Fire People Are getting On My tits

40%- WTF?

Give the money to the nurses, the fire job is a great job, thats why they got so many applicants for each and every position. It's statistally not very dangerous, they play lots of snooker, and I would sooner fight a fire than spend a Saturday night working on an A&E hospital ward.

They can't hold us to ransom like this demanding this kind of rise. They say fireman in US get 30k a year, but so what? in Africa, they get like nothing hardly. You cant compare US wages with UK wages when it suits your cause.

[insane_in_da_membrane]

There's already been one death because of the strikes, They should just raise their wages by the 11% (Maybe a bit more, who knows) and fire anyone who disagrees

[LHC]

Most people would happily be insulted by a 11% salary increase.

And I can't wait until a fireman's house burns down.

[Gayle29uk]

I need a 40% payrise just to match what they earn now, never mind after the rise.

I agree etc, and they and workers like them should be banned from striking ever again. There should be an independant body like ACAS to solve their problems.

I didnt know somebody had died already, but its inevitable i guess.

Damn them greedy buggers.

[Jammers]

Theres only one man who can handle this crisis, and he is a woman. Please come back Margaret Thatcher

[Gayle29uk]

Originally posted by Jammers
Please come back Margaret Thatcher

\o/

I've been saying that for years.

[Ragnarak]

ok

assume i'm ignornt (cos i am )

how much do fireman get payed for risking their lives on a daily basis on average now?

and how does this compare to army/police/etc?

I'm sure Hitler's policies on Trade Unions and the like would soon sort out this little crisis.


Shame he was such a naughty man.

IMHO the government's position on this issue is totally indefensible - Blair states that there should be an indepent review of firefighters' pay, but then makes it clear that if such a review found that firefighters were entitled to a 40% pay-rise they wouldn't get it anyway. That kind of "negotiating" is hardly conducive to a settlement. I mean, just imagine for a moment if George W. told Saddam that he had to let weapons inspectors in, but then made it obvious that he was going to bomb the crap out of Iraq anyway.... oh.... never mind, forget it.....

[Woof]

I'm only getting a 2.35% pay rise this year. Granted the most danger i face in my job is a nasty paper cut.

Originally posted by Ragnarak
ok

assume i'm ignornt (cos i am )

how much do fireman get payed for risking their lives on a daily based on average now?

and how does this compare to army/police/etc?

More than army, less than police i think. oveall, they compare well for what is at the end of the day, a manual job. if you can point a hose and use a hacksaw, you can be a fireman, sort of.

Originally posted by Distant Sun
40% etc

but if the independant enquiry said they should get 40%, which it didnt, then all public sector workers would have a claim also. agreed maybe the public sector is not really well paid, but if they all got 40% the economy would like, collapse or something.

[Gayle29uk]

23000ish is what a trained firefighter earns.

Although no doubt they'd prefer to be known as 'fire control and elimination executives' with the executive style salary package they want...

[Chrism]

It's quite unfair that the people standing in for them while they're on strike get paid £4,000 less p.a. even now.

Originally posted by Chrism
It's quite unfair that the people standing in for them while they're on strike get paid £4,000 less p.a. even now.

damn right! and they could soon be in Iraq etc fighting arabs. really, these fire people have gone mad. that andy gillchrist wanst looking up in a Zoo.

[Ragnarak]

Originally posted by Gayle28uk
23000ish is what a trained firefighter earns.

considering they risk their lives everyday that seems to be a ****e wage to me...they'd get more working on a building site or in a factory in what would be a safer job

Average firefighter earnings after five years (not including overtime)
Ireland - £26,518
Denmark - £24,171
Norway - £22,946
UK - £21,531
Belgium - £17,821
Germany - £16,401

Originally posted by Ragnarak


considering they risk their lives everyday that seems to be a ****e wage to me...they'd get more working on a building site or in a factory in what would be a safer job

Guess again:

America's Most Dangerous Jobs

Job Number Of Fatalities/Fatality Rate (Per 100,000 Employed)

Timber Cutters 105/122.1
Fishermen 52/108.3
Pilots 230/100.8
Structural Metal Workers 47/59.5
Extractive Occupations 69/53.9
Roofers 65/30.2
Construction Workers 288/28.3
Truck Drivers 852/27.6
All Occupations 5,915/4.3

[Jammers]

Originally posted by Ragnarak


considering they risk their lives everyday that seems to be a ****e wage to me...they'd get more working on a building site or in a factory in what would be a safer job

Factories can be remarkably dangerous places. Theres probably more deaths in factories than in firefighting.

Originally posted by End in Tears
Average firefighter earnings after five years (not including overtime)
Ireland - £26,518
Denmark - £24,171
Norway - £22,946
UK - £21,531
Belgium - £17,821
Germany - £16,401

and the fire loonies say the US get 30k so that what they want

i wish it were as easy as that, then i could get levi jeans for 20 quid, petrol for 20p a litre, and a big mac for 90p.

[sh@dow]

hmm there was a firestrike thread a few weeks ago and I said the exact same thing but got my ass flamed...anyway I agree completly, sure they deserve a little more but there holding the public ransom and only thinking of themselves. I also heard 1 of them on t.v talking about how sept11th firefighters dieing and that being 1 of the reasons they want it so bad, what crap! how often is that gonna happen. Their only excuse is the fact that they have a dangerous job but that said theres other jobs more danegous and paid less + the fact that what they want is impossible...twats

[G.K Zhukov]

Originally posted by Fluffy Bunny II
I agree etc, and they and workers like them should be banned from striking ever again. There should be an independant body like ACAS to solve their problems.

I didnt know somebody had died already, but its inevitable i guess.

Damn them greedy buggers.

Your dreaming about Italy under Benito Mussolini.
You damn fascist.

[G.K Zhukov]

Originally posted by Jammers
Theres only one man who can handle this crisis, and he is a woman. Please come back Margaret Thatcher

Hitler did a slighly better job than Thatcher.. They both destroyed the trade unions, but only Hitler put the trade union members & leaders in consentration camps.

Originally posted by Ragnarak
considering they risk their lives everyday that seems to be a ****e wage to me...they'd get more working on a building site or in a factory in what would be a safer job

Only 1 fireman has died since 1999.

[the_dastardley_chihuahua]

Originally posted by Gayle28uk

\o/

I've been saying that for years.

coming from yorkshire im suprised.

I need a 40% payrise just to match what they earn now, never mind after the rise.

and im sure you're worth every penny...

firefighters play an extremely important role within society, and although they may not risk their lives every day they are always prepared to do so should the need arise.

oveall, they compare well for what is at the end of the day, a manual job

'********'
firefighting is a highly skilled profession and they should be payed as such.

if you dont think they are worth the money, and agree with Ricks crazy ramblings to 'sack them all'. maybe you will change your mind if you are trapped in your car following an RTA and need cutting out, or need rescuing from a burning building. then you might see how important these 'greedy buggers' are.

firefighters dont like going on strike, this is the last avenue open to them after exhausting all other options. the 11% offer over 2 years (with changes in working practices) is pathetic.

Guess again:

America's Most Dangerous Jobs

Job Number Of Fatalities/Fatality Rate (Per 100,000 Employed)

Timber Cutters 105/122.1
Fishermen 52/108.3
Pilots 230/100.8
Structural Metal Workers 47/59.5
Extractive Occupations 69/53.9
Roofers 65/30.2
Construction Workers 288/28.3
Truck Drivers 852/27.6
All Occupations 5,915/4.3

i would guess most of those are down to accidents.

firefirghters actually walk into burning buildings.

the only reason more dont die is because they are highly trained professionals the fact they dont die doesnt mean the job isnt dangerous.

sure they deserve a little more but there holding the public ransom and only thinking of themselves.

hardly 'only thinking of themselves' if they were 'only thinking of themselves' they wouldnt be firemen in the first place, they could get better pay in other jobs.

the fact that what they want is impossible...twats

imposible? hardly. ill tell you what, those brand new euro fighters were are buying, lets cut that order in half then pay our firefighters a decent wage! (you get my point. the money is there. it depends on what your priorities are)

rick, have you ever considered that capitalism might not be the answer to all earth's problems?

Originally posted by the_dastardley_chihuahua
replies etc

mmk, nobody can argue they do an important job and are prepared to risk their lives and maybe i was a bit hard on them lasy night, but to me, demanding a 40% pay rise makes any kind of debate futile. if there is spare money. i say give it to the nurses, there is a recruitment shortage there after all, which to may says hell of a lot about pay/conditions etc. i think i am right in saying that US fire fighters are not allowed to stirke? not sure though.

according to the table below, they aint so bad off anyway.

Average firefighter earnings after five years (not including overtime)

Ireland - £26,518
Denmark - £24,171
Norway - £22,946
UK - £21,531
Belgium - £17,821
Germany - £16,401

40% is outrageous, insane, and doomed to failure. cut it out, get back to work, 40% aint going to happen and strike is doing much harm to the profession.

Originally posted by the_dastardley_chihuahua


i would guess most of those are down to accidents.

firefirghters actually walk into burning buildings.

ok this - i dont think firefighters walk in to buildings with the intention of getting killed, therefore if they did it would also be an accident.

countries need wood, and wood cutters get paid crap and clearly the job is more dangerous than fire fighters.

ummm, r u stoned or something?
lemme see...chopping down a tree, or walking into a burning building
wich is more dangerous???

[ELeeming]

I am personnally in favour of the strike, as if the government has to back down down, they will look bad; and a bad day for Tony Blair is a good one for me.

Originally posted by ReZpawner
ummm, r u stoned or something?
lemme see...chopping down a tree, or walking into a burning building
wich is more dangerous???

you didnt read the full thread?

America's Most Dangerous Jobs

Job Number Of Fatalities/Fatality Rate (Per 100,000 Employed)

Timber Cutters 105/122.1
Fishermen 52/108.3
Pilots 230/100.8
Structural Metal Workers 47/59.5
Extractive Occupations 69/53.9
Roofers 65/30.2
Construction Workers 288/28.3
Truck Drivers 852/27.6
All Occupations 5,915/4.3

they should stop trying to get hit by the trees then.

Originally posted by ReZpawner
they should stop trying to get hit by the trees then.

i wonder why they didnt think of that heh heh

saftey is down yes to well trained fire people, but also, most major buildinsg have fire incident managers, evacuation plans, etc and that is also why it is much safer now

thinking about it, i blame that andy gilcrest for leading his men down the river, doomed to failure. it is just SO stupid.

noboy can say the fire people dont do a good job, but equally, nobody can say its not a good job. good pension, lots of free time to play snooker, reasonable pay compared to many other workers of similar skill/risk, good pension, so what the **** are they going on about?

[pablissimo]

I'm all for them getting a better wage, it is a job that requires a lot of personal commitment, and they are highly trained professionals no matter what some of the above (lo 'hacksaw') are claiming.

But there is no way on God's green Earth that they're going to get a 40% payrise, which is nearly 17 times the current rate of inflation at 2.3%, in the timescale that they're thinking about.

[Taratang]

Originally posted by ReZpawner
ummm, r u stoned or something?
lemme see...chopping down a tree, or walking into a burning building
wich is more dangerous???

You're not too bright are you?

[Miserableman]

Originally posted by Rick
Maybe you ought to consider capitalism. If you dont want to pay the firefighters any more, then fire them and hire new ones who will work for less.I'm sure you can find some. If you cant find that many, then offer them a medium pay raise, those who dont accept it loose their job, those who do, keep it. Fill the remaining spots with fresh hirees. If they strike, fire them. collective bargaining is extortion. The only reason it works in an almost capitalistic economy is because of all the regulation. (and the criminal activity by some unions) Job security should be the result of supply and demand, NOT labor regulations. If you are hard enough to replace and get paid little enough to not want to, you have job security. Laws restrict freedom. That causes problems. It even kills people after you let it go far enough. The solution to your problem is not more laws, its less laws, and more capitalism. Those guys want to be arses instead of firefighters, fine let them, they can be arses, and you can find new people willing to be firefighters. If you cant replace them, then keep them, but dont deal with them as a chunk, do it individually, whenever anyone buys or sells in large non uniform quantities, one of the two gets ripped off, ether the buyer gets crap not worth as much as he paid expecting, or the seller dosent get as much as everything combined is worth because it cant be determined what its all worth. ever looked at ebay, its capitalism in action, again and again, you will see exactly this happen. large quantities of anything are usually underpaid for because the combined worth cannot be determined. Or expecting too much and not getting it and paying too much. When all of them demand 40% raise, you can be certain that some of them do not deserve it. Some could be hired for cheaper. If they were, there would be more money to pay the others.
IE, a 40% increase on all combined pay could give 40% to each and every person, or 10% to some and 50% to the rest. It should be easier to fire and hire, it allows better use of money which makes more.

Apply this reasoning to all jobs in the UK and watch them all **** off overseas? No thanks

Originally posted by ELeeming
I am personnally in favour of the strike, as if the government has to back down down, they will look bad; and a bad day for Tony Blair is a good one for me.

so allowing people to die and properties to be destroyed is an ok price to pay for a pay rise?

i think they are being extremely selfish. they already earn over the national average, 11% is a good pay rise

[pablissimo]

Originally posted by Miserableman
Apply this reasoning to all jobs in the UK and watch them all **** off overseas? No thanks

The demand and supply of labour works just like any other market; labour sets a price that they're willing to work for, firms take on as many as they think feasible at that price. The minimum wage was cunningly set a level low enough so it didn't interfere too much with this mechanism, with trade unions being one of the bigger causes of labour market failure.

That reasoning is being applied to almost all UK jobs.

[Tzencath]

i say give them the raise, only 8k for peats sake.

[LHC]

per person, per year

That's quite a lot of money.

[Haer]

Firefighters are actually pretty well trained(Hence we cant just "Hire" more)

Personally I think there being greedy and should settle for the 11%, altho I think the Restructuring to there hours needs to be looked at also.

[meaple]

I left the rage down in africa

[SeanG]

This strike is causing an uproar in my house, with my mum being a midwife and my step-dad being a soldier.

My step-dad has been in the army (parachute regiment) for 21 years and gets 23,000 per year.

This is roughly the starting wage for a trainee firefighter, 23k a year and he has been there TWENTY-ONE YEARS, risking his life by going to the gulf war, sierra leone, kosova, was on standby for afghanistan and I think has also been to Northern Ireland around 4 or 5 times (plus the falklands I think.)

He has numerous medals and still gets 23k a year, does he complain? no he shuts the fk up and gets on with it, and if their argument is 'risking their lives' well I think my step-dad whips their arses in that department.

Now my mother (midwife) has been a midwife for 2 years and earns 18k a year, significantly less than firefighters. She works four 13 hour days a week, delivering babies, attending to care, performing anti-natal and post-natal duties aswell as cesarian sections (I think.)

I think both of these professions deserve a hell of a lot more than they are currently getting paid, certainly a lot more than firefighters, yet their combined salaries only just beat what a single fireman wants. Firefighters plz read:

Another argument is that to be a fireman you need no education whatsoever, to become a midwife you need to study for 4 1/2 years paying university fee's etc etc

I personally don't give a crap what you want, 11% is a decent offer and asking for 40% and expecting to get it is taking the piss. If you people get 40%, then doctors, soldiers, nurses, midwives and policemen deserve a 60-70% payrise as their jobs are harder and/or more dangerous than yours.

don't overrate yourself, the army can do your job, you can't do theirs

[SeanG]

Also I forgot to add that the police, the army, and any medical-related profession are not allowed to strike.

If any of those professions went on strike there would be an even bigger uproar (possibly not to the army.)

Mr Fireman, would you agree to your house being burgled or your wife being assaulted because the police are on strike?

Or if you had a large tumour which needed operating on, oh but wait it isn't possible because all doctors were on strike.

[G.K Zhukov]

To SeanG.
23k a year.. thats less than a ensign gets in the norwegian army for serving in Kosovo a year..
Someone has been using your step-dad as cheap cannonfodder for 21 years.
And maybe they are ALL underpaid, not just the firefighers, but also the nurses, soldiers etc.

[SeanG]

Originally posted by G.K Zhukov
To SeanG.
23k a year.. thats less than a ensign gets in the norwegian army for serving in Kosovo a year..
Someone has been using your step-dad as cheap cannonfodder for 21 years.
And maybe they are ALL underpaid, not just the firefighers, but also the nurses, soldiers etc.

they are, the point is that other services aren't allowed to go on strike because they could cost lives, what makes the fire services different?

[G.K Zhukov]

Originally posted by SeanG


they are, the point is that other services aren't allowed to go on strike because they could cost lives, what makes the fire services different?

indeed, but instead of critizing the firefighters, why not critize that the other cant have (atleast) limited ability to strike.

In norway, the goverment have manged to pay nurses and some other medical staff extremly bad, couse they have always claimed its "dangerous for the patience" after 2 days of 500 nurses out in strike (on a nationwide basis).. just to keep the wages low.

[G.K Zhukov]

And there shouldnt be any regulations to hinder soldiers to strike in peace time.. should there?

(but ofc for a country like GB, who is always in war it seems... Maybe you and others should look into why its used so much money on keeping a army for imperialist actions)