fbu bnp

[dave bev]

kurnal, the original question was quite simple and specifically had reference to the ukf&rs and a particular trade union. i tried to offer opinion on the questions asked in the original post.

- if you want to discuss a much wider issue then you have every right to do so. i have every right not to.

dave bev

[kurnal]

Dave you make a fair point and I understand your position. I suppose otherwise you have two choices- spend your life on the forums or  never visit at all. Some things are better discussed over a beer after all.
Best wishes.

[dave bev]

mines lager, best drunk watching england beat the swedes, id like to say i'll be thinking of this topic when im drinking it but .......... !

ps, whats this bit about having a life LOL

best wishes

dave bev

[kurnal]

In terms of maineroad's last posting I dont know any details of the case and dont want to pry. But I can think of a number of cases where fire service personnel have been accused of unacceptable behaviour under the heading of harassment or discrimination and in some of these cases the accusations can be unfounded or malicious. (On the other hand the accused may be guilty as charged). Their Union is usually not prepared to support them - IIR they hold a regional hearing to decide if they will offer support -but the accused has little if any say in this.
The outcome is that the accused is considered guilty and has to prove themselves innocent, a complete reversal of UK justice. And they are on their own and have no help to do this.
Very often the first act of the CFO is to suspend them-  this so called neutral act can have a devastating effect on an individuals mental health as they become totally isolated from all support mechanisms close to them, and unable to gather the evidence with which to defend their case without expensive help from a lawyer.

I recollect one individual isolated in this way for many months before a hearing at which they were totally exonerated. In the final stages, whilst under a medical certificate, they were then visited in their own home by investigating  staff, their chosen representative denied to them (not a serving member)  and taped interviews held there.

This cannot be right. Even murderers and paedophiles have representation. All Unions should find a way of representing their individual  members in addition to their wider objectives.

[dave bev]

dear all, this is turning into an fbu bashing thread, and im getting a bit peed off when posts are made that are incorrect. i dont know why youre posting kurnal, but perhaps you have an agenda? at least be honest if you do.

do you know what the fbu policy is? please take the time to read it, then i will be willing to take up the gauntlet you have thrown and defend the position the fbu has taken.

dont forget you will need to read the conference decisions from 2005 to find the true position.

the rest of the info you offer re 'policy' is also wrong, even before conference 2005.

one of my main gripes is that all officials follow the fbu guidance. that guidance is decided by the members as to how they wish things to happen, it is not made up as we go along, nor does it change because a new boss comes along and changes it. the members determine policy and the members change policy when the majority are not happy with the policy, a minor fault of democracy unfortunately.

and if you truly do want an honest and open debate - try using your real name!

dave bev

[messy]

Dave

I declared myself a critic of the 'representation' policy from day one as I could see it would be misued or even abused. I was right.  I did read the entire FBU policy before making up my mind.

My main complaint is that FBU seem to read 'representation' as 'support'. This is not the case, and has been mentioned earlier, in the real world, even persons accused of the most awful offences are offered representation, on the basis of UK law that persons should be treated as 'Innocent until proven guilty'

The FBU policy of establishing whether the accused had an 'arguable defence' prior to representing him/her was the point at which I felt rather let down by my union. This is the job of the discipline panel and not the FBU

All FBU members are at risk from this policy. I, as a manager - sometimes make decisions that colleagues make not like/agree with . I feel extremely vulnerable as I feel that my union might not be there to support me if I p1ss off the wrong person and false allegations are made against me as a result.

I too agree that bullying in any form has no place in the UKFRS or FBU, but there must be a fairer way than this to deal with looking after all members interests.

I have tried to find the up-to-date policy on the FBU website to see if my argument still stands. However I cannot find it. Any chance of anyone pointing me in the right direction??

Lastly, Dave, please don't feel I am bashing the FBU or any individual. It is my personal opinion that this policy is grossly unfair. I do not post under my real name for various reasons. I cannot see how this hinders on line debate!

[dave bev]

messy, the policy is being rewritten - you will need to look at the conference decisions (2004/2005) to see where it is going to be ammended. i understand your concern re the location of an arguable defence but the alternative is also just as (and i think more) concerning. im not sure this the place to debate fbu policies but you may welcome the changes?

the point is that fbu policies are determined and developed by the members and a democratic decision taken at conference. officials then must follow the policy, they dont have a choice. its when they dont follow the policy or do what they should do within the policy. where problems occur, and they do and will continue to occur from time to time. i would like to believe by accident rather than design.

as for on line debate, you know i welcome it under normal circumstances, however that leaves it open for 'mischievous' comment that can not be attributable to anyone. i think some posts in this thread are exactly that.

dave bev

[maineroad]

kurnal,your last post sums my case up spot on ,dave you are right in that my original point was about suppressing debate when there is clearly growoing support for the BNP & worse still in working class areas i.e dagenham,barking ,east mids ect ,these are labour areas historically not daily mail land ,why are these core supporters voting BNP the working class movement needs to address this ASAP ,I include the FBU & its members as part of this movement & therefore part of the debate

[kurnal]

Theres certainly no intention on my part to use these forums for union bashing- and I have no reason to do so.
I was a member for most of my career apart from an aberration for a couple of years in the early 80s when  I joined NAFO - a big mistake- done in frustration at the politics of others at the time.

But its like this- if my car is acting up I dont spend hours berating the manufacturer , instead I discuss the problems with others to try and find a way of making it run better. But whilst I want it to go better I'm  not so dedicated or concerned as to want to roll up my sleeves and fix it myself. Hypocritical- probably. But I did my bit as a union rep for many years, a branch secretary through the 77 strike, and one of a FBU deputation selected to meet the prime minister. No fight left now  and I have no wish to lead an argument - but still interested to add my penn'eth to  any discussion thats going on that interests me.  And when I talk piffle I am quite happy to be corrected. just like the old days in the job with the heated discussions round the coffee table. For me the forums have just replaced the coffee table.
In terms of equal opportunities in the fire service its quite difficult to conduct a free and easy open debate. If anything its easier nowadays but there are still barriers, no go areas, poeple feel uneasy about exploring their views publicly for fear of being judged so issues dont get properly aired. People put up barriers and hide behind them. Thats a real shame. And when cases do occur they are often not handled well. And just for the sake of clarity I would add that the people who have sought my advice and help as an accused friend in the past were not all Union members in any case.

As far as being anonymous thats just not true. If you wish to look, all my personal details are visible to all. Even the ugly bits.

[Chris Houston]

As far as being anonymous thats just not true. If you wish to look, all my personal details are visible to all. Even the ugly bits.

That's true, follow the link to "Kurnal"'s website for a personal bio!

[messy]

In terms of equal opportunities in the fire service its quite difficult to conduct a free and easy open debate. If anything its easier nowadays but there are still barriers, no go areas, poeple feel uneasy about exploring their views publicly for fear of being judged so issues dont get properly aired. People put up barriers and hide behind them. Thats a real shame. And when cases do occur they are often not handled well. .

I believe this attitude of fear is endemic across the UK at present, and the fire service is no different.

It is very difficult to debate an opposite view when discussing equal ops, as the racist or sexist allegations are sure to follow which tend to end any useful discussions.


CRE boss Trevor Phillips's remarks at the weekend about changing the law to legalise positive discrimination in order to address minority recruitment within the Police will surely ripple out to the UKFRS. God help any who debate against this idea.

So it's within this atmosphere of anxiety and the fear of being stigmatised as a racist or sexist that the FBU set policies. It's no wonder we (FBU) end up with PC equal ops systems - like the representation issue- which don't work

The BNP are a legal party. I say again that I do not (and could not) support their racist agenda but I support their right to exist within the law. Employers and the FBU should leave well alone unless an individual's actions bring them into conflict with discipline procedures/rules

[kurnal]

Whats true Chris? The bit about the ugly bits?

[Chris Houston]

Whats true Chris? The bit about the ugly bits?

It's true that you are not anonymous.  I would not comment on a FireNet member's appearance.  Everyone is beautiful in the eyes of the Forum Admin.  :lol:

[dave bev]

i think you'll find my post talked about those who hold and express such views having no place in the ukf&rs - right or wrong - the rest is just padding!

and if it isnt your car whats it to do with you whether it gets 'mended' or not?

dave bev

[kurnal]

Dave
many people buy classic car mags to reminisce about happy days and cars they once owned- and even join the owners clubs. And sometimes the former owners can give useful advice to the cars new owners. ( but not always welcome!)
Best wishes.