Completely ridiculous striking for 40%

And all you people blaming the govt. what would you have them do - give them 40%, and then give every other public servant the same when they striked?

Some of you may not remember how things were before the stable economic climate we have now, but I do, and the Firenans union are a bunch of Red Ken's living in cloud cuckoo land, IMHO of course.

 

I can't believe this emphasis on FORTY PERCENT

A typical fireman earns LESS THAN the national average wage!!!!

Forget percentages, and start to support paying people who help us live a normal life - by paying them a normal wage!!

mb

 

One Point - They will NEVER get anywhere near 40% not even after 5 years on strike!! So why strike???

Top whack you can expect to win is about 6% and a review

What are you going to do when they start burying people because of a strike that will change nothing??

The Fireservice will lose public support VERY quickly indeed - and why just select days?? Just go out on all out strike FFS - dont pi55 about!

Pete

 

A thought for all the firemen.

The miners went on strike in the mistaken belief that they could challenge, and beat, a government. It led to a decimation of the mining industry, which ironically was more severe than it otherwise would have been.

We could never lose the fire service as we did the miners, but in seeking to get a very large increase, the firemen have put their heads over the parapet. History should teach unions to never try to take on the government, because they CANNOT be seen to lose. This government is particular cannot be seen to be in thrall to the unions, so will tough it out.

Whether that's right or wrong is, of course, debatable, but whilst there's a lot of goodwill towards firemen, there's actually very little sympathy for their current cause.

bros

 

Sack the lot and sub contract it out to "group 4" and "Rentokill"

 

I have to say, I wouldn't do their job for £21k. And, in fact, even if they win the salary increase, I wouldn't do the job for £30k either.

I have every sympathy for them, and totally support their action. I'd happily pay a hundred quid a year more tax if it funded decent salaries for them.

Oh, and no, I don't think they should earn more than nurses, etc., etc., etc. IMO, most of the public services are underpaid.

 

The difference is that mining was a subsidised industry which simply wasn't competitive. And since there were other, cheaper supplies of coal (imports) then there was no reason to continue pouring money down the drain to fund a dying industry.

Firemen, on the other hand, are completely different. I really couldn't give a toss if a fireman sits on his **** for 364 days of the year and gets paid £30k for it, if on the 365th day he's prepared to run into a burning building and save me/my wife/my child, etc. As I've said before, I wouldn't do it, thankyouverymuch.

I think perhaps people should remember a particular event last Autumn, and really think hard about whether they would seriously consider running into, say, the Canary Wharf tower if it was on fire and potentially about to collapse, whilst every other person is running out to save their own lives. £30k? Cheap at twice the price, IMO.

 

MarkO

You're missing my point.

Of course we won't get rid of the Fire Service, but just remember what happened to the air traffic controllers in the States. Couldn't happen here?

The Fire Service is a required national resource, but the fire fighters themselves are not. They could be replaced and, if they make too much of a nuisance of themselves, they will be. Not straight away, not all at once, but you'll see changes made to ensure they can't do this again.

For the record, I don't think a basic pay of £30k is justified - it's a mainly manual job, which does not carry a massive degree of risk. Yes, you can mention 11th September, but how often does that happen. When it did happen, how many lives did the NY fire service save?

Try being a teacher or a social worker - these people earn their (low) salaries many more times over than the average firefighter. Stress levels are much higher, and the possibility of being injured in the line of duty is, I'd imagine, about as high.

bros

 

Having seen Adam Boulton's show on Sky yesterday this strike seems to be more about the FBU trying to force Tony Blair and his cronies to be more socialist than the poor old firemen getting a decent wage. I don't know who the dick from the FBU was but if I was having to deal with him as a negotiator I would have smacked him [img]images/smilies/mad.gif[/img]. There is no way they will get a 40% payrise - saw another Union man over the weekend who said - the firemen are just a small group and it wouldn't lead to other claims - he was then asked about another small group (I think it was nurses) to which he said something like - oh yes that's the other small group with a justified claim - Anyone here remember the winter of discontent - nights are drawing in

 

This just to shed a bit of light on the 40% issue ,this figure was decided upon by the independant review of the Labour Research Dept,and the actual net pay for a firefighter who is qualified after 15 years doing a 48 hour shift pattern is £1100.

 

No sympathy I'm afraid. I don't see why firefighters should be exempt from market forces, and supply and demand determining their salaries. It may sound harsh, but if there are people queuing up to join the fire service, then arguably they are being paid too much to start with. They know the score when they sign up for the job, and anyone not happy with their pay and terms and conditions is free to look for alternative employment.

Gary.

 

Sorry to semi Hi Jack the thread but...

Marko,

Some truth in what you say but currently the only reason the UK coal industry cannot compete is that imported coal is heavily subsidised itself.
The French and German Coal producers receive over 1.5 Billion pounds of aid, the polish industry costs even more to their government. This is why the world coal price is on the floor.

UK coal is the cheapest mined coal in Europe bar none.

The UK Government is now worried as in 15 years or so when there are no pits left and North Sea gas has run out the UK will be 80% reliant on imported fuel for Electricity Generation, the majority of this fuel will come from unstable Eastern European countries.

We may find that destroying the coal industry was a big mistake. Once we have no home supplies of Gas and Coal for generation watch the prices soar.
Don't have any dreams of wind or solar power either as they can nowhere sustitute the base load of UK Electricity Generation.
If we went for totaly Nuclear generation at current prices that would mean electricity prices trebling for the consumer.
Coal generation is still the cheapest way to generate the base load in the UK and with desulphurisation plants it can be clean as well. Most European countries are investing heavily in this to maintain diversity of supply.

Lee

[Edited by logiclee - 10/21/2002 3:43:20 PM]

 

FAO: Bros2

It is a very hazardous job. You don't have to have a high profile incident to be in dangerous situations. The average house fire is alot more dangerous than it used to be. Double glazing and energy effiency measures retain the heat and structural integrity of a property for far longer and the fire loading or fuel for the fire is a lot higher due to the large amount of foam & plastics in most houses ie tv's, videos, vhs cassettes, toys etc the list is endless. It all means a potential flashover or backdraft which is deadly as Firefighters such as Fleur Lombard & Ian Macfee found to there cost.
A car stolen and set fire to by youths is an everyday occurence. They don't explode like they do in the movies, but they certainly do when a propane cylinder has been placed in it, and this is not a rare event. Neither are derelict properties full of booby traps.
And as for it mainly being a manual job, you must be joking. You need to be knowledgable and technically proficient in areas such as Building construction, Fire behaviour, Hydraulics, electricity, Enviromental protection, Haz Substances, Pre & pro-active publicity campaigns, railways, first aid & trauma, aircraft, risk assessment, etc. The list goes on and on. Go visit your local fire station and check it out for yourself.
And finally, regarding pay. You have to bear in mind that you face compulsory retirement at 55 and therefore have to pay 11% of your salary to the pension scheme which is a big hit on your monthly pay packet.
Rant over!
ps I do love my job

Darren

 

People are also forgetting that firemen don't just fight fires.

If I'm involved in an RTA, I don't think I'll be sitting in the car whilst they cut me out of it thinking "jeez, these guys are great at what they do, but a bit overpaid".

 

Yes, but you dont need a degree to fight a fire - ANYONE can do it!

I am grateful they do it - as I wouldnt, but my education says that I dont have to. See?

Pete

[Edited by pslewis - 10/21/2002 4:35:55 PM]

 

In my experience, people with degrees wouldn't have the common sense to be a firefighter

 

Lets just hope the government stands up to these pseudo-commie union ******.

Have a pay review by all means, no argument there.

Strange the retained firmen are urging them not to strike. £21k starting salary sounds pretty good to me.

 

Already had an independent pay review by the same agency that did the one for the MP's. They came up with the 30k figure. The govt are just stalling.

 

The RFU is the retained union which has a few hundred members and has been stirring $hit between wholetime and retained FF for years.
I was retained before going whole time and I can assure you that my old retained stn. WILL be on strike ! there are always a few that are retained that will play the 'for the community' card. to them I would say take the £5k+ rise the FBU is fighting for you and give it to a local charity.....this would not happen cos the retained are paid $hit !

 

BTW, the £21k is not the starting wage that is the 5 year fully qualified FF wage.
You start with a wage of £17.5k

 

And you are still on 21k with 14 years service. At 15 yrs you get an extra 1k then that is it.

 

You dont need a degree to fight fires ,if only you knew ,ask any Station Officer what exams you need to take to be one.

 

Dont mention the Exams !!

 

Andy Gilchrist, FBU general secretary is a completely intransigent ******* [img]images/smilies/mad.gif[/img] Most firefighters don't want this strike, he is just out for confrontation and like all bullies mistakenly things he will get his own way by force.

Apparently, there is an average of 40 applications for every fire service vacancy, so to me the course of action here is clear: Gilchrist calls off he strike or he and is dangerous trouble maker colleagues should be replaced a.s.a.p. This whole thing is an abuse of thier position in society and we don't need it, or them [img]images/smilies/mad.gif[/img]

 

Totally agree,

Just watched/listened to that power hungry pr1ck on the channel 4
news. What an *******!!
Even the head of strathclyde fire brigade did everything but tell him he was being a ********.

Dougie.

Ps wtf is this not letting army personel cross picket lines to get to equipment? who the **** owns and paid for this gear.
Very angry

 

most firefighters dont want this strike....to an extent this is true however most firefighters do want paid fairly for the work they do ! As was said the employers offered a rise that would have been accepted but the Govt. wanted to stir everything up with their $hitty stick !
Jeoff Orrd wants to remember where he came from !!
14 hrs sleep in 42hrs [img]images/smilies/mad.gif[/img] my @rse !!

 

PG,

As I said in an earlier post I have two friends that are firemen,
and I know there are busy stations and quiet ones, but without telling you which stations they work at I know which nightshift I would prefer to be doing between mine and theirs.

You may not get a good sleep at the station but you do get a lot of time to relax and watch telly/play snooker/nod off.
And as has been proven in statistics, the majority of call outs occur during dayshifts.

Just to reiterate: I do believe u should get more money but nowhere near what u are claiming.

just a rant from a soon to be redundant engineer.

Dougie

 

Personally I hope the govt. takes an even stronger line, and orders the army to use the fire brigade's equipment.

Paid for by us, the taxpayer, so what is the problem?

PS, I'd like to see the head of the FBU, whatever his name is (Red something probably) try and stop suqaddies crossing their picket line.

 

The problem with with using fire service equipment is they need to be trained on it ,and each brigade has different equipment,plus each piece of equipment is tested at different intervals,daily weekly etc ,after use on acceptance,to gain this knowledge in one go would take weeks, also in their wisdom most brigades dont own the equipment or fire engines it's leased and goes back to the leasing companies at the end,they have muted this would be a breach of the lease and huge penalty clauses would be implemented.Most firefighters do not have a problem with the army using the equipment ,the problem would be when they've finished with it.

 

Bollocks, just pay 'em !
What difference does it make to anyone. The working guy loves shooting himself in the foot doesn't he!
While all those fat cats at the top laugh, as we slag each other off!
Where will the money come from ?
Geoffrey Archer ofcourse !