Firefighters strike
12 November 2002, 01:42 PM
#2
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 17,199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I feel for them, in a way...but they knew the job when they went into it... They knew the risks, the pay, the quality etc... I'm not saying it's an easy job, or that it's for everyone...but it's akin to me sitting here now, rapping my boss on the head with a gold topped cane and saying "You there! I require a 25% pay rise now or I'm not working"....
I know what the response would be....
I know what the response would be....
12 November 2002, 02:13 PM
#4
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 953
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just saw one of the Green goddesses (did it look old!) filling up at my local BP petrol station and it got me thinking about what the Governments response was, when the tanker drivers went out on strike, due to the fuel price protests. Back then the government decided that they would never allow the country to be held to ransom like it again, so they decided that they would train up thousands of troops to drive fuel tankers.
I am sure that if the Government was able to fund this scheme that they would have the resources to train the Army to do the fire fighters jobs as well.
I think it is more a case of the Government being happy to put our lives at risk by not having an upto date contingency plan in the event of a national fire service strike, than to go without the revenue generated from Fuel sales. It just shows that the Governments priorities lie with filling there own coffers and not in the provision of Public safety.
ian
I am sure that if the Government was able to fund this scheme that they would have the resources to train the Army to do the fire fighters jobs as well.
I think it is more a case of the Government being happy to put our lives at risk by not having an upto date contingency plan in the event of a national fire service strike, than to go without the revenue generated from Fuel sales. It just shows that the Governments priorities lie with filling there own coffers and not in the provision of Public safety.
ian
12 November 2002, 02:16 PM
#5
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Scary bit is that a lot of the work the firemen do is cutting people out of car crashes.
Seems the Army firemen don't have anything like the same equipment so the roads are going to get a whole lot more dangerous.
Seems the Army firemen don't have anything like the same equipment so the roads are going to get a whole lot more dangerous.
12 November 2002, 02:32 PM
#6
Scooby Senior
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 8,204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMHO
The government want to force the firefighters hands, make them look like the bads guys and erode public opinion. They tried to do it during the fuel strikes, making out the protesters were all right wing trouble makers and that they were putting the NHS and people at risk. It was that tactic that cause the protestors to back down.
They will try the same thing here. They'll show the public news items on how dangerous it is now the public is on strike, plus add in a few more terrorist warnings to make it seem even worse.
The government are perfectly aware that they could have been training the army to use all the idle fire engines etc. They just don't want to. They would rather crush the strike by using spin and propoganda.
Then if the firefighters still don't back down, they will make them. Either by threatening them with arrest, releasing news and pictures of so and so's family who was burned to death because the army could'nt get there in time.
Gordon Brown has already lead the country up poo creek by commiting to spending plans taxation cannot afford. The govt cannot afford to give in the firefighters. They might compromise at say 15% but not the whole 40%
The government want to force the firefighters hands, make them look like the bads guys and erode public opinion. They tried to do it during the fuel strikes, making out the protesters were all right wing trouble makers and that they were putting the NHS and people at risk. It was that tactic that cause the protestors to back down.
They will try the same thing here. They'll show the public news items on how dangerous it is now the public is on strike, plus add in a few more terrorist warnings to make it seem even worse.
The government are perfectly aware that they could have been training the army to use all the idle fire engines etc. They just don't want to. They would rather crush the strike by using spin and propoganda.
Then if the firefighters still don't back down, they will make them. Either by threatening them with arrest, releasing news and pictures of so and so's family who was burned to death because the army could'nt get there in time.
Gordon Brown has already lead the country up poo creek by commiting to spending plans taxation cannot afford. The govt cannot afford to give in the firefighters. They might compromise at say 15% but not the whole 40%
12 November 2002, 03:31 PM
#7
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Scotchland
Posts: 6,566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do believe our firefighters should be getting a much better deal - but who needs spin doctors when Andy Gilchrist is fighting your cause.
if the FBU have let their members fall behind their worth by 40% then the firefighters should be blaming the leadership of their Union not the poor, soon to be burning, public
if the FBU have let their members fall behind their worth by 40% then the firefighters should be blaming the leadership of their Union not the poor, soon to be burning, public
Trending Topics
12 November 2002, 04:09 PM
#10
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well said Neil !!
Usual Labour policy... Tax and spend... and hey, what a surprise... they've over committed themselves and despite taxing the life and soul out of all of us, they still can't afford to sort the country out. Does that smug so-and-so Brown know what kind of a bollox he is making of everything ?
Last year - National debt stood at roughly £500 million.
"Ohh yess... the economy is doing well and we can afford to spend chuffing loads on sh1te"
This year - national debt stands at roughly £5.9 billion...
And what do we have to show for all this spending ? NOWT !!
Hmm.. powerful unions, hospital staff striking, teachers threatening to strike, airport staff striking, firemen striking...does this seem familiar to anyone ??
When will the powercuts start again ?
rant mode - OFF
Usual Labour policy... Tax and spend... and hey, what a surprise... they've over committed themselves and despite taxing the life and soul out of all of us, they still can't afford to sort the country out. Does that smug so-and-so Brown know what kind of a bollox he is making of everything ?
Last year - National debt stood at roughly £500 million.
"Ohh yess... the economy is doing well and we can afford to spend chuffing loads on sh1te"
This year - national debt stands at roughly £5.9 billion...
And what do we have to show for all this spending ? NOWT !!
Hmm.. powerful unions, hospital staff striking, teachers threatening to strike, airport staff striking, firemen striking...does this seem familiar to anyone ??
When will the powercuts start again ?
rant mode - OFF
12 November 2002, 04:46 PM
#13
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Carnetix, Adams and Nitosport
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Neil,
Have to agree that this seems to be the usual tactic of New Labour to put out messages that will destroy the ability of the protest.
I remember the stories about the truckers causing problems being released by the Government and then cutting to the Truckers sitting around quietly drinking tea and chatting with the Police. It did seem that the Governments idea of causing trouble and mine are rather different.
Being cynical the news about the Country being put on high security alert against terrorist attacks following the predicted rejection of the pay offer does seem a little less than coincidental.
The Government spends a fortune on things yet have nothing to show for it... of course there is a dirty great tent at Greenwich which could have been a few hospitals, the fire fighters pay rise and training the army in how to operate modern fire fighting equipment.[img]images/smilies/mad.gif[/img]
Have to agree that this seems to be the usual tactic of New Labour to put out messages that will destroy the ability of the protest.
I remember the stories about the truckers causing problems being released by the Government and then cutting to the Truckers sitting around quietly drinking tea and chatting with the Police. It did seem that the Governments idea of causing trouble and mine are rather different.
Being cynical the news about the Country being put on high security alert against terrorist attacks following the predicted rejection of the pay offer does seem a little less than coincidental.
The Government spends a fortune on things yet have nothing to show for it... of course there is a dirty great tent at Greenwich which could have been a few hospitals, the fire fighters pay rise and training the army in how to operate modern fire fighting equipment.[img]images/smilies/mad.gif[/img]
12 November 2002, 06:55 PM
#14
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,031
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They are a bunch of Greedy B----- 40% is ridiculous!!!! why then not give the Ambulance drivers the same money after all they have a very difficult job, or why not give the nurses the same rise as their job is very difficult, where will it stop I know back in the bad old Labour days when the Unions ran the country !!!! Next week nobody will be able to fly out of any UK airport because the firemen there want the same money and the people who answer the calls at the Fire Station say they are worth the same money. see what I mean, Whilst I agree totally that they have a very difficult and sometimes dangerous job they cannot truly expect to get 40% and I personally think 11% is very fair.
I am sure the first time some poor innocent person dies in a fire or in a road crash that need the skills of the Firemen Public support will wain very quickly.
Spare a thought for the troops they did not ask to be brought into this and by the way who owns the Fire Engines!!!!! they wont let the troops use them I thought that we public owned them.
All I can say folks is be vigilant and extra careful
These are my own personal views you may not agree with them, I respect yours so please do me the favour and respect mine
I am sure the first time some poor innocent person dies in a fire or in a road crash that need the skills of the Firemen Public support will wain very quickly.
Spare a thought for the troops they did not ask to be brought into this and by the way who owns the Fire Engines!!!!! they wont let the troops use them I thought that we public owned them.
All I can say folks is be vigilant and extra careful
These are my own personal views you may not agree with them, I respect yours so please do me the favour and respect mine
12 November 2002, 09:13 PM
#15
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Green Goddesses (GG's) DO actually have equipment fitted inside them for rescuing someone from inside their upturned twisted car - it's one hand axe! So unless your car body happens to be made of wood as coincidentally the GG's are (do not park this vehicle close to a heat source?), I suggest keeping all four wheels firmly placed on the tarmac and the roof sunny side up 
Not that your likely to see one for several hours anyhow!
Now obviously the guys have been training hard and will do their very best - at the end of the day they might as well be wearing red noses, orange hair and size 45 shoes. Rather than a police escort maybe an RAC or AA escort might be a better idea!
How many of the so called strikers will be out doing their second jobs, thus actually making extra money during the strikes?
ps. as one of the designated GG drivers (although due to circumstances now not doing so)I feel able to make these comments, with my mates still out there doing it.
Not that your likely to see one for several hours anyhow!Now obviously the guys have been training hard and will do their very best - at the end of the day they might as well be wearing red noses, orange hair and size 45 shoes. Rather than a police escort maybe an RAC or AA escort might be a better idea!
How many of the so called strikers will be out doing their second jobs, thus actually making extra money during the strikes?
ps. as one of the designated GG drivers (although due to circumstances now not doing so)I feel able to make these comments, with my mates still out there doing it.
13 November 2002, 02:11 AM
#16
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If they are worth 40% for the job they do is debatable, most of our jobs we do don't involve risking our lives on a daily basis.
But, the simple fact is that for every firefighters job advertised there are 20 applicants!
Are the goverenment gonna give em a pay rise, not a chance in hell, but you can bet that it will be the firefighters who are made out to be greedy by government spin.
mcbrun555
But, the simple fact is that for every firefighters job advertised there are 20 applicants!
Are the goverenment gonna give em a pay rise, not a chance in hell, but you can bet that it will be the firefighters who are made out to be greedy by government spin.
mcbrun555
13 November 2002, 08:06 AM
#21
Scooby Senior
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 8,204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Someone raised the point yesterday that lifeboat crews risk their lives to the same degree as firemen and don't get paid. Not saying that firemen should'nt get anything but 40% is just too much IMHO
13 November 2002, 08:08 AM
#22
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 17,199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
40% is way too much. Why should firemen get that amount increase when Doctors, Nurses, Teachers even, are struggling?
Firefighting is a dangerous job, admittedly....but they knew the pay scale when they took the job... Yes, give them a rise, but 40%?
Firefighting is a dangerous job, admittedly....but they knew the pay scale when they took the job... Yes, give them a rise, but 40%?
13 November 2002, 11:19 AM
#23
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: cuddly wobbly jelly land
Posts: 447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They know they're not going to get 40% - they've just aimed high so that when a compromise is reached, it'll at least be something reasonable. I'm slightly biased about this - when I was a kid, my Dad had to take early retirment from the brigade when a furnace at a steelworks fire he attended blew up. He had about 30% burns and was in a coma for a few days - 3 of his mates in the same room were killed. It doesn't matter how many people want to do the job - you should be given a decent wage for putting your life on the line every time you go to work.
13 November 2002, 01:48 PM
#24
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,031
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Popeye I am sorry to hear about your dad, and unfortunately in all walks of life Accidents and situations happen ir 911 in America but the fireman there did not ask for a 40% increase and surely they had a right after losing so many of their friends No they did their job and understood the risks involved everday.
I am afraid that Public sympathy is not going with the Fireman because their demands are unreasonable and would open a flood gate for all other unions.
Their Union Leader is out to make a name for himself and I fear we are heading back to the darkl old days of the sixties when trade Unions ruled the Goverment and the general public with Fear.
The Goverment have to listen to the People ordinary folks like you and me !!!! We elected them by a majority whethter you voted for them or not they are the Goverment and they have to run the country not the Trade Unions.
I truly hope no one loses their life during this 48 hour strike, and I hope NO firemen are evr killed in the line of duty, but if you dont want to put your life at risk then they should not take on the job.
I am sure many people reading this thread feel they are entitled to a 40% Pay rise but they accept that their company or organisation just could not do so. Nobody wants to see business , services closing down because mark my word this is what will happen to find the money something else has to go!!!!!
lets hope that it can all be resolved by discussion and spare athought for the Troops
I am afraid that Public sympathy is not going with the Fireman because their demands are unreasonable and would open a flood gate for all other unions.
Their Union Leader is out to make a name for himself and I fear we are heading back to the darkl old days of the sixties when trade Unions ruled the Goverment and the general public with Fear.
The Goverment have to listen to the People ordinary folks like you and me !!!! We elected them by a majority whethter you voted for them or not they are the Goverment and they have to run the country not the Trade Unions.
I truly hope no one loses their life during this 48 hour strike, and I hope NO firemen are evr killed in the line of duty, but if you dont want to put your life at risk then they should not take on the job.
I am sure many people reading this thread feel they are entitled to a 40% Pay rise but they accept that their company or organisation just could not do so. Nobody wants to see business , services closing down because mark my word this is what will happen to find the money something else has to go!!!!!
lets hope that it can all be resolved by discussion and spare athought for the Troops
13 November 2002, 02:49 PM
#25
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: cuddly wobbly jelly land
Posts: 447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe the US firemen are relatively happy with their pay and conditions? I don't know. I don't want to see trade unions running the country either but I think the firemen have a case, and like I said, they know full well they won't get 40%, but that's just how negotiations work. And as for not taking the job if you don't want to risk your life - if people are prepared to risk their life doing a job then they should be suitably rewarded. The firemen obviously feel they are not. Like I said, I'm biased. Good luck to 'em.
(Edited for some ropey spelling).
[Edited by popeye - 11/13/2002 3:37:54 PM]
(Edited for some ropey spelling).
[Edited by popeye - 11/13/2002 3:37:54 PM]
13 November 2002, 03:05 PM
#26
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The average wage for a fireman is something like 18k - these guys don't earn nearly enough for what they do - I think they are more than entitled to 30k per year, which isn't a lot of money nowadays, especially as there aren't massive prospects for promotion and increasing your salary that way.
However they do get to retire early and get a nice index linked pension.....
However they do get to retire early and get a nice index linked pension.....
13 November 2002, 03:13 PM
#27
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Carnetix, Adams and Nitosport
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What happens to be glossed over is that Nurses, Ambulance crews and the Police can all earn overtime.
In the perfect world they would all get paid what the MPs do (and have the tax breaks and all the other benefits) while the MPs get paid what the Nurses do at the moment.
I hope the fire fighters do get a pay rise, although I do think 40% is unobtainable, although I was thinking (as it has already been said) that it was a starting point for negotiations.
BTW I saw an interview with an American fire fighter from New York that said a load of them have retired now due to the overtime they have earned as a result of the Twin Towers being destroyed!
In the perfect world they would all get paid what the MPs do (and have the tax breaks and all the other benefits) while the MPs get paid what the Nurses do at the moment.
I hope the fire fighters do get a pay rise, although I do think 40% is unobtainable, although I was thinking (as it has already been said) that it was a starting point for negotiations.
BTW I saw an interview with an American fire fighter from New York that said a load of them have retired now due to the overtime they have earned as a result of the Twin Towers being destroyed!
13 November 2002, 05:10 PM
#28
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would just like to say two things;
1) They could sack the lots of them and have enough applicants to replace them should they chose to. 40 Applicants per places shows it to be a good job, these firemen are not mega qualified just brave souls who are trained correctly in very modern and safe equipment
2) The size of their demands shows their incompetence at speaking up sooner, also, their job is not even in the Top 10 dangerous jobs in Britain so stop harping on about how dangerous it is, with modern gear its safer that alot of professions out there (e.g. roofing).
They have no sympathy from me, in fact it should be written into their contracts (if we weren't bloody run by the EU) that any emergency service is denied a strike.
1) They could sack the lots of them and have enough applicants to replace them should they chose to. 40 Applicants per places shows it to be a good job, these firemen are not mega qualified just brave souls who are trained correctly in very modern and safe equipment
2) The size of their demands shows their incompetence at speaking up sooner, also, their job is not even in the Top 10 dangerous jobs in Britain so stop harping on about how dangerous it is, with modern gear its safer that alot of professions out there (e.g. roofing).
They have no sympathy from me, in fact it should be written into their contracts (if we weren't bloody run by the EU) that any emergency service is denied a strike.
13 November 2002, 05:26 PM
#29
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: Scoobysport, Basildon, UK
Posts: 4,300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What I really cannot get my head around is this business of the Army having to use Green Goddesses.
"Not trained on the equipment" the Fire Brigade keep telling us. How complicated is it? We are talking about fire and rescue trained solders. It is a prerequisite of being a solder that you become resourceful and learn to adapt to whatever equipment is available to you. Imagine them capturing an enemy field gun and not using against the enemy because they haven't been trained on it? Yeah right.
I honestly hoped they wouldn't walk out but they have been blinded by union retoric and have no idea how their esteem is freefalling in public opinion.
"Not trained on the equipment" the Fire Brigade keep telling us. How complicated is it? We are talking about fire and rescue trained solders. It is a prerequisite of being a solder that you become resourceful and learn to adapt to whatever equipment is available to you. Imagine them capturing an enemy field gun and not using against the enemy because they haven't been trained on it? Yeah right.
I honestly hoped they wouldn't walk out but they have been blinded by union retoric and have no idea how their esteem is freefalling in public opinion.
13 November 2002, 05:32 PM
#30
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 1,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it's the lawyers telling them they're not insured on it. One soldier accidently cuts off someone's head when trying to cut them out of a crashed car and the tills would be ringing for years...