benview7

Would it not make sense to have a two Tier Fire service along the lines of the Ambulance service. You would have Fully Trained well Paid Fully Qualified Emergency Fire Teams that carry out ALL emergency work and only Emergency work. Then the rest of them could go out checking Hydrants giving speeches and and educating children at schools etc surely this is the way to go?

It works well in the Ambulance Service with Paramedics responding to all 999 calls and the other Ambulance Staff picking up NON emergency patients ie for day clinics etc.

Did you know that the average times a fireperson is actually attending 999 calls in a Year is 5%!!!!!!!!!!!! the rest of the time they are washing Fire Engines, Training, sleeping etc.

th?e real problem is that we want the very best service but we want it cheaply well this is the solution, pay the Emergency Teams the £30,000 PA and the Non Emergency Teams £21,000 which I personally think is too much but they would have to sign a NON strike Agreement as the Police have to do. .

These are my Personal views I dont ask you to agree with them only respect them as I will respect your views even though I may not agree with them

Any thoughts on how we can improve the Fire Service?

fatherpierre

They do.

Retained and regulars.

benview7

My point was have dedicated 999 Emergency Crews and others I understand what you say about regular and retained but that is not a True 999 Emergency team.

Retained are on Standby if required. Do you think for example where I live that our local Fires Station has approx 20 men& women on each shift plus 4 officewrs plus control staff and on average they are called out on Emergency calls approx 5 times a week, granted we live in a quiter part of the country and it would be differtent in the cities, I think what we have is an excess of Fire crews so to me the logical answer is to have the dedicated 999 teams and No emergency teams, perhaps even adopt the American system where the Ambulance Service and Fire service are as one ie trained Paramedics working from the Fire Stations.

RON

As an ex retained firefighter, I can tell you that retained and wholetime do the same job, retained are not a do not give a lower level of cover, in many cases it's more, retained can be on call 24 hrs a day!! 7 days a week!
There a lot of people who would take great offence at being thought of as a lower tier of firefighter.
And another thing, the retained lads and lasses get paid even less than the wholetimers!!!!!!

benview7

Yes but you also have another Job or you can have? so when a 999 calls comes in you jump in your car and head for your fire station? suit up then head for the fire what about the other job, theirs your company depending on you to fulfill a vital order/service you get the shout and off you go F--k the boss Iam going to answer the 999 call. My point exactly!!!!! have a dedicated 999 Emergency FULL TIME FIRE SERVICE!!!!!! and scrap the retained part thus saving a fortune and increasing producttivity in the other companies where retaind Fire people work.

we are now in the 21st Century and we need to get a grip of this problem, The public demands a proper and well paid fire service and I am sure No one would disagree with that.

You want to be a true 999 Emergency Sevice then get the UNION to sign the NO STRIKE agreement as the POLICE have to do

RON

An awful lot of the retained guys and gals are self employed, so your argument is tosh!
And the only reasons they have retianed is cos it's cheaper than wholetime!, and there's not the need for wholetime in rural areas!

benview7

Ron, You miss my point!!!!!!!!! two Jobs!!!!!!! even though you are self employed you still have to stop what your doing then dash to the fire station and get a lower pay for it!!! I can see this upsets you but I am not trying to do this hopefully trying to show that we should have a DEDICATED Emergency FIRE Service without the need for retained. each Fire Station should have the correct level of Fire Staff without having to call on retained.

RON

OK, so imagine this, I was based at a small village station in mid Dorset, there was 1 fire engine, and a land rover for heath type fires, so, you need a minimum 4 to ride the pump, and a minimum 1 for the land rover, so, 5 people, with 4 watches, thats 20 wholetimers, doing what 12 retained guys where doing, which do you think is cheaper?, and don't you think that people would (justifiably) moan about the expense of having 20 people on call, for a mere 150 calls a year!, thats 3 a week! can't see it working somehow! Plus the fact that the wholetimers would get mighty bored, theres only so much training, testing, and community work you can do.

benview7

Ron I guess you and me will just have to agree to differ on this,I need to let other people make a judgement on this as I am in danger of using this as my personal crusade and that was never meant to be my intention.

Any other views?

scoobyroof

Spot on Benview !!!!

banshi

Benview, someone presenting a perfectly logical solution should also have the capacity to understand where that solution falls short.

Retained firemen will always be required in rural/remote communities, it is the only cost effective solution. Demand, as Ron pointed out, is insufficient to warrant a full 24/7 staffed station, but distance precludes appliances from central stations providing an timely response.

30k for 3 "shouts" a week and the option to run an IT consultancy from the station rest room, Please pop an application form in the post


The comparison with the ambulance service is a good one, as long as on this occasion the taxpayer is not burdened with the cost of a duplicated operational & management heirachy. If you consider the modernisation issue, unlike the fire brigade there has been a definate attempt to move forward. Perhaps this is true origin of the current problem.

The employers have for months focused upon cash linked to changes in working practice. So is the negotiating strategy really to demand a totally unreasonable salary with the intention of later accepting a sensible offer which retains the current cushy conditions??

benview7

My point eactly why dont they try and come into the 21st century and embrace the new changes things are different than they were 25 years ago, I am al for paying them a fair and decent wage but I truuly think that it will have to be a 2 Tier system without the need for recruiting more staff just utilising the under used staff that they have at present, In an ambulance depot you may have 2 999 Paramedic teams per shift and the rest of them are day Patient drivers etc.

We want the best Fire service we can have but at a reasonable cost to the public Im prety sure all of us think we are worth £30,000 a year but unfortunately to get this all our employers would either have to jack up prices of the products or services they provide which would mean we would all suffer by having to pay more for the goods and service we buy or reduce staff and cut back on costs etc.

benview7

now the telephone operators at the fire stations want 40%

logiclee

The retained part of the service is a must have.

Most areas around were I work have retained crews (Warsop and Clay Cross), they only get a few calls a week but the main station is over half an hour away (Mansfield).

If your suggesting that we didn't have retained are you saying that we man a station up 24hours a day for a couple of calls a week or let people burn for half an hour waiting for the regulars?

Retained fire fighters also give times they are available for fire fighting to their station. I have two electricians that work for me who are retained firemen at two different stations, not once in the last 5 years have they let me down due to fire duties.

Lee

benview7

I understand your views about the retained staff and it does make a lot of sense but surely all retained staff should be part of the999 Emergency only teams? that would make sense and pay the retained people the same wage as the FULLY trained 999 TEAMS but Pro rata say £30,000 PA but paid for the hours they attend an incident?

RON

The retained guys and gals only respond to their alerters for emergencies, the training is all taken care of one night a week, plus full days for specialist courses, so infact, the retained guys ARE the only part of the service that is emegency ONLY based, we don't/didn't get paid for sitting on our station waiting for the bells to go down, wholetimers do!
And yes, it would be good for the retained to get a sensible pay, in line with the wholetimers, at the moment they don't!

PG

so far I have not contributed to these FF posts and just treated them with the contempt they are due !
However I was a retained FF for 5 years (while in a retail management role) before going wholetime a couple of years ago so can do a wee comparison thing here.
TBH I started the retained as an interest and it was very enjoyable however it changed in a very short time to more of a chore due to the rules and regs being thrown at the retained service.
Having gone into the wholetime service I can honestly say that the working practices and training are leagues apart. That said, the tech advances of the job and the risks @ incidents are the same.
This was taken into consideration by the Union and they are now -along with the pay campaign for wholetime - actively fighting for an increase in the retaining fee from around £2.5k to £7k and parity pay (in the form of hourly rate) for retained members.
This hourly rate was one of 'the 'pillars' of the talks that was agreed as was parity pay for control staff (has been part of the campaign from the start) and all this was to be taken from the 4% offered this year.
Yes ... you read correctly. this 11% offer was not an 11% offer to individual FF but an increase to the top line of the pay bill.
There are - as there are with allot of things reported in the press - allot of misconceptions out there with regards to this whole situation.
This is and will always be an agree or disagree situation.
I could throw facts and figures up on this BBS all day from various reviews, fire cover reports, FDR1 fire stats....the list goes on however people have made their minds up. I am not posting to convert you all to my way of thinking nor am I saying that this is the best thing I have ever had to do in my career but I have ticked the YES box because I feel undervalued by the Government.
I work and study hard for my job. I am proud as hell the job I do and I enjoy the work and no amount of disrespect shown by certain members of this BBS or indeed society as a whole (yes there is a community outwith SN people !!) can take that away from me.
As far as I am concerned I see things changing in 2004 in the form of the shift system. The service looses around 1/3 of the workforce and to save recruiting I do foresee a change in the shift system.
The Bain report makes for interesting reading !! I have read trough it several times now and there are many, many item within the document that are already being undertaken (and have been for some time now) by brigades throughout the UK. His knowledge of the UK fire service is very limited IMHO but I will let you all make your own minds up

Each to their own

(wont be saying anything else on this issue and am not clockwork so will not be wound up )

Right off to bed to give my poor wee brain a rest cos it aint used to being used this much.......you know with me being thick an'all
BTW not sure how much I weigh

pslewis

You should feel rightly proud of what you do PG - I have NO problem with that ............... its just that, IMHO, you are NOT worth more than £21k as we do NOT have to pay any more to get interest in your job.

If you dont like it than LEAVE do NOT put lives at risk in the name of greed!!

I am sure it must be tough working 5 minutes out of every 100 - but someones got to do it, and at the moment its you!! so, shut up and get on with your 'tough' job or I will formally request (as I pay your ADEQUATE wages) that you ALL get the sack, OK?

I have some sympathy for London firefighters, BUT those in Scotland where housing is about as cheap as chips - I would suggest that Scots firemen take a DROP in pay to fund the London boys .......................... Now thats FAIR!!

Pete

easyrider

I have always been under the impression that firefighters were the lucky ones to be able to do somthing that they WANT to do, and get payed to do it(what a bonus),and didnt do it for the money.Dont get me wrong--i feel that they do an excellent and risky job which should be rewarded with good pay. I agree with pslewis in the prevoius thread that London firefighters should get more pay-along with SE England,where it is noticably more expensive to live.I feel even at £21K that firefighters are onto a winner, what with 4 days on/4 days off,5 mins out of 100 actually working ect..........They also have the HUGE BONUS that they dont have the stress of ludicrously stupid productivity/work levels.If they feel the urge, they have the time to do another job which can easily take their pay upto or even over £30K(all the firemen i know have 2nd jobs that they do so they dont get bored or its a hobby that they get money for-d.glasing/carpentry/fishing/building-the list goes on).
Obviously this is my own oppinion,and i am open to criticism,but no matter how many times i look at it ,i just cant seem to see how they can even justify a 10% rise,let alone a 40% one.

banshi

PG like you I attempted to stay out of this "debate", but allowed myself to be drawn into it last week. Treat my contribution with contempt if you wish but I have never implied that firefighters are either stupid or lazy.

If you are permitted to play pool, watch TV or sleep at work until needed, as indeed are hospital doctors, then so be it. I also know a fireman with a 1st in Civil Engineering which dispels the "thick" comments, though one might speculate why he should choose this career.

I trust you will forgive people not recognising the parity issue, it has not been given great prominence. Maybe because it diluted the "bravery" argument, for that matter the overtime ban has not featured in the unions statements either

It is good to see that the FBU are now supporting the retained staff who were for so long treated as second class citizens by the full timers, unions and employers. But whilst a 40% increase in the retained fee might be justified applying that figure across the board is plainly ridiculous, as your union leadership now seems to acknowledge.

I am old enough to remember the previous strike, and whilst the details are lost in the mists. Unlike this occasion, I recall being persuaded, along with many people I knew, to support the cause. However then (at one station at least, situated in the midst of bedsits and paraffin stoves) there was no question about responding to emergencies. The Green Goddess, unless called to something like a skip fire, was accompanied by an appliance, and firemen even followed them to minor incidents in their own cars.

When I drove past a station near work last week cars were parked across the garage doors. There is also footage of firefighters watching a fireworks factory go up in flames, a fundamental change from 25 years ago?

The courage of firefighters is admired and they were respected. Your perception of nurses change if they put lives at risk, because despite an independent review they demanded 40%.

I personally have nothing but contempt for the FBU leadership(who having playe their blckmail card have now reduced their demand by almost a quarter), the crew who left a driver trapped for 55mins and the local "hardliners" who I am sure would have left me in a similar position.

Respect takes time to earn but not long to lose.

benview7

Well said!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!