Firemans strike today - Retire at 55 or else...

[Nibble]

Apologies, it's hard to keep track of all the professions on here, last I knew you were an actor. My wife is a teacher and has no idea how she'll cope as a teacher in her late 60s if the kids are as boisterous as they are now (notwithstanding the fact that they'll probably be much worse!). While to a point I accept that there is a difference between wanting to and being capable of teaching, there is definitely a quality control issue. We all get worse at things as we get older (beyond a certain point) - is it actually in the best interests of schools and fire stations to keep employees on when they are relatively inefficient? Of course if people want to keep going they should be able to, but that's not what is being proposed.

I teach drama part time. I have taught various things in my life. Rock climbing for a few years. Wouldn't want to be teaching that much past my 60's but drama? Yeah, why not? I think most 60 year olds would be capable of teaching a wide range of subjects quite efficiently. Both my Brother's are teachers, I went out with a teacher for 9 years, a lot of my friends are teachers. It's a hard job.

 

[34064 Fighter Command]

If you're going to be arsey try and be less thick. The Fireman have a public sector pension with contributions from the public purse. A footballers pension is topped (if at all) by the club

They should be well paid, and well pensioned, for doing what is a dangerous job.

Two firefighters were KILLED doing their job in Southampton a couple of years ago. I bet their wives and kids are glad they had a pension. As were the dependants of the guys from Lewes who were killed when the Fireworks factory exploded. There aren't many jobs in civvy street or the public sector where that kind of risk is a daily one.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/sussex/8415936.stm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-22126431


One minute we're all praising people like the NYC Fire Dept for being heroes (especially on 11/09/2001 ) or the London Fire Brigade on 07/07/2005, the next they're pariahs on the taxpayer. You cannot have it both ways.

 

[Billy the Fish]

Work twice as long for half as much?
Have I missed something.Can you expand on this?

That was just a phrase to explain it. I don't know the exact details, but the value of their pension is being massively reduced. Current firefighters (again I'm not sure where the cutt off point is) c will be getting much less compared to someone who would retire next week having paid the same amount in. He definitely said it was half.

My point is that regardless of whether we all believe it's in the public interest to do so, I wouldn't just agree to someone cutting my pension* without a fight.

*If I had one.

 

[Billy the Fish]

They should be well paid, and well pensioned, for doing what is a dangerous job.

Two firefighters were KILLED doing their job in Southampton a couple of years ago. I bet their wives and kids are glad they had a pension. As were the guys from Lewes who were killed when the Fireworks factory exploded. There aren't many jobs in civvy street or the public sector where that kind of risk is a daily one.

One minute we're all praising people like the NYC Fire Dept for being heroes (especially on 11/09/2001 ) or the London Fire Brigade on 07/07/2005, the next they're pariahs on the taxpayer. You cannot have it both ways.

It's not that dangerous, I bet you can find as many people killed on building sites as you can firefighters. I'd wager that more firefighters have died in car accidents on the way to work as they have on the job.
It's cushy as anything, they spend an hour a day in the gym when they're at work, most of the night shift is spent sleeping, the rest of the time they watch telly or work on outside interests.

 

[nicko31]

I don't blame them for striking. My mate is a firefighter and explained it like this: If you signed up to a pension saying you'd get one thing and your employer changed it so you'd have to work twice as long for half as much, you'd try and fight it wouldn't you?

Whatever you think about how much they deserve it, and I know from my mate how cushy it is 95% of the time, if it happened to me I wouldn't bend over and take it either.

They are entitled to protest, but putting the public in danger by striking is no excuse. If there is no danger to the public, they are clearly overstaffed. Of course this sense of entitlement is deep rooted throughout the western world. Only recently has someone finally done the sums and realised the welfare state can no longer be sustained.

 

[Theatre of Trees]

I suggest you try teaching before you are quite so quick to judge the amount of effort and physical/mental fitness it takes to supervise 30 unruly teenagers. All I know (as neither a teacher nor a fireman) is that I certainly wouldn't fancy doing either job when I'm approaching old age.

Your argument kind of falls down on the 30 unruly kids - there are never that many in a class. I work as a supply teacher so often get parachuted into classes where I know nothing about who I am teaching in schools where i have often never worked before. In general most classes, depending on how good the school is, will have generally nice kids. There will be a one or two knobs and a further small number of camp followers (i.e those who are quite willing to follow the trouble but wouldn't dream of starting it). The trick is to mute the knobs quickly, either by charm or getting them out of the class quickly - last thing you want is conflict - and the rest of the class will settle down. And I can work out pretty quickly who will be trouble.

 

[Nibble]

They are entitled to protest, but putting the public in danger by striking is no excuse. If there is no danger to the public, they are clearly overstaffed. Of course this sense of entitlement is deep rooted throughout the western world. Only recently has someone finally done the sums and realised the welfare state can no longer be sustained.

The welfare state can be sustained tenfold, getting people to pay a fair amount of tax, that's what is unsustainable.

I understand why Firefighters are striking but to be frank, they get it easy. They are able to create double income, they work good shift patterns, they get a lot of respect and they rarely go to anything too serious. If you can stomach seeing RTA victims you will probably be alright. Chances of you having to deal with any serious fires in your career are slim. They get alright pay and a cracking pension. What's not to like.

 

[Nibble]

Your argument kind of falls down on the 30 unruly kids - there are never that many in a class. I work as a supply teacher so often get parachuted into classes where I know nothing about who I am teaching in schools where i have often never worked before. In general most classes, depending on how good the school is, will have generally nice kids. There will be a one or two knobs and a further small number of camp followers (i.e those who are quite willing to follow the trouble but wouldn't dream of starting it). The trick is to mute the knobs quickly, either by charm or getting them out of the class quickly - last thing you want is conflict - and the rest of the class will settle down. And I can work out pretty quickly who will be trouble.

I imagine parachuting into class shuts them up pretty quickly?

 

[34064 Fighter Command]

It's not that dangerous, I bet you can find as many people killed on building sites as you can firefighters. I'd wager that more firefighters have died in car accidents on the way to work as they have on the job.
It's cushy as anything, they spend an hour a day in the gym when they're at work, most of the night shift is spent sleeping, the rest of the time they watch telly or work on outside interests.

But the fact remains that most regular employers DON'T put their employees in potentially life threatening environments (especially Construction workers and employers because they know how hard the HSE can bite). And they know a dead employee is a useless employee.

If you were asked by your employer to form part of an at-work retained fire fighting service would you expect to do it for nothing, or tell your wife and kids that they've really nothing to worry about. I'm talking about the kind of employment where there are real risks in the event of fire ( oil rigs, chemical plants, Buncefield Oil Storage depots and the like - not a cushy office job where the highest risk is a paper cut ). Most employers wouldn't even want you to attempt to fight a fire you might discover in your workplace, the advice is always to get out and stay out.

If you think the Fire Brigade should be run like the RNLI then fine, but expect massive reductions in the number of firestations and fire appliances if you do. Come to think of it, why bother having a fire service at major airports as well, we could save a bit on air fares if they went.

 

[The Buttery Biscuit Base]

http://fullfact.org/factchecks/how_generous_firefighters_pensions_scheme_26000-29202

 

[ozseagull]

Your argument kind of falls down on the 30 unruly kids - there are never that many in a class. I work as a supply teacher so often get parachuted into classes where I know nothing about who I am teaching in schools where i have often never worked before. In general most classes, depending on how good the school is, will have generally nice kids. There will be a one or two knobs and a further small number of camp followers (i.e those who are quite willing to follow the trouble but wouldn't dream of starting it). The trick is to mute the knobs quickly, either by charm or getting them out of the class quickly - last thing you want is conflict - and the rest of the class will settle down. And I can work out pretty quickly who will be trouble.

Well that embarrassing because my sons class has 30 kids!! One teacher and an assistant

 

[nicko31]

The welfare state can be sustained tenfold, getting people to pay a fair amount of tax, that's what is unsustainable.

I understand why Firefighters are striking but to be frank, they get it easy. They are able to create double income, they work good shift patterns, they get a lot of respect and they rarely go to anything too serious. If you can stomach seeing RTA victims you will probably be alright. Chances of you having to deal with any serious fires in your career are slim. They get alright pay and a cracking pension. What's not to like.

So I guess the solution is tax the hell out of everyone and expand the welfare state. France is a beautiful country..

 

[happypig]

So I guess the solution is tax the hell out of everyone and expand the welfare state. France is a beautiful country..

Or, make big corporations pay the tax they should and honour contractual obligations.

 

[Nibble]

So I guess the solution is tax the hell out of everyone and expand the welfare state. France is a beautiful country..

Nope. Just round up the uncollected tax owed to the UK by the likes of Philip Green and increase Welfare.

 

[Theatre of Trees]

Well that embarrassing because my sons class has 30 kids!! One teacher and an assistant

You've misunderstood me, what I mean is that all 30 kids in the class are not unruly.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

I work with the fire brigade a lot, & I completely respect what they do. But I do think there is occasionally a little bit of a myth that they spend all day ploughing into burning buildings.

The high volume stuff they deal with is car crashes, often not serious but ones which require the roof removing at the request of the ambulance service just in case there is any sort of spinal injury. Then there's the educational work in schools, the stuck lifts, the alarm checks, the people who've accidentally got their penises stuck in the Hoover attachment, cows marooned in ponds, small rubbish bin fires and so on.

The sort of fires that necessitate real risk to life are, thankfully, relatively rare thanks to improved fire safety regulations and the advent of smoke alarms. Their job is to minimise that risk when they do deal with them, not to go recklessly in with no consideration for their own safety.

Please don't think I'm belittling what they do (I'd have liked to join myself at one stage in my life but my eyesight wouldn't meet their requirements): I just think a little bit of balance is required. They do great stuff at times, but so do the ambulance service, for example.

 

[surlyseagull]

Says it all when they can physically do a second job no problem on their rest days ,most people after a days or weeks work are totally sh**ged . I have a very good friend of mine who is a fire fighter and yes he is also a painter and decorator.

 

[Nibble]

Edna speaks truth.

Worst emergency services job by a long, long way is being a paramedic in an area with major roads and motorways.

 

[Seagull over Canaryland]

Looking into the background to this dispute it is not quite as straightforward as some make out. There is only one group of fire fighters who are striking (FBU) and even so it is not fully supported by all members in many areas. Other non-FBU fire fighters are providing emergency cover knowing they will not have reinforcements available and therefore deserve our support. I for one am reassured to know that there are still professionals on duty out there, rather than untrained military personnel muddling through using 1950s equipment.

As usual there is some mischief making by Govt. Yes public sector pension schemes definitely need reviewing because the country cannot afford them however this Govt is imposing this new scheme without actually telling those within it what they will have to pay in, yet it is a mandatory scheme. Fire fighters pensions are already much stricter than virtually all other public sector schemes and many are already required to work until 60. Fire fighters are required to pay up to 14% of their gross pay into their pensions from around 20 years old - how many punters are required to make that provision at that stage of their life and stick to for 40 years? That's a huge chunk out of your pocket when you are trying to afford your first mortgage etc.

You would also hope that successive Govts had carefully invested the fire fighters contributions over those 40 years service (like private pension funds do) - but sadly not, for many years that money was just spent elsewhere, so fire fighters pensions were not 'funded', which was scandalous.

I agree it would make sense to have a less generous pension scheme if fire fighters could be redeployed into other duties from 60 but I note evidence was given to Parliament last week showing there are virtually no opportunities, despite this being very much the intention. I think many fire fighters would love to use their valuable skills and experience in other ways such as educational and safety work instead of being put on a scrap heap at an arbitrary age by a Govt that hasn't thought through the whole process.

Fire-fighters (and other emergency service workers) have a 'can-do' attitude. They will routinely enter hazardous situations when most other punters run away. Yes Fire fighters are permitted to undertake other jobs but this is strictly controlled within their time off and not permitted to interfere with their main job. We shouldn't be surprised if they channel that positive attitude into earning a bit more cash. If only more punters got off their backsides.

Finally I note a lot of this discussion is focused on 'firemen'. Yet there are significant numbers of female firefighters too - it won't be easy for them to retain full fitness until 60. I wonder for example how many aged 59 and 364 days will be able to run up 10 flights of stairs in full protective clothing, wearing breathing sets and carrying heavy hose lines, before they start fighting a fire in a block of flats?

Ok this isn't an every day occurrence but if they injure themselves doing so (quite possible, there have several fire fighter fatalities doing that in recent years) or while under realistic training they could be sacked without pension, because it is harder to maintain fitness. An interesting dilemma - pay more over a longer period for a smaller pension and with no guarantee you will receive it and have no access to redeployment to a less deamding role that uses your skills. I think I'd be asking the Govt to think again too.

 

[withdeanwombat]

I despair of some of the total brain dead on here who bang on about teachers and firefighters whilst they are probably flipping burgers and have nothing better to tax themselves with.Teachers work under terrible duress - probably from the offspring of the morons who like to whinge about the pay and holidays teachers get whilst not thinking about the sometimes horrid material they have to work with. Get real jobs, dingbats, and stop banging on about four hour stoppages by firefighters, and consider the toughness of their work, and whether it would truly be safe to have a Dads Army of firefighters putting their false teeth in before coming out to rescue you after you've fallen asleep in front of the telly after too much ale and a fag in your nicotine stained maulers.