Firefighters Striking During Firework Weekend.

[Steve White]

No its not. They are lazy sods and half haven't attended a fire unless they attend lewis on firework night. Health and safety makes sure they dont enter buildings like the old days. If they arrive at a fire they have to fill in a risk acessmant form by which time the building has burnt down.

Firefighters have the same rights as any other worker to not be killed or seriously injured at work. They will however take significant calculated risks to save lives. Perhaps you'd find the HSE's guidance on this matter helpful:

http://www.hse.gov.uk/services/fire/duties.pdf

http://www.hse.gov.uk/services/fire/heroism.htm

 

[EDS]

No its not. They are lazy sods and half haven't attended a fire unless they attend lewis on firework night. Health and safety makes sure they dont enter buildings like the old days. If they arrive at a fire they have to fill in a risk acessmant form by which time the building has burnt down.

Brilliantly educated and informed reply

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Thanks for your kind wishes.

On the subject of re-deployment you're in disagreement with the fire service national employers. They're the ones telling us that there are no jobs for firefighters who are no longer fit for operational duties. The majority of support roles like training, fire safety inspecting officers etc are no longer carried out by uniformed staff, but by non-uniformed staff or contractors. For instance all of London Fire Brigade's training has been outsourced to Babcock. The jobs just aren't there any more.

I'd like to know how the question was worded.

If it was "Do you have such roles available now?", then of course the answer would be no. Why on earth would there be vacant opportunities sat waiting to be filled?

Your answer isn't logical. At the end of the Babcock contract, don't renew it, and use the skills within the Service to carry out the work.

 

[Footsoldier]

Brilliantly educated and informed reply

Thank you.

 

[Footsoldier]

Don't see British soldiers on the front line dowing rifles and saying right we want more money. Fireman get more for what?

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Don't see British soldiers on the front line dowing rifles and saying right we want more money. Fireman get more for what?

They can't, so that's a pointless argument.

 

[Footsoldier]

They can't, so that's a pointless argument.

That's why these vile firemen are taking the piss. Lazy firemen sit on their arses most of the time while soldiers get paid a pittence knowing when they leave their base they may never return.

The wages should be reversed and firemen get sod all.

 

[Steve White]

I'd like to know how the question was worded.

If it was "Do you have such roles available now?", then of course the answer would be no. Why on earth would there be vacant opportunities sat waiting to be filled?

Your answer isn't logical. At the end of the Babcock contract, don't renew it, and use the skills within the Service to carry out the work.

I'm not really sure where this is going. The government told the FBU that sufficient re-deployment opportunities exist. The national employers confirm when asked that no, there are no re-deployment opportunities.The FBU has to act in the best interests of its members with the information available.

If there was a national strategy to create re-deployment opportunities for the cohort of firefighters approaching their 55th birthdays as the proposed changes came into place the I'd have thought that the government and employers would have brought it to the negotiations by now. They haven't, so I can only assume that there are no plans to bring outsourced jobs back in house for re-deployed firefighters to do. I'm not surprised, ideologically this government is committed to shrinking the public sector, not growing it.

My apologies for leaving this debate early - I do have to go out soon.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

That's why these vile firemen are taking the piss. Lazy firemen sit on their arses most of the time while soldiers get paid a pittence knowing when they leave their base they may never return.

The wages should be reversed and firemen get sod all.

If you want to debate with people, do so rationally and try to remain civil. You are not making yourself any friends.

 

[Creaky]

I don't know enough about the details of the dispute to make any comment on the rights or wrongs of the firefighters claims. I do however support the right of any worker to withdraw their labour.

Of course the ultimate recourse of the employer in such situations is to sack anyone who does so.

 

[Footsoldier]

If you want to debate with people, do so rationally and try to remain civil. You are not making yourself any friends.

You carry on supporting the firemen for being greedy and I'll carry on supporting the brave soldiers who might die any minute for pittance.

Have a nice day.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

You carry on supporting the firemen for being greedy

I'd go back over the thread if I were you.

 

[Creaky]

You carry on supporting the firemen for being greedy and I'll carry on supporting the brave soldiers who might die any minute for pittance.

Have a nice day.

It's not one or the other - why not support both groups of brave men and women?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I have a lot of respect for the Fire Brigade. They are getting a raw deal for a tough job. It's up to them when they strike.

 

[banjo]

I think you have to respect anyone who would risk their own life to save another.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

You carry on supporting the firemen for being greedy and I'll carry on supporting the brave soldiers who might die any minute for pittance.Have a nice day.

If this is the case then it is a seperate argument. Fire fighters have nothing to do with military salaries so why point a finger at them?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I think you have to respect anyone who would risk their own life to save another.

I like the way the US treat their fire fighters. They get proper respect and it is a very different culture to the UK.

 

[Tory Boy]

Anyone voting wrong needs to ask themselves if they'd feel safe being rescued from a burning building by 60 year old firefighter.

But currently we are recused by 55 year old firefighters.

Ask any member of the emergency services who has the cushiest job. And the vast majority will say the 'Trumptons'.

TB

 

[Albumen]

In your opinion, but not in the opinion of Dr Williams who conducted the research on behalf of the government. Williams reported that the natural age-related decline in fitness would lead to 66% of currently serving firefighters being unable to achieve a fitness standard of 42ml/kg/min VO2 max between the ages of 55-60. This is largely because fire brigades recruit from the ordinary population and not elite athletes who may expect to maintain higher fitness levels in older age.

So what's to become of these firefighters who aren't fit enough to do the job, but aren't old enough to retire under the proposed scheme? Well in 2006 the government of the day promised that there would be non-operational re-deployment posts for them. The FBU conducted a survey of all 46 fire service employers this year. Only 5 responded that they had re-deployment jobs available, a total of 16 jobs representing 0.04% of the workforce nationally. So what else?

Well the national employers have been quite clear. Firefighters over the age of 55 who fail to achieve the required fitness level will face capability dismissal with no access to their pension until the deferred pension age, which is the national pension age. Remember, these are people who joined the service expecting to be able to retire at 55 (or over 50 with 30 years service).

Firefighters pay dearly for the right to retire earlier than other workers. They currently pay over 13% of their wages in their pension scheme and their contributions make up a higher proportion of the total scheme cost than in any other public sector pension scheme. And anyway, don't we deserve a fit, healthy fire and rescue service?

There's a lot of talk on this thread about firefighters doing second jobs, like that's some kind of justification for attacking the terms and conditions of their primary employment. It's a race-to-the-bottom frame of mind that will see all of us worse off to the benefit of the ruling elite. Yes, firefighter's shift patterns may lend themselves to working a second job, but don't you think they might be more inclined to spend their off-duty time with their loved ones if they could afford to? After all, they work a 42-hour week on average, nights, weekends, public holidays etc and routinely miss birthday celebrations, Christmas at home and so on to provide a 24/7 emergency service.

Nobody enjoys withdrawing their labour, least of all those of us that work in the emergency services, but after three years of negotiation with a government that's ignored every fact we've put under their noses we don't really have a choice. The four hour stoppage in September achieved virtually no press, at least the timing of this strike means that it's gained some attention. If you want to have a safe bonfire/firework party, go to an organised display. If you really must do it yourself, do it on Saturday night, or on Bonfire Night, when we're not on strike.

And please remember, we're not asking for anything, there are no demands for more or better; we're just stopping them from taking away what's ours. Firefighters didn't cause the economic crisis, and they don't get paid bonuses.

By the way, as an Orient fan, could I just say thank you very much for Tiny Cox and Romain Vincelot, both of whom are enjoying outstanding seasons at the O's this year.

Cheers,
Steve

I'd like to see people argue against this. They will of course as the word 'strike' sends them into palpitations and they dream back to the 70's and the usual generalisations will come out about unions. Gawd bless Maggie, she was a princess blah blah.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Don't see British soldiers on the front line dowing rifles and saying right we want more money. Fireman get more for what?

Most soldiers are out of the Army by the age of 45, having served their 22 years and entitled to a pension at the end of their service.

In your opinion, but not in the opinion of Dr Williams who conducted the research on behalf of the government. Williams reported that the natural age-related decline in fitness would lead to 66% of currently serving firefighters being unable to achieve a fitness standard of 42ml/kg/min VO2 max between the ages of 55-60. This is largely because fire brigades recruit from the ordinary population and not elite athletes who may expect to maintain higher fitness levels in older age.

So what's to become of these firefighters who aren't fit enough to do the job, but aren't old enough to retire under the proposed scheme? Well in 2006 the government of the day promised that there would be non-operational re-deployment posts for them. The FBU conducted a survey of all 46 fire service employers this year. Only 5 responded that they had re-deployment jobs available, a total of 16 jobs representing 0.04% of the workforce nationally. So what else?

Well the national employers have been quite clear. Firefighters over the age of 55 who fail to achieve the required fitness level will face capability dismissal with no access to their pension until the deferred pension age, which is the national pension age. Remember, these are people who joined the service expecting to be able to retire at 55 (or over 50 with 30 years service).

Firefighters pay dearly for the right to retire earlier than other workers. They currently pay over 13% of their wages in their pension scheme and their contributions make up a higher proportion of the total scheme cost than in any other public sector pension scheme. And anyway, don't we deserve a fit, healthy fire and rescue service?

There's a lot of talk on this thread about firefighters doing second jobs, like that's some kind of justification for attacking the terms and conditions of their primary employment. It's a race-to-the-bottom frame of mind that will see all of us worse off to the benefit of the ruling elite. Yes, firefighter's shift patterns may lend themselves to working a second job, but don't you think they might be more inclined to spend their off-duty time with their loved ones if they could afford to? After all, they work a 42-hour week on average, nights, weekends, public holidays etc and routinely miss birthday celebrations, Christmas at home and so on to provide a 24/7 emergency service.

Nobody enjoys withdrawing their labour, least of all those of us that work in the emergency services, but after three years of negotiation with a government that's ignored every fact we've put under their noses we don't really have a choice. The four hour stoppage in September achieved virtually no press, at least the timing of this strike means that it's gained some attention. If you want to have a safe bonfire/firework party, go to an organised display. If you really must do it yourself, do it on Saturday night, or on Bonfire Night, when we're not on strike.

And please remember, we're not asking for anything, there are no demands for more or better; we're just stopping them from taking away what's ours. Firefighters didn't cause the economic crisis, and they don't get paid bonuses.

By the way, as an Orient fan, could I just say thank you very much for Tiny Cox and Romain Vincelot, both of whom are enjoying outstanding seasons at the O's this year.

Cheers,
Steve

This is one of the best posts I have ever read on Nsc.