Firefighters' strike - Nov 5th

Impeccable timing by the FBU.

BBC Report
________
SPICE WEED

 

[Vagabond]

I don't quite get this antipathy that gets aimed at firefighters in this forum The fire service is surely something we pay for and must have but hope we don't need; just like the armed forces in fact. I'd much sooner keep 5,500 trained firefighters and lose an equal number of Equality and Diversity Co-ordinators and other jobs which meddle and interfere with everyone else's business.
Their shifts are attractive and they can hold down second jobs? So what, are they the only ones in this situation, Lyneham certainly had plenty of shift working second job holders at one time. And as for never beating a fireman at darts, well what exactly are they supposed to do while waiting for the next call - they can't be training the whole time.

I think its because they have good pay & conditions, have a fairly cushy working life. (I know they have to deal with horrific car crashes ect, just like the old bill and ambulance type chaps). They can sleep on duty, have got sky, pool tables, canteens and video games at work, work four days a week and 50% of them have second jobs.

The military cover for them when they strike at the drop of hat claiming they just want to "maintain public safety" but we all know its about pay and conditions. To cap it all off they swan about having naked calenders made and begin to believe their own and the media's hype about them all being studley-handsome damsel rescuing heroes. They need to get a grip on the current economic problems, be thankful they are gainfully employed with a cracking pension and crack on with it. If they don't like it- resign! Plenty of people would step in, not exactly bloody rocket science is it?

Get the military to cover the strike and send the bleeders to Afghanistan to cover the military. Let them moan about conditions then. All in the interest of public safety of course.

 

[firestorm]

Do you think the FBU has scored an own-goal by electing to strike on 5 Nov to support their cause?

Getting the public to accept the reasoning behind the strike as inevitable due to the behaviour of management is one thing, persuading them that the 5 Nov is inevitable and reasonable is another because it clearly isn't. I believe the FBU have made a PR mistake in selecting 5 Nov further eroding public sympathy and strengthening the employers hand.

Mixed feelings about the timings of the 5 Nov strike TBH.
Its good because its the first time this issue has been brought into the wider public arena, this dispute has been rumbling on for some time without the media or public knowing about it, there has already been an 8 hour strike on Saturday that no one knows about. It also puts pressure on the employers to come back and talk.
Obviously I have grave concerns about the day itself and the risk it poses to the people of London.

 

[RAF Bird]

I have great admiration for the Fire Service. Cantering through the FBU webpage to see what has led to the strike, I noted advice on how to picket and was interested, if not somewhat perturbed, to note contingency stations (staffed by non FBU members) are to be targetted and the workers therein to "be approached and discouraged from working". Members are not to picket their own stations.

Even though we do not have the luxury of a representative forum I am very much aware that, legislatively, the right to strike must be maintained. However, I cannot think of a single dispute in the last 20 years that have been solved by this form of action. I fear this threat is more likely to distance firefighters from public support.

Most definately.... with current climate and people loosing their jobs every day half of the military worried about if they are going to have a job this time next year I dont see them gaining much support.

I spoke to a friend of mine out in the stan yesterday. morale is low out there... guys worried about their jobs... knackered needing time off but working 15 hour days pushing themselves to the absolute limits. I'm sure the firemen dont give two hoots what these guys think of them or their working conditions but it's hardly going to win them any fans is it?

 

[The Masked Geek]

[/COLOR]

I'm sure the firemen dont give two hoots what these guys think of them or their working conditions but it's hardly going to win them any fans is it?

Trouble is, I don't think the average fireman is intelligent enough to realise.

The union bullies have conned them all into thinking it's a good idea and they will blindly follow along; it's about time they started thinking for themselves.

 

[firestorm]

I think its because they have good pay & conditions, have a fairly cushy working life. (I know they have to deal with horrific car crashes ect, just like the old bill and ambulance type chaps). They can sleep on duty, have got sky, pool tables, canteens and video games at work, work four days a week and 50% of them have second jobs.

The military cover for them when they strike at the drop of hat claiming they just want to "maintain public safety" but we all know its about pay and conditions. To cap it all off they swan about having naked calenders made and begin to believe their own and the media's hype about them all being studley-handsome damsel rescuing heroes. They need to get a grip on the current economic problems, be thankful they are gainfully employed with a cracking pension and crack on with it. If they don't like it- resign! Plenty of people would step in, not exactly bloody rocket science is it?

Get the military to cover the strike and send the bleeders to Afghanistan to cover the military. Let them moan about conditions then. All in the interest of public safety of course.

Can I address a few points here? Good pay and conditions? Well they are comparable to yours, except we pay for our pensions and work longer to earn them. The conditions, like yours, are being eroded, plus we've accepted the need for a 2 year pay freeze, so the employers said we can have a 3 year one instead.
Sleep on duty? Well some do and some don't, many brigades have removed these facilities.
Sky? Only if we pay for it, though many brigades have removed it. Canteens? Well, we have a kitchen we can cook our own food in, though these are being removed. Video games? Nope, never seen them. Work 4 days a week? Depends were you go, the basic hours we're contracted for are for a 42 hour week, though the shift I work is a 48 hour one.
Second jobs? Is there a law against this? I haven't worked a 2nd job for over 15 years as my wife works too, unfortunatly many have to as living in the smoke is expensive.

Military don't cover for us, there's simply not enough of you to do it anymore, London have paid assetco £15m to provide temporary cover. On Saturday they couln't provide the 27 fire engines they were contracted to so they started with 24 and finished the day with 11 after crashing them or giving up and going home.
This isn't about pay, its about being sacked. All 5500 of us will be sacked if we don't accept their new contracts, with worse conditions.

 

[firestorm]

Trouble is, I don't think the average fireman is intelligent enough to realise.

The union bullies have conned them all into thinking it's a good idea and they will blindly follow along; it's about time they started thinking for themselves.

Why thank you. I may be "a bit thick" but I understand the situation much better than you do.

 

[Realist78]

As always there's two sides to any dispute, I don't think the 5th Nov is a good move though. If you were in their place, how would you feel about the threat of being sacked only to be let back in on a changed contract? It is bully boy tactics by the management and should have never got to this stage IMO.

 

[firestorm]

There is a really simple solution to this, but hard line management can't or won't address it.
The strikes will all be called off instantly if the employers lift the Section 188 notice of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and talk with us.
We've asked them to do this in public on several occasions and they've refused point blank.
Simply, removing the threat of sacking us and talking will stop this strike.

 

[The Masked Geek]

Why thank you. I may be "a bit thick" but I understand the situation much better than you do.

Just a shame the retard on the radio earlier didn't.

 

[firestorm]

Just a shame the retard on the radio earlier didn't.

Agreed. Some people shouldn't be allowed to talk to the press. I'm sure you have some less than erudite colleagues you'd hate to have speaking on your behalf.

 

[Stevienics]

I appreciate the firepeople are stuck between a rock and a hard place on both sides of the fence.

A strike can only work if it brings external (public/political) pressure to bear on the employer to act, and yet to achieve this you must implicitly hope for bad stuff to happen, or it will never be noticed and nothing actually will happen - wihch sort of puts you in the shoes of the public executioner.

On the other hand, the management will have been handed a fait accomplis by the senior civil servants and thus must act to rationalise the service and no amount of striking will change that - perhaps only the way it is acheived can change. The only alternative to that is old contracts and fewer of them.

The firepeople may have a case, but it's an academic one in relation to the prognosis I am afraid.

 

[Vagabond]

Firesttorm,

Have been out of the military for ten years mate and have had to work bloody hard to get anywhere near a firefighters salary. I aslo worked within Leicesterhire Fire & Rescue for seven years and have seen all of the equipment mentioned in numerous stations throughout the County.

Never, in my life, have I come across such a number of blokes just t0ssing it off on a daily basis, whilst moaning like billy 'O'.

My boss was based in a large station on the outskirts of Leicester where I had to visit frequently, lots of non-operational firefighers openly admitted they had nothing to do and used to wander around drinking tea. The crews generally loafed around trying to chat up any woman within 100 yards. I could garuntee you, we would be the last in the office on a Friday afternoon. Just an observation mate, I worked with you guys, can't pull the wool over my eyes dude.

P.S Aplogies for spelling, had a few beers. Very slow day in Greece.

 

[The Masked Geek]

There is a really simple solution to this, but hard line management can't or won't address it.
The strikes will all be called off instantly if the employers lift the Section 188(4) notice of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and talk with us.

(4)For the purposes of the consultation the employer shall disclose in writing to the [F248appropriate] representatives—
(a)the reasons for his proposals,
(b)the numbers and descriptions of employees whom it is proposed to dismiss as redundant,
(c)the total number of employees of any such description employed by the employer at the establishment in question,
(d)the proposed method of selecting the employees who may be dismissed, F249. . .
(e)the proposed method of carrying out the dismissals, with due regard to any agreed procedure, including the period over which the dismissals are to take effect. [F250and
(f)the proposed method of calculating the amount of any redundancy payments to be made (otherwise than in compliance with an obligation imposed by or by virtue of any enactment) to employees who may be dismissed.

That'll be 188(4) can't see a problem with it myself.

 

[firestorm]

On the other hand, the management will have been handed a fait accomplis by the senior civil servants and thus must act to rationalise the service and no amount of striking will change that - perhaps only the way it is acheived can change. The only alternative to that is old contracts and fewer of them.

Fair comment, however this sacking isn't about saving money, its about increasing productivity and equalising shifts. This issue is before the cuts of the spending review and saves no money at all. The FBU proposed 2 alternative shifts that delivered both increased productivity and produced cost saving but both were dismissed out of hand by the employers.

 

[The Masked Geek]

Can I address a few points here? Good pay and conditions? Well they are comparable to yours, except we pay for our pensions and work longer to earn them.

We pay for our pensions and our pay is only comparable because we get the X-factor; otherwise you'd be better off.

This argument has been done to death so you gain no ground there.

 

[firestorm]

Firesttorm,

Have been out of the military for ten years mate and have had to work bloody hard to get anywhere near a firefighters salary. I aslo worked within Leicesterhire Fire & Rescue for seven years and have seen all of the equipment mentioned in numerous stations throughout the County.

Never, in my life, have I come across such a number of blokes just t0ssing it off on a daily basis, whilst moaning like billy 'O'.

My boss was based in a large station on the outskirts of Leicester where I had to visit frequently, lots of non-operational firefighers openly admitted they had nothing to do and used to wander around drinking tea. The crews generally loafed around trying to chat up any woman within 100 yards. I could garuntee you, we would be the last in the office on a Friday afternoon. Just an observation mate, I worked with you guys, can't pull the wool over my eyes dude.

Not on my watch my friend. We have set targets to reach every month with regards to community safety, home visits and training. We always meet or exceed these targets only to get new targets. We meet and exceed them as well. Whilst I can't speak of the FRS you mentioned I can only assume they weren't shift workers, as we work weekends and nights too. Though I did enjoy the early knock on Friday in my time in the raf, when the camps would empty at lunch for the weekend.

 

[firestorm]

(4)F


That'll be 188(4) can't see a problem with it myself.

An employer is legally required to consult its trade unions when it is 'considering' redundanicies.

Consultation should begin at least 90 days before the redundancies .

A section 188 notice serves as notice that an employer intends to make a number of employees redundant (in this case all employees!) and that the required consultation period has begun.

Their purpose in doing so in this case, is to then offer re-employment on new terms and conditions.
Still can't see the problem?

 

[firestorm]

We pay for our pensions and our pay is only comparable because we get the X-factor; otherwise you'd be better off.

This argument has been done to death so you gain no ground there.

So my point stands? Our pay and conditions are similar. What deduction do you see in your monthly salary for your pension? I was led to believe that your pay was adjusted as no actual deductions take place. AFPS 75 is non-contributory.


Is the below article wrong?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11446834

 

[The Masked Geek]

Still can't see the problem?

Indeed I can. You can only be made redundant if the job is no longer needed.

It would appear that they are acting illegaly if they are making the whole fire service redundant, not removing said jobs and hiring essentially "new" firemen on new terms in to those jobs that should no longer exist......


I would be interested in seeing the employers spin on it.

 

[snowball1]

Yawn, didnt we have all these arguments during Op Fresco!

At least that chump who was in charge of the FBU has gone, he never did reply to my e-mail when he claimed that the military were receiving approx 2k for covering the strikes!