DJKillaQueen

I agree that Beyonce was awesome. That's what it's really all about. I thought Rihanna was good at the weekend too.

There are numerous problems with this juction as it stands and part of it is the amount of traffic flowing through it at peak hours, part of it is impatient drivers beaking the rules of the road. Some of the suggestions raised at the last Peckham and Nunhead CC Meeting, where several schemes that will be part of the next round of road improvements were opened to consultation and ideas, included rephasing of lights, using diagonal pedestrian crossings, shortening the East Dulwich Road bus lane and introducing right turn filtering (phased with the lights) and even a roundabout.

That's right *bob*....artists do turn down requests to appear and most of those that criticise the show would never be seen dead on it.....I can at least respect that.....

No it doesn't...because they sing much better written songs sometimes written by bigger and more talented artists...and oh yeah...all his records sound the same......like 'bout now' says, you only need to listen to one.....or even to one guitar riff only......

It all comes under the Tenant and Landlord Act 1995. You can view that in full here Stick to your guns. You have served notice and move out on or before the date. Let them take you to court if they truly believe they have a case (which they don't)....what I find mistifying is that the moving out date is the end of the fixed tenancy anyway so there really is no breach of contract.

He sells records because people are willing to by bland 'sounding all the same' albums....which makes him the ideal contestant for X factor according to some views of the show. He's a one trick pony. Perhaps his comments were out of the embarassment of having finally found his level. Either way it is extremely unprofessional to make stupid sexist comments the day before appearing on a show involving those you've just insulted. Just makes him look stupid.

The council ARE aware this junction is an accident blackspot richfish...one of the worst locally which is why it is part of the coming round of road improvement schemes. Perhaps if you attended Community Council meetings or any of the other council meetings that allow public attendance you might be better informed instead of assuming the council are doing nothing or unaware.

Ive seen the effect this is having on ffs and i do not believe they deserve to be treated this way. But what effect? A shift change......jeez.....get in the real world. Do Police Officers moan when they have shifts that change from week to week, or nurses, or doctors, and so on? There is only ONE reason why ffs bermoan the cutting of the 15 night-time shift to 12 hours.....because they won't be able to get any sleep probably, meaning those with second jobs will feel a little more tired than usual. When I have down time at work I read a book. I don't sleep. The salary is good enough and there shouldn't be any problem for any ff to work 12 hours shifts.....millions of other workers manage it. They should just accept the new contracts and get on with it.

Are you drunk native lol? You are clearly either not interested in anything but a slanging match or you really don't have any ability to engage in debate. Kbabe....where do you think the money comes from to pay for the fire service? Public sector workers serve US, not the other way around. They should respect the public money that keeps them in jobs (and deliver good value for that money) just as I respect the entrepreneurial nouse of someone that can employ me. The fact is you will not listen to anyone...... Pot calling kettle black I think. I do read the other views but I refute the FFU claims and have explained why I refute them. I have looked and listened to all sides. It is my opinion and it is a well researched opionion. You don't like it but that doesn't make it misguided and niaive. The truth is that the FFU are entrenched in an outdated attitude and behaviour. Furthermore the debate in this thread is being won by those opposing the strikes, because the FFU debate isn't up to it. MM, H and myself will be making no apology for that any time soon. Anyway it's all relative because the FFs won't win the dispute and most of them will sign the new contract anyway.

Can Simon Cowell sing? Or Louis Walsh? Do a search on Dannii minogue...you'll see she's been in the music and TV business since the age of 8...like her sister. She fronted a major music show in Oz.....in fact, she has more years in the business than Simon Cowell. Don't underestimate her skills, knowledge and experience. She's a very smart lady. Cheryl of course is the newbie, but given that on both the years she has been on the show the winner has been one of her acts then she obviously has some idea of what's going on. So no..JK doesn't have a point....

I love you too native lol...Have you seen how much your union boss is paid too? He's lapping it up whilst you guys take all the heat (no pun intended) as well. I don't like it either but bosses of anything are generally as bad as each other when it comes to extravagance. I agree that fire fighters need more than two weeks training, and then placements with more experienced fire fighters but what option does London have if there's a strike.....poorly trained ffs are better than letting the city burn. Although I'm sure that each crew has an exerienced supervisor too. It's not ideal I agree.

People like me whose taxes pay YOUR wages.......have some respect. I have plenty of sense but I also have more intelligent responses to those that disagree with me than the ones you are giving here. MM, H and others have posted every document any person needs to read to get a good overview of the arguments from all sides. The union is clearly losing the debate. You are not hard done by as a profession...not even close. That is why public support is not the great mass you think it should be. The fire service can not remain in some kind of untouchable cocoon because of the self importance some of it's members place on themselves. Cuts have to be made, either through efficiency savings or job losses...you choose.

That's not even an argument that dignifies a response unless you want to dismiss the bbc as well. And I hope you are not being paid for your strike days.

I have respect for emergency workers native...what I don't have repsect for are 'bully boy' blackmailing tactics of the Union, like some of the behaviour on the picket lines today and calling a strike on the busiest night of the year, Nov 5th. Did you know some fire stations needed a Police officer in attendance to ensure that pickets didn't stop engines from going out to (emergency) calls. Police officers that could be better used elsewhere. The Union have had plenty of time to negotiate an acceptable compromise but have failed. What are management expected to do? How long do they have to wait before that are 'allowed' to make any changes (especially with steep public sector cuts coming). FFs are EMPLOYEES not EMPLOYERS. We the tax payers pay their wages. They work for us (something many emergency service workers forget in thinking they provide a 'free' service to the public). And I don't think a small shift change splitting hours evenly is anything like the deal the FBU is making out.....after all, not much to ask for is it!

I think the strike for bonfire night is a publicity nightmare! But you don't think it's a wreckless act designed to put the ffs cause before the saftely of the public on the busiest night of the year? What kind of publicity would it take to convice us all otherwise I wonder lol. most people do not put their lives at risk when they go to work So what.....that has nothing to do with any aspect of the dispute. But FYI, of all the risky jobs out there ffs are one of the safest jobs with very low fatality rates, lower than the Police and much lower than construction workers. They are trained to be safe. they should be afforded some respect and at least the curtesy to be allowed to fight for their jobs. See this is exactly the kind of comment that get's my back up....This idea that somehow your son's job is more worthy than any debate and therefore 'deserves' special privileges. We musn't touch the fire service..... when it is a normal part of business practise to improve efficiency and change contracts as required (especially public sector services that require tax payers money). You son earns above the average wage which is a reflection of what is required for the job...(although it still remains most jobs dominated by men are overpaid whilst most sectors dominated by women are underpaid - but that another discussion). I gave very good reasons why the ffs reaction to a contract change (normal practise elsewhere) is an unreasonable and outdated response and you reply with...oh my son risks his life and blah blah blah. He has more chance of being in a traffic accident than he does of being fatally injured or maimed tackling a fire (although I wish neither ever happens to him of course).

As you say Moflo you are emotionally involved but that also means you are not arguing with any objectivity. It is normal industrial parctise for employers to change contracts from time to time. And it's a fact of life that if you don't sign a new contract you don't get the job. If we all threw a hissy fit every time that happened there'd be few people left in employment. The shift change isn't anything like the big deal some are making out. Do I like everything in every contract I sign? No I don't. I'd like to have pension rights as part of my contract and other things that your son takes for granted, but like most people I'm thankful to have a job.

LOL....>:D

But the point of less fires? I remember the same dialogue being levied many times whenever a fire station was hit with planned closure. There were strikes and the station closed anyway.....but there turned out to be no increase risk from any lack of cover. It was always a false claim. I feel that part of the argument is 'little boys crying wolf' instead of a straighforward honesty that the ffs are fighting the 'inconvenience' of the new contract rather than for anything proven to be a true risk to the public.

Native you are incapable of rational debate so whatever you say sunshine. Kbabe.....I know exactly what firemen do...so keep your assumptions to yourself. Now the claim that altering shifts will increase risk to the public is nonsense. The FFU have provided NO EVIDENCE whatsoever to prove that claim. H on the other hand has put it eloquently in this point; The FACT is there are 48% less fires in London than there were 10 years ago. That this is down to fire prevention education and support, and that this is a wiser and more efficient way of spending ffs time than by sleeping through 30% of their paid salary time. Would any ff like to dispute that (the 48% less bit)? People don't strike out of altruism...they strike because they either want better pay and conditions, or they don't want to give up some aspect of pay and conditions. And yes please do enlighten us all as to the thinking behind striking on November 5th... Comments like it hasn't changed for 30 years so why change it now, I think perfectly show the intransient attitude that gets many people wound up - because common sense knows things change all the time and we have to change with them.

djkilla i dont need to read this thread in detail , you have the knockers,and the supporter's Yes you do because you don't understand the points that the 'knockers' as you metaphorically call them are making. To comment in a debate and have no interest in reading the content of that debate is just lazy and shows a disrespectful lack of interest in any view but your own. MOFLO these strikes are not as a result of the threat of sackings. They are as a result of the managements desire to CHANGE CONTRACTS. Sacking means no more employment. Change of contract is something most employers have a perfect right to do. AND had the union made more of an effort to compromise instead of the usual 'we ain't changing nothing' then the management would not have had to resort to an enforced change of contract. FFs should blame their union if they are looking for excuses and scapegoats.

Native you clearly haven't read this thread in any detail. The idea that FFs are beyond criticism is galling. They've cynically picked one of the busiest nights of the year to strike.....for nothing more than maximum effect, because they put themselves first and don't give a toss if anyone dies on Nov 5th.

Any ssupport I had for the FFs has now gone...and the only people to blame if anyone dies on Nov 5th in a fire, are the striking so called professionals who think they should retain perks and working practices that are unrealistic in the current economic climate. Sure, in an ideal world we should all have decent pensions, levels of pay, hours etc...but the harsh reality is that we don't have an economy that can support that...and I for one begrudge being asked to support public sectors workers on above average wages who seem to think that any suggestion they should compromise is an attack on their right to exist, or disrespect by us for the job they do. Btw thew there are around 3 million unemployed some of whom would jump at the chance to train as fire fighters and earn that kind of salary and do whatever working hours the management require.....ffs would do well to remember that.

And I attend Police Ward Panel meetings and there's always a shift needed here or there depending on what type of crime is most prevelant from month to month. The crime is determined by what gang or group are in the area. One month it might be car crinimals, then next house burglary, the next anti-social behaviour. The Police target the one that's most common, until either the culprits are caught or move to another area (either way reducing the level of that type of crime for a while). Eventually criminals replace criminals so it's a never ending process. When you look at the stats overall though.....there's very little swing either way in the levels or types of crime annually.

Regarding pensions sounds like a case of I don't get so why should they! Again. Pathetic. So you think it's perfectly fair that we should all pay for public sector workers pension whilst most can't afford one for themselves. Typical selfish public sector 'poor me ' attitude.... Not pathetic at all but a real understanding of the poverty that comes with state pension....for people who have worked just as hard and just as long. That comment by you is why the public are increasingly less supportive of public sector disputes. If you want public support and respect, show them some in return. The gravy train is over for ALL of us.

Even if legalised, criminals would still sell drugs, just below retail rpices. Look at tobacco and acohol smuggling for example.