Please read and support your firefighters!!!!

[katie1997]

brum Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Like I said DJ, firefighters don't work in the

> same way as other emergency services or most other

> shift workers. This is just the nature of the

> beast. There are some night shifts that are so

> busy, there is no time to sleep. On others, not

> one emergency call is received and all is quiet.

> This clearly is good because it means the

> community is safe that night. However whether

> there are lots of shouts or none at all, the same

> level of response needs to be maintained. This is

> your insurance, and that is what you pay for in

> your taxes. These are long shifts but with a rest

> period it means that firefighters can cope. There

> just isn't a worthwhile argument to change the

> shifts, which have been operated for over 30 years

> now.

>

> Remember that this job is high risk. It can make

> extreme demands on the firefighter, physically and

> emotionally, and just keeping them awake for no

> real benefit doesn't make much sense. Did you know

> that not very long ago the average life expectancy

> for firefighters was just 55? The hours and

> working conditions have improved a lot since those

> days and it's important to maintain them now.

Totally agree with you there brum. Very well said.

[DJKillaQueen]

Thankfully Ratty most of us won't ever experience a fire, just as most of us won't ever have our houses burgled, or be murdered and so on.

I'm not denying it's a job that has stresses and requires bravery and skill to do (that's common sense)....just arguing that is one of many jobs like that, none of which provide beds for their employees to sleep on during the hours they are paid to be on duty.

[Pearson]

If it a profession competition, what about the military/army? the RLNI (as already mentioned)?

They literally risk they're lives everyday, with shit conditions & equipment.

I don't see them whinging about sleep & shift patterns.

And lets not forget that any new buildings fire detection systems are a far cry from those available 10/20 years ago.

Automated sprinkler systems, early warning detection systems etc etc...

Building are way more protected than they were 10/20 years ago.

Sorry if i missed something

[Dougal Mulldoon]

It comes after the FBU union members voted 79 percent yes to strikes on a 79 percent turnout yesterday.

That you have majority support does not, of itself, mean your argument is right. It may mean that the union leaders have misrepresented the situation to their members, something that is hardly unknown. Yes it does. If 10% had voted for strike action you?d be screaming about bully boy unions. 79% vote in favour and you?re saying fire fighters don?t have a mind of their own. People don?t go on strike for a laugh, it?s a last resort to lying bullying management.

They are fighting their bosses? plan to sack all 5,500 of them unless they sign up to worse shifts. This threat, which has been part of employment legislation since the 70's, only came about because the two parties have been unable to agree - or even agree to talk. It is not, of itself, the cause of the strike,

It is the cause of the strike, go back and read the original post. I am not sure it?s been part of employment legislation since the seventies but it is a disgusting way to treat working people.

The shift changes would see the night shift made three hours shorter and mean cuts to night-time fire cover. Hardly - since the day shift will increase by three hours - therefore the 24/7 cover remains

Go back and read the original post.

London?s firefighters are already taking action short of a strike. Their overtime ban has forced some fire stations to temporarily close, showing how far the service has been relying on their goodwill just to run normally.

Use of overtime work is a recognized way of increasing flexibility without incurring permanent costs of higher staff numbers. As firefighters have firstly, willing taken up the overtime, and secondly been paid for it - this is hardly a goodwill gesture on the part of the firefighters

I?m sure fire fighters would prefer more fire fighters, a decent wage and no need to have second jobs just to survive in London. The fact that fire stations have closed does show good will on the fire fighters part to keep you and me safe.

But now the battle is really on.

And the clock is ticking. The mass sackings are not just a threat?they are a legal process that the bosses started back in August.

If the plan is not defeated then the first firefighters could be sacked on 26 November.

The fire authority bosses, led by crazed Tory councillor Brian Coleman, have shown all along that they?re spoiling for a fight.

And over the last five years the firefighters haven't equally been spoiling for a fight? This is normal union rhetoric and does not advance the argument about shift patters

No they haven?t. They did ask for a basic wage of ?30,000 per annum. Peanuts when compared to the bankers who got us into the mess we are in now, all back on the bonus bandwagon again. If you had a fire, who would you want to turn up? A fire fighter or a banker?

Last month, with 3,000 firefighters from across the country laying siege to their headquarters in a protest march, the bosses still decided to push ahead with the plan.

Then the protest wasn't very helpful - constructive talks might have been

I think people fought in the last world war to give us the right to protest even if it is ignored.

And the FBU gave the bosses 24 hours to back down after their decisive strike vote yesterday ? yet still they refused. Instead they have been spending their time preparing a scab force run by private firm AssetCo.

Equally the FBU had 24 hours to back down - there are two parties to this dispute

That?s because they are out to break the FBU.

The union has rightly said that there can?t be any talk of negotiations until the sacking blackmail is withdrawn. ?You don't negotiate with a gun to your head,? FBU general secretary Matt Wrack has said.

Perhaps the Fire Service chiefs feel the same about the proposed strike action - it's a gun to their head. That's what strike action is about - threats of losing a service. Again I refer you to the original post.

>

But the bosses have shown no sign of taking away that gun.

And the union has shown no signs of backing off the proposed strike

Faced with the kind of union busting attitude from their management I don?t blame them and totally support them.

Now the union can, and must, beat them once and for all. And to do that the firefighters will need as much support and solidarity as we can possibly deliver.

Socialist Worker talk. The strikers do not have my support with this kiind of talk. Put together a rational argument as to why the move from 9; 9; 15; 15; hour shifts to 12; 12; 12;12 hour shifts is dangerous, costly, illogical or something else and I might listen and might support you but not before

Good luck to the fire fighters.

[Huguenot]

It seems to me that the only well informed rational post on this subject has been MM's.

No-one actually knows at the moment what the firefighters are protesting against. What specifically are the terms being offered, and how do they compare with the previous situation?

I suspect that the lack of clarity on this issue is a reflection of the lack of substance to the protest.

Has nobody else seen the lack of consistency in hailing the heroic nature of firefighters and then suggesting they're 'bullied' by management? I mean, come on guys, either you're raging supermen, or you're cowering floopies. Make a choice.

I respect Carnell's observations, but it's mostly about union dogma, not about finding a solution to what looks suspiciously like a groundless quest for cash.

And finally, can people please desist from trying to support one side or the other on the basis that firefighters are woo wow angels? What a rubbish rubbish argument.

[Dougal Mulldoon]

Huguenot,

It isn?t about cash, just terms and conditions. The OP makes that quite clear. You may never have had bullying managers, I have and there is always an imbalance of power, as someone said before if you?ve been in a fire they are heroes.

Any way I am off to sleep.

Cheers.

[Huguenot]

"as someone said before if you?ve been in a fire they are heroes"

You've just done it again Dougal. This is NOT an argument.

"You may never have had bullying managers, I have and there is always an imbalance of power"

This is the point I just made, can you not see the contradiction here? What are they, heroes or weedies?

The OP does NOT make it clear that this is about terms and conditions, all the OP does is insist this is about terms and conditions. Saying so doesn't make it so.

There's no rational discussion about what these terms and conditions are, just a load of old bicep clenching blart.

[Fuschia]

I find it a bit sad that some many people in ED seem to be so smug and naive.

[Huguenot]

I'm interested in the 'naive' bit, Fuschia.

Can you educate me? What have I missed?

[Marmora Man]

It is somewhat unusual for Hugenot and me to be on the same side - but always good to have another rationalist onboard.

If Moflo or Douglas would lay out objectively the basis of the dispute, what the firefighters are trying to achieve and what the management team are offering we might be able to have a rational debate.

I'd acknowledge that anyone that runs deliberately into a fire to rescue someone is a useful member of society, but so is a school crossing lady, a school teacher, a nurse, a doctor, a soldier, a lawyer, a sailor, a chef, a social worker and yes, even a banker. They all contribute in different ways to the society we live in. Bravery is to be respected not but not to the exclusion of all other parts of the argument.

[*Bob*]

Reasons for striking that are never properly explained or understood by the general public - check

Dissent (on account of the above) met with 'how would you like to burn to death?' - check

Groundhog Day. Firefighters strike.

[Fuschia]

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm interested in the 'naive' bit, Fuschia.

>

> Can you educate me? What have I missed?

Regurgitating what you hear in the media... believing that this is just about "lazy firefighters not wanting to change" and not making any link with the massive reductions going on in public services...

[Fuschia]

Marmora Man Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> I'd acknowledge that anyone that runs deliberately

> into a fire to rescue someone is a useful member

> of society, but so is a school crossing lady, a

> school teacher, a nurse, a doctor, a soldier, a

> lawyer, a sailor, a chef, a social worker ...

I'd be opposed to the wholesale sacking of ANY of these workers to force acceptance of major cutbacks in the service....

[Applespider]

I'm not a firefighter nor am I married to one, going out with one or have any material interest in this so possibly not the best qualified to try to summarise but I'll try from what I've gleaned from various sources.

The firefighters want to keep their current working terms and conditions; pay isn't an issue in this strike. The firefighters are arguing that their current shift pattern works well so why change it? The 9 hour day shift allows for both firefighting during the day and additional community support when not firefighting. The 15 hour night shift generally works since there's less community support in those hours so unless it's a very busy night there's time to rest which offsets the additional hours.

They are going on strike because the fire brigade have threatened to sack all of them and force them to sign new contracts with the revised t&c if they want to carry on being ff. The revised t&c call for them to work 12 hour day shifts and 12 hour night shifts. The FF fear is partly that this makes dayshifts tougher since it's already a very full shift. But it's also because the 12 hour night shift increases the likelihood that certain stations will become unmanned at night and covered from a more central fire station. The FF argument on this is that this risks lives and property since every second counts in a fire. The brigade have offered a compromise position of 11 hour day shifts, 13 hour night shifts (although, to my eyes, that seems close enough to 12/12 that it's pointless)

The Fire Brigade view is that 12/12 shifts will allow more advanced training for firefighters on day shifts and shouldn't compromise safety. The FF view on training is that most advanced training requires a course anyhow rather than ad-hoc on the job that may be interrupted for a 'shout' so there's no real benefit there. They are not looking to change the other aspects of the shift pattern, weekly hours worked etc so on the surface it's not about costs. I can't find any other reasons mentioned officially for wanting to make this change. The Brigade's press officers seem to be more interested in blackening the firefighters than explaining WHY they're doing this. The example of taking fire engines out of service for fear of 'sabotage' is one of these despite there being no evidence of it.

Below the surface, and admittedly perhaps therefore a red herring, is the Brigade's relationship with a private company who, incidentally, will be providing cover during the strikes. There is apparently a fear that the recruitment ramp up by this company suggests that at some point, the fire brigade would like to outsource some firefighting duties (perhaps outlying areas/night duties) to this company and therefore reduce the level of public firefighters. There is a belief that the current 'shift pattern' dispute is more about breaking the FBU to facilitate changes of the outsourcing kind going forward than for any proven benefit in doing so.

Where strikes are demanding extra money for no extra work, reinstatement of troublemakers or minor perks, I don't believe in strikes. If this strike was purely about say getting a bed rather than a reclining chair for the night shift, then I wouldn't give it the time of day.

But where costs/hours/pay are all staying the same, threatening people with being sacked and forcing them to sign new contracts doesn't feel particularly fair. Yes, it happens in private companies too but that doesn't make it necessarily right. I'm still not a big fan of strikes but people do have the right to withhold labour. The FBU don't appear to come from the Bob Crow school of unions so I'm slightly more likely to believe that if they truly feel that a strike is the only way to indicate strength of feeling. Of course, should my flat go on fire on 23 October, I may entirely change my viewpoint.

[Kbabe01]

Regarding the private company being drafted in, the 27 AssetCo machines, complete with undertrained crews (They will not be able to deal with RTA's, Ladder Rescues, Risk assessed 'Snatch' rescues, Lock out's, Lock in's, Floodings, High risk electrical incident's, Chemical incidents, High rise incidents, Sub-Surface incidents,...... Water rescues,Person shut in Lift or anything which will go to a 6 pump fire or more!!!! Oh... And they will NOT be asked to go and fit smoke alarms, Perform Home Fire Safety Risk Assesments, Check on surrounding risks and properties in any form of survey whilst on duty OR, Continually. Personally. Develope!!!!) will be placed (In the event of strike action) at the stations they were taken from in the first place...

They will however be paid MORE money to perform a FRACTION of the service!!!!

[Bish Bash Bosh999]

Fuscia's argument does not hold water with me either for two main reasons. I know how many carry on part time work on days off even, shock horror, in between nights; a practice not officially allowed. How do you think that impacts on a Ff's operational effectiveness; not exactly family friendly either. The FBU's proposals also seem to contradict this argument. Namely producing a detailed business case for an 8/16 shift split and even proposing to LFEPA 24 hr shift patterns. I am lead to believe that they represent the wishes of their membership - maybe they haven't friendly families. Propaganda is a fish that can swim up or down stream.

[Bish Bash Bosh999]

Funny how the Brigade can run with reduced appliance cover during strategic resource and when they come off the run due to personnel booking late or sick. Also funny how those sicknesses levels suddenly reduce on PH days.

[Marmora Man]

What field of work was this MM?

Emergency services? I'd rather not have firefighters working 14 days solid if it's ok by you. That would seem to produce rather tired fire fighters.

My team were watchkeepers in Maritime Headquarters Northwood - responsible for among others things, in no particular order, the nuclear deterrent submarines, any other UK or NATO submarine at sea (ensuring that two submarines were not in the same part of the Atlantic at the same time), maintaining an intelligence plot of USSR submarines suspected locations, liaising with RAF and NATO maritime aircraft, co-ordinating air - sea searches, transfers and rescues. Plus anything else that came along - like the Falklands conflict. So not firefighting but it did require alert, enquiring and dedicated teamwork.

[Kbabe01]

Bish Bash Bosh you have commented on the i support london firefighters facebook page and on your profile it says your employer is LFB? Is this true?

[Pearson]

^So what's your background Kbabe01?

[Kbabe01]

I am a 32 mother of 2 boys age 10 and 18 months. My brother is a FF who is struggling to bring his son up with the 80% wages he's now on. What has my background got to do with anything pearson? I was asking BBB is he really was employed by the LFB because i found it interesting to hear him not supporting the FF. Is that ok Pearson?

Out of interest Whats your background?

[Bish Bash Bosh999]

Dougal Mulldoon Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> Now the union can, and must, beat them once and

> for all. And to do that the firefighters will need

> as much support and solidarity as we can possibly

> deliver.

> Socialist Worker talk. The strikers do not have my

> support with this kiind of talk. Put together a

> rational argument as to why the move from 9; 9;

> 15; 15; hour shifts to 12; 12; 12;12 hour shifts

> is dangerous, costly, illogical or something else

> and I might listen and might support you but not

> before

>

> Good luck to the fire fighters.

Nice piece Dougal

The line that, for me, sums up the FBU's push for a strike is the quote "Now the union can, and must, beat them once and

for all." I still believe that they spurred the workforce to put their heads above the parapet back in 2003 with the 30K strike and got their fingers burned (excuse the pun). They got the money but, imo, never recovered from the fact that the bosses wanted something in return i.e. a full days work for a full days pay.

[Pearson]

Easy tiger.

The one and only reason for my asking, was that you were questioning bish bash bosh about his background!

That's all.

I have no connection to the FB at all. I simply have a dislike for unions and strikes.

[Bish Bash Bosh999]

Kbabe01 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Bish Bash Bosh you have commented on the i support

> london firefighters facebook page and on your

> profile it says your employer is LFB? Is this

> true?

Not quite true will update my profile now as I stare at my axe on my mantle piece.

[Chick]

Does that make you Gimli, Son of Gloin?