FBU A step too far..Its beyond a joke

[Jim Creak]

The goodwill between the public and the Fire Authority will not sustain this new abuse..

The taxpayer certainly does not get anything like value for money from the £2 billion spent annually on the fire service, with a fortune wasted on inefficient use of staff.
Firefighters have to work only 142 shifts a year, made up of 71 night shifts and 71 day shifts, allowing them plenty of time to hold down second jobs. Yet, even with these limited hours, their pay is well above the public sector average.
Nationwide, the basic salary for a trained firefighter is £28,200 (excluding overtime), rising to £33,200 in London, significantly above the average earnings in the capital for police officers and nurses.
 With overtime, that figure will be increased to anything between £40,000 and £50,000. Moreover, a watch manager in charge of up to 12 firefighters is paid around £40,000 a year before overtime.
On top of this, most current firefighters are entitled to an excellent pension after 30 years of service once they have reached the age of 50, though, due to a Government reform of 2006, new recruits will have to complete 40 years’ service before they will be able to receive their pension.
Despite the protestations of the FBU, firefighting is seen as one of the best jobs in the ¬country. That is why there is no shortage of new recruits, with at least 27 applicants for every vacancy.
Nor do many firefighters leave before taking their pensions. Last year in London, just 15 employees, less than 0.3 per cent of the entire workforce, quit their jobs, a level of ¬stability unheard of in any other occupation.
The FBU might have exploited public sentimentality to protect their empire, but the reality is we no longer need this vast standing army of well-paid ¬professionals who, because of the nature of their work and shift patterns, spend so much time hanging round their stations or doing other jobs.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1324092/Fire-Brigades-Union-defends-jaw-dropping-perks-gross-inefficiencies.html?ito=feeds-newsxml#ixzz13jAkuFo5

[Nearlybaldandgrey]

Interesting comments from the Daily Mail.

I wish I had time to 'hang around the station' when I'm doing one of my 142 shifts. Perhaps they don't realise that my working week is 48 hours, much longer than the average working week and clearly, they have no idea of what we do during that time.

Our salary is decent, but firefighters fought to get this in 2002/3 when many unskilled jobs paid more than our 'professional job' to quote the mail. London salaries are subject to 'London weighting' so will be more and managers are paid to manage, not just personnel but incidents where critical deisions have to be made quickly with little or no information.

There is no mention there of the cuts that the Fire and Rescue Service is about to face ... up to 25% reduction in funding for many, the fact that alot of Services have had to impose pay freezes, recruitment freezes and crewing reductions, yet will be expected to deliver the same high standard of front line service to the public we so proudly serve.

[nearlythere]

I'm afraid that, as with all conflicts, the first casualty here is the truth. The press and fbu are sacrificing the integrity of an honourable profession with lies and spin purely for headline grabbing purposes.
Reading an article by the dep political editor in the Daily Mail yesterday and knowing the FB I wonder how I can ever believe anything written in this paper again.

Is it a requirement of good journalism  to be able to ignore the facts for a good story?

Certainly a case of the press ensuring we only hear what it thinks we should hear.

PS. Anyone know the number of applications there normally are when a Fleet St job comes up?

[Nearlybaldandgrey]

Certainly a case of the press ensuring we only hear what it thinks we should hear.

Or what it's told to publish.

[Jim Creak]

As a union of labour supporter, I think this stinks.....If it is more press lies then I hope the individuals concerned sue the pants off the Daily Telegraph from where this information came....If it is true it is disgraceful

A respected profession and its members cannot justify this profligacy....."Some pigs more equal than others" quote unquote at this trough of public money.

Daily Telegraph.....FBU Union leaders?

"The payments included tens of thousands of pounds worth of perks including pension payments, mortgages costs and the contributions towards the cost of running a car.

Documents filed with the Union Certification Officer show five officers at the FBU shared packages worth £598,833 in 2009 and £587,778 in 2008.

The largest amount went to Matt Wrack, the union’s general secretary, who received £128,328, including £46,250-worth of pension contributions and £4,584 for his car. His basic pay was £69,340.

Andy Dark, Mr Wrack’s deputy, received £121,468, including £65,413 in basic pay, £43,631 for his pension and £4,773 in a car allowance.

Three other national officers – Sean Starbuck, Paul Woolstenholmes and John McGhee – received between £114,167 and £118,719 in 2009.

The accounts do not make clear which of these sums paid to which officer. One of the national offices received £14,042 towards the costs of his car, fuel and mortgage. Another received £8,477 towards his car and fuel.

There are 4,500 frontline fire fighters in London. A fully trained-up or “competent” fireman is paid £28,499 a year, plus £5,021 for London weighting, excluding pension contributions and car allowances.

Value for money campaigners criticised the payments. Emma Boon, campaign manager at the TaxPayers’ Alliance, said: “It is hypocritical for FBU leaders to attack high earners and call for strikes while they themselves live a life of well-paid luxury. "


The changes required are reasonable and the members should accept them, much worse is happening throughout the economy.

[kurnal]

The changes required are reasonable and the members should accept them, much worse is happening throughout the economy.

The changes required should be identified, justified,  negotiated in good faith by both parties and agreed.

Neither side seems capable of basic civilised industrial relations. The FBU must recognise the need to negotiate on this, the employer is wrong to impose a choice of these conditions  or the sack. 

[mr angry]

As I understand it since Matt Wrack took position he earns the average wage of a uniformed member of the fire service, whatever that amounts to I am unsure. This was his pledge leading up to his election.

[AnthonyB]

How often are pledges forgotten after election in politics though?

And don't try and tell me Unions are not politicised....

[mr angry]

Yes Anthony election pledges can often be forgotten but it would not take much to confirm for anyone interested.

As far as being politicised goes, well not quite sure what you refer to here but I can confirm that the fbu are no longer financially affiliated with the Labour or indeed any political party.

[Jim Creak]

Well I speak as I find and it would seem that the FBU have seen reason and a bit of old common sense now prevails. I hope it will continue for the sake of the profession and not outdated selfish political ideals that have no place in the 21st century

[mr angry]

Jim, can I assume that you consider firefighters right to strike an outdated, selfish polical ideal?

[Auntie LIn]

Well I certainly do, having just received a letter from a "full-time professional firefighter" with an outer London Brigade asking me to use his services as a Fire Risk Assessor "on my days off".   There was a time when I would have had sympathy with brigades, for the job they are employed to do, but the more I hear of their dissatisfaction with salaries which frankly a huge number of the population of the UK would give their eye teeth for (and be well satisfied with, thank you very much) and the amount of time they have in which to do all these other jobs - nice little earners - the more closely I ally them with politicians - and I thought nobody had a higher opinion of their worth than them!   Seriously considering changing my name to Mrs Grumpy!

[mr angry]

So Aunty (or is it Mrs Grumpy), is 42 hours a week too short a working week for your liking?

Do you disagree with anyone having more than one job or is it simply firefighters?

Is it acceptable for coucillors, MPs, doctors, nurses etc etc..........?

I am not quite sure what you mean when making reference to "their dissatisfaction with salaries" as there has been no campaign on pay touted as far as I am aware.

[Username]

I know it's going back abit now, but wasn't one of the outcomes of the '78 strike the current shift system, and with it an understanding within the Union that they wouldn't condone second jobs?

I know alot of things have changed since then, not all (sadly) for the better!

[nearlythere]

The Union is more than happy that many firefighters have second jobs. I don't mind and I think it is everyone's right to work as they wish.
But when they have a second job and are on strike they still have an income of sort and are less likely to suffer hardship, thus staying out longer. Some may even be better or no worse off. Happy union officials.
I have never done the double and can remember standing regularily on a freezing picket line whilst other strikers drove past on their way to work tooting their horns. Until I caught myself on that is.