John Prescott - Todays Top Wanker

[Vaio]

You useless fat piece of ****, couldnt be arsed to sort out the firemans pay agreement so people suffer. Nice one wanker

Vaio

[Tietäjä]

Acknowledged.

[insane_in_da_membrane]

so the firemen who are on strike and refusing an offer has nothing to do with it then?

Originally posted by insane_in_da_membrane
so the firemen who are on strike and refusing an offer has nothing to do with it then?

[Vaio]

From http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2501695.stm


Strike 'could have been avoided'

After the overnight talks broke down, the general secretary of the Fire Brigades Union (FBU), Andy Gilchrist, claimed a deal had been struck with employers but was blocked by the government.

"This strike action could have been avoided but the government has ensured there will be a strike," he said.

But Downing Street suggested the "drama" of the talks had been set up so firefighters could blame the government for the walk-out.

nuff said

Vaio

[Deffeh]

yes because Andy gilchrist is a reasonable man who has no particular bias in this argument, and isnt a spin doctor of any sort

[insane_in_da_membrane]

Originally posted by Vaio
From http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2501695.stm


Strike 'could have been avoided'

After the overnight talks broke down, the general secretary of the Fire Brigades Union (FBU), Andy Gilchrist, claimed a deal had been struck with employers but was blocked by the government.

"This strike action could have been avoided but the government has ensured there will be a strike," he said.

But Downing Street suggested the "drama" of the talks had been set up so firefighters could blame the government for the walk-out.

nuff said

Vaio

:-/
nuff said indeed

but then again, I see where Deffeh is coming from so who really knows whos fault it is?

[LHC]

no he can't because they are striking.

Originally posted by Iniluki


give me your address, i'll set fire to your house. then you can see how little they actually do.

[Jammers]

To be fair , it is a bit unreasonable to phone John Prescott at 3am, and ask him to sign an agreement he hasn't read.

If someone did that to me I would probably give them a pay cut, and then sack the lot of them, but then, I tend to be somewhat irritable when awoken at 3AM.

Originally posted by LHC
no he can't because they are striking.

giggle nice one

[Homerio]

Prescott didnt reject it, he was phoned at 3am, told to sign it, and he refused to sign something where the employers had not even worked out how much it owuld cost. He said at the beginning that the government would not make any more money available and that the money from modernisation would go towards the new wages, wo why the employers make an agreement that would require more money than modernisation supplies and then expect him to sign it is beyond me.

[Sandsnake]

I still find it disturbing that people don't find the fact that fireman appear to make less than most fast food workers a tad odd.

when 40% only equals out to about 5 or 6k a year, something is extremely wrong, but that's the typical western attitude people hate us for, I guess. We have grown to EXPECT service, and expect it CHEAP, even if the individuals might die doing it.

i blame the union, not the firemen themselves.

Public support for them is falling.

I doubt there will be a second 8 day strike.

if he gave in to the demands of the firemen then all the other slightly hard done by professions in civil service would demand a pay rise too.

'lo economic crisis or striking frenzy.

rock on, prescott.

[Deffeh]

labour cant win here unfortunately.

They have 2 choices which amount to 1 of 2 results

1. Destroying the economy
2. Losing Power

So would you labour bashers kindly stfu, the tories dont have the fkn answer to the questions either, and are a lot ****ing worse than blair & co.

Originally posted by Sandsnake
I still find it disturbing that people don't find the fact that fireman appear to make less than most fast food workers a tad odd.

when 40% only equals out to about 5 or 6k a year, something is extremely wrong, but that's the typical western attitude people hate us for, I guess. We have grown to EXPECT service, and expect it CHEAP, even if the individuals might die doing it.

ERMMM WHAT!?!?!

when I was a fast food worker I was on £4.50 an hour. With shifts that worked out to be less than £9,000. The average basic wage for firemen is £22,500.

Fast food workers deserve 40% raise. There job is **** and they are treated like ****. At least the firemen have the respect of the country. (and a salary I would be very happy to earn)

[Radical Edward]

Originally posted by Sandsnake
I still find it disturbing that people don't find the fact that fireman appear to make less than most fast food workers a tad odd.

when 40% only equals out to about 5 or 6k a year, something is extremely wrong, but that's the typical western attitude people hate us for, I guess. We have grown to EXPECT service, and expect it CHEAP, even if the individuals might die doing it.

when you discuss things about which you know the facts, you are quite good at it. Stick to that tactic, and don't comment when you don't know what is going on.

[Deffeh]

Im struggling to see where sandy was coming from.

[LHC]

When a strike starts, the strikers have public support. By the time they're over, everybody hates them. But in the period between one strike ending, and another one starting, support rises again. I can't see this being sorted any time soon.

Originally posted by Trevize


giggle nice one

eh?

[Dante Hicks]

Originally posted by not sword
they already get almost double the French Firemen and do less hours.

Source please.

Oh, and please don't give in to the silliness you might have heard. Giving the fireman 40% (or 100% or 200%, etc.) wouldn't "destroy the economy". It wouldn't unleash hyperinflation or anything of the sort. It would increase expectations of other public services to get increases, obviously - but that's a completley different kettle of fish.

The government I expect will win this particular dispute (sadly) as media propaganda will be so ridiculously OTT ("5 BILLION PEOPLE WILL DIE AS RESULT OF FIRE STRIKE!", "ANDY GILCHRIST IS RELATED TO HITLER!", etc) that public support will begin to ebb as there's no actual sane counterweight.

If the government do appear to "lose" (highly unlikely in current climate) then all that will happen is Prescott will simply be sacrificed, but he's highly expendable anyway.

[pablissimo]

I fear public support will ebb more because of the arrogance of the firefighters beliving that going on strike for 8 days is entirely necessary and that they will maintain public support during the period.

That and the fact that the majority of people that I've spoken to (granted, not a survey of the country) and the majority of posters on this board who've taken part in other such threads readily acknowledge that 40% isn't happening, and similarly that they'd give their right arm for a 16% pay-rise over 2 years.

[Nusselt]

how do you choose a top wanker?? by amount of ejaculation or by number of times hand has pumped penis?

[Homerio]

If you look at how often the firemen go into life threatening positions its not actually very often. I saw some figures a while ago that said it was actually mroe dangerous working in a factory than as a fireman. And adding 20p onto what the tax payer pays all adds up. After the firemen started to strike the people at my mums university started to strike as they believe they should be paid more considering they are paid less than primary school teachers. It all adds up, and itd be stupid to let it add up when it isnt deserved to that degree.

No one put a gun against their head and forced them to become firemen. They knew before what they would be paid.

[Vaio]

Originally posted by Homerio
If you look at how often the firemen go into life threatening positions its not actually very often. I saw some figures a while ago that said it was actually mroe dangerous working in a factory than as a fireman. And adding 20p onto what the tax payer pays all adds up. After the firemen started to strike the people at my mums university started to strike as they believe they should be paid more considering they are paid less than primary school teachers. It all adds up, and itd be stupid to let it add up when it isnt deserved to that degree.

How often do you go into a 'life threatening position' ?

Vaio

Originally posted by Iniluki



And that makes it all alright that they don't get paid enough for risking their lives everyday?


mmmmkay.

I hardly think a few thousand pounds more compensates their lives. Besides, there are thousands of other people who are willing to do the job for that amount.

[Vaio]

Originally posted by Deffeh
labour cant win here unfortunately.


So would you labour bashers kindly stfu, the tories dont have the fkn answer to the questions either, and are a lot ****ing worse than blair & co.

Yes, Ghengis Khan, ANY Tories, Bush and Stalin, I cant think of any more

Vaio

[Apothos]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2507457.stm

"Chancellor Gordon Brown says a 16% pay rise for firefighters, without savings from new working practices, would cost Britain more than £500m."

Seems a bit steep to me...

Blair should go bomb Iraq or something to make sure we get our share of the oil so we can afford all the pay increases that are gonna come out of this mess.

[Vaio]

Originally posted by Apothos
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2507457.stm

"Chancellor Gordon Brown says a 16% pay rise for firefighters, without savings from new working practices, would cost Britain more than £500m."

Seems a bit steep to me...

Blair should go bomb Iraq or something to make sure we get our share of the oil so we can afford all the pay increases that are gonna come out of this mess.

hmmm, they would never consider that......

giggle

Vaio

Originally posted by Iniluki



Yes. But they weren't picked first time round now where they. Because they weren't as good as the fire fighters that got the jobs. Now would you really want to replace them with people that weren't good enough to get a job as a fireman first time round?

how do you know they werent good enough ?

Originally posted by Miasma



The firebrigade tends to choose the best candidates from candidate groups.

Assuming that is true then to choose others from those groups would mean your taking those who were not the best.

I wonder if the number of applications for the service will go up or down after all this is over.

it dosent mean they werent good enough, it simply means that only 1 of a group of 40 can be recruited. 5 of those 40 could be exceptional candidates.

[Geeza]

Originally posted by Iniluki



And that makes it all alright that they don't get paid enough for risking their lives everyday?


mmmmkay.

when you use this argument...you're more or less trying to put a price on peoples lives. Im not against a pay rise, but frankly it's just your opinion that their not paid enough.

If a fireman dies, (or risks his life) for £20k would his family feel better about it if he was earning £30k? I doubt it.

The whole 'they risk their lives' shouldn't ever be brought into an argument about pay, as, quite frankly, you can't put a figure on how much someone should get in order for them to risk death. It's a job, yeah it's dangerous, it can be crappy....but then so can a lot of jobs. A little more emphasis should be put on the fact that:

a) they knew EXACTLY how much they'd be getting paid when they chose this career if it's not enough for them to live on, then more fool them for choosing it in the first place.
b) there are people out there who are willing to do the same job for the same money.

Again - im not against a pay rise (but i laugh at 40% - even 16% is a lot) but the fact they risk their lives should not be the deciding factor.

They do a difficult job that requires a lot of effort, training and hard work.

[LHC]

Originally posted by Iniluki
Or maybe we just shouldnt go to war with Iraq at all and save ourselves a few billion pounds. And with that we can afford to pay the firefighters.

I fail to see why we shouldn't depose an evil dictator who clearly owns chemical weapons in exhange for firemen's money.

[Geeza]

Originally posted by LHC
I fail to see why we shouldn't depose an evil dictator who clearly owns chemical weapons in exhange for firemen's money.

but...but...what if he sets fire to stuff?

[Smudger]

Six railway men have been killed this year. One fireman has been killed this year. Does that mean that railway men should be paid more than fireman, because the job is quite obviously more dangerous?

[Homerio]

Originally posted by Vaio


How often do you go into a 'life threatening position' ?

Vaio

the fact that i dont go into life threatening positions due to my job ahs absolutely nothing to do with teh argument. as smudger said 1 firemen died this year compared to 6 railway workers. There are other much more dangerous jobs out there and to say firefighters deserve 40% more for danger pay is stupid

[Deffeh]

ive said it once and ill say it again.

* They are over stating the danger
* They are riding public support because of 9/11
* The independant inquiry was in no way biased and should have been followed.


Why dont they get like fkn, 11% pay rise (as said the independant report) and cushy life insurance policies(thus invalidating the danger aspect) in return for modernisation?

It makes the most sense.

Oh, and dont forget

The tories are much worse. So, dont bash labour, think what the fkn tories would be doing now.

[Nodrog]

Do you think the firemen are going to secretely start setting fire to houses during the strike, to try and demonstrate how needed they are, and that they deserve a higher salary?

Originally posted by Deffeh

* They are riding public support because of 9/11

11/9

[Nodrog]

Originally posted by mogrika


11/9

never forget.

[Deffeh]

9/11. Americans use Month/Day/Year for some reason.

Originally posted by Smudger
Six railway men have been killed this year. One fireman has been killed this year. Does that mean that railway men should be paid more than fireman, because the job is quite obviously more dangerous?

I think train drivers get a lot more than firemen anyway (The earn quite a large amount iirc)

Originally posted by Deffeh
* They are riding public support because of 9/11

I actually haven't heard anyone (other than you) mention 9/11.

[Homerio]

i believe he is referring to the people who stand next to the rails trying to fix them inbetween getting hit by trains rather than the drivers themselves.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally posted by Deffeh
Oh, and dont forget

The tories are much worse. So, dont bash labour, think what the fkn tories would be doing now.

So, by that logic, when the Tories are in, we shouldn't bash them as "just imagine what the BNP would be doing"?

[Deffeh]

no.

Face it, for the next 20 years at least we have a two party system, as much as the lib dems are growing

Charles kennedy said "Just because the tories are on a downward slope, doesnt mean they have to bounce back up again"

As much as i like him, hes wrong. The result of this ****ing crisis will be either the destruction of the economy, or the removal of the labour party being replaced by the ****ing tories.

[Nodrog]

Originally posted by Deffeh
no.

Face it, for the next 20 years at least we have a two party system, as much as the lib dems are growing

Why do we have to 'face it'? Surely if people arent happy with a two-party system, then can change it easily enough by voting for a third party.

[Deffeh]

Reality, nodrog.

I would, and will vote for the liberal democrats.

What difference is this going to make?

In the literal sense, the liberals will be able to add one more young voter to their ranks. This will catch them up One vote on the labour party in Eastwood.

In the wider debateable sense, it means the Liberals will gain many more votes. This is because of
a/ The climate
b/ Their growing credentials
c/ The "echo" factor

What i mean is the immense similarity in humans as a whole. I believe truthfully when you make a decision, you are echoing a decision for others too. Example : If its a polling day and its raining, and my car is broke, i have no means of transport.I have two choices. Get soaked, or Stay at home.

If i stay at home, 1000 (or whatever the figure in my position) people dont vote.

If i make the effort to vote, Just under 1000 people do too.

I dont know if ive made myself clear

However
As nice as it is to attempt to believe we can change the world
every party has a core base of members that will vote one way regardless, mainly parents influence (and i feel strongly parents should NEVER rub off their political inclinations on a child). Tactical voting, refusal to accept change, inability to distinguish the liberal ground, extremists who either believe in RIGHT or LEFT. While i think the Liberals can only rise and rise,

Surely like i said it will take 20 long years for them to even be close to being a "contender" for power?

[Jammers]

Originally posted by Deffeh

However
As nice as it is to attempt to believe we can change the world
every party has a core base of members that will vote one way regardless, mainly parents influence (and i feel strongly parents should NEVER rub off their political inclinations on a child).

Perhaps the reason people vote for the same party as their parents is because the children are now in a similar situation to their parents, and so what was good for the parents is now good for the children.