I am a simple soul

[boatone]

Bet you didnt think........

........when you started this thread that it would hit the 200 posts level.......dont you owe someone summink now????

<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.boatsontheweb.com/galleryframes.html> BoatsOnTheWeb Photo Gallery</A>

 

[Solwaycruiser]

200 posts about what?

Absolutely sweet ** to do with sailing but I do note that claymores last post which was about sailing managed 17 posts. Not bad really so why change of post subject to a highly topical subject which had nothing to do with sailing. I am not sure but it certainly achieved much more interest. Perhaps that indicates that many on this forum should consider posting on other general interest forums instead of this "sailing forum" I come here, perhaps lurking in the background, to hear about sailing not about politics which this subject is certainly about, so lets drop this and get back to something relevent. I could answer many of the posts but why here? I did answer one load of twaddle but that was the end of that thread probably because the poster had the good grace to appreciate they had swallowed the "government hook" and jumped on the bandwagon.

 

[jimi]

Not quite correct M\'lud

The CiC was an Admiral .. so I suppose that's something to do with boats .. on the other hand ...

 

[Twister_Ken]

So we\'re not trying for the 250 then?

Plenty more inflammatory behaviour associated with the strike that we could witter on about.

 

[sailbadthesinner]

Re: So we\'re not trying for the 250 then?

Inflammatory? surely not?


Come on brain.get this over and i can go back to killing you with beer

 

[Twister_Ken]

Re: So we\'re not trying for the 250 then?

Inflame a Tory, if you prefer.

 

[themount2]

Me too, must have been what they taught them after their extensive training was finished. They were also very good at darts, football and sitting around drinking as I recall. Got a bit twitchy when the phone rang though!

 

[adarcy]

Re: 250 + ?

What's the going record anyway?

With 'only' 7 more strike days this could go a lot higher and that's not counting any future down hoses.

 

[alant]

Re: We drifted here

On a recent survey of 'dangerous' jobs, firemen were not 'high' particularly on the list - don't think they were even in top 10.
Many firemen will admit that due to HSE requirements, they do not act as 'instinctive hero's' anymore, so many less injuries or hazards apparently (their comments not mine).
I have a son (navy) on these Green Goddesses (BAR) - he reports that the Forces (particularly the many Para's) have very little sympathy regarding the FBU & the so called 'dangerous job' they claim they do. Also if they do settle, how will the 'black economy' recover from the loss of firemen employing themselves in outside jobs - almost all I know personally have at least 2-3 other jobs (and all extremely well paid particularly those in London).
How really essential are they? When did you last see a fire engine in your street??
Main job seems to be cutting motorists out of crashes & saving burning property.
These should be paid for from Motor & House Insurances (which was how fire brigades were originally formed anyway)
As a seperate issue, shouldn't those oil drums filled with burning 'chemically loaded' wooden pallets etc be banned. This must surely be illegal & also a HSE issue.

 

[aztec]

sorry its a long one but....

thanks to all who have replied and expressed an opinion. i have been reading the threads and responding with info as i have been able to. it now looks like the basis of an agreement has been found, we know that without the support of the public our action is without support, this seems to be the situation we find ourselves in at present.

we suspect that for a long time our pay has fallen behind, due to an outdated pay formula, this is now the least of our concerns. the modernisation of the fire service looks likely with the admission of the office of the deputy prime minister admitting that "any" pay deal must be funded by the reduction of 20% in the fire budget. this figure comes from the wage bill, as only 18% of the total applies to equipment. and as i have said before, we needed to invest, not cut the the budget to reach standards of service to the public indicated by the "eight " reviews of fire cover over the last few years.

in a small county like mine, the modernisation equates to a loss of 134 jobs, 5 fire stations, and 10 fire appliances. argued on this forum as being state of the art appliances that would make the differance between life and death.

i am saddened by the way we have been treated, not because we "greedy" firemen have lost our wages rise. but because the public have been duped and now stand to lose alot more than money, just look at the modernisation of the ambulance, hospitals, railways, power copanies... i don't need to go on.

these losses in personnel are to be due to natural wastage, mostly from people that joined in 74/75 when it was realised that it was too expensive to have people doing wholetime, and retained duties on their days off. another point at this intersection.... these four days off we get... my first day off i can't ride a retained pump, as it's been identified that iv'e already done 9 hours work (gov't figures not mine) i also can't ride on a retained pump on my last day off, as i am due back on shift the day after. (again the gov't rules, not mine. so that only leaves 2 days classed as days off... work it out for yourselves.

so it looks like we've all lost this one, but bear in mind this. we are looking for a pay rise (39%) that could destabilise the econony. the gov't ministers accepted 40% without making a fuss, that didn't destabilise anything. since 1977 firefighters wages have risen by 27%, your ministers have had 148% pay rise.. but they won't tell you that. if you believe you have been given duff gen, ask your MP what a "D notice" is, then apply this info to what we were allowed to tell the public.

i'm sorry to all members of the public for withdrawing our labour, but the gov't have withrawn our services over the next 25-30 years, and we've all let them do it.

thanks for your patience and if theres any more info or views you wish to share please don't hesitate, thaks again. steve. crew commander westbourne fire station, dorset fire and rescue service.

 

[aztec]

had to look hard to find the thread but...

now it's over what service have we got?

any more firefighters?
better pay?
better resources?
long term security?
better responce times?
better placed to serve the community?
a highly motivated team of proffesionals?

we got beat.. public support wained, we wouldn't/couldn't go without public support (it's our public too). our union wouldn't have survived another strike. pay deal? we will get 4.5% and another 7 if we "modernise".

what does this mean to you?? the home office response times abolished in favour of a risk assessed aproach (those of you in management who know about risk assessment can explain how this works" in real terms, closing stations that arn't cost effective (that'll be you lot living in the countryside away from large towns)
"They can't do that!"... they can (that's why they got rid of section 19 in the last white paper) if you use monitoring at home for burglar alarm or fire detection... who's paying for the service? .. nope, you just pay for the call centre staff... they just relay the alarm to us (the police have already declined to attend burglar alarms, unless they are backed up with "someone seen on premises")

legislation to improve fire safety in the home (this is good) it means that you'll have to have detection and or sprinklers installed. a good move but didn't someone say that all that was needed was education.... not enforcement... not who was that. we have been given responsibility to attend RTA's when before we did it in goodwill. who's gonna pick up the tab for that one?

all in all we're in for the same sort of "modernisation" that meant the ambulance, and the police having insufficient resources to attend effectively the calls they recieved.

just an opinion of course... i'm alright jack.. i got a good job, ain't i. steve.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Gordonmc]

Did the firefighters lose public support?

My recollection was that there was pontification about the potential loss of support when the country was at war. What happened then was that the FBU, employers and two-jags went behind closed doors and came to a deal.

If the FBU had suspended action for the duration hostilities I think you would find there was enduring public support, once the public was properly made aware of the huge con which the government is dressing up as "modernisation".

I am not a firefighter and I have no axe to grind, other than as someone who might need the services of the brigade at some point. I have no problem with paramedics travelling on appliances. If a full time station is "under-used" I have no problem with its closure or replacement with a retained unit, especially as these changes had already been accepted through local negotiation.

But I do have an issue with being told that de-manning according to slide-rule calculations will improve the service.

The FBU went in with a daft claim in the first place, playing right in to the hands of the government which was bent on radical restructuring.

I just feel sorry for the firefighters who will have to take up the slack with longer hours, fewer hands at the pumps, worse pension rights and and uncertain future.

Lions led by donkeys. So there!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[claymore]

Is it all going to kick off again then?

<hr width=100% size=1>regards
Claymore
/forums/images/icons/smile.gif

 

[claymore]

Re: So we\'re not trying for the 250 then?

How do you inflame a Tory then - does it involve lighter fuel and a Swan Vesta?