Please read and support your firefighters!!!!

[legalbeagle]

Moflo, don't misunderstand. I'm a supporter of the Firefighters. I think that, somewhat sadly, some change is inevitable, but I really hope it doesn't compromise the safety of the public and firefighters. For what it's worth, I just can't see the sense in keeping firefighters awake at night. I think of them as a sort of insurance policy. They are there just in case. If there is a fire, they wake up and turn up PDQ and do their job. If there's no shout, they sleep. Seems sensible to me. Since they don't know whether there will be one shout, or ten, or none, they have to provide the same level of cover just in case. But they don't need to be sitting there, awake, for the sake of it. In this respect, they aren't like the police or nurses or factory workers on night shift, because those people actually have something to do during the hours they are at work. The firefighters don't. They can't do fire safety inspections, or drills, or training, or fitting smoke alarms for the public, at 3am. If there IS something useful they could be doing, I'd understand the need to keep them awake.

I don't, however, like the idea of them striking. I wish they could find another way, though I confess I don't know what it is. I'm worried for public safety during a strike, but also for the firefighters, who might get too entrenched with the unions to negotiate. And they will have to negotiate in the end. I've never witnessed a strike that has ended with one side winning everything they want. If you have to strike, be respectful of those who choose not to. "Scab" is not a word anyone should be using. This is a democracy. Give others the respect you want to be shown when you exercise your right to speak out.

[Emerson Crane]

Well said legalbeagle, and I totally agree with you.

[laincoubert]

They wish there was another way too. But the FFs only had two options on their voting paper, Yes or No. There was no mechanism to say "we dont want the new contracts and we dont want to strike either, can we vote for more discussions and consultation with us on finding an amicable solution"

Their only remaining power once presented with a strike ballet was a yes vote.

If they had voted No, that would have been acceptance of the new contracts.

A FF i have spoken with recently rather naively believed that a Yes vote wouldnt lead to immediate strike action. He had expected that giving the union bosses a mandate to srike with the yes vote would have given them more bargaining leverage in the negotiations and the commencement of strike action would have been a last resort used in the more distant future. He and some of his colleagues are upset that the mandate to strike was not used as a tool for a longer time before the strike dates being decided upon, these were I understand revealed very shortly after the vote results were counted.

I have heard that a large number of officers have now quit the union and will be working on the strike days. FFs however are in a tricky position, they will be under pressure not to break ranks and ignore the union directives. A rock and a hard place for them.

Worse still is the possible eventualities on strike days, again lose lose for FFs:

If there few fires and those that occur are easily dealt with by assett co, this will strengthen the position of the employers who will have demonstrated that their contingency force is as goood as the real thing and that they can cope just fine with these guys during walkouts

If there is one or more major incidents which they fail to cope with adequately, the finger will be pointed firmly at the FFs for irresponsibly abandoning their duties to protect the public against these disasters.

Both possibilities are a PR nightmare for FFs. But they will be entrenched by the union already and will sadly no doubt follow directives for now. On the positive side, the financial pressures of not being paid will gradually crack them all and pretty soon I reckon forcing them back to work! they will probably be happy to sign anything just to be able to pay the bill and get their wages coming in again.

So yes strikes are bad news for everyone and will not achieve them their desired outcomes. They have put their faith in their unions who will in the end, inadvertantly let them down. However, in my opinion they are only having to put their faith in the unions because their employer has already let them down by not negotiating these changes and finding enough common ground to reach agreement without resorting to section 188.

Final point, I wonder how long the bad feeling between FFs and management will last following this dispute, it will leave a bitter taste in the mouths of both sides and morale will be rock bottom. You do not need to be sigmund freud to know that an unhappy workforce who resent their employers and the conditions under which they work will at best be unenthusiastic at worst. Well good morale must be one of the best ways to maximise efficiency of a workforce

[Moflo]

I think you are right there, there obviously is going to be bad feelings on both sides, If the Section 188 is removed then no strike, I take the point about the FBU, I personally do not think they have handled this well, The losers in all of this is the FF's and eventually the public if the changes that they think will come through later, ie closing stations and reduced night time cover. They do not want to strike, who does but I think they have been minipulated into this. As statistics show most fires are at night, so I do not think that Assetco will be stretched too far,this the managment know. Although how they will be equiped for RTA's I'm not sure, as for as I know they will not have the equipment for this. Yes enevitably the service is going to change, time will tell if it will be for the better. LB I take your point, and well said.

I can only speak from a peronal standpoint, my son as a FF doesn't want to strike, he cannot afford to lose a days wage plus the 20% they are alread deducting, but he will support his colleagues!

The have put forward different shift patterns but all have been ignored, the suggested the same system as US 24hour shifts, most feel this would work best but again LFB have ignored these proposals. Its seems to be accept or go! Does not seem right to me, maybe I am missing something, or being too simplistic!

[Pilgrim]

Apparently the Brigade have formally rejected the 24hour system favoured by FF's, Ticks all the boxes concerning overtime and change over patterns. Not given reason for rejection. Have given 11/13 and some minor concessions, committee will discuss later today.

[Kbabe01]

I think its a shame its coming to this. I really dont see the ff have any choice but to strike. On the other hand though i dont think this strike will make any difference. Its sad.

[Moflo]

Pearson!! I'm here! you have got your way and they have been removed! Cant understand why Pilgrim's has been taken off, Is this sensorship?? how undemocratic? By the way as I was saying, Firefighters have broken the strike to cover an incident as I thought they would anyway. Assetco crews could not cope. But news censorship will not cover that! Some of them have refused to cover because they will not cross picket lines. There, I'm finished til next time!

[frierntastic]

Moflo,

Your glee in announcing that the Assetco crews could not cope is distasteful at best, sickening at worst. Striking firefighters put public lives at risk and is totally irresponsible. Thank God the police, army and NHS are not so self-interested.

F

[reggie]

Moflo

You have my support but does that mean that you are justified in hanging on to working practices that are being tightened up?

These are not normal financial times, the shit has hit the fan and flexible has to be the response to getting squeezed. As a self employed person my income has been cut by 50% in the last 12 months, no pension, no union, no boss to blame just half pay.

It is true that your job is more important than mine but does that mean your response to the economic meltdown should differ from the way others are responding?

The Suburban Pirate-taking moderation to the extreme

[annaj]

It's not censorship, Moflo,just keeping the place tidy. You said yourself the moderators would decide and they have.

No-one is trying to supress debate on this topic. You can post all you want on this thread, but there's no need to fill the whole page with the same thing.

I'm not sure how I feel about the strike, but I saw a group of men trying to obstruct and heckling a fire engine trying to get up Crystal Palace Road, with its blue lights on, earlier and what I am sure of is that, whichever side of the divide you're on, trying to stop a fire engine on the way to a call is irresponsible.

[Moflo]

I agree and am sure it was not firefighters as they are all at their stations picketing. The FBU have reported that the so called replacements have been caught using red lights to get to Macdonalds (Actually pulled over by police, my nephew confirmed this, he is police) not answering calls by going to status 0. One even asked at a station if by working for Assetco would it help his FF application. These are the people who are protecting you today. If they are crossing picket lines then the must expect to be put on the spot. But IF they were on a shout lets hope they could deal with it because plenty of others couldnt and fire crews have gone out to cover. While on strike and attending an incident and are injured they do not get sick pay or worse come to worse they have no death cover! That is the type person you want to protect you, not someone who thinks Macdonalds is important!

[Moflo]

Also I take our point about other postings. But one was to wind someone up!!

[laincoubert]

I have heard rumour (and today has been filled with all sorts of outrageous rumour from both sides) that a flat in south london was on fire and not dealt with adequately by the private fire force and as a result the fire got bigger and resulted in several flats and the entire roof being destroyed.

Without doubt this is terrible news for the residents who undeservedly have been let down catastrophically. I lost my home to a fire and this is obviously a terrible and sad event. But who let them down??????

Not Asset co. They are in the business of making money and they got the chance to profit from the 12 million Mr Dobson wanted to spend on a reserve force and they have understandably done it as cheaply as possible in order to maximise their share holder gains. They were never going to have anything more than a mickey mouse rag tag bunch with very limited capability.

So its the firefighters or the management. I know this will divide opinion, but for me responsibility lies solely with the management.

They merely needed to lift the section 188 industrial relations notice and resume fair negotiations with the unions and the strike would have been averted. The strike only took place because with the deadline looming in november, there is a very limited window remaining for FFs to oppose the new contracts. Once november 25th is upon them, they will be left with one choice, sign or be sacked. Lifting the 188 will remove the excessive pressure from the management and allow fair negotiations to resume and a genuinely worthwhile settlement to be agreed which benefits Londoners without changes which are too detrimental to FFs lives. They know changes are inevitable, but they deserve the opportunity to limit the damage to their personal lives, and the 188 deadline is adding unnecessary pressure for them to take this extreme action now which benefits no one. We can all only hope that they will see the sense and remove this pressure before the next strike date and enter into a meaningful consultation.

[Kbabe01]

This thread is getting nowhere. All of us who support the firefighters will continue to do whatever we can to help them get the outcome they want and those who dont obviously have their reasons. I for one hope the non supporters are right and the changes will be for the better but i very much doubt it. The guy in charge is nothing but a corrupt fat cat who will do nothing but harm. Ive never been more sure of anytthing.

[Moflo]

Iaincoubert.

The fire at Millwall was fact. The Assetco could not cope, took too long to respond and could not deal with the extent of the fire. A catastrophy for all! FF's tried to help but were told to remove themselves. Out of 27 Assetco cover only 11 completed the day. 2 appliances wrecked! Kbabe01 is right, lets hope sense will prevail and management see what they have to do, remove section 188!

[Pearson]

Moflo

"The fire at Millwall was fact. The Assetco could not cope, took too long to respond and could not deal with the extent of the fire. A catastrophy for all! FF's tried to help but were told to remove themselves"

Forgive me:

Would the Firefighters that went to help be considered 'scabs' for breaking the picket.

Or is it different for FF's.

Or did they go to assist out of guilt?

This is a genuine question, i am not trying to be contentious.

Would just like to know what you think.

[Pilgrim]

Pearson for goodness sake, what would you expect them to do? They are damned if they do and damned if they don't. I suspect you are playing devil's advocate? I cannot believe you are that cynical in "real life" Have you noticed how a news blackout on the facts seems to be the order of the day? Dobsons spin on things are not accurate but I suspect you wouldn't believe the FF's either so no further on are we?

[Fuschia]

Of course the FF would step in if they saw the private FF making a mess of things and lives were at risk, they have been saying as much amongst themselves and would hardly call each other scabs for stepping in in those circumstances!

[Fuschia]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/frpix/sets/72157625105534167/with/5110755444/

[Huguenot]

I don't think anyone is surprised that a part time fire crew isn't as good as a full time professional one.

I do think FFs need to be very careful with stories of this kind as it looks suspiciously like an attempt to threaten and blackmail both the Brigade and the general public.

This one, whilst of course extremely saddening for the family, appears to be somewhat smaller than the story makes out. In fact it seems to be simply a fire in the converted roofspace. The curtains in the top bedroom and still drawn and undamaged.

With 2 fire crews already in attendance, it would have been a very crowded site - I can't see how three more crews could fit into it.

Finally, the fire crews arrived at 5.20pm, and the strikers could only have arrived there at 6.15pm earliest. It seems very likely to me that by the time they had arrived the fire would have been under control if not extinguished. That may have been the real reason the crews were turned back.

So not only does this scare story seem underhand, it also seem like it might not quite be giving us the full picture.

[Fuschia]

Huguenot Wrote:

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

>> it also seem like it might not quite be giving us

> the full picture.

As opposed to official press reports, which as we all know, can always be relied on...

[Pearson]

Huguenot Wrote:

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

> So not only does this scare story seem underhand,

> it also seem like it might not quite be giving us

> the full picture.

_______________________________________________________

+1 To this.

Just don't appear to get straight answers to straight question.

Throughout this thread.

[Moflo]

Fuschia Wrote:

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

> http://www.flickr.com/photos/frpix/sets/7215762510

> 5534167/with/5110755444/

I hink this covers it.

[Moflo]

Sorry about spellings but comp playing up after baby spilt drink!!

Pearson, I get the feeling what ever is said you won't believe anyway so no point in trying! It has been spelt out by plenty of posters including a London Firefighter and others, both sides so what ever you want to think is fine. I and plenty of others know that their cause is a just one and they will continue to fight for their jobs and your fire service!

http://www.demotix.com/news/484789/firefighters-strike-after-sack-threat?awesm=fbshare.me_AVjkm

[laincoubert]

Point understood regarding how this could be interpreted, there is very little PR which will actually benefit the striking FFs regardless how they present it.

As for this incident, the loft and roof is totally destroyed. LFB crews would have entered and tackled the fire offensively, i.e. by entering the roof space and hitting the seat of the fire as it was developing.

Assett co crews only tackled from the outside. I.e. dumping thousends of litres of water up and on to the roof drowing the fire. This has two consequences firstly it takes significantly longer to extinguish thus much more fire damage occurs.

Secondly, the thousends of litres of water will travel through the house destroying furniture and fixtures and floors right through the property. The curtains may have survived, but I doubt anything else below the fire will be fit for use ever again.

Good firefighting uses a minimum amount of water to extinguish, if done perfectly without any surplas water damaging the property below. Secondly LFB crews with additional man power that should have been there to assist will have salvage crews in the property below the fire level using plastic sheeting and other tools to capture excess water and minimise additional damage caused by the firefighting. The two assett co crews would not have had sufficient personnel to do this, and were not permitted to enter the property anyway until they had washed it away from the outside first.

So yes this is tragic and will feel like "the end of the world" to the home owner regardless of how well insured they are. And the LFB will be paying a large contribution to then insurer for additional damage that was caused by the assett co crews not dealing with it correctly by entering and attacking the seat of the fire close up and using too much water.

This would not have happened if the LFB resumed fair negotiations and removed the 188 notice to terminate FF contracts.

Shame this publicity probably serves to damage the FFs case further