Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Proz]

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.

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 .
 

[albitz]

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.

[Banjax]

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? 

[Proz]

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 

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 .

[albitz]

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.

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 .
 

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 ?

[Proz]

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.

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 .
 

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 .

[Banjax]

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.

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 .
 

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 .

Albs was an enforcer for the Teamsters in 30's Chicago by the sounds

[albitz]

"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

[albitz]

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]

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? 

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. :-?

[Proz]

"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 

[albitz]

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.

[albitz]

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

[Proz]

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   :-/

[Proz]

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 
He would have just punched them into submission