Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: albitz on 31 October 2010, 13:11:41
-
One of the reasons they are getting so upset about the change in shift patterns, might be the fact that many of them live a long way from London. I can only assume that the pay/terms/conditions etc. make it worth their while to get on
their bikesan Easyjet flight from.......
Spain (1)
Denmark (1)
Republic of Ireland (6)
Northern Ireland (3)
Portsmouth (50)
Bournemouth (37)
Swansea (11)
Cardiff (6)
Newcastle (5)
liverpool (4)
Dumfries (1)
Falkirk (1)
etc. etc, ::)
-
one of my friends only became a fireman so he could do his knowledge and get his green badge.packed in the firebrigade and hes now a london taxi driver.i know night workers on the underground who have day jobs.. and they dont mind the odd strike now and then
-
I can understand why, they get an extra weighting for London sallary.
I commuted from Northamptonshire to London for years, its easily do-able, maybe these shift hours makes them commute in rush hour :-/
I think they are reducing hours of weekday shifts but increasing weekend ones.
-
Something wrong here.
Last time I visited London I thought that everything was ludicrously expensive.
Is it a problem with accommodation costs. If so we could build prison like complexes(but free to come and go) well away from London for the unemployed. They could do worthwhile work like the prisoners are going to do. That would free up affordable accommodation for folk like firefighters. Win win ;D ;D ;D
-
The change in shifts will affect those who fly in, do a few shifts and then go home for a week etc.
It will also affect the reported 33% of them who have second jobs, ranging from undertakers/taxi drivers to accountants/ modelling for versace...... they have a nice little gravy train going and someone has just shone a spotlight on it.
None of it really bothers me much tbh. but if the employer wants to change things round a bit to hopefully save the taxpayer some money, then I think they should accept the change.
If they go on strike over the issue I would like to see (ideally) the lot of them sacked.
-
If i was in charge i would report every one that strikes to HMRC for tax avoidance >:( >:(
-
Something wrong here.
Last time I visited London I thought that everything was ludicrously expensive.
Is it a problem with accommodation costs. If so we could build prison like complexes(but free to come and go) well away from London for the unemployed. They could do worthwhile work like the prisoners are going to do. That would free up affordable accommodation for folk like firefighters. Win win ;D ;D ;D
A site which would fit that bill quite nicely, will be available in Stratford in about three years time. :y :)
-
I dont know much about this, but I have a cousin who has recently left the London Fire Service after a considerable number of years service (in the senior ranks) that has now become an engineer in a completely un-related trade because he was so fed up of the continual changes in conditions, shift patterns, hours, and terms of employment. Why would a man on reasonable money and guaranteed a good pension leave a "safe" log-term job unless somethings were seriously bad??
My cousin is a sensible intelligent man, and thinks hard before he does anything, so to leave must have been a long considered decision for him.
Something must be really wrong in the LFS then, or they wouldn't strike or leave??
Just a observation.................... :-/
-
One of the reasons they are getting so upset about the change in shift patterns, might be the fact that many of them live a long way from London. I can only assume that the pay/terms/conditions etc. make it worth their while to get on their bikesan Easyjet flight from.......
Spain (1)
Denmark (1)
Republic of Ireland (6)
Northern Ireland (3)
Portsmouth (50)
Bournemouth (37)
Swansea (11)
Cardiff (6)
Newcastle (5)
liverpool (4)
Dumfries (1)
Falkirk (1)
etc. etc, ::)
What the hell is wrong with this?
They do their job, get paid their money, and can live wherever they want.
Have you not considered that on their wage they might not be able to afford to live near their place of work, or might not be from london, and might originally be from these places?
Whatever the press say about ffs being paid more than PCs is totally untrue, whether it's any relevance or not.
-
If i was in charge i would report every one that strikes to HMRC for tax avoidance >:( >:(
That's assuming all the strikers have second jobs, then assuming that the ones that have second jobs, don't declare those earnings, then assuming that the ones that have second jobs haven't been authorised by the brigade to do said second job. Firefighter with authorised 2nd job - brigade tells taxman anyway.
In anycase, tax avoidance is perfectly legal.
And why would you report them in some sort of nasty cynical ploy? Because you believe everything you hear on the news and in the media, without knowing all the facts?
-
The change in shifts will affect those who fly in, do a few shifts and then go home for a week etc.
It will also affect the reported 33% of them who have second jobs, ranging from undertakers/taxi drivers to accountants/ modelling for versace...... they have a nice little gravy train going and someone has just shone a spotlight on it.
None of it really bothers me much tbh. but if the employer wants to change things round a bit to hopefully save the taxpayer some money, then I think they should accept the change.
If they go on strike over the issue I would like to see (ideally) the lot of them sacked.
What a very dismissive and vindictive post! It's not so much of a gravy train when they are risking their lives to save others, or taking on the huge responsibility they now have compared to not so long ago.
Having the same number of bods, working the same number of hours, isn't going to save money. Changing the length of shifts, isn't going to save money. Why don't you whinge about MPs having second jobs or anyone else for that matter. Everyone is only doing the best they can for themselves and their future.
-
totally agree with Geoffr70, there seems to be massive media manipulation to paint anyone on strike as the bad guys, as I understand it, the main point of the threatened strike is to make management withdraw its threat of sack for refusal to agree new shift patterns....surely a sensible, cool, calm discussion is better than pointing a gun at someones head and saying "sign it".
Further I've heard a lot of "how will you feel if a kid dies on 5th november" stuff from those against the strike, now I'd ask anyone with that view to ask themselves, with less flexible shift patterns, less cover in London and therefore longer response times what about the deaths caused next week, next month, next year etc by reductions in service? or doesnt that fit the humanitarian argument? I'm surprised the union doesnt highlight this, but then maybe using death to make a point isnt their style :-?
-
I dont care if they live on Mars and have 20 other jobs. Dont see that as a problem. What I do see as a problem is the fact that their employer (ultimately us taxpayers) is trying to make the service more efficient, but they (led by their 1970,s style union) are going on strike on bonfire night in order to try to protect what most people believe to be a cosy little number with plenty of perks - ie plenty of time off, plenty of shifts where much of the time is spent sleeping etc..
As for risking their lives etc. I have no doubt that many of them do just that at times, but I am also aware of the recent high profile stories regarding 7/7 when they refused to go into the stations to help until someone could guarantee it was safe to do so. And a police inspector testified that even though he was standing on the lines to prove they werent live, the firemen still refused to proceed to the bombed trains until they had official confirmation of the fact.The extra 30 minutes that took must have seemed like an eternity to the victims awaiting help.
There was also the recent publicity about the case where 2 of them refused to take any action to try to save people from drowning - who were reportedly begging them to save them - because they hadnt had the appropriate training.
Some of them are undoubtedly in the job for the right reasons and will act heroically when the situation calls for it. Others are undoubtedly in the job, for an easy life and the chance to earn decent money for doing nothing much. Just like any other group of employees really.
I believe that the strike is unjustifiable (and may well be partially politically motivated) and if I was in the position to do so, would investigate the option of sacking the strikers.
-
Management have been trying to reach an agreement with them on this issue since god was a boy, but they wont budge.
I seriously doubt that they are resisting because they know it will provide a worse service than the current system. Much more likely protecting their current position, which management consider to be unsustainable.
Seem to remember reports of nasty intimidation against those who didnt join the strike last time they took action. That in itself, removes sympathy for the cause - if they have a genuine cause, which I seriously doubt.
At the end of the day, management must have the right to manage. If after long negotiations, there is no progress then management should use their judgement and impose the new regime. If the Union think they have a good case, let them have a chat with independent arbitrators imo. ;)
Far too many people who have their wages paid by the taxpayer seem to think that they can always have everything they want, and dont seem to be able to understand that they dont have a licence to print money, They need to join the real world imo. If they worked for a private employer, would they be able to have the terms/ conditions/money they currently have ?
No chance.
-
I'm not a firefighter, I don't know any, and I can't comment on whether their current employment conditions are reasonable nor whether the changed conditions they are being asked to accept are reasonable.
What isn't reasonable, IMHO, is an emergency service striking at a time chosen purely to maximise risk to the general public.
Strikes are supposed to be awkward for management, to make their lives difficult and prompt them to think again and, if you are looking for the support of the general public in arranging such action, the impact to the public, and especially their safety, needs to be minimised.
If instead the firefighters follow their slack-jawed union leaders into action that appears to have been designed for maximum media coverage at the expense of the safety of the general public then they deserve no support from the public whatsoever, IMHO.
Kevin
-
I wonder what would happen if one of the firefighters houses was ablaze during the strike period? ::)
Oh...just remembered.....the Swansea brigade would deal with it. ;D
-
I dont care if they live on Mars and have 20 other jobs. Dont see that as a problem. What I do see as a problem is the fact that their employer (ultimately us taxpayers) is trying to make the service more efficient, but they (led by their 1970,s style union) are going on strike on bonfire night in order to try to protect what most people believe to be a cosy little number with plenty of perks - ie plenty of time off, plenty of shifts where much of the time is spent sleeping etc..
As for risking their lives etc. I have no doubt that many of them do just that at times, but I am also aware of the recent high profile stories regarding 7/7 when they refused to go into the stations to help until someone could guarantee it was safe to do so. And a police inspector testified that even though he was standing on the lines to prove they werent live, the firemen still refused to proceed to the bombed trains until they had official confirmation of the fact.The extra 30 minutes that took must have seemed like an eternity to the victims awaiting help.
There was also the recent publicity about the case where 2 of them refused to take any action to try to save people from drowning - who were reportedly begging them to save them - because they hadnt had the appropriate training.Some of them are undoubtedly in the job for the right reasons and will act heroically when the situation calls for it. Others are undoubtedly in the job, for an easy life and the chance to earn decent money for doing nothing much. Just like any other group of employees really.
I believe that the strike is unjustifiable (and may well be partially politically motivated) and if I was in the position to do so, would investigate the option of sacking the strikers.
The facts of the case are as follows :-
man jumps into frozen lake to rescue dog, man gets into difficulties and passer-by jumps into help but he too gets into difficulties.
Fire crew arrive, senior firemen does quick risk assessment and decides (rightly IMO) not too send his men into the water as probably would be sending them to their certain deaths.
Specialist rescue crew arrive approx 30 mins later but by then too late to save the men.
Tragic story all-round and I guess the moral of the story is don't try and rescue a drowning dog/cat/animal.
I also cannot see the logic in sacking the london firemen as who would do the job then - the management.
-
I dont care if they live on Mars and have 20 other jobs. Dont see that as a problem. What I do see as a problem is the fact that their employer (ultimately us taxpayers) is trying to make the service more efficient, but they (led by their 1970,s style union) are going on strike on bonfire night in order to try to protect what most people believe to be a cosy little number with plenty of perks - ie plenty of time off, plenty of shifts where much of the time is spent sleeping etc..
As for risking their lives etc. I have no doubt that many of them do just that at times, but I am also aware of the recent high profile stories regarding 7/7 when they refused to go into the stations to help until someone could guarantee it was safe to do so. And a police inspector testified that even though he was standing on the lines to prove they werent live, the firemen still refused to proceed to the bombed trains until they had official confirmation of the fact.The extra 30 minutes that took must have seemed like an eternity to the victims awaiting help.
There was also the recent publicity about the case where 2 of them refused to take any action to try to save people from drowning - who were reportedly begging them to save them - because they hadnt had the appropriate training.Some of them are undoubtedly in the job for the right reasons and will act heroically when the situation calls for it. Others are undoubtedly in the job, for an easy life and the chance to earn decent money for doing nothing much. Just like any other group of employees really.
I believe that the strike is unjustifiable (and may well be partially politically motivated) and if I was in the position to do so, would investigate the option of sacking the strikers.
The facts of the case are as follows :-
man jumps into frozen lake to rescue dog, man gets into difficulties and passer-by jumps into help but he too gets into difficulties.
Fire crew arrive, senior firemen does quick risk assessment and decides (rightly IMO) not too send his men into the water as probably would be sending them to their certain deaths.
Specialist rescue crew arrive approx 30 mins later but by then too late to save the men.
Tragic story all-round and I guess the moral of the story is don't try and rescue a drowning dog/cat/animal.
I also cannot see the logic in sacking the london firemen as who would do the job then - the management.
Me, i'd love a decent job ;)
-
totally agree wtih Kevin and Albs - striking around bonfire night is out of order - unfortunately the firefighters just behave like sheep behind their moronic union leaders
-
Im sure the queue would stretch half way back up the M1.
The problem would be the interim period when the new workforce were being trained up.
I still believe that there should be laws preventing emergency services from taking industrial action. In fact I could see the argument for that applying to all public servants. :)
-
totally agree with Geoffr70, there seems to be massive media manipulation to paint anyone on strike as the bad guys, as I understand it, the main point of the threatened strike is to make management withdraw its threat of sack for refusal to agree new shift patterns....surely a sensible, cool, calm discussion is better than pointing a gun at someones head and saying "sign it".
How about pointing a gun at someone's head and saying "we won't sign it", which is what the FBU is doing.
Further I've heard a lot of "how will you feel if a kid dies on 5th november" stuff from those against the strike, now I'd ask anyone with that view to ask themselves, with less flexible shift patterns, less cover in London and therefore longer response times what about the deaths caused next week, next month, next year etc by reductions in service? or doesnt that fit the humanitarian argument? I'm surprised the union doesnt highlight this, but then maybe using death to make a point isnt their style :-?
Where did you get that from? Reductions in service? Less flexible shift patterns?
Try reading the Brigade's position:
What’s wrong with the current start and finish times?
The current start and finish times have been in place since 1979 and the work we do today has changed dramatically. We don’t just respond to fires anymore. Firefighters train for and attend a much wider range of incidents such as flooding, collapsed buildings, chemical incidents etc, and work harder than ever before to prevent fires from happening in the first place.
The current start and finish times also result in a change of shift during both the morning and evening rush hours when fire brigade incident demand is at its highest.
What are the benefits of the proposed changes?
The changes would significantly increase the productive time available during the day shift for essential training and community fire safety work to be arranged. For instance, firefighters now prevent fires by visiting Londoners in their homes, fitting free smoke alarms and offering advice on preventing fires.
The new start and finish times would also mean less disruption to services during a crucially busy period of the day. The current shift change takes place during morning and evening rush hour.
Will firefighters actually be working more hours?
No, the overall number of hours that firefighters currently work each week is not increasing. The balance in hours between the day and night shifts is all that is changing.
http://www.london-fire.gov.uk/news/NewsReleases2009_PR1470.asp
Now tell me, BJ, how you can write about "the deaths caused next week, next month, next year etc by reductions in service". ::) ::) ::)
-
What are the benefits of the proposed changes?
The changes would significantly increase the productive time available during the day shift for essential training and community fire safety work to be arranged. For instance, firefighters now prevent fires by visiting Londoners in their homes, fitting free smoke alarms and offering advice on preventing fires.
Ahh.. Perhaps we're getting somewhere now? :-?
Kevin
-
I dont care if they live on Mars and have 20 other jobs. Dont see that as a problem. What I do see as a problem is the fact that their employer (ultimately us taxpayers) is trying to make the service more efficient, but they (led by their 1970,s style union) are going on strike on bonfire night in order to try to protect what most people believe to be a cosy little number with plenty of perks - ie plenty of time off, plenty of shifts where much of the time is spent sleeping etc..
As for risking their lives etc. I have no doubt that many of them do just that at times, but I am also aware of the recent high profile stories regarding 7/7 when they refused to go into the stations to help until someone could guarantee it was safe to do so. And a police inspector testified that even though he was standing on the lines to prove they werent live, the firemen still refused to proceed to the bombed trains until they had official confirmation of the fact.The extra 30 minutes that took must have seemed like an eternity to the victims awaiting help.
There was also the recent publicity about the case where 2 of them refused to take any action to try to save people from drowning - who were reportedly begging them to save them - because they hadnt had the appropriate training.Some of them are undoubtedly in the job for the right reasons and will act heroically when the situation calls for it. Others are undoubtedly in the job, for an easy life and the chance to earn decent money for doing nothing much. Just like any other group of employees really.
I believe that the strike is unjustifiable (and may well be partially politically motivated) and if I was in the position to do so, would investigate the option of sacking the strikers.
The facts of the case are as follows :-
man jumps into frozen lake to rescue dog, man gets into difficulties and passer-by jumps into help but he too gets into difficulties.
Fire crew arrive, senior firemen does quick risk assessment and decides (rightly IMO) not too send his men into the water as probably would be sending them to their certain deaths.
Specialist rescue crew arrive approx 30 mins later but by then too late to save the men.
Tragic story all-round and I guess the moral of the story is don't try and rescue a drowning dog/cat/animal.
I also cannot see the logic in sacking the london firemen as who would do the job then - the management.
Sorry but I dont agree. I would like to think that in their position I would have tried to do something. Throw them a rope, or tie a rope to yourself, the other end being held by your colleagues while you attempt to get to them and help if possible. I dont know how they could stand on the bank listening to the men pleading "please dont let us die" and simply wait 30 minutes for people with the appropriate training and equipment to arrive. It seems inhuman to me tbh. :(
-
1) when they refused to go into the stations to help until someone could guarantee it was safe to do so. And a police inspector testified that even though he was standing on the lines to prove they werent live, the firemen still refused to proceed to the bombed trains until they had official confirmation of the fact.The extra 30 minutes that took must have seemed like an eternity to the victims awaiting help.
2) There was also the recent publicity about the case where 2 of them refused to take any action to try to save people from drowning - who were reportedly begging them to save them - because they hadnt had the appropriate training.
my limited understanding of such things leads me to surmise that
1) had they gone in and there been an accident due to live lines, or other safety issues, that they should by protocol, have confirmed before entry, they would have been liable due to negligence.... both for themselves, and any member of public victims.
2) unless trained to do so, they are not insured to do so, so no death benefits if they risk their lives and lose the gamble.... explain that to a widow and kids faced with the bills for a funeral, and no insurance pay out because they didn't follow procedure.
and i'm told, you better believe that they would have been hung out to dry.... quite apart from the government and insurers being tightwads that like to wriggle out of any liability.... it's also one way of trying to enforce adherence to protocol, to maximise their safety, and that of their "clients"
risk their lives sometimes...
virtually every day.....
have several friends as part timers, and a few as ex full timers....
if you're committed enough to risk your life for others on a daily basis, something has to be pretty out of whack for you to decide to leave.
and sorry, a bit touchy maybe, but i find it offensive when people marginalise the "risk your life" factor in any service , be it police, fire, ambulance or armed services.
and that's what i feel you're doing.
maybe you didn't mean it that way, i certainly hope so, but that's how it came across
what choice do they have really.?? i find the imperious decision making process of their employers equally as demeaning and offensive... it's not like THEY're the one;s risking a burning building falling on them...... they always seem to put pressure on such people, relying on their commitment and devotion to saving others, to let them get away with rolling them over a barrel...
frankly much the same has traditionally been foisted on nurses, police officers and armed forces personnel.
were i in charge, i'd reduce MP's salaries to the same sort of levels as firefighters , nurses etc, after all they're only public servants.... or raise that of the worthier sorts to the same as MP's
and i would cheerfully pay a penny more tax in the pound to fund such a thing.
-
The change in shifts will affect those who fly in, do a few shifts and then go home for a week etc.
It will also affect the reported 33% of them who have second jobs, ranging from undertakers/taxi drivers to accountants/ modelling for versace...... they have a nice little gravy train going and someone has just shone a spotlight on it.
None of it really bothers me much tbh. but if the employer wants to change things round a bit to hopefully save the taxpayer some money, then I think they should accept the change.
If they go on strike over the issue I would like to see (ideally) the lot of them sacked.
What a very dismissive and vindictive post! It's not so much of a gravy train when they are risking their lives to save others, or taking on the huge responsibility they now have compared to not so long ago.
Having the same number of bods, working the same number of hours, isn't going to save money. Changing the length of shifts, isn't going to save money. Why don't you whinge about MPs having second jobs or anyone else for that matter. Everyone is only doing the best they can for themselves and their future.
Why don't you whinge about MPs having second jobs or anyone else for that matter
I agree .... seems everyone has a grudge against the fire service .... :-/
-
ie plenty of time off, plenty of shifts where much of the time is spent sleeping etc..
And what about the unsociable hours they work , ie bank holidays or xmas or new year ... nights and weekends etc when almost everyone else is off enjoying themselves :y
-
In reply to Max. Im not saying they should have been compelled or forced to go in, just that from a humanitarian point of view I dont see how they could take the watch and wait approach.
I understand the issues about liability etc. but tbh if this country had adopted that sort of attitude in the 2nd world war, we would all be speaking German now. A bit lass elf n sayftee and a bit more True Brit Grit would be nice to see sometimes. :y
In reply to Proz. I dont have a grudge against the Fire Service. Much of their work is very worthy of high praise.
I do have a grudge however against moronic lefty Union leaders, and have little time for anyone who is daft enough to be led around by the nose by them. ;)
-
ie plenty of time off, plenty of shifts where much of the time is spent sleeping etc..
And what about the unsociable hours they work , ie bank holidays or xmas or new year ... nights and weekends etc when almost everyone else is off enjoying themselves :y
Give me a break!! What about truckers, nurses, doctors, restaurant staff, police, military, breakdown services, bakers, newspaper workers. security staff, airport/airline workers, train drivers, etc. etc? ::)
This is about a small change in shift patterns. You can't be a firefighter without agreeing to shift work, thus the "unsociable" hours they work is a given. You can't bring up that "poor little darlings" argument! ;)
-
ie plenty of time off, plenty of shifts where much of the time is spent sleeping etc..
And what about the unsociable hours they work , ie bank holidays or xmas or new year ... nights and weekends etc when almost everyone else is off enjoying themselves :y
I will be working Christmas day, boxing day and new years eve this year - the same as I did last year. Most of my working days begin at 5pm and end at 8am the following day. I work 3 out of every 4 weekends.I earn a lot less than a firefighter.Its part of my job and I accepted that when I took the job. I dont plan on going on strike over it. Maybe thats the difference between the public and private sectors. ;)
-
have you considered that the union may be acting in the interests of, and with relevance to the concerns of their members.... ?? rather than leading around by the nose?
not ALL union activity is left wing, activism for the sake of it..... they by and large exist to protect the rights and interests of their members
as for Nov5th
if you want free publicity.... do something when the press will blow it up.....
-
In reply to Max. Im not saying they should have been compelled or forced to go in, just that from a humanitarian point of view I dont see how they could take the watch and wait approach.
I understand the issues about liability etc. but tbh if this country had adopted that sort of attitude in the 2nd world war, we would all be speaking German now. A bit lass elf n sayftee and a bit more True Brit Grit would be nice to see sometimes. :y
In reply to Proz. I dont have a grudge against the Fire Service. Much of their work is very worthy of high praise.
I do have a grudge however against moronic lefty Union leaders, and have little time for anyone who is daft enough to be led around by the nose by them. ;)
I would assume they would have had a ballot or vote for strike action ... i belive that would be a free vote and up to the individual concerned .
So if they voted for a strike of there own back how is that being led around .
Everyone can make up there own mind and obviously the majority voted to strike .
Im not up to speed on the full ins and outs of it and i dont care how many 2nd jobs they have as long as they do there main job .
:y :y
-
Im reasonably conversant with the internal workings of the Union movement Max. I was a young left wing TGWU shop steward in a former life. There is much to be proud of from the early days of the Union movement, but very little in the last 40 years or so imo.
The FBU is rum by 70,s style left wing Union men. They need to be put in their place imo for the long term good of their members, the service, the taxpayer and the public at large.
-
Nickbat, surely no change in hours but an increase in productive (ie daytime visits, safety talks etc) hours means that less officers will be available for night-shift, which absolutely has an impact on safety? :o
-
ie plenty of time off, plenty of shifts where much of the time is spent sleeping etc..
And what about the unsociable hours they work , ie bank holidays or xmas or new year ... nights and weekends etc when almost everyone else is off enjoying themselves :y
Give me a break!! What about truckers, nurses, doctors, restaurant staff, police, military, breakdown services, bakers, newspaper workers. security staff, airport/airline workers, train drivers, etc. etc? ::)
This is about a small change in shift patterns. You can't be a firefighter without agreeing to shift work, thus the "unsociable" hours they work is a given. You can't bring up that "poor little darlings" argument! ;)
Not bringing up the "poor little darlings argument" ... i work in one of the establishments you list and work xmas new year etc .
They agreed to a shift pattern that sounds like its being forcably changed .
Would you be happy being told your recognised shift pattern that you work is changing and we dont care how it affect you ??
Or should we all just lie down and accept it.
I dont even know how they want to change there shift patterns and dont care really but i wouldnt be happy having things forced on me . :y
-
In reply to Max. Im not saying they should have been compelled or forced to go in, just that from a humanitarian point of view I dont see how they could take the watch and wait approach.
I understand the issues about liability etc. but tbh if this country had adopted that sort of attitude in the 2nd world war, we would all be speaking German now. A bit lass elf n sayftee and a bit more True Brit Grit would be nice to see sometimes. :y
In reply to Proz. I dont have a grudge against the Fire Service. Much of their work is very worthy of high praise.
I do have a grudge however against moronic lefty Union leaders, and have little time for anyone who is daft enough to be led around by the nose by them. ;)
I would assume they would have had a ballot or vote for strike action ... i belive that would be a free vote and up to the individual concerned .
So if they voted for a strike of there own back how is that being led around .
Everyone can make up there own mind and obviously the majority voted to strike .
Im not up to speed on the full ins and outs of it and i dont care how many 2nd jobs they have as long as they do there main job .
:y :y
These "free votes" often take place in an atmosphere of propaganda/ emotional blackmail/ degrees of bullying and even at times threats of or actual violence.
Regardless of all of that, I think it should be illegal for them to strike anyway. If the job is that bad why have vacancies for the fire service(even before the recession) many times more applicants than jobs available ? ;)
-
In reply to Max. Im not saying they should have been compelled or forced to go in, just that from a humanitarian point of view I dont see how they could take the watch and wait approach.
I understand the issues about liability etc. but tbh if this country had adopted that sort of attitude in the 2nd world war, we would all be speaking German now. A bit lass elf n sayftee and a bit more True Brit Grit would be nice to see sometimes. :y
In reply to Proz. I dont have a grudge against the Fire Service. Much of their work is very worthy of high praise.
I do have a grudge however against moronic lefty Union leaders, and have little time for anyone who is daft enough to be led around by the nose by them. ;)
I would assume they would have had a ballot or vote for strike action ... i belive that would be a free vote and up to the individual concerned .
So if they voted for a strike of there own back how is that being led around .
Everyone can make up there own mind and obviously the majority voted to strike .
Im not up to speed on the full ins and outs of it and i dont care how many 2nd jobs they have as long as they do there main job .
:y :y
These "free votes" often take place in an atmosphere of propaganda/ emotional blackmail/ degrees of bullying and even at times threats of or actual violence.
Regardless of all of that, I think it should be illegal for them to strike anyway. If the job is that bad why have vacancies for the fire service(even before the recession) many times more applicants than jobs available ? ;)
Maybe in a different age you were told how to vote with the threat of violence but i have never seen anything like that in any union vote i have been in . :y
-
In reply to Max. Im not saying they should have been compelled or forced to go in, just that from a humanitarian point of view I dont see how they could take the watch and wait approach.
I understand the issues about liability etc. but tbh if this country had adopted that sort of attitude in the 2nd world war, we would all be speaking German now. A bit lass elf n sayftee and a bit more True Brit Grit would be nice to see sometimes. :y
In reply to Proz. I dont have a grudge against the Fire Service. Much of their work is very worthy of high praise.
I do have a grudge however against moronic lefty Union leaders, and have little time for anyone who is daft enough to be led around by the nose by them. ;)
I would assume they would have had a ballot or vote for strike action ... i belive that would be a free vote and up to the individual concerned .
So if they voted for a strike of there own back how is that being led around .
Everyone can make up there own mind and obviously the majority voted to strike .
Im not up to speed on the full ins and outs of it and i dont care how many 2nd jobs they have as long as they do there main job .
:y :y
These "free votes" often take place in an atmosphere of propaganda/ emotional blackmail/ degrees of bullying and even at times threats of or actual violence.
Regardless of all of that, I think it should be illegal for them to strike anyway. If the job is that bad why have vacancies for the fire service(even before the recession) many times more applicants than jobs available ? ;)
Maybe in a different age you were told how to vote with the threat of violence but i have never seen anything like that in any union vote i have been in . :y
Albs was an enforcer for the Teamsters in 30's Chicago by the sounds ;D :y
-
"The minister criticised alleged intimidation and bullying by those on the picket lines"
http://web.orange.co.uk/article/news/firefighters_to_strike_on_bonfire_night
-
I dont care if they live on Mars and have 20 other jobs. Dont see that as a problem. What I do see as a problem is the fact that their employer (ultimately us taxpayers) is trying to make the service more efficient, but they (led by their 1970,s style union) are going on strike on bonfire night in order to try to protect what most people believe to be a cosy little number with plenty of perks - ie plenty of time off, plenty of shifts where much of the time is spent sleeping etc..
As for risking their lives etc. I have no doubt that many of them do just that at times, but I am also aware of the recent high profile stories regarding 7/7 when they refused to go into the stations to help until someone could guarantee it was safe to do so. And a police inspector testified that even though he was standing on the lines to prove they werent live, the firemen still refused to proceed to the bombed trains until they had official confirmation of the fact.The extra 30 minutes that took must have seemed like an eternity to the victims awaiting help.
There was also the recent publicity about the case where 2 of them refused to take any action to try to save people from drowning - who were reportedly begging them to save them - because they hadnt had the appropriate training.Some of them are undoubtedly in the job for the right reasons and will act heroically when the situation calls for it. Others are undoubtedly in the job, for an easy life and the chance to earn decent money for doing nothing much. Just like any other group of employees really.
I believe that the strike is unjustifiable (and may well be partially politically motivated) and if I was in the position to do so, would investigate the option of sacking the strikers.
The facts of the case are as follows :-
man jumps into frozen lake to rescue dog, man gets into difficulties and passer-by jumps into help but he too gets into difficulties.
Fire crew arrive, senior firemen does quick risk assessment and decides (rightly IMO) not too send his men into the water as probably would be sending them to their certain deaths.
Specialist rescue crew arrive approx 30 mins later but by then too late to save the men.
Tragic story all-round and I guess the moral of the story is don't try and rescue a drowning dog/cat/animal.
I also cannot see the logic in sacking the london firemen as who would do the job then - the management.
If the NYFD had taken that approach on 9/11 there would probably be hundreds of firefighters alive today who perished in the twin towers.
There would also have been thousands more people who would have perished but they are alive today because of the selfless and brave attitude of the NYFD. ;)
-
Nickbat, surely no change in hours but an increase in productive (ie daytime visits, safety talks etc) hours means that less officers will be available for night-shift, which absolutely has an impact on safety? :o
The LFB states: "The changes would significantly increase the productive time available during the day shift for essential training and community fire safety work to be arranged."
BJ, you can't conclude from that statement that the result would be less officers on the night shift.
It's a complete non sequitur. :-?
-
"The minister criticised alleged intimidation and bullying by those on the picket lines"
http://web.orange.co.uk/article/news/firefighters_to_strike_on_bonfire_night
Of course they are going to claim there is bullying etc going on ...
They are just trying to make the firefighters look worse .
And im sure the firefighters will say they are being bullied and intimidated into accepting something they dont agree too ;D ;D
-
Employers tell employees what to do - thats the way of the world.
If the emploer is being seriously unreasonable there are ways of having thids inspected/redressed without walking out the door, especially if peoples lives may depend on you. Imo its indefensible which ever way you look at it.
-
That old right wing extremist - John Prescott - seemed to have the same problem with them. ::)
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article857629.ece
-
I dont care if they live on Mars and have 20 other jobs. Dont see that as a problem. What I do see as a problem is the fact that their employer (ultimately us taxpayers) is trying to make the service more efficient, but they (led by their 1970,s style union) are going on strike on bonfire night in order to try to protect what most people believe to be a cosy little number with plenty of perks - ie plenty of time off, plenty of shifts where much of the time is spent sleeping etc..
As for risking their lives etc. I have no doubt that many of them do just that at times, but I am also aware of the recent high profile stories regarding 7/7 when they refused to go into the stations to help until someone could guarantee it was safe to do so. And a police inspector testified that even though he was standing on the lines to prove they werent live, the firemen still refused to proceed to the bombed trains until they had official confirmation of the fact.The extra 30 minutes that took must have seemed like an eternity to the victims awaiting help.
There was also the recent publicity about the case where 2 of them refused to take any action to try to save people from drowning - who were reportedly begging them to save them - because they hadnt had the appropriate training.Some of them are undoubtedly in the job for the right reasons and will act heroically when the situation calls for it. Others are undoubtedly in the job, for an easy life and the chance to earn decent money for doing nothing much. Just like any other group of employees really.
I believe that the strike is unjustifiable (and may well be partially politically motivated) and if I was in the position to do so, would investigate the option of sacking the strikers.
The facts of the case are as follows :-
man jumps into frozen lake to rescue dog, man gets into difficulties and passer-by jumps into help but he too gets into difficulties.
Fire crew arrive, senior firemen does quick risk assessment and decides (rightly IMO) not too send his men into the water as probably would be sending them to their certain deaths.
Specialist rescue crew arrive approx 30 mins later but by then too late to save the men.
Tragic story all-round and I guess the moral of the story is don't try and rescue a drowning dog/cat/animal.
I also cannot see the logic in sacking the london firemen as who would do the job then - the management.
If the NYFD had taken that approach on 9/11 there would probably be hundreds of firefighters alive today who perished in the twin towers.
There would also have been thousands more people who would have perished but they are alive today because of the selfless and brave attitude of the NYFD. ;)
Maybe the americans dont have the same pathetic Health and Safety laws that we do .
If that fire officer had ordered his guys into the water and anything happened to them he wouldnt have a leg to stand on.
Now im not saying it was right to stand and do nothing and i would find it very difficult to do nothing BUT if anything had happened you can imagine the world of crap that would open
Same applies to the Police and Ambulance crews .
Health and Safety has a lot to answer for :-/
-
That old right wing extremist - John Prescott - seemed to have the same problem with them. ::)
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article857629.ece
Prescott ;D ;D ;D
He would have just punched them into submission ;D ;D
-
Agreed. :y
-
Nickbat, surely no change in hours but an increase in productive (ie daytime visits, safety talks etc) hours means that less officers will be available for night-shift, which absolutely has an impact on safety? :o
The LFB states: "The changes would significantly increase the productive time available during the day shift for essential training and community fire safety work to be arranged."
BJ, you can't conclude from that statement that the result would be less officers on the night shift.
It's a complete non sequitur. :-?
I can't see how you don't see that Nick, where are these "magical" extra working hours coming from then if it has no impact on service elsewhere? True nightshift will often spend much of the time asleep, but surely the point is that they are there and able to be deployed at a moments notice? I'd rather a fire service was used for putting out fires and cutting people from RTAs than showing Mrs Miggins up the road how to switch off her TV - leave that to retired or injured firemen :-?
-
I personally feel that fire figters should be banned from strike action... I have a very poor view of strike action in any industry, besides the fact that their action could result in people dying.
To strike of the Bonfire night period is completely irresponsible and outrageous...
The actions of not rescuing people from the water due to lack of training I find terrible... For many years they have had to deal with all kinds of rescues, ranging from serious car accidents to rail and water rescues, surely every crew should have a minimum of 2 trained for water rescue and methods of testing whether rail lines are live or not....
I beleive part of the reason for longer day shifts is to give the opportunity for more training..
-
Nickbat, surely no change in hours but an increase in productive (ie daytime visits, safety talks etc) hours means that less officers will be available for night-shift, which absolutely has an impact on safety? :o
The LFB states: "The changes would significantly increase the productive time available during the day shift for essential training and community fire safety work to be arranged."
BJ, you can't conclude from that statement that the result would be less officers on the night shift.
It's a complete non sequitur. :-?
I can't see how you don't see that Nick, where are these "magical" extra working hours coming from then if it has no impact on service elsewhere? True nightshift will often spend much of the time asleep, but surely the point is that they are there and able to be deployed at a moments notice? I'd rather a fire service was used for putting out fires and cutting people from RTAs than showing Mrs Miggins up the road how to switch off her TV - leave that to retired or injured firemen :-?
Huh?
They're just changing the times of the shifts, there's no magic involved. ::) ::)
-
Nickbat, surely no change in hours but an increase in productive (ie daytime visits, safety talks etc) hours means that less officers will be available for night-shift, which absolutely has an impact on safety? :o
The LFB states: "The changes would significantly increase the productive time available during the day shift for essential training and community fire safety work to be arranged."
BJ, you can't conclude from that statement that the result would be less officers on the night shift.
It's a complete non sequitur. :-?
I can't see how you don't see that Nick, where are these "magical" extra working hours coming from then if it has no impact on service elsewhere? True nightshift will often spend much of the time asleep, but surely the point is that they are there and able to be deployed at a moments notice? I'd rather a fire service was used for putting out fires and cutting people from RTAs than showing Mrs Miggins up the road how to switch off her TV - leave that to retired or injured firemen :-?
Huh?
They're just changing the times of the shifts, there's no magic involved. ::) ::)
are there plans for more or less fire fighter hours at night, and if its less, you dont think that will impact response times? :o
I dont live in London Nick, I'm just trying to look out for you guys that do :y
-
Nickbat, surely no change in hours but an increase in productive (ie daytime visits, safety talks etc) hours means that less officers will be available for night-shift, which absolutely has an impact on safety? :o
The LFB states: "The changes would significantly increase the productive time available during the day shift for essential training and community fire safety work to be arranged."
BJ, you can't conclude from that statement that the result would be less officers on the night shift.
It's a complete non sequitur. :-?
I can't see how you don't see that Nick, where are these "magical" extra working hours coming from then if it has no impact on service elsewhere? True nightshift will often spend much of the time asleep, but surely the point is that they are there and able to be deployed at a moments notice? I'd rather a fire service was used for putting out fires and cutting people from RTAs than showing Mrs Miggins up the road how to switch off her TV - leave that to retired or injured firemen :-?
Huh?
They're just changing the times of the shifts, there's no magic involved. ::) ::)
are there plans for more or less fire fighter hours at night, and if its less, you dont think that will impact response times? :o
I dont live in London Nick, I'm just trying to look out for you guys that do :y
I don't think there is any less cover, it's just the shift times that are changing by an hour or so. But, as the LFB says, current timings mean a shift change in the middle of the rush hour, which adversely affects performance.
-
Why is it so important now all of a sudden to change the shifts ??
Due to changing over in rush hour ? ;D ;D
Its been that way for years and years so why the big panic now .
I didnt realise that having change over in a fire station was so badly affected by the traffic outside ;D
-
Why is it so important now all of a sudden to change the shifts ??
Due to changing over in rush hour ? ;D ;D
Its been that way for years and years so why the big panic now .
I didnt realise that having change over in a fire station was so badly affected by the traffic outside ;D
They (the LFB) have been trying for five years. Keep up! ::) ::)
As for the rush hour, it's nothing to do with the traffic but, as the LFB points out, "The new start and finish times would also mean less disruption to services during a crucially busy period of the day." :y
-
Why is it so important now all of a sudden to change the shifts ??
Due to changing over in rush hour ? ;D ;D
Its been that way for years and years so why the big panic now .
I didnt realise that having change over in a fire station was so badly affected by the traffic outside ;D
They (the LFB) have been trying for five years. Keep up! ::) ::)
I'll try ::) ::)
So does everyone else that starts work during rush hour get there shifts changed :-?
Not a bad idea really cause then there wouldn't be a rush hour :y :y
-
1) when they refused to go into the stations to help until someone could guarantee it was safe to do so. And a police inspector testified that even though he was standing on the lines to prove they werent live, the firemen still refused to proceed to the bombed trains until they had official confirmation of the fact.The extra 30 minutes that took must have seemed like an eternity to the victims awaiting help.
2) There was also the recent publicity about the case where 2 of them refused to take any action to try to save people from drowning - who were reportedly begging them to save them - because they hadnt had the appropriate training.
my limited understanding of such things leads me to surmise that
1) had they gone in and there been an accident due to live lines, or other safety issues, that they should by protocol, have confirmed before entry, they would have been liable due to negligence.... both for themselves, and any member of public victims.
2) unless trained to do so, they are not insured to do so, so no death benefits if they risk their lives and lose the gamble.... explain that to a widow and kids faced with the bills for a funeral, and no insurance pay out because they didn't follow procedure.
and i'm told, you better believe that they would have been hung out to dry.... quite apart from the government and insurers being tightwads that like to wriggle out of any liability.... it's also one way of trying to enforce adherence to protocol, to maximise their safety, and that of their "clients"
risk their lives sometimes...
virtually every day.....
have several friends as part timers, and a few as ex full timers....
if you're committed enough to risk your life for others on a daily basis, something has to be pretty out of whack for you to decide to leave.
and sorry, a bit touchy maybe, but i find it offensive when people marginalise the "risk your life" factor in any service , be it police, fire, ambulance or armed services.
and that's what i feel you're doing.
maybe you didn't mean it that way, i certainly hope so, but that's how it came across
what choice do they have really.?? i find the imperious decision making process of their employers equally as demeaning and offensive... it's not like THEY're the one;s risking a burning building falling on them...... they always seem to put pressure on such people, relying on their commitment and devotion to saving others, to let them get away with rolling them over a barrel...
frankly much the same has traditionally been foisted on nurses, police officers and armed forces personnel.
were i in charge, i'd reduce MP's salaries to the same sort of levels as firefighters , nurses etc, after all they're only public servants.... or raise that of the worthier sorts to the same as MP's
and i would cheerfully pay a penny more tax in the pound to fund such a thing.
Exactly. Guy. ::)
-
Wait until you've been cut out of the wreckage with your feet & ankles snapped & bent the wrong way under the seat, the pedals buried in your shins, the dash & bulkhead buried in your knees, your nose broken, face all smashed & cut by going through the windscreen only to have the steering wheel save you going through the screen but breaking 5 ribs in the process. The engine is revving it's tits off & you can't get out or reach to switch off. ....will it go bang? Thankfully it did'nt. I've been there. Unless you have i suggest you think before deciding what these guys & girls should be paid & thier working conditions. What the hell do you know?
One day you might be glad to see them. >:(
-
Wait until you've been cut out of the wreckage with your feet & ankles snapped & bent the wrong way under the seat, the pedals buried in your shins, the dash & bulkhead buried in your knees, your nose broken, face all smashed & cut by going through the windscreen only to have the steering wheel save you going through the screen but breaking 5 ribs in the process. The engine is revving it's tits off & you can't get out or reach to switch off. ....will it go bang? Thankfully it did'nt. I've been there. Unless you have i suggest you think before deciding what these guys & girls should be paid & thier working conditions. What the hell do you know?
One day you might be glad to see them. >:(
Couldn't agree more :y :y :y :y
-
Wait until you've been cut out of the wreckage with your feet & ankles snapped & bent the wrong way under the seat, the pedals buried in your shins, the dash & bulkhead buried in your knees, your nose broken, face all smashed & cut by going through the windscreen only to have the steering wheel save you going through the screen but breaking 5 ribs in the process. The engine is revving it's tits off & you can't get out or reach to switch off. ....will it go bang? Thankfully it did'nt. I've been there. Unless you have i suggest you think before deciding what these guys & girls should be paid & thier working conditions. What the hell do you know?
One day you might be glad to see them. >:(
It's got nothing to do with what they do. The same could be said for police, military, doctors, surgeons and many others. They are paid by us, the taxpayer. We have a perfect right in a democracy to express our opinions. They have a job to do and, by and large, they do it well. However, this is not about their pay, it is about their union refusing, over a period of five years, to accept a small change in shift patterns.
Although doctors, paramedics, ambulance crews, firemen etc. are on the front line, it does not give them the right to dictate the terms of their employment. :(
Simples. ;)
-
Wait until you've been cut out of the wreckage with your feet & ankles snapped & bent the wrong way under the seat, the pedals buried in your shins, the dash & bulkhead buried in your knees, your nose broken, face all smashed & cut by going through the windscreen only to have the steering wheel save you going through the screen but breaking 5 ribs in the process. The engine is revving it's tits off & you can't get out or reach to switch off. ....will it go bang? Thankfully it did'nt. I've been there. Unless you have i suggest you think before deciding what these guys & girls should be paid & thier working conditions. What the hell do you know?
One day you might be glad to see them. >:(
Couldn't agree more :y :y :y :y
Me also!
I sometimes get the impression, from people who I talk to, and generally, that they are envious to some degree about the working conditions. Yes you could argue the working conditions are good, but there are also many negatives, that other jobs also have which has already been pointed out.
Many people couldn't and wouldn't do the job. I bet most people haven't got a clue about the job of a modern day firefighter, the skills and knowledge they have, and the responsibilities they have. The workload is vast, people seem to think we sit round the station all day watching tv and drinking tea.
I'm nothing to do with LFB, so can't directly comment. If both parties, employer and employee, sign a contract stipulating certain conditions, then employer tries to force employee to change conditions under pain of losing job, then that is just underhand and disgraceful.
Alot of the time, people aren't interested in 'fire safety advice'. They just want to see whatever they can get for free like smoke alarms and deepfat fryers. The boxes from the dffs are taken though so people can't them sell them a they sometimes do! Through labours vast job creation exercise over recent years, there are fire safety departments now who conduct inpections on licensed premises, which wouldv'e otherwise been dine by firefighters. This time has been freed up for firefighters to do community safety work, which as LFBs figures suggest, has worked well. But i don't see where all this extra time is coming from as there are no loads of responsibilities, which take time to train and plan for.
I think the firefighters are just the latest group in the firing line of the public, some of which are envious of the conditions (they must think it's some sort of Utopia!), whipped up by the media. It might be better if people concentrate on themselves and their own lives instead of concerning themselves with other people like this nasty socitey encourages us to do.
-
Wait until you've been cut out of the wreckage with your feet & ankles snapped & bent the wrong way under the seat, the pedals buried in your shins, the dash & bulkhead buried in your knees, your nose broken, face all smashed & cut by going through the windscreen only to have the steering wheel save you going through the screen but breaking 5 ribs in the process. The engine is revving it's tits off & you can't get out or reach to switch off. ....will it go bang? Thankfully it did'nt. I've been there. Unless you have i suggest you think before deciding what these guys & girls should be paid & thier working conditions. What the hell do you know?
One day you might be glad to see them. >:(
It's got nothing to do with what they do. The same could be said for police, military, doctors, surgeons and many others. They are paid by us, the taxpayer. We have a perfect right in a democracy to express our opinions. They have a job to do and, by and large, they do it well. However, this is not about their pay, it is about their union refusing, over a period of five years, to accept a small change in shift patterns.
Although doctors, paramedics, ambulance crews, firemen etc. are on the front line, it does not give them the right to dictate the terms of their employment. :(
Simples. ;)
Equally, it doesn't mean their employer can forcefully impose terms of employment under pain of losing their jobs.
Simples
-
Wait until you've been cut out of the wreckage with your feet & ankles snapped & bent the wrong way under the seat, the pedals buried in your shins, the dash & bulkhead buried in your knees, your nose broken, face all smashed & cut by going through the windscreen only to have the steering wheel save you going through the screen but breaking 5 ribs in the process. The engine is revving it's tits off & you can't get out or reach to switch off. ....will it go bang? Thankfully it did'nt. I've been there. Unless you have i suggest you think before deciding what these guys & girls should be paid & thier working conditions. What the hell do you know?
One day you might be glad to see them. >:(
It's got nothing to do with what they do. The same could be said for police, military, doctors, surgeons and many others. They are paid by us, the taxpayer. We have a perfect right in a democracy to express our opinions. They have a job to do and, by and large, they do it well. However, this is not about their pay, it is about their union refusing, over a period of five years, to accept a small change in shift patterns.
Although doctors, paramedics, ambulance crews, firemen etc. are on the front line, it does not give them the right to dictate the terms of their employment. :(
Simples. ;)
Equally, it doesn't mean their employer can forcefully impose terms of employment under pain of losing their jobs.
Simples
FFS, after five years of negotiation, I feel the Brigade has the right to call an end to all this. After all, they are in charge. ::) ::)
-
Equally, it doesn't mean their employer can forcefully impose terms of employment under pain of losing their jobs
Again i couldnt agree more :y :y .... are we really to let bully boy tactics rule ??
Seems some people think so ... hopefully the bully boy tactics arn't played on them some day :-/
-
Equally, it doesn't mean their employer can forcefully impose terms of employment under pain of losing their jobs
Again i couldnt agree more :y :y .... are we really to let bully boy tactics rule ??
Seems some people think so :-/
Bully boy tactics are calling strikes on 5th November. ::) ::)
-
Equally, it doesn't mean their employer can forcefully impose terms of employment under pain of losing their jobs
Again i couldnt agree more :y :y .... are we really to let bully boy tactics rule ??
Seems some people think so :-/
Bully boy tactics are calling strikes on 5th November. ::) ::)
In your opinion that is :y.... my opinion says they have the right to withdraw there labour when feeling threatened etc .
Doesnt make any difference to me if they strike or not but i admire them for standing for what they belive in .
Dont you belive in workers rights ;D :y :y
-
Wait until you've been cut out of the wreckage with your feet & ankles snapped & bent the wrong way under the seat, the pedals buried in your shins, the dash & bulkhead buried in your knees, your nose broken, face all smashed & cut by going through the windscreen only to have the steering wheel save you going through the screen but breaking 5 ribs in the process. The engine is revving it's tits off & you can't get out or reach to switch off. ....will it go bang? Thankfully it did'nt. I've been there. Unless you have i suggest you think before deciding what these guys & girls should be paid & thier working conditions. What the hell do you know?
One day you might be glad to see them. >:(
It's got nothing to do with what they do. The same could be said for police, military, doctors, surgeons and many others. They are paid by us, the taxpayer. We have a perfect right in a democracy to express our opinions. They have a job to do and, by and large, they do it well. However, this is not about their pay, it is about their union refusing, over a period of five years, to accept a small change in shift patterns.
Although doctors, paramedics, ambulance crews, firemen etc. are on the front line, it does not give them the right to dictate the terms of their employment. :(
Simples. ;)
Equally, it doesn't mean their employer can forcefully impose terms of employment under pain of losing their jobs.
Simples
FFS, after five years of negotiation, I feel the Brigade has the right to call an end to all this. After all, they are in charge. ::) ::)
They are not in charge at all, I don't know why you would think that.
A contract is signed between two parties, employer and employee.
Both parties agrees to certain conditions, the main ones being: employee turns up, does work, goes home, gets paid.
Where does it say the employer is in charge of a massive change in the conditions, merely for its own benefit, without consultation, and under threat of being sacked? The relationship is mutually beneficial, just because the employer is 'bigger', or has more money doesn't mean they're in charge.
I think there is an opening to be the leader of 'The Dictator Party'. You should apply for it Nickbat. Actually don't apply for it, just tell them you are now in charge, and if they don't like it, throw them out.
-
ISTR that in the private sector employers can usually change contracts at will as long as they provide notice of such changes, and that your 'continuing to receive remuneration' serves as acceptance of the contract - your alternative being to walk and find a new job..
Of course it wouldn't work out so well for the rest of us if all the firefighters walked and got new jobs..
-
Wait until you've been cut out of the wreckage with your feet & ankles snapped & bent the wrong way under the seat, the pedals buried in your shins, the dash & bulkhead buried in your knees, your nose broken, face all smashed & cut by going through the windscreen only to have the steering wheel save you going through the screen but breaking 5 ribs in the process. The engine is revving it's tits off & you can't get out or reach to switch off. ....will it go bang? Thankfully it did'nt. I've been there. Unless you have i suggest you think before deciding what these guys & girls should be paid & thier working conditions. What the hell do you know?
One day you might be glad to see them. >:(
It's got nothing to do with what they do. The same could be said for police, military, doctors, surgeons and many others. They are paid by us, the taxpayer. We have a perfect right in a democracy to express our opinions. They have a job to do and, by and large, they do it well. However, this is not about their pay, it is about their union refusing, over a period of five years, to accept a small change in shift patterns.
Although doctors, paramedics, ambulance crews, firemen etc. are on the front line, it does not give them the right to dictate the terms of their employment. :(
Simples. ;)
Equally, it doesn't mean their employer can forcefully impose terms of employment under pain of losing their jobs.
Simples
FFS, after five years of negotiation, I feel the Brigade has the right to call an end to all this. After all, they are in charge. ::) ::)
They are not in charge at all, I don't know why you would think that.
A contract is signed between two parties, employer and employee.
Both parties agrees to certain conditions, the main ones being: employee turns up, does work, goes home, gets paid.
Where does it say the employer is in charge of a massive change in the conditions, merely for its own benefit, without consultation, and under threat of being sacked? The relationship is mutually beneficial, just because the employer is 'bigger', or has more money doesn't mean they're in charge.
I think there is an opening to be the leader of 'The Dictator Party'. You should apply for it Nickbat. Actually don't apply for it, just tell them you are now in charge, and if they don't like it, throw them out.
WITHOUT CONSULTATION? They've been consulting for five years!!! ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
..and (LFB quote follows)
"By reducing the current 15 hour night shift to 12 hours, and increasing the current 9 hour day shift to 12 hours, therefore providing a longer day shift. Firefighters will continue to work two day shifts followed by two night shifts then have four days off. "
That is hardly a "massive" change.
BTW, calling me a dictator is bizarre. I merely have an opinion as to the functioning of the London Fire Brigade. Clearly, you think that that the workers should tell management how they should work and management should say "OK, then".
::) ::)
-
Like wise you think the managment should have the right to say were changing your agreed shift patterns wether you like it or not ... oh and if you dont like it your sacked ::) ::)
-
We could all go on expressing our views 'til the cows come home. Nick you've appointed yourself wilfully or not as the forums Jeremy Drone..sorry, Vine. You're up on commerce, media, politics, finance & general news which involves working conditions & should it ever get to the nitty gritty i'd lose against you bigtime debate wise. However your over used argument that these folk put themselves forward & only do a job like the rest of us carries no weight whatsoever. I drive a truck to turn a coin, a civilian everyday job as most of us here do. Some are engineers, mechanics, security guards, shop & factory workers, office & IT workers, the list could go on . I don't know what you do for a living. In all your time sharing your infinite wisdom with the rest of us in the cheap seats you hav'nt as yet shared this with us. I don't possess the knowledge, courage & most importantly the dedication that every Fireman, Policeman, Soldier, Nurse, Ambulance medic, male & female have to carry out thier duties against getting beaten up on a call by idiots, being underpaid & unappreciated in having to deal with things most of us would shy away from & you consider it thier own choice of career then try it yourself brave man. You talk the talk. Walk a mile in thier shoes. I would'nt. Until you will i suggest you go back to the benches & keep quiet.
-
Wait until you've been cut out of the wreckage with your feet & ankles snapped & bent the wrong way under the seat, the pedals buried in your shins, the dash & bulkhead buried in your knees, your nose broken, face all smashed & cut by going through the windscreen only to have the steering wheel save you going through the screen but breaking 5 ribs in the process. The engine is revving it's tits off & you can't get out or reach to switch off. ....will it go bang? Thankfully it did'nt. I've been there. Unless you have i suggest you think before deciding what these guys & girls should be paid & thier working conditions. What the hell do you know?
One day you might be glad to see them. >:(
It's got nothing to do with what they do. The same could be said for police, military, doctors, surgeons and many others. They are paid by us, the taxpayer. We have a perfect right in a democracy to express our opinions. They have a job to do and, by and large, they do it well. However, this is not about their pay, it is about their union refusing, over a period of five years, to accept a small change in shift patterns.
Although doctors, paramedics, ambulance crews, firemen etc. are on the front line, it does not give them the right to dictate the terms of their employment. :(
Simples. ;)
Equally, it doesn't mean their employer can forcefully impose terms of employment under pain of losing their jobs.
Simples
FFS, after five years of negotiation, I feel the Brigade has the right to call an end to all this. After all, they are in charge. ::) ::)
They are not in charge at all, I don't know why you would think that.
A contract is signed between two parties, employer and employee.
Both parties agrees to certain conditions, the main ones being: employee turns up, does work, goes home, gets paid.
Where does it say the employer is in charge of a massive change in the conditions, merely for its own benefit, without consultation, and under threat of being sacked? The relationship is mutually beneficial, just because the employer is 'bigger', or has more money doesn't mean they're in charge.
I think there is an opening to be the leader of 'The Dictator Party'. You should apply for it Nickbat. Actually don't apply for it, just tell them you are now in charge, and if they don't like it, throw them out.
WITHOUT CONSULTATION? They've been consulting for five years!!! ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
..and (LFB quote follows)
"By reducing the current 15 hour night shift to 12 hours, and increasing the current 9 hour day shift to 12 hours, therefore providing a longer day shift. Firefighters will continue to work two day shifts followed by two night shifts then have four days off. "
That is hardly a "massive" change.
BTW, calling me a dictator is bizarre. I merely have an opinion as to the functioning of the London Fire Brigade. Clearly, you think that that the workers should tell management how they should work and management should say "OK, then".
::) ::)
Their understanding of consultation is: Do this or we'll sack you.
Nickbat, if you re-read my post you will see i don't think the workers should tell the employers how it's going to be. It is a two way relationship that LFB are trying to abuse, which has now backfired on them.
I likened you to a dictator because your posts seem to suggest that you think it's ok to tell people what to do, and expect them to do it, without question, otherwise they will suffer a misfortune of some sort.
-
We could all go on expressing our views 'til the cows come home. Nick you've appointed yourself wilfully or not as the forums Jeremy Drone..sorry, Vine. You're up on commerce, media, politics, finance & general news which involves working conditions & should it ever get to the nitty gritty i'd lose against you bigtime debate wise. However your over used argument that these folk put themselves forward & only do a job like the rest of us carries no weight whatsoever. I drive a truck to turn a coin, a civilian everyday job as most of us here do. Some are engineers, mechanics, security guards, shop & factory workers, office & IT workers, the list could go on . I don't know what you do for a living. In all your time sharing your infinite wisdom with the rest of us in the cheap seats you hav'nt as yet shared this with us. I don't possess the knowledge, courage & most importantly the dedication that every Fireman, Policeman, Soldier, Nurse, Ambulance medic, male & female have to carry out thier duties against getting beaten up on a call by idiots, being underpaid & unappreciated in having to deal with things most of us would shy away from & you consider it thier own choice of career then try it yourself brave man. You talk the talk. Walk a mile in thier shoes. I would'nt. Until you will i suggest you go back to the benches & keep quiet.
:y :y :y :y :y :y :y :y :y
-
Time for the Bus Thread I think................. ::) ::) ::)
-
We could all go on expressing our views 'til the cows come home. Nick you've appointed yourself wilfully or not as the forums Jeremy Drone..sorry, Vine. You're up on commerce, media, politics, finance & general news which involves working conditions & should it ever get to the nitty gritty i'd lose against you bigtime debate wise. However your over used argument that these folk put themselves forward & only do a job like the rest of us carries no weight whatsoever. I drive a truck to turn a coin, a civilian everyday job as most of us here do. Some are engineers, mechanics, security guards, shop & factory workers, office & IT workers, the list could go on . I don't know what you do for a living. In all your time sharing your infinite wisdom with the rest of us in the cheap seats you hav'nt as yet shared this with us. I don't possess the knowledge, courage & most importantly the dedication that every Fireman, Policeman, Soldier, Nurse, Ambulance medic, male & female have to carry out thier duties against getting beaten up on a call by idiots, being underpaid & unappreciated in having to deal with things most of us would shy away from & you consider it thier own choice of career then try it yourself brave man. You talk the talk. Walk a mile in thier shoes. I would'nt. Until you will i suggest you go back to the benches & keep quiet.
Yes I have mentioned my occupation. I'm a self employed graphic designer with no job security, no health benefits and no company pension. I am not complaining, though, it's my choice.
The fact that I did not choose to be a firefighter, a police officer or crew an ambulance does not prevent me from having an opinion. As a taxpayer, living in a democracy, I have every right to express my views about public services.
Who the hell gave you the right to tell me to keep quiet? >:( >:( >:( >:(
I thought we were allowed to express our thoughts on here? >:( >:( >:( >:(
If others share your views, I am perfectly willing to leave the forum lest I upset people. >:( >:(
-
Anyway, being more general, I like to think we're all important in this society. Everyone does an important job in their own way, in one way or another. I'm behind the firefighters on this one, but being a firefighter myself (not LFB), my job is hard sometimes (I still enjoy the hard bits), it is my career choice.
I think more thanks should go to the people in our society who work the hardest, and get paid the least, with the worst conditions.
Take care workers for example, they probably work the hardest, the longest, doing unpleasant things everyday, in the worst conditions, with little thanks, low pay and no complaints. They get looked down on whether people admit it or not. What a sad state of affair when you work the hardest for the least, especially in a caring role!
There is a big imbalance in society, 'hero' footballers being an example!
-
We could all go on expressing our views 'til the cows come home. Nick you've appointed yourself wilfully or not as the forums Jeremy Drone..sorry, Vine. You're up on commerce, media, politics, finance & general news which involves working conditions & should it ever get to the nitty gritty i'd lose against you bigtime debate wise. However your over used argument that these folk put themselves forward & only do a job like the rest of us carries no weight whatsoever. I drive a truck to turn a coin, a civilian everyday job as most of us here do. Some are engineers, mechanics, security guards, shop & factory workers, office & IT workers, the list could go on . I don't know what you do for a living. In all your time sharing your infinite wisdom with the rest of us in the cheap seats you hav'nt as yet shared this with us. I don't possess the knowledge, courage & most importantly the dedication that every Fireman, Policeman, Soldier, Nurse, Ambulance medic, male & female have to carry out thier duties against getting beaten up on a call by idiots, being underpaid & unappreciated in having to deal with things most of us would shy away from & you consider it thier own choice of career then try it yourself brave man. You talk the talk. Walk a mile in thier shoes. I would'nt. Until you will i suggest you go back to the benches & keep quiet.
Yes I have mentioned my occupation. I'm a self employed graphic designer with no job security, no health benefits and no company pension. I am not complaining, though, it's my choice.
The fact that I did not choose to be a firefighter, a police officer or crew an ambulance does not prevent me from having an opinion. As a taxpayer, living in a democracy, I have every right to express my views about public services.
Who the hell gave you the right to tell me to keep quiet? >:( >:( >:( >:(
I thought we were allowed to express our thoughts on here? >:( >:( >:( >:(
If others share your views, I am perfectly willing to leave here lest I upset people. >:( >:(
I don't want you to leave Nick & of cousre you can express your thoughts on here, we both just have. I just find it hard to understand given you're not thick we both hold civilian jobs how little you think our emergency services/forces are worth.
Guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. Guy.
-
Anyway, being more general, I like to think we're all important in this society. Everyone does an important job in their own way, in one way or another. I'm behind the firefighters on this one, but being a firefighter myself (not LFB), my job is hard sometimes (I still enjoy the hard bits), it is my career choice.
I think more thanks should go to the people in our society who work the hardest, and get paid the least, with the worst conditions.
Take care workers for example, they probably work the hardest, the longest, doing unpleasant things everyday, in the worst conditions, with little thanks, low pay and no complaints. They get looked down on whether people admit it or not. What a sad state of affair when you work the hardest for the least, especially in a caring role!
There is a big imbalance in society, 'hero' footballers being an example!
[/highlight]
I like your thinking, such a misunderstood profession and so lowly paid..... :( :(
5-1............ :-X :-X :-X
-
4-5 years ago i walked past a chap seated on a park bench crying ,not wanting to intrude i kept walking and did another circuit of the park . IEventually came back to the bloke on the bench again and he was still crying After some chit chat and a smoke he revealed he was a fire man for Greater Manchester Fire service. He was crying for a child whose life he/his watch couldn't save. I came away from that discussion with the knowledge that being a fire man/woman isn't so much a job but a calling. I know that not all brigade staff think and feel the same , I was just wondering what its taken for them to strike on the busiest night of the year
-
Ahh .. Self Employed ....
So you dont have an employer shoving things down your neck that you didnt agree to when you signed the contract .
Im sure you wouldnt like it if the shoe was on the other foot.
You make your own working rules then ... you dont have them forced on you .
I almost sense some bitterness in you towards the fire service for the very reasons you stated above ie job security , health benifits although i would be interested to hear what they are , and as far as im aware its a pension they pay into although i could be wrong on that one . But dont they deserve it anyway for keeping you safe ? Or wont you appreciate that till the day you need them ??
Dont get me wrong as i do belive that some of them are out for nothing but themselves and what ever other interests they have .
But i think they should be treated correctly and fairly and it doesnt seem like they are .
So why dont you get a job with LFB if its that great and gives you all the "perks " you think it does .
::) ::) ::)
-
Anyway, being more general, I like to think we're all important in this society. Everyone does an important job in their own way, in one way or another. I'm behind the firefighters on this one, but being a firefighter myself (not LFB), my job is hard sometimes (I still enjoy the hard bits), it is my career choice.
I think more thanks should go to the people in our society who work the hardest, and get paid the least, with the worst conditions.
Take care workers for example, they probably work the hardest, the longest, doing unpleasant things everyday, in the worst conditions, with little thanks, low pay and no complaints. They get looked down on whether people admit it or not. What a sad state of affair when you work the hardest for the least, especially in a caring role!
There is a big imbalance in society, 'hero' footballers being an example!
[/highlight]
I like your thinking, such a misunderstood profession and so lowly paid..... :( :(
5-1............ :-X :-X :-X
Not being a fan myself Vamps, some people think that influences my opinion. It took me a while to realise what 5-1 meant!
I like it when Sunderland lose, because the city is on a downer, so by contrast I'm on an upper!
-
Ahh .. Self Employed ....
So you dont have an employer shoving things down your neck that you didnt agree to when you signed the contract .
Im sure you wouldnt like it if the shoe was on the other foot.
You make your own working rules then ... you dont have them forced on you .
I almost sense some bitterness in you towards the fire service for the very reasons you stated above ie job security , health benifits although i would be interested to hear what they are , and as far as im aware its a pension they pay into although i could be wrong on that one . But dont they deserve it anyway for keeping you safe ? Or wont you appreciate that till the day you need them ??
Dont get me wrong as i do belive that some of them are out for nothing but themselves and what ever other interests they have .
But i think they should be treated correctly and fairly and it doesnt seem like they are .
So why dont you get a job with LFB if its that great and gives you all the "perks " you think it does .
::) ::) ::)
FFS!! They are being instructed to change their shift patterns to make the LFB a better service, that's all!!
Why all this emotive stuff about them doing a horrid job for a pittance?
It is not about pay, but about hours and shift change!!! ::)
And I suppose there are no ex-frontline firefighters among the management of LFB are there? No, they will all be cigar-smoking fat cats eager to exploit the downtrodden workers. ::) ::) ::)
As a Londoner, I want a fire service that is efficient as it can be. Is there something wrong with that? :(
-
Anyway, being more general, I like to think we're all important in this society. Everyone does an important job in their own way, in one way or another. I'm behind the firefighters on this one, but being a firefighter myself (not LFB), my job is hard sometimes (I still enjoy the hard bits), it is my career choice.
I think more thanks should go to the people in our society who work the hardest, and get paid the least, with the worst conditions.
Take care workers for example, they probably work the hardest, the longest, doing unpleasant things everyday, in the worst conditions, with little thanks, low pay and no complaints. They get looked down on whether people admit it or not. What a sad state of affair when you work the hardest for the least, especially in a caring role!
There is a big imbalance in society, 'hero' footballers being an example!
[/highlight]
I like your thinking, such a misunderstood profession and so lowly paid..... :( :(
5-1............ :-X :-X :-X
Not being a fan myself Vamps, some people think that influences my opinion. It took me a while to realise what 5-1 meant!
I like it when Sunderland lose, because the city is on a downer, so by contrast I'm on an upper!
:y
Not into football myself but swmbo and my stepsons are from Sunderland.. ::) the boys are into football so always good for a wind up, as a Gordie by birth... :D :D :D
-
Ahh .. Self Employed ....
So you dont have an employer shoving things down your neck that you didnt agree to when you signed the contract .
Im sure you wouldnt like it if the shoe was on the other foot.
You make your own working rules then ... you dont have them forced on you .
I almost sense some bitterness in you towards the fire service for the very reasons you stated above ie job security , health benifits although i would be interested to hear what they are , and as far as im aware its a pension they pay into although i could be wrong on that one . But dont they deserve it anyway for keeping you safe ? Or wont you appreciate that till the day you need them ??
Dont get me wrong as i do belive that some of them are out for nothing but themselves and what ever other interests they have .
But i think they should be treated correctly and fairly and it doesnt seem like they are .
So why dont you get a job with LFB if its that great and gives you all the "perks " you think it does .
::) ::) ::)
FFS!! They are being instructed to change their shift patterns to make the LFB a better service, that's all!!
Why all this emotive stuff about them doing a horrid job for a pittance?
It is not about pay, but about hours and shift change!!! ::)
And I suppose there are no ex-frontline firefighters among the management of LFB are there? No, they will all be cigar-smoking fat cats eager to exploit the downtrodden workers. ::) ::) ::)
As a Londoner, I want a fire service that is efficient as it can be. Is there something wrong with that? :(
No, it's about LFB trying to forcefully impose a change in working conditions, which if not agreed to, they will be sacked, which is wrong, and certainly not fair, whatever you think of the fire service.
-
Imo the problem stems from the fact the the London area of the Union concerned was long ago infiltrated/ hijacked by a band of militant, hard line unionists who have an agenda which has little to do with the best interests of their members.
They are determined to railroad the management and any of their members who dont agree with them into submission.
They want to call the shots, have management scared to do anything without asking them first. Just like much of the country was in the 70,s.
There is a "militant tendency" within the Union movement that is determined to take us back there, and they see the fact that we have a Tory led govt. as the perfect time to start a new class war.
Bob Crowe said as much a couple of weeks ago.
I have had a conversation with someone who was a senior Union figure in the 70,s and he admitted that he and others became drunk with power, intoxicated by their own ego,s.
The feeling of walking through a factory, whistling and pointing at the door, and have hundreds of workers fall in line behind you and march out the door without even asking why, can do things to a mans sense of judgement/ priorities/fair play etc.
Some of these Union leaders imo are desperately missing that kind of experience and are hell bent on getting it back.
Theres nothing they would love more than Beer and Sarnies in Number 10 in 5 years time, with a nervous Ed Miliband asking them what they would like from him. ;)
-
this whole debate is a race to the bottom, lets see how many rights we can get rid of, how many indignities we can bestow on workers - every strike now is seen as some communist plot to wrestle control into the hands of the unions.....well what if the unions are merely standing up for workers rights? how far do we have to go before enough is enough? i said race to the bottom as whenever industrial action is called the braying hordes come out citing examples of people on less pay with less conditions - i fear some on here wont be happy til every worker is on minimum pay working 80hr weeks. sometimes you need to take a stand, yes it'll ruffle some feathers, but look back in history - industrial action and protest has driven huge benefits in the way we work, the safety and environment we all benefit from so on this one i'll happily defend the right of anyone to withdraw labour or we'll all suffer as hard fought rights get slowly chipped away under the guise of "efficiency" :(
that maybe sounds a bit too strong in light of this particular dispute, but i see it as the thin end of the wedge - the more its accepted, the more will be taken :o
-
Lets just hope that some of the union leaders and the workforce in general arn't as prepared to bend over as much as the employer wants .
I would hate to think what state the country would be in if we let our employers take away every agreement whenever it suited them .
Mind you i suppose some would be quite happy by the sound of it ..... untill it affected them i expect ;)
-
I know that not all brigade staff think and feel the same , I was just wondering what its taken for them to strike on the busiest night of the year
.
Unions have no place in front line public services. They only stir up hornets nests like this to remind people that they still exist.
No union action= no union members (staff would not feel the need to be represented in this way)= no union income=no union.
By making mountains out of molehills they are simply justifying their existence. (and ensuring continued income).
I work 6/7 nights a week, usually 12+ hours, have no sick pay, no paid holiday, and no income guarantees. I'm self employed by choice and wouldn't accept union representation if it were given to me.
I know too many people who have had their lives ruined by management making poor decisions based on union pressure. ie demanding a 10-15% pay rise 'to make up for limited rises in previous years' with no compromises. Net result was anyone with more than 2yrs service, or on pre existing contracts, was made redundant. The firm the employed eastern europeans on new contracts with a 10% drop in the posted hourly rate (against the existing contracts) with overtime paid at basic rates. The company lasted another 3 months, as it had no experienced staff left.
Cheers unite >:(
Fortunately the world has not yet gone totally mad, and we are able to have these discussions in a civilised manner on forums like this.
-
I know that not all brigade staff think and feel the same , I was just wondering what its taken for them to strike on the busiest night of the year
.
Unions have no place in front line public services. They only stir up hornets nests like this to remind people that they still exist.
No union action= no union members (staff would not feel the need to be represented in this way)= no union income=no union.
By making mountains out of molehills they are simply justifying their existence. (and ensuring continued income).
I work 6/7 nights a week, usually 12+ hours, have no sick pay, no paid holiday, and no income guarantees. I'm self employed by choice and wouldn't accept union representation if it were given to me.
I know too many people who have had their lives ruined by management making poor decisions based on union pressure. ie demanding a 10-15% pay rise 'to make up for limited rises in previous years' with no compromises. Net result was anyone with more than 2yrs service, or on pre existing contracts, was made redundant. The firm the employed eastern europeans on new contracts with a 10% drop in the posted hourly rate (against the existing contracts) with overtime paid at basic rates. The company lasted another 3 months, as it had no experienced staff left.
Cheers unite >:(
Fortunately the world has not yet gone totally mad, and we are able to have these discussions in a civilised manner on forums like this.
Totally totally wrong. Perhaps you think this as you have no employer breathing down your neck trying to forcefully change your working conditions.
Why should frontline public services not have unions?
I'm employed, not self employed, and wouldn't tell self employed people what to do, so you saying this is wrong.
As far as unions making outrageous demands, there is good and bad everywhere, this doesn't mean, however, that certain people shouldn't be represented by a union.
-
this is the kind of outcome that is unintended by all - but has happened before and will no doubt happen again!
Striking fireman run over at picket.
Source
Sun The (UK), (ADRY), 02, 02 November 2010, ISSN: 0307-2681.
Text
A STRIKE-breaking fire officer was arrested last night after a picketing
colleague was run over.
Station manager Chris Young had been returning from a call-out when the car hit
Tamer Ozdemir, who was protesting outside.
It is believed a group of enraged firefighters were shouting "scabs" and
"traitors" at those still working at Croydon fire station, South London.
Witnesses said Mr Ozdemir, who is in his 40s, was thrown several feet into the
air. He was on the ground for 25 minutes until paramedics arrived. Last night
he was being treated in hospital for pelvic injuries.
Fire Brigades Union boss Mick Shaw said the car was following an engine back to
the station.
He claimed it accelerated as pickets tried to talk to the driver.
Mr Shaw added: "It accelerated suddenly and one of the striking firefighters
was thrown up and into the windscreen."
But onlookers said a large mob had surrounded the car and were shouting abuse
at the strike-breakers.
Contract staff from a firm called Assetco were called in to deal with 999 calls
during yesterday's strike. They were supported by senior brigade staff driving
cars. London firefighters were striking in a row over new contracts. Another
strike is set for Bonfire Night.
Abuse
Copyright © 2010 News International Ltd.
This is the fulltext.
-
'Cost of London means we need second jobs'.
Source
Evening Standard (London UK), (ACPM), 01, 01 November 2010, ISSN: 0958-5907.
Author(s)
Rob Parsons.
Text
FIREFIGHTERS today defended their right to have second jobs amid concerns that
their ability to earn two salaries is at the heart of the dispute.
A third of London firefighters are able to hold down two jobs because they work
only four days in every eight.
Brigade managers want to re-employ all frontline staff on new contracts that
will mean longer day shifts up from nine to 12 hours and shorter night
shifts, down from 15 hours to 12, to boost daytime fire prevention work. The
days off would be unaffected.
But firefighters today defended their second jobs saying they earned too
little to cope with the cost of London. Trainees earn GBP27,059, while
qualified crew are paid GBP33,220, and watch managers receive GBP39,982. All
salaries include GBP5,021 London weighting.
Two thousand London crew members have second jobs. Lucas Gypsiotis, based at
Leyton, is on the books of a top casting agency. The 29-year-old has appeared
in TV advertisements for Walkers Crisps and Tesco.
Watch manager Richard Golds, 46, who also runs a driving school in St Albans,
said: "Most of the firefighters live outside London because they can't afford
to live there any more."
Copyright © 2010 Associated Newspapers Company.
This is the fulltext.
-
'Cost of London means we need second jobs'.
Source
Evening Standard (London UK), (ACPM), 01, 01 November 2010, ISSN: 0958-5907.
Author(s)
Rob Parsons.
Text
FIREFIGHTERS today defended their right to have second jobs amid concerns that
their ability to earn two salaries is at the heart of the dispute.
A third of London firefighters are able to hold down two jobs because they work
only four days in every eight.
Brigade managers want to re-employ all frontline staff on new contracts that
will mean longer day shifts up from nine to 12 hours and shorter night
shifts, down from 15 hours to 12, to boost daytime fire prevention work. The
days off would be unaffected.
But firefighters today defended their second jobs saying they earned too
little to cope with the cost of London. Trainees earn GBP27,059, while
qualified crew are paid GBP33,220, and watch managers receive GBP39,982. All
salaries include GBP5,021 London weighting.
Two thousand London crew members have second jobs. Lucas Gypsiotis, based at
Leyton, is on the books of a top casting agency. The 29-year-old has appeared
in TV advertisements for Walkers Crisps and Tesco.
Watch manager Richard Golds, 46, who also runs a driving school in St Albans,
said: "Most of the firefighters live outside London because they can't afford
to live there any more."
Copyright © 2010 Associated Newspapers Company.
This is the fulltext.
I'd never have guessed it. ::) ::)
-
I agree wholeheartedly with Banjax,three years ago I took promotion on to the management team of one of the largest bus
-
Oops sorry computer operator error!!anyway all I was about to say was that I was astounded at the behind closed doors attitude towards staff and the constant policies of trying to shaft them!
In the end my bad attitude towards the job came through and I told them to stick their job where the sun does'nt shine and came away with a poor opinion of so called management.All I found really it's full of people trying to cover their own backsides and trying to make a name for themselves on the backs of the people who get the lowest pay and in general the dirty end of the stick!Sadly I'm now one of them,but happier for it. :y :y
-
I'd never have guessed it. ::) ::)
I've never lived in London but it sounds to me like they should be spending all this time off learning how to manage their finances if they consider £30K a year to be "too little to cope".
Watch manager Richard Golds, 46, who also runs a driving school in St Albans...
So "moonlighting" two professions that require him to have a clear head and react quickly to situations that could potentially endanger themselves and the public? :(
Kevin
-
Fully agree with geoffr70 and others on here. We have gone way beyond the days when employers can arbitarily decide to impose changes to working conditions and contracts without any meaningful negotiations and then threaten workers with the sack. We do not live in the age of Victorian working conditions and employers as some on here would seem to wish. Do they really want to live in a country where union leaders and members "disappear" like in Chile and Argentina in the past, I think not. I guess some of them actually believe everything they read in the Sun, Express and Mail and the other right wing gutter press. For gods sake get real!!
-
The management have been trying to have meaningful negotiations with the Union for 5 years. Even John Prescott (Labour leftie, former trade unionist and union sponsored MP) gave up trying to have meaningful discussions with them. ::)
Get real. ;)
-
The management have been trying to have meaningful negotiations with the Union for 5 years. Even John Prescott (Labour leftie, former trade unionist and union sponsored MP) gave up trying to have meaningful discussions with them. ::)
Get real. ;)
Yes you're right they have, and now that they haven't got their own way they've resorted to bully boy tactics, much like a young childing whacking another child and snatching a toy, and how very childish.
It's just disgraceful that two parties agree to a set of conditions, then after negotiations, one party, who hasn't achieved what they wanted to, resort to the method of sacking the workforce and re-employing them on less favourable conditions. I think the management at LFB need to grow up and stop acting like spoilt children.
What do you mean by 'Get real' Albs?
How would you like it if your mortgage lender arbitrarily changed your mortgage contract to make it less favourable to you in some way by an increase in payments or lengthening the period or some other way? I don't see the difference.
After negotiations, if nothing new is reached, then the existing conditions are still observed that BOTH parties have already agreed to.
-
I believe that management must have the right to manage. If you remove that right every business in the country would fall on its face in no time. Management should reach a decision after taking into account thwe views of the workforce. If the workforce strongly believe that the decision is unfair they can go to ACAS or similar. Striking should be an absolute last resort. Reserved for only the most extreme circumstances, and imo emergency services (and probably all other public servants) should be barred by law from striking in any circumstances.
-
I believe that management must have the right to manage also, but resorting to these tactics isn't managing.
Can you confirm Albs if you find the actions of LFB acceptable, and 'managing', as it appears so!?!?!
-
this whole debate is a race to the bottom, lets see how many rights we can get rid of, how many indignities we can bestow on workers - every strike now is seen as some communist plot to wrestle control into the hands of the unions.....well what if the unions are merely standing up for workers rights? how far do we have to go before enough is enough? i said race to the bottom as whenever industrial action is called the braying hordes come out citing examples of people on less pay with less conditions - i fear some on here wont be happy til every worker is on minimum pay working 80hr weeks. sometimes you need to take a stand, yes it'll ruffle some feathers, but look back in history - industrial action and protest has driven huge benefits in the way we work, the safety and environment we all benefit from so on this one i'll happily defend the right of anyone to withdraw labour or we'll all suffer as hard fought rights get slowly chipped away under the guise of "efficiency" :(
that maybe sounds a bit too strong in light of this particular dispute, but i see it as the thin end of the wedge - the more its accepted, the more will be taken :o
Banjax is spot on. Those who disagree and would like to see workers rights decimated in the name of efficiency or "managements right to manage" may like to consider the poem by Pastor Niemoller namely :-
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a communist; Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist; Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew; Then they came for me— and there was no one left to speak out for me"
-
Go Wingman-Go Wingman-Go Wingman :y :y
-
Banjax is spot on. Those who disagree and would like to see workers rights decimated in the name of efficiency or "managements right to manage" may like to consider the poem by Pastor Niemoller namely :-
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a communist; Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist; Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew; Then they came for me— and there was no one left to speak out for me"
He of course was trying to assuage his guilt and - by extension - that of the Protestant churches in Germany by not challenging the authoritarian rule of Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party - can that emotive piece really apply traction (or indeed be relevant) in the case of this dispute?
-
yes
-
No.
And I can confirm that I support managements stance in this dispute. The gutless Govt. shouldnt have let it get this far though. They should have outlawed their right to strike a long time ago. They arent normal employess doing a job for a private business. They are paid from my taxes to stop people from dying in fires etc. People providing a service to the public such as that should nt imo be able to strike and play games with peoples lives. The police and armed forces arent allowed to strike 0 dont see why firefighters are different.
Its nothing to do with workers rights etc. The issue involved is to petty to play that card. Its about protecting a rather cosy system and a dtermined mentality to beat the management come hell or high water.
-
No.
And I can confirm that I support managements stance in this dispute. The gutless Govt. shouldnt have let it get this far though. They should have outlawed their right to strike a long time ago. They arent normal employess doing a job for a private business. They are paid from my taxes to stop people from dying in fires etc. People providing a service to the public such as that should nt imo be able to strike and play games with peoples lives. The police and armed forces arent allowed to strike 0 dont see why firefighters are different.
Its nothing to do with workers rights etc. The issue involved is to petty to play that card. Its about protecting a rather cosy system and a dtermined mentality to beat the management come hell or high water.
They are still people, still employees, and still have rights.
It's everything to do with workers rights, give an inch, take a mile.
It is the management of LFB playing games with peoples lives, the firefighters lives, and the lives of the public by forcing them to do this.
Anyway, you say playing with peoples lives, I bet most people would be shocked at the double standards, when a brigade allows the level of cover to drop to a certain level just for it's own ends (money), yet for any other reason it's not acceptable.
And it doesn't matter what system they are protecting or whether you think it's cosy or not. Both parties signed up to that so it can't be that cosy. It is about the disgraceful, arrogant and contemptful way the LFB are treating its staff.
-
I dont think we are ever going to agree or convince one another of the other point of view on this issue Geoff. ;)
-
I dont think we are ever going to agree or convince one another of the other point of view on this issue Geoff. ;)
Yeah I suppose you're right! I must sound like a socialist, I am far from it though!
Are you sick of writing?!
-
Unions have no place in front line public services
The point I was trying to make is simply that there must better ways of dealing with such issues, without holding the general public to ransom. My experience of unions is generally not a positive one. Unite being a new name for an old dinosaur, and an oxymoron to boot. :-/
Not all firms are out to rip the peas out of their staff, as disgruntled staff usually cost firms more in down time/ abused vehicles and dissatisfied customers, than it would cost to sort the niggles that become strike issues. TNT involves union management in all its staff discussions so that the decisions that are made by the company cannot be disputed. How much say the union actually gets is a different question. Not sure when any TNT staff have taken strike action, if ever.
Perhaps a lesson in itself... :-X
-
Where is the Bus thread?, I can not find it..... :'( :'( :'(
-
Deleted - hopefully. :y :D ;D ;D
-
Deleted - hopefully. :y :D ;D ;D
:D :D :D :P :P :P
-
Finally been called off..
Someone has seen sense :y