actual vehicles. One of these being driven at 60 mph up a busy main street by someone being put in such a position will surely lead to disaster.
Please also remember it is not the appliances which put out fires, cut people out of accident damaged vehicles, deal with chemical incidents etc, it is the people in them.
Careful now as the appliances are very powerful and I hate to think of the consequences of them being driven by someone, no matter how experienced at driving but with minimal training on the actual vehicles. One of these being driven at 60 mph up a busy main street by someone being put in such a position will surely lead to disaster.
Please also remember it is not the appliances which put out fires, cut people out of accident damaged vehicles, deal with chemical incidents etc, it is the people in them.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess that they can't use the modern fire engines as everytime they were handed back to the fire fighters the appliances would have to me made u/s until all the systems were checked out.
When you use a hire car, you tend to mis treat it as it's not yours. You might run the engine ragged or wear out the brakes but you don't care and then hand the keys back to the next user.
You can't do that with a fire engine. You don't want to be given the keys back from the forces personnel and go straight out to a shout not knowing if the equipment will work or not!
But then again they shouldn't be going on strike and this is all down to the political spin doctors at number 10 calling the FBUs bluff, forcing them to go on strike and making the whole nation suffer so taking the heat off the bad press this goverment has been getting recently.
When you use a hire car, you tend to mis treat it as it's not yours. You might run the engine ragged or wear out the brakes but you don't care and then hand the keys back to the next user.
You can't do that with a fire engine. You don't want to be given the keys back from the forces personnel and go straight out to a shout not knowing if the equipment will work or not!
But then again they shouldn't be going on strike and this is all down to the political spin doctors at number 10 calling the FBUs bluff, forcing them to go on strike and making the whole nation suffer so taking the heat off the bad press this goverment has been getting recently.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: North of the border
Age: 71
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree that we should not be going on strike. I would however ask who is calling who,s bluff. Bluffing is a rather dangerous game and if not handled properly someone will suffer, the public. The FBU agreed to the employers wording which is now the sticking point. The employers did not like their own words and voted them down when the negotiations were finished. They then asked for an adjournment and walked out stating that they would only resume talks if it was a yes vote for strike action. It would appear that the government and the employers do not intend to settle and are intent on keeping this dispute going. You make up your own mind why.
The government see everyone as expendable as long as they get what thay want. No sacrifice is too great for them as long as they stay in power. It is not them however that are expected to make the sacrifices it is people like me and you that are thrust into whatever front line it is this time to make these sacrifices to satisfy some idealogical battle.
The government will not suffer as the spin doctors will ensure that teflon tony will not have any muck sticking to him. They will see that the blame for this sorry mess will lie with everyone else.
The government see everyone as expendable as long as they get what thay want. No sacrifice is too great for them as long as they stay in power. It is not them however that are expected to make the sacrifices it is people like me and you that are thrust into whatever front line it is this time to make these sacrifices to satisfy some idealogical battle.
The government will not suffer as the spin doctors will ensure that teflon tony will not have any muck sticking to him. They will see that the blame for this sorry mess will lie with everyone else.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,089
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Runway 31 - what is so special about an hgv painted red rather than one painted camouflage?
So that we all may understand the economics at work here please tell us what is the average GROSS pay of the lowliest fireman and what other taxabale or non taxable benefits exist. Is it true that you will be paid DOUBLE time for bank holiday working AND time off in lieu AND you dont want to work normally on those days? If it is not true tell us all the true picture IF YOU DARE
So that we all may understand the economics at work here please tell us what is the average GROSS pay of the lowliest fireman and what other taxabale or non taxable benefits exist. Is it true that you will be paid DOUBLE time for bank holiday working AND time off in lieu AND you dont want to work normally on those days? If it is not true tell us all the true picture IF YOU DARE
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Muscat, Oman
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Runway31 already said he does not get paid any different for working Christmas day. I think there are also insurance issues that prevented us from using the red machines last time.
I'm not normally a supporter of the FBU on this issue, indeed I suggested on another thread that the firemen should get sacked if they strike, like the USA did with their ATC. However, Runway31 comes across as a sensible sort of guy who is putting his life on the line just as much as the rest of us. His story of the Gov't stitching up the FBU also sounds worryingly believable.
With a handle like "Runway 31", are you part of the "normal" fire service and operating on the same terms and conditions, or do airport fire services employ people under a different scheme?
I'm not normally a supporter of the FBU on this issue, indeed I suggested on another thread that the firemen should get sacked if they strike, like the USA did with their ATC. However, Runway31 comes across as a sensible sort of guy who is putting his life on the line just as much as the rest of us. His story of the Gov't stitching up the FBU also sounds worryingly believable.
With a handle like "Runway 31", are you part of the "normal" fire service and operating on the same terms and conditions, or do airport fire services employ people under a different scheme?