|  | Add your comment The Fire Brigades' Union is calling for a 40% pay rise and have rejected the 4% they have been offered. As the army and their Green Goddesses are mobilised, fears are growing in Beds, Herts and Bucks that emergency cover may not be sufficient. Should this action be allowed? Do they deserve 40 per cent? What's the answer? Have your say here. Read more about this story
See more comments | Che, Stevenage | Tuesday 17
December, 2002 | | | The Coastguard are not just the coastal police force they do have rescue facilities - the RNLI do not need to exist. However the government rely on a charity to ensure there is an adequate search and rescue facility available to respond in a similar way to air ambulances - we in this country are very forward thinking - 'i dont need it so i dont care' and 'oh and it costs too much'. Moving on to some of your comments using the correct terms for something ensures that no misunderstandings are made - the tax office considers 'allowances' to be very different to 'wages' for instance. With regard to current night time staffing the current system is actually very effective - it provides good immeadiate (less than 5 Minutes) fire cover for the people of all towns and ensures there is an effective Health and Safety package available for fire service staff (Any incident is the workplace for firefighters therefore H & S legislation applies). It would only be a matter of time before firefighter injuries and deaths increased should you remove this level of cover - i'm sure the HSE would have something to say about that! And so would the tax payer who would have to pay out more ill health pensions and insurance claims. Your entire basis for not having full-time staff on duty at night revolves around the fact that we do not do anything other than fire calls. We could do all sorts empty dustbins, paint roads, we could be special constables between calls, hold night surgeries for hyper-condriacts etc - what you do not consider is that you must have adequate personnel available immeadiately to respond to calls (not just calls to fires as the press would have you believe but accidents, floods, body recovery, lock outs, other rescues including animal rescues) That does save lives and you cannot argue against that i would quite happily stay up at night if i was working on fire service related work and was paid an appropriate salary. I know that Police officers are quiet at nights, that ambulance staff are quiet at nights, do you suggest that they should have half the staff they do during the day? The system works really well in the ambulance and police services that is why i have waited longer than 20 minutes for ambulances in the past, considering you will be dead after 3 minutes exposure to smoke it seems like a model that should be applied to the fire service after all it seems to be cost that most people are concerned about - until they dial 999 then they may have a different concern - the words 'i got here as soon as i could' does not really wash and i hope i never have to use them. Community fire safety does save lives but there is a limit to its effectiveness, a parallel can be seen in road safety campaigns there are those that take heed and follow advice, and those that dont despite an enormous enforcment presence (police, Speed cameras, Speed limits, etc) yet more and more people die and are injured in road accidents every year. I have a young son and i stay home to look after him whilst my wife works - a common occurance at most fire stations - i hear Mr Blair and co constantly talking about family friendly issues yet he and you advocate changing to shift systems that are less family friendly and more obstructive to family life, those same shifts traditionally used by the police. Unfortunately these police forces and ambulance services are tryng as we are to promote family friendly practices in the public services and are now moving to shifts such as 4 on 4 off! After all it must be remembered there always has to be a 24 hr presence. If as you have stated wholetime Firefighters should be retained on their days off i assume that you will recommend brigades give them mortgage allowances etc so that they can move to areas close enough to stations so that they may then respond effectively to calls? although the cost would be exuberant it would mean that the aims of making firefighters work more than 42 hrs a week (which is above the working time directive and is only allowed because HM Government secured a special dispensation) is realised. And those fantastic conditions of service well i dont receive any 'perks' i get a good pension that i pay for and am fortunate enough to see my son more than the average dad however my wife receives for her 9-5 job Free Shares, Share options, Share save Schemes, subsidised meals, subsidised drinks facilities, non contributary 2/3 final salary pension scheme and an annual bonus - they are benefits and if you ask me to compare with the police well police allowances can add thousands of pounds onto the annual salary of an officer and they have comparable pensions and conditions of service oh and they also get london weighting in herts i dont. The fact is the government beleive i am a professional worker, i believe i should be paid a professional wage - however the government would like to cut the fire service not because it is failing or cannot perform adequately but because they wish to save money which will adversly effect the service it provides, it can be dressed up how you like it will have an effect. The government do not care how many lives it loses by these cuts (savings if we are being politcally correct) it will simply shift the blame down the chain for not implementing its suggestion as intended and you will start hearing stories on the news of failing fire services and fire crews that arrived 20 minutes too late. I do not want that to happen. |
| Nigel, Luton | Tuesday 16
December, 2002 | | | Che: You seem to have taken words from different sentences of mine and strung them together to give a contradictory tone. Where I used the term "allowances," I was using a combined term to include both the "annual retainer" and call-out payments. I have not referred to either Retained or Wholetime firefighters as worthless, in fact I have said that I am satisfied with the current system as it is - not delighted, but given the need to provide 24 hour cover (and at current night-time staffing levels!), I can't see an effective alternative. I have also not said that your job is not dangerous. I have said that your job is not AS dangerous as propaganda would lead us to believe. I compared the risks with a lollipop lady, not to demean the firefighters, but to show that there are many other occupations which involve a high degree of risk, but because they don't hit the headlines, we don't think about them. As an abstract thought - if all the lollipop ladies went on s! trike, there would be a greater risk to life than if the firefighters were on strike, but who would support a £30k pay claim for lollipop ladies? Let's also make clear that the terms "disgusting, heartless and lazy" are your words, not mine. I have not used these words to describe firefighters, nor would I wish to. I have not spoken out AGAINST firefighters having second jobs. If they want to do second jobs, then fair enough. BUT I have made the statement that their ability to do these jobs is a result of their having so much time off. Even with regard to the time off, I have raised this as a benefit of conditions rather than as a crib - converting your 48 hour, 8 day rota to a 7 day week, you clock on for 42 hours which is comparable to most other occupations, though your night shifts, with the exception of call-outs, would be regarded by most people as leisure rather than work. If the slack hours of the night shift were occupied by tasks of use to the community (I d! on't know, repairing wheelchairs, producing hand-made items to benefit charities maybe) so that you actually needed your fifth day to recouperate, perhaps you would have more public sympathy. As it stands, you can do your firefighting duties, spend two days on a second job and still have two full days off. Of course, if such an initiative we included in a modernisation package, no doubt you would demand extra pay, even though you are already paid for the time. You surely can't deny that you have more opportunity for enhancing your income than people in other occupations. Digressing to the RNLI and the Coastguard - the Coastguard don't have the facilities for rescue, most of the staff being shore-based, but in addition to other duties (more akin to a police force) are the link to notifying the RNLI of the need for their assistance. Both need each other but there the comparison ends. Perhaps the reason for 20% of Retained firefighter vacancies being unfilled is their adde! d requirement that they live and work close to the fire station. Modern lifestyles generally result in a high frequency of commuting and overtime, both precluding service in the Retained stations, not to mention that the Retained stations tend to be in less populous areas and hence are likely to have fewer locals who can achieve entrance requirements. If the stations were in more populous areas, no doubt the frequency of call-outs would be greater and therefore warrant Wholetime staffing. You have also stated that "Retained firefighters are reconsidering their stance of not striking because they realise that their stations are for the chop." Interesting... in the early stages of the dispute, one of the reasons given by a Retained firefighter for not striking was that the FBU (YOUR UNION) was operating a programme of trying to replace the Retained firefighters with Wholetime personnel and that the FBU only seemed to consider the Retained firefighters when they could be used! as a bargaining pawn to gain benefits for the Wholetimers. If I remember correctly, there are some comments to this effect on the RFU website. So, nothing really new from me, just a restatement of some of the things I've said in the past. And no, as far as I'm aware, I've not contradicted myself. I still maintain that your current salary, plus a cost of living increase, is a fair wage considering the beneficial conditions of your job. |
| Katie, Milton Keynes | Tuesday 16
December, 2002 | | | I'm only fifteen, but i do not believe fire-fighters should be given a pay-rise. This is because lots of other jobs deserve it more,mainly Teachers,without teachers we would not be educated in the first place,also doctors. |
| Nigel, Luton | Monday 15
December, 2002 | | | Peter of Hemel: nearly forgot - the ideal situation would be if Wholetime firefighters could also undertake Retained duties during their off-duty periods. The advantages would be the increased availability of personnel during call-outs, increasing response times, the provision of Retained allowance to the Wholetime firefighters willing to take on these commitments (extra pay) and the transfer of knowledge gained from experience from Wholetime to Retained firefighters. What is stopping this? Legislation? No, it is the FBU's ruling. Firefighters need to consider whether their union really has their member's interests at heart. I don't see it. IF I'M WRONG, CONTRADICT ME, BUT BASE YOUR ARGUMENTS ON FACTS THAT I CAN LOOK UP. DON'T ROMANTICISE, HERO STATUS IS FOR THOSE WHO ACT BEYOND THE CALL OF DUTY, NOT FOR THOSE WHO TAKE THE JOB. |
| Nigel, Luton | Monday 15
December, 2002 | | | Let's get rid of some more fallacies: Firefighters claim that their prompt action in putting out fires prevents insurance costs rising. This argument is only valid where their action prevents fire spreading to other properties. Most contents damage is as a result of smoke. This is often caused even before the Fire Brigade is called. Many buildings are made of brick. Bricks are made at high temperatures and therefore are often unaffected by the heat of a fire. Bricks cannot, however, withstand rapid cooling and therefore crack when the Fire Brigade's water jets hit them. Mortar pointing does not withstand high temperatures but can be replaced at relatively low cost, provided that the bricks are intact. I have investigated several fires and found that the majority of damage has been caused by the action of putting out the fire rather than the fire itself. This is not a condemnation of the Fire Brigade, but of the techniques used and which are taught. Many commercial buildings have smoke vents which are like opening windows but have a lock which is specially designed to be opened by the use of the square section of a firefighters axe. These vents should be opened when the fire is under control and the concern is to enable firefighters to work in the building without breathing apparatus. The general experience is that firefighters prefer to break the glass of the vent, causing hundreds or thousands of pounds worth of damage, rather than turning the catch a quarter turn and pushing the vent open. Yes, breaking the glass saves time, but in a non-emergency situation, it must surely be better to minimise the cost of the damage. In an emergency, the glass should not be broken as this would provide oxygen to fuel the fire. I have personally seen Grade II listed buildings which have had to be demolished because the Fire Brigade has taken extinguishing of fire as their primary concern rather than minimising the damage. Claims that prom! pt action reduce insurance costs are not always valid. The cost of rebuilding can often be less than the cost of repairing, so don't take insurance considerations into account, particularly when the average home, insurancewise, is worth more than two or more lives. Save lives, but don't try to bring insurance into the equation. |
| Nigel, Luton | Monday 15
December, 2002 | | | Peter of Hemel: If you've read through my comments and come to the conclusion that I don't like firefighters, then read through them again. I've been careful not to that firefighters don't do a good job or that they are a waste of money, or that they are lazy etc. etc. My argument is not against the firefighters but against their exorbitant pay claim. I have taken the arguments put forward in favour of the pay rise and systematically destroyed them. I have also set out to destroy some of the myths which some of the public have and which the firefighters are exaggerating in order to encourage support. You argue that you have a dangerous job. I don't deny that going into a burning building can carry great risk, but please, in return, don't deny that few call-outs involve entering burning buildings and that many of the life-saving call-outs don't involve risk to the firefighter. Firefighters save lives in road accidents because the cutting gear is part of the eq! ui! pment carried on the tender. Were it carried in police cars, it would be the Police that would be hailed as the life-savers. With regard to the degree of danger that you experience, my job involves working with two of the trades listed in the "10 most dangerous," not during a call-out, but as part of an 8-10 hour shift, five days a week. I accept it as part of the job and certainly don't leave the house in the morning, wondering whether I'll see the wife and kids again. Yes, in the current circumstances I have a greater respect for the Retained firefighters than the Wholetime. But please also check the facts (they're available on YOUR union's website). Running the Fire Brigade on a totally Retained basis wouldn't be cost-effective - they are "volunteer" only in the same way that the TA is "volunteer." That is, they get paid for their time fulfilling their commitments and receive an allowance for accepting that responsibility. It's not a free service, as I suspect you ! kn! ow, nor should it be. You ask if I could give first aid at a wedding reception. I've never tried, but I have given first aid to a woman who decided to drive her "girlie" Suzuki 4x4 into the path of a lorry loaded with 15 tons of aggregate which was travelling at 60mph. I arranged for stopped motorists to control the traffic on the A40 until the police arrived. I strapped the woman to her seat, undid the seat fixings and, with the help of another person, carried her away from the wreckage of her car which by now was mostly about 2ft wide, and continued to give her first aid until the ambulance arrived about 15 minutes after the crash. The ambulancemen told me that I had acted correctly. The Fire Brigade did not attend, presumably because there was no need for them. And yes, when it was all over, I threw my guts up, then went back to work. Would you also like to hear about the drunk driver who drove through a brick wall on a remote road one night, when I and a mate kept ! th! e idiot alive for half an hour until a passing police car stopped and radioed for an ambulance? These weren't part of my job, so I can't bleat on about them when my firm gives me 2%. I do have a gripe with your union. The FBU is making mugs out of its members. Gilchrist seems to be another Scargill. The miners went on strike out of concern for their future, and because of their leadership's personal agenda, they lost. The firefighters did not start the strikes with an issue about their future but if they carry on, how long will it be before somebody realises that an alternative fire service, perhaps staffed by eastern european immigrants, may be a possibility? I actually want the Fire Service to run as it is, it seems to work after all, but holding it's customers (who are also its true employers) to ransom over unrealistic claims is not the way forward. I have suggested a route to more disposable income for firefighters (don't retire early) but have had a response to t! hi! s only from a prospective firefighter (which was favourable). I really am not against firefighters, only against misleading propaganda which I believes emanates from the FBU and which contradicts the information of the FBU website. Why else would the qualified firefighters be arguing for £8.50 per hour when THEIR website shows they are already on £9.83 per hour? |
| Peter, Hemel Hempstead | Monday 15
December, 2002 | | | Nicola. During the strikes Firefighters left their picket lines to attend incidents where lives were at stake, however since the government said that the armed forces were able to deal competently with all the calls (they dont realise that lives are put at risk).They have based major cuts to the Fire service Nationally, they forgot to tell the Public that the armed forces dealt with less than a third of the calls normally received by the service. Therefor the Fire Service will not be able to attend as fast as they presently do, this in itself will put lives at greater risk, please ask your council or MP as to how this will affect attendance,I bet you dont get a straight answer. All of this has come about by simply asking for a payrise, the government have known about the pay claim since May 2002. |
| Dave, Northampton | Monday 15
December, 2002 | | | Mr Blair says that you should not believe everything you read in the paper or see on tele yet 3 weeks ago or so he was going on about how right they were being about firemen and women. Do you see mr blair as the liar or the papers or the firemen? because i dont believe mr blair or the papers. You seem to harp on about why firemen on strike dont deserve their job yet you dont mention yours! so come what do you do? whatever it is you seem pretty bitter and twisted about people who do a good job for not a lot of money. ps im a builder and earn considerably more than a fireman. keep fighting for what you deserve |
| Che, Stevenage | Monday 15
December, 2002 | | | Nigel, lets clear up some mistakes you have made about retained Firefighters. There is infact a large proportion of retained firefighters who are striking for better pay and conditions because currently they receive the thin end of the wedge when it comes to training and pay, many members of the Retained Firefighters Union are reconsidering their stance of not striking because they realise that their town and village fire stations are for the chop, as well as their second jobs. Lets also be clear retained firefighters are paid employees with a contract of employment who do not receive 'allowances' - they are paid an annual retainer and receive payment for every hour worked and are able to participate in a pension scheme. You are right that they have full time jobs and firefight as a second job - unlike the 'disgusting, heartless and lazy' wholetime firefighters who work fulltime as firefighters and have second jobs. You have in the past spoken out against wholetime ! firefighters having second jobs should this argument of equality not be applied to retained firefighters? You do seem to live in a world of contradictions. For example - you imply the retained firefighters as people dedicated to the job who will risk their lives any time of the day or night yet you then go on to say that their 'commitment' is worthless as it is not a dangerous occupation and not worthy of admiration because they are paid for providing this service to the community - which incidently does 'indisputedly' involve risking your life to save others. Also you seem to forget those volunteer Fire Brigades such as that in parts of Peterborough who receive no payment for firefighting. To suggest that a person is not brave or worthy just because they are paid to do a job is nonsense, for instance you would never hear of brave soldiers because they are paid to soldier. The people of the RNLI are to be admired and celebrated however there are reasons why they came into being. They were set up and crewed initially by fishermen to save the lives of the other fishermen from their villages because no one else considered it their job. And in many ways 100 years or so on this is still true up to a point. Consider the aspect of funding an adequate coastguard because if they did that, there would be no need for the RNLI. So the government rely on people giving up their own time to prop up a rescue service that should be paid for by government - oh and those members of the coastguard that do the same job as those in the RNLI are they to be considered lesser men and women as well?. You may get 40 or so applicants for a firefighters job but a significant proportion do! not even pass the basic intelligence and aptitude tests. And if everyone is queing up to be firefighters why do 20% of retained firefighters positions go unfilled? You cannot argue that my skills are not worth the value i claim and your arguments that a firefighters job is not dangerous are flawed in many ways. |
| Barbara Cooke, Hemel Hempstead | Monday 15
December, 2002 | | | I wonder how King Blair now feels about the media turning on him and his family ? I would have thought not to good As I have Talked, Read and listend to every one who is anyone, put and pull the fire service apart. I am sorry to say I have no sympothy with Queen Blair as a her husband is the one who branded my husband a killer and told him and the rest of the fire fighters they should be proud of their jobs THEY ARE. well she should do the same and not buy 2 flats on the cheap by the way why does she need 2 ? just greedy I would say what about the people who live in a cardboard box or who can not afford to buy a place I think Blairs comments on the fire service only a few weeks ago shows what a big two faced poliction he realy is. She now knows how hurtful people can be when it involves children I know because of the remarks said about my childrens Dad they are proud of their Dad for what he stands for and it is not trying to get money out of people like the Blairs ! |
| Nicola Pearce, Rochester | Friday 13
December, 2002 | | | I think the firefighters are out of order because if they are so caring about saving peoples lives and want more money in doing it then they are lying because all the time the strike is going on peoples lives are at risk! Thank you! Im 16! |
| Peter, Hemel Hempstead | Friday 13
December, 2002 | | | Nigel. You dont like Firefighters As shown by your comments, perhaps you would like all Firefighters to be volunteers and do it for the love of the job,(which I Do)that way we dont have to pay them and while we are at it add the Nurses Ambulance Crews to this and save a fortune, however the Government will take that to finance other crazy schemes and ideas, so we will still be worse off. You quoted Firefighters being killed on duty, So with all our skilled training we still die(according to you and some others iys not dangerous). Fires ,Buildings and Toxins cant read books. ,One thing I do agree with is the RNLI they are BRILLIANT and display great COURAGE. But they are not Government funded (Thank god) otherwise they would be subjected to cuts called MODERNISATION. I have attended incidents when I have been off duty, including 1st Aid at a Wedding Reception WOULD YOU!! or COULD YOU?? |
| Steve, Leighton Buzzard | Thursday 12
December, 2002 | | | Y HAS EVERYBODY GONE QUIET? |
| Nigel, Luton | Tuesday 10
December, 2002 | | | Lucy of Rochester: It seems that you have a different fire service in Kent, or perhaps your local firefighters are RETAINED (not on strike) as opposed to WHOLETIME (claiming unrealistic pay rises as a result of being misled somewhere along the line). The Wholetime firefighters do not "give up their time even on important occasions" - they are paid to attend fires as a full-time job. Retained firefighters attend fires in addition to holding down a full-time job and receive allowances for being available for duty and for call-outs. Your admiration is worthy of an organisation such as the RNLI, staffed by true volunteers and indisputably ready to risk their own lives to save others. The Wholetime firefighters have a less dangerous occupation than their propaganda attempts to lead us to believe. 12 firefighters have died in the last 11 years. I don't have access to the ! figures, but suspect this is less than the number of lollipop ladies killed in the same period. I would also dispute that the firefighters risk their lives more than the Police - armed crime is frequent and at least as unpredictable as a fire. With regard to your comment that many of the public wouldn't do a firefighter's job, consider how many applicants there are for each vacancy. Forget the romantics and look at the facts. |
| lucy deadman, rochester kent | Monday 9
December, 2002 | | | i personally feel it is right for the firemen/women to strike as this is the last resort. it is unfair that they risk theyre lives more so than people in services such as the police force and nursing and recieve the least pay. they give up theyre time willingly even in the middle of important occasions risking theyre lives whilst the families worry for there safety, an uncertainty every time they go on a call out. surely the government arent taking into account the risks, time and bravery they give the country everyday of the year. many of the public feel the firefighters dont care enough as striking is risking even more lives however they arent willing to put themselves forward into their position and do the same thing. they deserve fair pay and this case would surely be bordering on the lines of discrimination should they not get it. |
| nadia magdenovic, malvern worcestershire | Friday 6
December, 2002 | | | i think that the firefighters deserve a payrise as they do a great job and put there lives at risk to save others!!!If it wasnt for them lots of people would have died in fires.Maybe one day you might be in a fire then you will see how much they help and how good they are to the community! |
| Che, Stevenage | Friday 6
December, 2002 | | | Nigel, It is fair comment that the night shift is mostly unproductive - after 11.00pm you cant really be proactive in the community and drilling on station after that point would certainly upset the neigbours! However to maintain the same level of response 24 hrs a day you still need the same number of staff etc. and it is for all the reasons i have stated before nessacery to have that level of response as the same. It doesnt matter how the shifts are worked you will still have a period of unproductivity until the point a call comes in. The politicians have one concept and that is cost versus productivity. That may be applicable to industry because profit is the motive, but should this concept be applicable to emergency services? I do not think it should as a tax payer i am happy to pay to ensure there are enough ambulances, police officers and yes firefighters (i am no different to anyone else when i'm off duty!) to respond immeadiately should i dial 999. I'm certain there are slack periods when there are 'too many' police officers on duty not being productive, however when an event occurs those 'too many' become 'not enough'. We (the UK) do not have an oversized or extravagent fire service we have an adequate fire and rescue service that currently has the ability to react very quickly (once notified). Unfortunately as i have described before time is of the essence The point i have been trying to make is that the governments modernisation proposals do not address increasing or even maintaining attendance times, they do not address improving training to an even greater standard they only address saving money, diluting skills, and slowing the full and effective reaction to calls - it cannot be argued that any of these will save lives or improve performance, this is why the politicians avoid mentioning any of these subjects. The deal brokered by the employers and then binned by the government would of allowed 16% staged over one year, ga! ve both the union and the employers the ability to discuss and work on ANY subject raised by either side with regard to modernisation - if either side refused to accept a modernisation proposal it would of had to of gone to arbitration and that decision would of been binding. However that deal would have cost £200 million pounds over 3 years for the government to fund on a current budget of £1.7 billion pounds a year. That has already been spent on the armed services alone, when insurance claims are met, police overtime is met and the cost of all the other agencies who stepped in to fill our shoes are added in it would be cheaper to have paid the full 30K. I am skilled and believe that £25 000 was an offer that we would have all accepted and would have meant that savings would of been made but sensible ones not the ill concieved stupiditys of ministers that havent got a clue. |
| Nigel, Luton | Thursday 5
December, 2002 | | | Peter and Che: Thanks for putting me right on your leave criteria. It seems odd that you have to take leave in blocks of 7 when your rota has an 8 day length. You also have an odd three days left after 5 blocks, so 38 days leave is a further strange number. Now, presuming that you take your blocks of leave to include your duty hours, you are at the fire station for 202 days per year, of which 41 are the tail ends of night shifts. You have 125 totally free rest days plus your 38 days leave, making 163 days off per year. You can compare this to industry where there are 104 days of weekends, 8 bank holidays and 20 or 25 days leave - total 132 or 135 days off per year. If we are to take your arguments seriously, hold up your hands and admit that you get a month more off work each year than people in other employments. You also have the most usable part of the day available when you finish your 2nd night shift, so it could be argued that you have an additional month and a half. I won't, other than to say that it generously offsets any claim you may make regarding night shift working and transition from days to nights. If you then work out the salary of a 5th year qualified firefighter on a pro-rata basis, £21531 x 233(public working days) / 202 (FB working days), the firefighters effective salary is £24835 (pro rata). Not bad when you consider that this could be the wage of a 23-year old firefighter. |
| Nigel, Luton | Thursday 5
December, 2002 | | | Che: I didn't say that we needed fewer firefighters at night, you must be confusing me with someone else. My argument was that you have 2 productive shifts per rota and 2 which, though long, are almost totally non-productive unless you get a call-out. In the private sector, there are many who work a productive five-day week and also are available for call-out for weekend emergencies. The lucky ones (not all) may get an extra payment for accepting the extra on-call status. You have some pretty excellent working conditions which most people would be glad to offset against lower pay. The trouble is, you aren't on "lower" pay, you are already being paid more than the average worker, either in the private or public sector. As I've said in the past, don't be fooled by the term "National Average Wage," the average worker earns far less than this - footballers, tv personalities and stock traders etc. totally screw up the numbers. |
| Colin, Bedford | Thursday 5
December, 2002 | | | To Barbara of Hemel and Phil(DEC 2) The 'facts' that you felt that I had "not got right or needed to get right" were observations and information gained from :- a local firefighter (I am told he is a 'sub'?) who is also a plummer complete with van, a televised interview with husband and wife / both firefighters, a couple of 3CR-live interviews also tv interviews with firefighters and a 3CR listener who was a builder 'phoning in, he agreed,on air, that he regularly used firemen as they were the best building labourers - they were used to working at heights and were usually available - he said that not me! also one of my ex apprentices who had become a fireman and told me of "how fortunate he was to have electrical skills in order to carry out part time electrical work" these firefighters presumably were telling their own story not the media's version? I am not knocking them but merely stating facts I still maintain that they have knocked themselves- or were all of those televised and radio interviews stage mana! ged and with incorrect facts portrayed? if so they did not do their cause any justice! As for my need to 'get a life' as you put it- I can assure you that I have done plenty in my life including dealing with fatalities and the injured. I have been a musician for several years (so yes -I have done part time work also) and have literally been there and done that, I've played in several bands and with 'famous names' UK and USA during the 60's and since (yes I am that old - before you say so)I have gained several skills in life also within the workplace and I am thoroughly grateful for 'my lot'(so far?)and I am quite prepared to be criticised which is why I have used my own name and not "hidden" where I could have given you a real bashing, I prefer to be honest and upstanding and face up to reality also my critics. I have my health and hopefully some future left? (Phil)I was not whinging about my lot or my earnings, merely comparing yours with others,it is you guys that have put! yourselves up for comparison hence critism! Manual workers can still be "professional" and usually are, or are you knocking other manual workers? manual workers do work with their hands, so you are manual workers so be proud to say so! and really need to read my comments more closely. By the way,it was once my ambition to be a fireman too! |
| Nigel, Luton | Thursday 5
December, 2002 | | | Phil (Hitchin): I've got to take Colin's side on this. The point he's making is that you seem to have lost touch with the real world outside. In the early days of this site, the firefighters were having a go at the MP's increase (I am in agreement) and arguing that the same review body, having classed firefighters as professionals, should be entitled to £30k. The review body's assessments were obviously flawed (why else the MP's increase?), so why should they be correct in respect of the firefighters? The review body quite obviously doesn't have a clue of the rates of pay in the real world - perhaps the body was made up of High Court judges??? Where will you find a 20-year old who has achieved professional status? Where will you find a 20-year old on £30k? If you compare the fire brigade with industry, I would suspect that professional status arrives at Station Officer level. If you start knocking people who earn less than you while actively working more hours, you will lose what little support you have from the gullible section of the public. Also, don't forget that Colin (or his equivalent in your county) pays your wages and can reasonably be discontented if his standard of living is to drop to fund an unreasonable increase in yours. |
| Phil, Hitchin | Wednesday 4
December, 2002 | | | Colin, so you've struggled to get a decent paid job despite qualifications therefore everyone else must suffer because you have? Is this the crux of your argument? it is right that just because firefighters do not have degrees then they do not deserve to earn a wage concurrent with their skills? Why do you say we are 'manual' workers anyway? Ask the government and they will reassure you we are professional (that is the skills bracket they have put us in). The union actually discourage second jobs perhaps it could be added to all public sector workers contracts - though it would be unlikely to be passed as the MPs would all have to give up their second jobs. I did have two jobs before i joined the fire service i would hope that you were not greedy like i was at some point in your career. You make a comment that firefighters do not enter burning buildings if there is any risk - well any fire carries risk and we enter the majority of them to search for casualties and extinghuish them, you do not extinguish a fire from outside you attack it from inside - the army has shown that attacking fires from outside leaves a nice burnt out shell. A 'simple' house fire carries many risks from exploding aerosols, collapsing ceilings, stair cases and floors, damaged electrical cabling, flashovers, backdraughts, gas explosions, oxygen cylinders kept at home for the elderly, asbestos and not forgeting fire, heat and smoke itself. We do only enter with appropriate training and equipment - its what keeps us alive and allows us to save life - it doesnt make it any safer or easier! Oh and the Health and Safety Executive likes it this way. If you have difficuties in getting work then perhaps you should campaign with the appropriate pressure groups to get the law changed on ageism instead of campaigning to get everyone else in the same boat as you. |
| Peter, Hemel Hempstead | Wednesday 4
December, 2002 | | | Nigel. The leave we take has to be taken in a block of 7 therefore 1 weeks leave also includes periods when we were off duty, so to say we get 9 weeks leave, yes please let me have it as with everyone else, but we can dream.9 weeks leave sorry you got that wrong. |
| Che, Stevenage | Wednesday 4
December, 2002 | | | Nigel, you are right 38 days leave, great! except that a number of those days are taken when we are on rota, im sure you know what that means, but for those that dont it is when we are on rest days - yes! We have to take holiday when we are off already!. So its actually about 30 or so days and that compares well with the private sector. As for the shift system it should be banned for industry as well - oops but then places like Luton and Stansted airports would have to put up their costs and the business men and women would have to pay more to travel or our food would be more expensive! Its quite simply a cost effective way of of ensuring 24 hr cover, business would not use it otherwise. We get no shift allowance, no unsocialble hours payments and we do an excellent job. If you would like me to do hydrants at night or communtiy fire safety at night i will, however the public seem to get the hump when you refill at the hydrant outside their house at 3am! But to say that you need less firefighters at night is illconceived, a fire during the day needs the same number of firefighters as one at night. The concept of the fire service is to provide an ADEQUATE level of emergency response at all times. Fire is fast moving aggresive and grows exponentially for every minute it is allowed to continue - by increasing the time it takes to arrive you increase the death rate. You appear to be intelligent - you cannot deny that fact or these - the majority of these Modernisation proposals are designed to save money by reducing adequate cover and immediate response therefore increasing attendance times Eg Reduction of work force, reduction of appliances, increase in retained appliances (4 minute turnout), allowing mixed crewing at all stations (ie delaying the first wholetime pump whilst a retained member arrives 4 minutes later) and removal of the 1947 fire services act which prevents Station cuts, Appliance cuts and job cuts(retained and wholetime) it also makes our attendance times legally binding unlike the police and ambulance services. I agree with and work with retained firefighters, but there is always a longer delay in turning out and there is always a risk that there will not be a crew - a common occurance in Herts. Quite simply we have an effective and efficient fire service to change the basic function so radically will destroy its performance. It is an interesting concept to note that fire alone costs this country over £3 billion a year which we all pay for in insurance, the link is clear longer attendances mean more damage and the more we pay in insurance - so even if there is no life risk at a fire the quicker it is extingushed the less it costs. During the last strike the government met half of all claims to insurance companies because the cost of the claims for fire went through the roof. The armed services have not been dealing with fires any differently than they did then - it will be interesting to see! how much the government pays up this time! And if they proceed to 'modernise' then you will see an increase in insurance instead of your council tax. |
| John, UK | Wednesday 3
December, 2002 | | | Andy Luton, The reason people die in house fires BEFORE the we get there is because they do not have a servicable smoke alarm, this is something we have been addressing with community fire safety visits, (something the Bain report wants us to do) We have been doing it for at least the last 10 years. Unfortunately childrens electronic game seem to take preference over smoke detectors, so often there is no battery in the detector. |
| Nigel, Luton | Wednesday 3
December, 2002 | | | Peter of Hemel hasn't disputed 38 days leave, albeit including some Saturdays and Sundays, so this must be true. Andy of Luton is a bit out in his estimation of seven and a half weeks, though. Because a fireman's rota is 2 days and 2 nights in an 8 day period, he only needs to take 4 days leave to get a clear week off. The bright fireman, presumably subject to being able to get holiday relief, can thus take 9 weeks off and have a few days to spare. Or, to put it another way, firemen get between 156 and 160 clear days off per year and another 40 which are free from 9am. Compare this with the norm of 132 to 137. Oh, and Peter, this not only includes weekends, but also Bank Holidays. It is time you realised that you have it cushy. On your 2 day shifts, you may be doing things other than emergency work which will fill the time, but I doubt that you will inspect many hydrants or give fire safety lectures to old dears during the night shifts. If getting a fair night's sleep during a night shift is the exception rather than the rule, I would be very surprised. |
| Richard Heath, Bedford | Wednesday 4
December, 2002 | | | I think their are two sides to this argument over firemen's pay. Firstly yes, the firefighters do risk their lives for others and it's a fair point to say that they should get more money. Secondly everyone knew this already so why the hell haven't they had a pay rise already? Thirdly the emergency services are important to all of us and we rely on them every day. Doing the strike isn't helping anyone, causing uproar and endangering people's lives. The strike should stop as soon as possible and a resonable increase in pay should be given to them to keep them happy and stop the madness, even if it isn't right. |
| Steve, Leighton Buzzard | Tuesday 3
December, 2002 | | | At last,the FBU has seen the light! Sit down and talk, talk, talk until a reasonable settlement is reached. It's a lot better than "Bully Boy" tactics which in my opinion would have lost u even more public support. |
| Peter, Hemel Hempstead | Tuesday 3
December, 2002 | | | Vince, I am a Firefighter and highly offended by your remark I am not a Beggar rattling buckets under peoples noses, and definately not a killer as you put it. The Military Personnel have done well during this dispute attending Fires and Road Traffic Accidents only with 19.000 Personnel what about all the other types of call that the normal Fire Services get called to, and all the Community Fire Safety, Industrial visits and inspections. Is the small number of calls (APPROX A THIRD) answered by the Military a basis for cutting the Fire Service. Andy, 38 days includes Saturdays and Sundays, No good at MATHS!! John, I don`t believe in going back to the bad old 70`s. However Gullible Britain YES pouring money into Asylum Seekers, EU (United Socialist European Republic 'User for short'),Iraq and Government Lies. Colin, For your qualification and the Job that you do you are porrly paid as are all the Public Sector, they have all been ignored for a very long time. As! for your comment that we don`t rush into buildings, Oh yes we do ,I have personally done this on a few occasions to carry out a snatch rescue without Breathing Apparatus where seconds mean Life or Death. |
| Peter, Bedford | Tuesday 3
December, 2002 | | | "I'm quite prepared to work to replace New Labour with what I'm prepared to call Real Labour." Andy Gilchrist. Fire Fighters will not achieve a settlement quickly if the motives of the FBU leadership are as blatantly political as they appear to be from the remarks of Mr Gilchrist. Public support will fall even faster if it is the case that a seventies type challenge to the government is part of the present strike strategy. |
| Barbara Cooke, Hemel Hempstead | Monday 2
December, 2002 | | | Well said Jim and Che. Colin needs to get a life and not just quote what 1 fireman and his family may or may not earn, not all fireman including my husband have part time jobs he needs to get his facts right before saying things he is not sure about we can all read and see what the media want to say just to turn the latest news to there way how else do they make their money? I wonder who`s next to be pulled apart? maybe if the nurses went out we would see how evil these people are don`t you think? I only hope all the people including the goverment who are saying disgusting things about the firefighters sleep well at night and never want to come face to face with a firefighter may it be walking down a street or needing them to rescue them out of a situation they could have or could not avoided be it in their home, car, stuck in a lift or any other situation they are paid to do. If these people are human they will not be able to look them in the eye for feeling guilty ! calling them such EVIL people, they are human and I am sure you will need them more than they ever will need you. Remember this strike is about pay. So putting these people down for wanting a fair pay and putting the likes of these people first in the job they do and have done for years to make our lives safe is not the right way to do things.I am sure we feel sorry for prince`s william and Harry reading bad things about their mother well I can say as a parent my children are not happy to see a few arrogant people call their father EVIL AND A KILLER! |
| Steve, Leighton Buzzard | Monday 2
December, 2002 | | | In reply 2 che,perhaps the fbu should take note of mr lyons of the amicus union.he is living in the real world,not gilchrist.get real che,the fbu executive is a throw-back 2 the silly seventies |
| Colin Crane, Bedford | Monday 2
December, 2002 | | | I believe that the firemen should have a decent wage and I believe that they have got a decent wage already. I work in a hospital lab and would like to earn the firemens wage as it is! I have work colleagues earning less than £10k, they also pick up bits of bodies while at work, there was a lab job that required a degree that paid less than £12k starting pay that eventually would earn you about £14k (with a good science degree!!!)I am currently earning £15K and I am also a Borough Councillor and that provides a further £4k, I regularly attend 3 or four evening meetings and frequently work more hours than a fireman for much less money-I am highly trained and would not dream of strike action in a similar situation! I still do not see £20K a year! My life is also at risk as is any worker whether a lorry driver / taxi driver etc any job carries its risks. Firemen do not rush into burning buildings to rescue people, there is a careful risk assessment and they will enter if safe to do so and then only with the appropriate training and safety equipment! They keep talking about £7 per hour or whatever take home pay when most of the ordinary working men and women do not even get that rate in the first place, before further stoppages. I would like to know just who is supposedly on this mythical average wage of £400+ whatever per week as I am sure it is not the average manual worker(or are the NHS really that poor payers?) I was a time served apprentice electrician and have found that even with a string of various qualifications you still get made redundant when in your mid fifties, you cannot retire or claim any pension as can the firemen but end up taking a really low paid job just to get any work as nobody values the "older person?. So we all can suffer but the rest of us just get on and do it! Voluntary overtime argument:- if they are working a 48 hour week and feel it unsafe to work longer hours how are they carrying out second jobs? just greedy. The husband and wife firefighters recently moaning on TV must bring in £40k+ between them and still cannot manage on that? they are obviously not worth a £30k individual wage as they mustlack intelligence and common sense? They say they cannot buy a home on their money? do all of their neighbours also earn high wages? I suspect they manage like the rest of us have to? |
| Jim, UK | Monday 2
November, 2002 | | | I have read with disgust the amount of ignorance that is being displayed on this subject.There is a simple reality that can explain all the different viewpoints that are being put forward to knock the fire fighters. Ask yourself this question 'do I have all of the following qualities'? Compassion, benevolence, generosity, courage, honour, devotion, tolerance, selflessness, patience, dedication. If the answer is no to just one, then it is a waste of time trying to convince you of the importance of the fire fighters plight, because you lack the credentials to understand. This explains why so many apply to join the service, and so few are admitted.The filtering process weeds out those that do not face up to the fact that they lack all of the above qualities. Those that are in a position of power over the fire fighters, definitely lack the majority, if not all of those qualities. Fire fighters cannot be compared to any other profession. They are the only emergency servi! ce that has to meet attendance times by law. They are the only service that attends literally all types of emergency . They are often faced with situations that are life threatening, where a split second decision can influence the outcome of an incident. So what if they can sleep at night. Surely, the paramount, overriding consideration must be that they are available, fully staffed, fully trained and fully motivated. Does it not make sense, to make sure that the UK’s premier emergency service, is at least in a state of contentment? What is the point in ending up with a broken, de-motivated and demoralised service? I shudder to think what the consequences could be if the government implements the cuts it wants. |
| stacey, aylesbury | Sunday 1
December, 2002 | | | As the wife of a firefighter I would just like to say that no firefighter wants to be on strike and would much rather be at work. On the first walk out my husband said this had to be the worst day of his career. Its time to back our firefighters and get this horrible mess sorted out. |
| john, Mk | Sunday 1
December, 2002 | | | So now at last, the real reason for the strike has been revealed.replace New Labour, with "Real Labour" ,says FBU. This must refer to the good Old days of mass pickets,Miners and local authority strikes.Tube drivers union comrade , Bob CROW & the Crow-nie,s wants to support FBU Aims.So there you are Firepersons, You got" Highjacked" Sad but true, GB means "Gullible Britain". |
| Ivor, Aylesbury | Saturday 30
November, 2002 | | | Firemen who can't survive on twentythree thousand per year are in the wrong job and should go and find another. There job is no where near as dangerous as a Prison Officer's job and they are not allowed by law to strike. Come on firemen live within your means or get another job. |
| Andy, Luton | Saturday 30
November, 2002 | | | Why are the firefigters comming out with so much bull on these pages. It is true as they say that most people die in fires at night. But almost all of them die BEFORE the fire service arrive (because everyone is asleep so they dont get called)If you were to double the number of firemen on duty you would save no more!If we halve the number asleep in the station, no more will die! you know it's true so CUT THE BULL. Is it true that firemen get 38 days holiday, thats severn and a half WEEKS not bad eh? |
| che, stevenage | Friday 29
November, 2002 | | | Steve, i would have to say that in theory a no strike agreement would be good, however we live in a real world and people take advantage of inaction - take the police for instance how many Police Stations have closed in recent years despite protestations from the public and the police federation? In essex a number of years ago they tried to withdraw an aerial appliance stating it wasnt needed, the union went on strike and succeded in having it kept (there were not going to be job loses or pay cuts etc) the week after the strike that appliance saved 11 lives from a fire in a block of flats. Now you may not agree with the tactic but it was proven to be right and perhaps if the ambulance service still had the right there would be more ambulances to serve Herts - sometimes there are just four ambulances covering a million people in herts - this is why waiting 20 minutes for an ambulance is a common occurance. There have been many comparisons between the nurses and us and it interesting to point out that they still have the right to strike and i believe they have used it in the past as well. The fact is we have been on strike only once in 82 years because of pay up until the current strike. |
| che, stevenage | Friday 29
November, 2002 | | | Vince, you obviously believe i am a polititian pre-desposed to tell half truths well i am not i am an ordinary Firefighter. You know which station i am at come down and tell me where i am lying and i will give you my side, you can then make your own mind up. By calling me a killer you imply that is the very nature of all Firefighters - something i would describe as hurtful and untruthful at the very least. I can say without a doubt i have saved many lives and in fact have continued to do so despite being on strike as im sure the van driver at Hooks Cross would be pleased to tell you. Its funny because when i was called to the Hatfield rail crash the papers and Mr blair couldnt say enough about what a great job we did and Mrs Follett echoed those words yet she will not even answer my letters when it comes to a real issue, it just shows how impotent she is. As for being beggars well i've never begged in my life - i've worked hard throughout it to provide for my family (obviously an outdated quality). The simple fact is we have been to the town to try and talk to people like you who disagree or perhaps dont understand what it is all about, we dont force people to think our way and we dont preach, we let people know the other side of the story giving good reasons for it. If people want to donate money then they can. Out of interest would you call them accomplices to murder? When we are in the town 'Begging' for charities i dont see you berrating us for our disgusting behavior then. I dont know where you got the idea that we believe the army have killed anyone, what we believe and know is they are inadequately trained and are being made to be something they are not. The RAF rescue unit at hooks cross had one firefighter incharge who had not long been out of basic training 1 Raf police officer and a fire safety advisor - so much for being skilled firefighters - that is why they had no hope of saving that van drivers life. And the Green Goddess crew had just 1 and a half hours training! What happened to the 6 weeks intensive training? Yet again the government tells you one thing yet the reality is another. I look forward to seeing you at the fire station for what will be an interesting conversation, unlike the politicians i wont duck a question i dont like and will give you full and truthful answers. |
| Bill Stevenson, Stevenage | November, 2002 | | | To Nigel of Luton. I have read all of your comments and up to this point have disagreed with all of them. However your latest comment on increasing the retirement age to 65 and getting these people to do the community advise, hydrant checks and other non front line duties is spot on. Unfortunately, I doubt if the Government would even entertain the idea as it does not adress the fact that they want to cut staffing levels in the fire service. |
| Vince, Stevenage | Fri 29 November, 2002 | | | So Che, you say the only way to get a reasonable response about the firefighters strike is to speak to a fireman! Rubbish! All you will get is spin that the union has told you to say. Just the same as if you ask a MP for their opinion. Yes you do deserve some sort of payrise, as does everyone else in this country, but to hold the public to ransom is wrong. People are dying in fires and accidents and it is all down to you, not the army or government. You should be ashamed of being on strike and most of the striking firefighters are nothing worse than beggars rattling your buckets in our faces in Stevenage town centre. Get back to work and stop killing innocent people. |
| steve, leighton buzzard | Fri 29 November, 2002 | | | further 2 my last e mail, in return 4 extra money how about a no strike agreement as in other essential services. Comments welcome |
| che, stevenage | Fri 29 November, 2002 | | | Peter, the government want us to do these areas of community fire safety, fire safety enforcement, petroleum inspections etc. you may well be right that these areas could be done more cheaply by other staff however there are good reasons why it is given to us as a task, in terms of fire safety enforcement we carry out inspections because we are the enforcing authority similar to the way the Health and Safety executive looks into safe practice at work. It is not just going to existing buildings but officers also advise, recommend and approve safe designs for new buildings and conversions etc. it is performed by us because we do have experience of the way fire grows, reacts and develops and allows crews to become familiar with the fire regulations so that at a fire or other incident we can recognise breaches in regulation. Community fire safety has been pushed more and more ! by! government and for good reason it will help to prevent fire deaths in the home. This includes trying to target people in vulnerable categories and supplying and fitting smoke detectors and visiting schools and getting the fire safety message over to the children who may then push that advice to their parents. In one respect it does make sense other than getting the message 'direct' from firefighters and that is productivity, we do train regularly but there are days when there are not many calls and once the equipment has been checked, tested and cleaned etc without this work you would be sitting around doing nothing as the army currently demonstrates. Therefore it does make sense for a workforce with vehicles, an intimate knowledge of their local area and the time and expertise to advise on these subjects to do this task and I would suspect it is in the long run a cheaper and more efficient way of performing it. In terms of firefighters doing overtime the main reason it has never been done in the past is simply the way the pay formula worked, meaning quite simply if firefighters were carrying out vast amounts of overtime the year before it would reduce the pay award for the next year, it is a complicated calculation but that is what it simply boils down to. Another aspect is that following a 48 hour shift the union believes that in terms of health and safety you shouldn't work anymore hours, it is interesting to note that most jobs are a basic 37.5 hours a week because of the working times directive however the fire service among others were given an exemption from this. Firefighters are rightly concerned that we may go the way of the ambulance service where overtime is rife and there are simply not enough staff leaving ambulances idle because there are no staff to crew them, this leads to the scenario that if people refuse overtime (it is now illegal for compulsory overtime) then fire engines will be left idle as well - something that never happens now. Peter, I have written an answer to your entire comment however it is so long I don't think they would post it! needless to say I'm sure I could change your opinion of the proposed modernisation. Most ideas for modernisation do need investment to prevent and reduce deaths under the governments Best Value directives. I do think most of the cost efficiencies that would save money and not effect the emergency response are token savings - because the service does perform extremely well. |
| Barbara Choke, Heel Hempstead Herts | Fri 29 November, 2002 | | | I Have been reading the peoples comments on here for the past few weeks and have worked it out that the only people that are behind the strike are those that really understand what they are ( the firefighters ) trying to achieve. I sat a fire station on Monday listening to vice president, king , Tony Blair NOT answering direct questions that the press were putting to him. The only thing to come out of the kings mouth was to tell the world that the fireman are so important that they are going to ruin the country big time,not himself and his puppets who got their BIG pay rise,and the puppet Gordon Brown who cant do maths and on tuesday declared to the world that G.B. are going to have to borrow money to keep our head above water. Its funny how they managed to sort their wage rise out first. They as they keep going on about are the ones that do the book keeping of our financial! l situations,well so far apart from keeping the likes of lapdog prescott etc in pocket the rest of their employees i.e. firefighters, teachers,nurses,etc don't seem to be on the same wave length as them, as we have all read about in the papers. |
| Nigel, Luton | Fri 29 November, 2002 | | | To Che and other firefighters: Compromise is the only way forward. Obviously, you're not going to get 40% or anything remotely like it. To get 16%, you will have to accept some changes in practices - what has been suggested in this respect, I haven't a clue, though as nobody seems able to agree on it, it probably doesn't matter anyway. Why not, instead, push for raising the retirement age to 65. This will gain you support from the public who resent your current very early retirement. The more elderly (relatively) firefighters could then take over the training, community awareness and hydrant checking etc, leaving the active crews to concentrate on their prime role. A cost saving to government is that they could do this in pairs in a 40mpg vehicle, rather than in fives with a 6mpg vehicle. The firefighters could then see an immediate increase in their income as a re! sult of a lower outlay in pension contribution. I'm guessing, but say from 11% to 5%. You wouldn't need to build up such a massive pension as currently because in later years, you would still be receiving an income. The government (or employers, depending on how you draw the line) would see a further cost saving as they would be expected to contribute 10% of your salary rather than 22%. Just an idea - discuss it among yourselves, then mention it to your FBU rep. Everybody saves face and you get 6% on top of whatever pay increase is offered - at no cost to the government. |
more comments » |
