Please read and support your firefighters!!!!

[Mick Mac]

Im with Loz.

I could not believe it when i heard the FF were to strike on the most dangerous night of the year.

This is blackmail and must surely lose public support.

The publics respect was your greatest asset and this could potentially be lost.

Ff will probably change their mind close to 5 nov but this will annoy the public more as you have messed with their emotions.

[Kbabe01]

The fact you think ANYONE wants to see people killed is disgusting. You're a disgrace. You blame the FF for letting people die? How? The LFB have told everyone that asset co can cope. So do you believe they cant? Does that mean you think LFB are lying? So then are the FF telling the truth? You have no clue.

[Loz]

Well, kbabe01, my knowledge of the dispute is the same as 99% of the public and I am pretty sure they will come to the same conclusion as me. If the fire fighters want to lose all public support then they are going exactly the right way about it.

Remember - the firefighters chose the date of the strike. You can shout and shriek and WRITE IN CAPITAL LETTERS as much as you like, it won't change that fact. And that's what the public will see,

[Marmora Man]

Kbabe01 - you or your colleagues have consistently said that AssetCo cannot cope. If you truly believe that then your striking on 5th November is a dangerous action.

As I keep asking - let us see what your alternative proposal is to counter the management one put forward and evidenced on this thread by several different reports.

If the facts change I can change my mind - but you have yet to put up an argument that even starts to make a case that might change my mind.

[Kbabe01]

Loz you said yourself you have no idea what its all about so i have no respect for your opinion. If you knew what was happening and was still against them then fair enough.

Firefighters dispute

[Mick Mac]

That link looks like it could ignite at any moment. I won't click on it.

[huncamunca]

I am always up for a bit of strike action where it is deserved, but should the FF be given more creedence than , for example, the Tube Workers ?

Without wishing to place the FF in a "Saint Diana" Scenario, given the emotion attached to Fires - do we give support to tube workers as well?

What kind of suppoet have the FF given to other unions/ groups taking similar action?

Not a goad, but merely a basic question.

[Mick Mac]

They are good at pool.

[reggie]

This is from the fire brigade link posted above

"Our real issue is that we know the LFB plan to close Fire Stations on a 'risk based' basis and this is the first step towards it. They want to run the Fire Brigade on fewer fire engines to save money. This means moving fire engines around London according to fire statistics, thereby closing some Stations at night in areas where calls are fewer. Their own figures however, show that most fire deaths and injuries happen at night."

I dont know how the fire brigade should be run other than 'risk based'? Why would they close a station at night if there is more demand at that time. I doubt any manager is that stupid. I detect willful misunderstanding or misinformation.

[Loz]

Kbabe01,

I don't think you follow - it is the date of the strike that is the issue here.

If you want to strike on the 2nd or 3rd or 7th or 10th or whatever, then fine - go for it. Striking on the 5th of November - the busiest day of the year for fires - is just plain irresponsible. It doesn't matter what your grievances are. Nothing justifies striking on bonfire night.

[Pilgrim]

Unfortunately these are the only guys that still have a voice when it comes to standing up to protect their jobs & working conditions, something Nurses & Police Officers are unable to do !!!!!!!! Sometimes the public think those in these services have got it all good, well, if only they looked deeper, they'd see that actually it ain't all sweet & rosy and that they all go above and beyond what is expected without any additional pay or recognition for doing the job they love even if this means impinging on their own work/life balance!!!

It is their democratic right to take action to protect there jobs. Some one earlier asked why are they any different than trains drivers etc. I think that by the fact that they put their lives on the line when they go to work makes them a special case and deserve our respect. Some of you are making it sound like they are heartless selfish bastards!! Shame on you! I dont like strikes, but I respect someones right to do so. If the LFB are to be believed on the 1st Nov and the 5th Nov you are all safe because they have got it covered! You are slating the FF's because you know that isnt true so why wouldnt you support them in getting the threat of the sack removed thereby removing the strike action.

As for the 5th being the most dangerous night and peoples lives at risk, 99.9% of deaths on that night are from fireworks and not fires, firemen do not put out fireworks.

[Pearson]

@ Pilgrim/ Supporters of strike

I don't believe you answered Loz question, although I'm sure you'll disagree

Really, why does it have to be the 5th?

Are you proud of that decision??

why not strike on the 2/3/4th/67/th :-)

[Pilgrim]

As far as I know there is a strike on the 1st for 8 hours. Then 5th for 47 hours. I know no more than you or Loz but I would be quite willing to go and talk to FF's at local staion to ask why? Would you? You might get an incite as to the why's and wherefore's of this dispute, it might even change your cynical mind. As I am not privvy to the FBU's directive I cant say why that date. I would have thought to show that the LFB and Assetco crews cannot cope.

I am certain that FF crews will not allow a major incident go uncovered, they broke strike and went out on Saturday! These are dedicated people trying to save their jobs and your fire service. Goodnight!

[Marmora Man]

Still no answer to my challenge.

What alternative proposals do the FBU have for shift patterns in London?

[laincoubert]

Fbu proposed several, 24 hour shifts being the most recent. You would need ff to explain exactly how it would work the benefits etc but it does replicate a common shift pattern in USA and several European countries. Although it doesn't seem very family friendly to me.

0800 til 1600 and 1600 til 0800 was proposed weeks ago. This would appear to tick a lot of boxes with the added benefit of the early evening start allowing more training time and community fire safety work at the start of their night shifts. You don't need to be a fbu rep to be able to see thebenefits of the 8-16 shift proposal. Management said no and refused to consider. I still firmly believe management want the strike, this is a cynical ploy to break the back of the union and asmr coleman said on the radio lastlast night "if no ffs sign the newcontracts, that's fine I will rebuild the fire brigade". Doeshe sound like he is spoiling for this fight or what

[Fuschia]

I've lost respect for a lot of forum posters I'm afraid. Looks to me like people just want to hang out in this thread piling on the s*@t on a dedicated group of workers defending their contracts and fireservice as we know it.

[laincoubert]

I been looking into the brigade proposals a bit more. They demand 12/12 which we all know although there are question marks as to the real reasons since their stated reasons are very flimsy.

But the managements alternative "compromise" is 13/11. Which on the surface seems like middle ground between what they want and what ffs currently have. What isn't so well published is that 13/11 is only offered but with strings attached. Conditions which are unacceptable to ffs, a lot of conditions. The 13/11 is a or stunt to look flexible, but unless thry drop the strings they are not iffering ffs any real alternative or room to move.

Why is 12/12 demanded with no extra strings but 13/11 only offered with these conditions?? That is nor negotiation, it is manipulation

[Marmora Man]

IainC - taking your 07.42 post first.

1. The 24 hours offer must be simply a stalking horse - put forward knowing it would be shot down. If firefighters were to be on duty for a 24 hour period this would require them to have a stand down and rest periods - reducing availability. If no rest period were included the firefighters would be too tired to perform effectively and the long term impact of such shifts would be damaging to health at least and probably family life as well.

2. The 08.00 - 16.00 with 16.00 - 08.00 offer is no real offer as it doesn't address the management's desire to lengthen the dayshift, in fact it decreases it. As I understand it the management's position is that by lengthening the dayshift by 3 hours to 12, and shortening the nightshift by 3 hours would allow greater day work of community fire safety visits, fitting smoke alarms, training with their equipment to be carried out - as these are not done on night shift when firefighters consider themselves to be "on call" but not required to carry out this sort of work. You say that you don't have to be a firefighter to see the benefits of the 08.00 - 16.00 system, but I'm afraid I cannot see them.

On your 08.01 post:

The 13/11 alternative does seem, on the face of it, to be an acceptable compromise. You state it is unacceptable to firefighters because of the strings attached. What are these strings? Why are they unacceptable?

You and others claim that management is trying to break the union, that they have reasons other than trying to create a more effective and productive service. You offer no evidence for this - merely assertions.

There is a very good general case to be made that key public services should have no strike clauses - neither the police or the armed forces can strike. Nurses and doctors are not forbidden by legislation to strike but have a tradition of not doing so (and, as a result, tend to have public support when they are in dispute with management). Public transport staff and firefighters can and do strike. I feel that there is growing sympathy for the idea of such "no strike" deals and the current actions of the FBU, and the RMT on London Underground, are only likely to increase support for the idea.

[*Bob*]

Pilgrim Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

I cant say why that date. I would have

> thought to show that the LFB and Assetco crews

> cannot cope.

If they said why, it would help.. instead of employing monotoned union jobsworths to busy themselves on London radio stations with a feigned air of indignance claiming it 'just happened to be one of the available dates for striking.. you know.. a bit of a coincidence'.

Treating the very people you need to get on-side as complete idiots is a poor tactic.

[SeanMacGabhann]

If this particular night is so dangerous that the FFs absence is putting lives at risk, I'd look at the root cause and ban fireworks like other countries have. No? ok then....

I would say to the FFs that ignoring the public view of the dates is self-defeating and clearly the message they are trying to get across just isn't. I don't know why so many people are instinctively adopting managements role in this one - they seemed happy enough with the service they were getting up until all of this this came to light. And whilst some workforces (both unionised and non, in private and public) can be intransigent to the point of exasperation, management track-record across a number of services doesn't make this anywhere near clear-cut to me. If management didn't push through these proposals would any of us REALLY care? I suspect not

Huguenot's response to my previous questioning was

"In answer to SMG, the management seems clear - the new shift patterns are more healthy, create better firefighters, more streamlined, more cost efficient, and allow more flexible fire cover to meet the changed world we live in: "

which seems reasonable but also seems an answer to a problem that doesn't convince. We need better firefighters do we? Why, what's wrong with the ones we have? Are they unhealthy? More flexible cover for the changed world we live in? The world has changed but what is it the FFs haven't adapted to? Are they NOT putting out fires the way they were before? That leaves costs - and when that is the only genuine consideration, a top-down edict usually results in depreciation of service. Again, I've seen this in public and private sectors

I think the FFs on this thread have done a better job than many other strkers in outlining their position - they strike me as the opposite of unreasonable. I understand why they think strike is the only option. I would still advise them against it tho - a strike is only effective if it generates enough public support- and this one will not only fail to do that, it will make things worse

If I was a FF in their position, I would reluctantly swallow these changes. By all means outline your fears and if they transpire use them as a bargaining chip, both with management and public, when the next difference of opinion comes up ? but I can?t see striking doing anything other than weakening whatever strength you have

[laincoubert]

Marmora man.

1. Ffs are always available for 999 calls. This includes during stand down periods, during change of watch during community work during training, while eating lunch, when in the shower and on the toilet. 24 hour shifts do not reduce availability. There is no time during the ff shift when they are not available. Only cuts reduce availability.

2. Why the fixation on performing all training and community work on day shifts. Night shifts are currently used for some community work and class room training. There is no clause that if 1700 is part of the dayshift then theycan train but if 1700 is part of the night shift they have to stand down and play snooker. Your arguments are entirely flawed, ffs want to train and are happy to perform community work, perform inspections and test equipment. There is no reason why their night shift cannot be better used for this and the early start time of 1600 fits the bill perfectly!

I eagerly await your next clueless rebuke

[SeanMacGabhann]

Marmora Man is many things Iain, but clueless isn't one of them. I might disagree with him but you only have to read his post to see he puts thought and effort into them. Name calling someone like that isn't going to garner any support

[SeanMacGabhann]

PS - MM doesn't need me to stand up for him either - I just wanted to voice my distaste of iain's comment

[Marmora Man]

IainC

24 hours on duty is unsupportable - either you have bleary eyed and tired staff by hour 18 or you have staff sleeping during the shift they are being paid to work. THus the full 24 hours cannot be used productively.

If, as you say, night shift staff are prepared to carry out the "day shift" jobs during the night shift hours and forego 3 hours of their current rest period during that shift - that's fine. However, that doesn't seem to be the case, for it it were there would be no argument between management and staff.

Does the FBU have a simple paper, similar to those posted on here by individuals presenting the management case, that sets out the union position and that we can all read?

[laincoubert]

Not sure about all the strings but one is to do with working at different stations. Currently they report to their own stations but can be ordered to travel to any other station as required. This is done once on duty and travel expenses are paid. Additionally at the end of the shift overtime is accrued while they return their uniforms and other kit to their own stations. One of the strings is to report with kit to any station in London, thus travelling in their own time to undetermined locations. The expenses offered to remunerate the additional time spent travelling are unattractive.

Separate to this, why are the brigade docking 20% pay of officers who have merely withdrawn voluntary duties. They are still fulfilling their contractual duties in full! This is currently in court and no doubt the fb will lose this in months to come and pay a heavy fine. But short term they are financially breaking junior officers. Divide and rule!! The management are pretty ruthless too no?