Please read and support your firefighters!!!!

[Kbabe01]

the start of moflos post you have there bbb was an excert from what a ff had written. Just to clarity incase you thought she was trying to say she was a ff and a mother of a ff????

[Moflo]

Thank you Kbabe01 for clearing that up.

BBB999 I stupidly forgot to add the words "as quoted by a serving London Firefighter" my apologies it must have confused you no end!! Glad to hear that you are interested in my predicament and yes I am the mother of a serving FF (not the one who made the post) who hasnt had time to make any posts coz he is busy working and looking after his family the best he can whilst, serving the community (another sarcastic reply coming I think) while worrying about being sacked and losing 20% of his wages, that are not anywhere near ?40,000+ by the way, If you are as I think a retired FF then I am surprised at your attitude as you surely know how the service has been denegrated! But whatever! you are entitled to your opinion and I mine.

The FBU have an intersting news release on their website that may be of interest to some!

Search this Website

News & Press

? PRESS RELEASE ? PRESS RELEASE ? PRESS RELEASE ?. PRESS RELEASE ? Download Format

15 October 2010

WOULD YOU TRUST THIS COMPANY WITH YOUR FAMILY'S SAFETY?

When London?s firefighters go on strike, the safety of Londoners will be in the hands of an international company whose chief executive officer, John Shannon, receives an annual bonus of ?400,000 and salary of ?300,000, largely paid for by London council tax payers. This sum would employ more than 20 firefighters, Fire Brigades Union general secretary Matt Wrack said today (Friday).

?Last year the company, Assetco, made a ?10.8 million increase in profits, again largely wrung from its biggest client, the London Fire Brigade? said Mr Wrack. ?Mr Shannon is far from their only fat cat. Many of the directors are on stunningly large salary and bonus packages, and also hold several other directorships.

?Assetco will deploy at most just 700 poorly trained employees to try to do the work of nearly 6,000 highly professional London firefighters? said Mr Wrack. ?In fact, they are understood informally to have just half that number. They are very secretive about who these employees are.

?Assetco?s temporary workforce have been secretly trained in Lincolnshire at a former RAF base. But the nature and length of that training is a closely guarded secret. We hear informally that it is just a few days. You cannot train a fully competent firefighter in a few days.

?They will operate from 27 locations, instead of London?s 113 fire stations, and they will use 27 fire engines instead of the normal 169.

?The London Fire Brigade is by far Assetco?s biggest customer, according to its website, ?the business is built around a cornerstone 20-year operational asset management contract with the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority (LFEPA) for London Fire Brigade.? Its other clients are the Abu Dhabi government, the UAE government, and Lincolnshire Fire and Rescue.

?In February 2001 it secured a 20-year PFI contract to own and manage all London fire engines and equipment. London?s fire engines, which used to belong to Londoners, now belong to Assetco.

?In July 2009 AssetCo secured a 7-year contract, the first of its nature in the UK, to provide a 700 strong firefighter reserve capability to LFEPA. They and the LFEPA put about the myth that it was for emergencies like a pandemic illness or flooding, but its real purpose was as a strikebreaking force, designed to ensure that London firefighters were always negotiating at a disadvantage.

?The London Fire Brigade started the process of sacking all its firefighters, and intends to have their work done in a half-hearted and inadequate way, by a company whose top people have already grown rich at Londoners? expense, just in order to avoid sitting down and negotiating shift patterns with the Fire Brigades Union. Nothing could be more irresponsible, and nothing could be more pig-headed? said Mr Wrack.

[Londonfireman]

Hi everyone,

I've just registered to the forum to try and put and clarify some questions, statements, etc in previous posts.

I'll try and answer as honestly and without bias as I can. There are 4 pages of opinions on here so this may well be a long old post and I salute you if you actually read all of it!

First of all, can I say that I am on the watch due to strike this Saturday. I DO NOT want to walk out of them doors but I honestly feel that, in the long run (only if we win of course) this action will protect Londoners. The real reason behind the authority wanting to change to 12 / 12 shifts if to cut fire cover at night. 12 / 12 shifts will make it much easier for them to close stations at night because it means instead of some firefighters working 2 days and 2 nights they will work 4 days and still be working the same amount of hours as everyone else, so will not need to make them up elsewhere.

The productivty argument is rubbish- we already hit every target the brigade gives us in regards to training and fitting smoke alarms. We could do more on the current system. Despite this, the FBU has outline, in detail other shift systems that would increase productivity, more so than 12 /12s but the LFB will not go for this because they want to close stations at night. How do I know this? The FBU has hold of a leaked document from the LFB outlining plans to reduce night time cover. How the authority continue to deny it, I don't know- the simple fact is they are lying.

"If i don't like cuts to my salary etc i have the choice to quit or be grateful that i at least have a job... "

With respect to you, I don't know what you do but we believe the action we are taking is going to save lives in the long run, by maintaining a 24/7 fire cover for London from 113 fully staffed stations. Cut these and people will die. We are passionate about protecting the lives of Londoners so we are not going to lie down and accept conditions that will put them and us at further risk.

Secondly, this is not about salary- despite what you read in Murdochs media. We have accepted a 2 year pay freeze- fair enough in my opinion, we're in a recession so we all have to make sacrifices. It would be nice if we all made these sacrifices- Our beloved Brian Colemans voted himself and other members of the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority (LFEPA) a 30% increase in allowances this year. Scandellous.

Hi everyone,

I've just registered to the forum to try and put and clarify some questions, statements, etc in previous posts.

I'll try and answer as honestly and without bias as I can. There are 4 pages of opinions on here so this may well be a long old post and I salute you if you actually read all of it!

First of all, can I say that I am on the watch due to strike this Saturday. I DO NOT want to walk out of them doors but I honestly feel that, in the long run (only if we win of course) this action will protect Londoners. The real reason behind the authority wanting to change to 12 / 12 shifts if to cut fire cover at night. 12 / 12 shifts will make it much easier for them to close stations at night because it means instead of some firefighters working 2 days and 2 nights they will work 4 days and still be working the same amount of hours as everyone else, so will not need to make them up elsewhere.

The productivty argument is rubbish- we already hit every target the brigade gives us in regards to training and fitting smoke alarms. We could do more on the current system. Despite this, the FBU has outline, in detail other shift systems that would increase productivity, more so than 12 /12s but the LFB will not go for this because they want to close stations at night. How do I know this? The FBU has hold of a leaked document from the LFB outlining plans to reduce night time cover. How the authority continue to deny it, I don't know- the simple fact is they are lying.

"If i don't like cuts to my salary etc i have the choice to quit or be grateful that i at least have a job... "

With respect to you, I don't know what you do but we believe the action we are taking is going to save lives in the long run, by maintaining a 24/7 fire cover for London from 113 fully staffed stations. Cut these and people will die. We are passionate about protecting the lives of Londoners so we are not going to lie down and accept conditions that will put them and us at further risk.

Secondly, this is not about salary- despite what you read in Murdochs media. We have accepted a 2 year pay freeze- fair enough in my opinion, we're in a recession so we all have to make sacrifices. It would be nice if we all made these sacrifices- Our beloved Brian Colemans voted himself and other members of the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority (LFEPA) a 30% increase in allowances this year. Scandellous.

"It really wasn't that long ago that you took similar action?"

Correct- I was 14 in the last dispute in 2003 so, needless to say, I wasn't in the LFB, so any firefighters that went on strike, sorry but I don't agree with us striking for more money, but this is different- this is about reduction in fire cover. I do my job so I know how important it is- people rely on us more than you would think. A house fire in a poor estate in London will not make the news- barely any fires in London do; believe me, we as a Brigade, save many Londoners daily.

"I simply have no respect for the sort of action they are proposing."

If I were a Londoner (I love in Buckinghamshire) I wouldn't be happy either... but I also wouldn't be happy at plans to permenantly reduce fire cover... this will be just a temporary reduction, and with the public support, hopefully it won't be for long. We are being sacked next month- we really have no other choice.

"All public sector services are going to have to make cuts"

There is so much money that could be saved in the LFB. My e-mail address is listed on here and my employers may be lurking- I really - don't want to further jeapordise my job by listing these internal matters but cutting fire cover is the easy option and believe me, a hell of a lot could be saved else where.

"Ask any private sector worker when they last got a pay rise for example..year on year rises just don't exist for them."

And a 2 year (at least) pay freeze for us- like I said- fair game, recession and all that.

"Not sure i like the tone of your last paragraph either.

Comes across as bullying/ scare tactics to gain my vote?"

I can see why you may be intimidated by what was said, but to be fair, the person is right in what they say- simply, the longer it takes us to get there, the less chance of survival of anyone inside.

"working in a very similar pattern to the firefighters, the current pattern seems to me to be inefficient."

Similar shift pattern, fine... similar job? Our work is extremely efficient. You ask for a smoke alarm to be fitted, we wait for members of staff at HQ (not firefighters) to process this all. As soon as it is sent back to us, you'll get it that day. If you dial 999 because you are stuck in your bedroom with smoke pouring in and the temperature rapidly rising, you'll usually get a fire crew there within 5 minutes. That crew will then risk life and limb, not only to rescue you but to save your house as well. We are a very efficient and committed group of men and women.

"If you look at the stats for the number of incidents that firemen attend accross London, they are not spending every hour of every day attending stressful or dangerous incidents."

I am a huge supporter of the Ambulance Service and the Police do a good job too, I don't want this to turn in to a slagging match between the services but show me any member of the emergency services who spends every hour of every day attending dangerous incidents. I've only been a firefighter for 6 months (4 months of training school before that) but have lost count of the amount of house / flat fires I've been too, and as I'm sure you can understand, any fire we enter is dangerous and we know we may not come out of it. No, I don't run in and out of burning buildings every hour of every shift, but we are all prepared to. I'm not even working at what's considered a busy station- some stations will attend 6 or 7 times the amount of calls mine does- yet like I say I've had my fair share of action.

"Given that fire-fighters are not always fighting fires then effective day shifts spent, at least in part, publicising fire prevention policies seems a good idea."

We do this already- we fit numerous smoke alarms each shift, attend any local event to promote fire safety, visit schools, inspect properties and businesses, hand out leaflets in the street. I've even been door to door giving advice- most people didn't like it and considered it cold calling but we've done it.

"But to add some perspective to this, the RNLI are an entirely charitable emergency service. They are also on call 24/7. They don't get paid at all and share the risks on their lives every day."

And an amazing bunch of men and women they are... however the LFB has 6,000 firefighters doing 48 hours a week each. We can't volunteer 48 hours of our time every week for free whilst trying to support a family. We don't do this for the money, we do it to help people. Having said that, we couldn't do it without the money...

" Brian Coleman ? City Hall ? Place adverts for fire fighters in all job centres. Lots of ex-service men and women looking for work."

A hell of a lot of the LFB are ex service men and women- I was in a squad of 12 trainees at training school, 5 of these saw service in Iraq and Afghanistant.

"Using private companies for public safety seems to be going back to the days where you had your insurance through a fire company and if your house burned, if you weren't covered, they stood by and watched. I understand that's not likely but it still seems a step backwards."

You are not a million miles from the truth. Brian Coleman is a councillor for Barnet. He recently proposed an idea to provide a service where residents are charged extra for services provided- IE you want your rubbish collected? You pay... as well as your taxes. This man runs the LFEPA and has just introduced charges to places where we rescue people from their lifts on more than a few occasions. In 10 years time, I dread to think that if we turn up to your house on fire, we will be asking for a cheque before we put it out to cover fuel costs, water costs, equipment maintenance costs etc.

"Do police officers and paramedics get beds? C'mon you are employed to do a job, not to sleep. There are millions of shift workers in the UK and shift work is usually set in blocks giving the body time to adjust."

Police Officers need to patrol the streets to prevent crime... us patrolling streets will not prevent fires. We are employed to do a job, you're quite right. We are employed to prevent fires, and respond to fire and other emergencies. We do a hell of a lot of fire prevention work on day shifts. After midnight we are allowed to sleep, but what preventative measures can we take at that time? Who wants a smoke alarm fitted at 2am? We still respond to fire in this time and attendance times are not affected by us being asleep when the call comes in.

I'll just explain to you my shift pattern to explain why my body tells me I need sleep when I'm on night shifts (excuse me if I sound patronising, I'll try not to be) after coming off my second day shift, I go to bed that night because I'm tired as hell. The next day I have to leave for work at 3.30pm to get in for 6 o'clock start. By midnight, my body is tired again and I need sleep. I know I may not get sleep that night but if I get the chance, I'll take it- people want a refreshed firefighter turning up to help them than one who can barely keep there eyes open. At 9am (if I finish on time) I stay around London as there is no point in going home to come back 9 hours later, I'd have about 3-4 hours at home which isn't worth the petrol. I'm not allowed to stay around the station so can't get my head down anywhere. I'm then back for 6 and need sleep again at midnight. So you can see, I don't have enough time to adjust my sleep pattern accordingly with the night shifts. If I wasn't allowed to sleep, I'd be going more than 48 hours awake... I don't fancy that.

This is already a massively long, and probably boring post so I'm stopping here, as I don't want to be typing away all night. I'll just finish with this:

London's 6000 firefighters are some of the most committed, passionate, hard working people I've ever met. These people are willing to risk never seeing their wives and children again so that Londoners like yourselves can live. At my station, we have a memorial for 3 firefighters who were serving Londoners from the station and one day went to help someone in distress and never came back. This was not one incident, it was 3 seperate ones. I look at the memorials every day to remind me that it could happen to me one day... and I accept that because the people of the worlds greatest city deserve a dedicated fire service. 5 days ago, at a fire in South London, a firefighter broke his back and both his legs when a wall collapsed on him. This is a cause of fire cover being already reduced at the moment. The authority has done their best (and done well) to keep this out of the publics eye- it looks bad on them.

Please remember, this is not about pay, this is not about us doing more hours, this is because the LFEPA thinks it is okay to put you and us at risk by reducing cover. I'm not standing for it so I'm striking next saturday because the LFEPA is refusing to negotiate and told me they're sacking me and every other firefighter next month unless we agree to these changes. I HAVE NO OTHER CHOICE.

Finally, sorry for the long post. If anyone has any questions for me, I'll stick around for a while.....

Take care out there guys and girls.

EDIT: To add on to this post, I've just seen someone saying this has been going on for 5 years. The idea was bought up 5 years ago, but not agreed by the union. Negotiations then stopped and the plans gathered dust. The authority want you to believe they have been negotiating hard for 5 years straight and got no where.

[DJKillaQueen]

We saw this argument every time a station was faced with closure (only to see that the closure had no impact on the safety of the public as claimed in the end).

Can you give us some statistics on just how many fires happen at night on average and how many firemen/ stations are needed to cover them? Because it suggests that if firemen have time to sleep on night shifts then there are clearly too many of them on duty (controversial statement I know but as yet no-one has provided any hard evidence that public safety will be at risk by the changes).

[Kbabe01]

Are you SERIOUS? If you get statistics that there is 1 fire every week in the whole of London it doesnt mean to say next week there wont be 10 a night! Id rather there were a few FF sleeping soundly at night safe in the knowledge they're there if we need them.

[Moflo]

DJKQ The man has just laid out how his shifts work. What difference does it make what the statistics are? One one shift they may have 10 shouts, another 2, then the next 12, then none so gives an average of 8 over the 4 days how does that help the situation? Do you only read the points that you like or do you take notice of what is being said.

IT IS NOT ABOUT MONEY OR HOURS WORKED OR SLEEPING, IT IS ABOUT THE REDUCED COVER IN THE NIGHT that will happen if the LFPP bring in these changes. So if your local station is shut and you dial 999 (not bish bash bosh999 coz he wont come out!) see how much longer it will take for them to get to you!! By the way doctors sleep on their night shifts! Go tell them they shouldn't, you want an alert and competent doctor. You also want an alert and competent firefighter, not one who hasn't slept for 24 hours! And before you rant on I am not comparing firefighters with doctors, but then again doctors don't go to work with the chance they won't go home again! But again that isn't the issue!

[DJKillaQueen]

In that case I just don't agree that the changes will increase the risk you claim. I am sure there will be adaquate cover just as there has been every time a fire station has been closed...in spite of the claims made to the contrary.

And can we cease with this our job is soooo dangerous nonsense. You chose to be a fireman.

[Londonfireman]

DJKillaQueen Wrote:

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

> We saw this argument every time a station was

> faced with closure (only to see that the closure

> had no impact on the safety of the public as

> claimed in the end).

>

> Can you give us some statistics on just how many

> fires happen at night on average and how many

> firemen/ stations are needed to cover them?

> Because it suggests that if firemen have time to

> sleep on night shifts then there are clearly too

> many of them on duty (controversial statement I

> know but as yet no-one has provided any hard

> evidence that public safety will be at risk by the

> changes).

In London? What station closures?? There haven't been any for a long time as far as I'm aware???

Here is a link to London Fire Brigades latest incidents. I would have an educated guess that only around 5% of the major fires we attend are listed. You will notice that the last incident shown, a man was killed in a flat fire in Sutton. Something I neglected to say in my last post is that fire deaths are up by 20% in London.

Out of the 20 incidents listed on that page, 14 were attended by night shift staff. In those incidents, 2 people died and 9 people were rescued by firefighters. Last week, 15 people were rescued from a building fire in the night by the initial firefighters on the scene.

We attend more incidents in the day but generally attend more developed fires at night and also attend a lot more 'persons reported' fires (fires with people trapped) at night.

http://www.london-fire.gov.uk/LatestIncidents.asp

EDIT: Yep, I chose to be a fireman. I know it's a dangerous career and firefighter deaths are increasing rapidly to figures seen in the 60's and 70's. The point is sort of irrelevent to the topic of conversation but I'm just trying to get across to you that we aren't the bad guys; WE are the ones who will risk life and limb to get you out of a raging inferno, NOT the polititians who have never been firefighters but think they know all about how the fire service works.

[DJKillaQueen]

If you look at the annual national deaths of fire fighters over the past 20 years you will see they vary between 1 and 8 per year. Compare that to up to 60 construction workers per years and 14 Police Officers two years ago. Now one death is one too many but it is just not true to say that there is a significant number of deaths amongst fire fighters.

[Moflo]

Thats the point there has not been adaquate cover. And there wont be especially with Assetco! You have been warned so best of luck!

[DJKillaQueen]

I don't need warning about anything.

[Moflo]

Oh sorry did I upset you?

[Londonfireman]

DJKillaQueen Wrote:

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

> If you look at the annual national deaths of fire

> fighters over the past 20 years you will see they

> vary between 1 and 8 per year. Compare that to up

> to 60 construction workers per years and 14 Police

> Officers two years ago. Now one death is one too

> many but it is just not true to say that there is

> a significant number of deaths amongst fire

> fighters.

Can you send me a link to the 14 police officers killed two years ago please? Since 2003, 18 firefighters have lost their lives in a fire.

2.5 per year is a good figure in comparison with the rest of the world. In America, they lost on average 110 firefighters per year... yet there are more fire, per firefighter every year in the UK. Are fires less dangerous in the UK? No... The resident of the UK have the privilege of having the best firefighters in the world.

We are going off on a tangent a bit...

EDIT AGAIN:

The figures I was working on were based between 2003 and 2008.

Add to that Firefighter James Shears and Firefighter Alan Bannon, who died after helping to rescue 50 people from a high rise fire in Southampton.

[*Bob*]

Londonfireman Wrote:

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

The

> resident of the UK have the privilege of having

> the best firefighters in the world.

I must let the only fireman in our family know.. he's a stationmaster in Australia.

[Londonfireman]

> I must let the only fireman in our family know..

> he's a stationmaster in Australia.

Tell him if he wants to see real firefighters in action he's welcome to come see us at work any time!

[Moflo]

Londonfireman, Thank you for your posting I hope ED read it. I dispair at some of the comments but such is the situation because of the negative media. I personally think the FBU should have been a bit more pro-active. I hope sense prevails and you all are able to get on with your work in keeping London safe. x

[*Bob*]

Londonfireman Wrote:

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

> Tell him if he wants to see real firefighters in

> action he's welcome to come see us at work any

> time!

I can only speculate at what his response might be. Actually maybe I just won't mention it.

[Londonfireman]

Whatever it may be, I'll put it down to firefighter banter!;-)

[laincoubert]

I dont think 'who has the most dangerous job' competitions are very helpful. It is obviously a dangerous profession and has some of the highest long term health risks associated with any job too http://www.howtobecome.info/articles/Being-a-Firefighter-What-Health-Risks-Are-Involved/2440/338.html is a useful take on the dangers if they really interest you. Though I suspect the guys a sellafield could out do everyone in the long term health risk contest.

Dj kills queen, you sound very much like your attitude is "I'm alright, I don't need em, so what's the point in having them around"

Which is fine so long as you dong need them and perhaps you never will, I hope you never do. But guaranteed, someone does, everyday. And they will need them fast

[Londonfireman]

Absoloutely Iain, it's not a competition, and we're certainly heading away from the main subject matter, but I was just trying to make the point that these people are willing to risk everything for Londoners... All we ask in return is a little support when we need it.

[laincoubert]

Apparently Coleman has given ken livingstone a cast iron guarantee that there will not be cuts or jobs lost. That's that then, if he's promised, everyone might as well sign up now because a politician would never ever lie would they.

If I was a ff I would not sign the new contract, I would just get another job. Leave Coleman and his scab buccaneers to their juicy contract and let London fend for it's self.

[Londonfireman]

Well I'm sure good old honest Coleman wouldn't lie, he seems like a trustworthy individual. I bet he never took a back hander to accept the Asset Co contract either!!

The only trouble is Iain, I've dreamed of doing this job since I was 3 years old. I love the job, I look forward to going to work every day and I feel satisfied when I come home. I don't want to leave but I also don't want the LFB to go from the worlds best fire service to the fire service all others avoid being. Of course I'm not going to suggest that the brigades managers are intent on ruining the LFB for personal gains such as knight hoods and big f*ck off pensions.

I can't transfer because recruitment is being stopped all over the country

I don't particularly want to because I love protecting this amazing city, the history of the LFB is one to be immensley proud of.

[Moflo]

And I think it is then same for most FF's. My son has wanted to be a FF since he was 7. He applied twice before being accepted after a two year application process. Then 5months training, plus numerous courses in safety procedures such and chemical and terrorist attacks. To leave all that would be heartbreaking for him!

[Msgee]

I've not read the whole thread but I'm ::o at some of the comments on here

If I was a firefighter I'm pretty sure I'd be thinking: nuts to you lot- I'm off to do something a bit less risky. "Noone asked you to be a firefighter"???- are you going to say that to all members of the emergency services when they have a grievance? I'm not. I'm grateful for every last one of 'em.

there seems to be an ingrained attitude in this country that anyone who goes on strike- for whatever reason and under whatever circumstances- must be taking liberties. Margaret Thatcher certainly did her job good and proper

good luck to the lot of you.

[Marmora Man]

Londonfireman, your statistic of 2.5 deaths a year in the Fire Service is clearly 2.5 too many. However, dangerous work cannot, of itself, justify uncritical support for what to me, despite four pages of comment and at least three requests from me, an unexplained and unnecessary strike. It could be about shift patterns, or maybe the right of management to manage or the right of unions to oppose management or something else entirely.