Finance Ireland Share Discussion Threads

[i rely on balls] 16/11/2002 17:18

Gypsy

The union have 3 million in cash.

Though if my union were anything to go by, many moons ago, all they'll end up with is enough to feed the cat, Tight gits.

[gypsy king] 16/11/2002 15:54

They WILL be back soon .

No money = No food

[bradwell] 16/11/2002 15:45

Gypsy

Sorry who has beaten who?????

[boobly] 16/11/2002 14:06

Typical,
Lefty, Psuedo - intelectual, Socially inadequate, Chip on your shoulder,
Guardian Trash.

p.s. Is that clear enough ?

[jonc] 16/11/2002 13:27

What planet does this Geoff Martin inhabit.

Bizarre individual.

[wageslave] 16/11/2002 13:18

Their fight is our fight

Everyone in the public sector should support the firefighters' cause, because if they lose, we all lose, says Geoff Martin

Friday November 15, 2002

Anybody who thought that the firefighters might get a fair opportunity to pitch their case in this pay dispute will have had their eyes opened, as the full force of the establishment, from the Sun and the Daily Mail through to deputy prime minister, John Prescott, and even the Guardian leader page, has ranged up against them.
So let's get back to the core of the Fire Brigades Union case - if the claim for a 40% increase looks high that's only a reflection of the battering that firefighters' salaries have taken since the mid-1980's. Firefighters' leader Andy Gilchrist is right to point out that even if the FBU win their full claim it still means a take-home salary of just £8.50 an hour.

Firefighters' pay is still linked to the earnings of the top 25% of male manual workers. But if it had kept pace with average male earnings since 1978 - rather than the upper-quartile of male manual earnings - they would be roughly £100 a week better off today, and with a bit of extra money to reflect the changing nature of the job, would be as near as dammit on the £30,000 a year they are calling for.

Sir George Bain, the head of the Whitehall-appointed inquiry into firefighters' pay - chose to ignore all of this. The Blairite argument that firefighters are resistant to modernisation is as ludicrous in respect of their service as it is when he fires the same jibe at the NHS.

Unison has pledged full support for the FBU in their campaign and we have already put in place arrangements for hospitals, schools, town halls and colleges to twin with their local fire station to support our public sector colleagues in any way we can. Other unions are doing the same.

Of course the enemies of the trade union movement will track down and wheel out the odd dissenting voice. But the vast majority of our members worked out long ago that the firefighters' fight is their fight and that if they win they all win. A mass rally of striking university staff in London this week echoed exactly those sentiments.

There's a real chance that if the government hadn't intervened in the fire service pay negotiations back in the summer we wouldn't be seeing the braziers being stoked up as the nights start to draw in.

John Prescott, a man who owes his education, his position and his luxury lifestyle to the leg up that the trade union movement gave him, should be feeling a deep sense of personal shame.

I've got no time for this government but I never thought I'd see the day when politicians trading under the banner of the Labour party would employ the services of the Sun and the Mail and the forces of the state to batter a group of dignified and proud trade unionists into the ground in the same way that Thatcher set out to destroy the miners.

When Blair made his "wreckers" speech and when he talked about "the scars on his back" from dealing with the public sector he was laying in to everyone who makes this country's services tick.

The firefighters have been brave enough to make a stand. The government wants to isolate them and starve them back to work. We all have a duty to stop that from happening. If Blair breaks the firefighters, I'll give you odds that it will be you next.

Geoff Martin is London convenor for Unison

[jaxaxe] 16/11/2002 12:42

WUZZUP ,
I prayed for you again today as did the rest of the congregation at the synagogue;we hope that your journey back to normality is a speedy one and not fraught with dangers;we were especially sorry to hear of your tragic loss and all of us hope that you will be united with your brain in the not too distant future.
your good friend Jacob Levi. Sholom. ps your filtered.

[tanners] 16/11/2002 12:24

Sparky/Bonehead- it must be a big relief to you that you've got the great British public (wuzzup) behind you.
Perhaps you really do deserve 40%.......................of your current wages.

[goodcall] 16/11/2002 12:02

Whats the matter with this guy "wuzzup", has he got a screw loose?
Why so many logins?
Why do AFN put up with it?

[verulamium] 16/11/2002 12:02

A pleasure Jack. I'm actually pro-union and a member of one, but to see the FBU behaving as if this is the 1970s makes me very angry. I feel sorry for the firemen they're using, the pressure to conform must be immense.

As for Wazzup/Fast Player, they were both filtered as soon as I saw their first posts, I've no idea what they've been saying, and I really don't care.

[boonyed] 16/11/2002 10:32

graham142
Your points are covered in earlier posts, all apart from the chain of command part.

Each appliance has a Crew Commander, each Station a Station Commander, a number of Stations form a Division and all have Divisional Officers and so on...

Each building/property/area has a'first attendance' this might be 1 appliance, 2appliances and an aerial..you get the picture.

As an incident gets bigger then so the level of command gets higher, but initially it's down to the Officer in charge of the first attendance, he is responsible for carrying out a risk assessment and then he will commit a crew or crews into the incident. It is then the responsibility of each Firefighter to carry out dynamic risk assessments as they progress.

As for Fire Prevention Officers, well they follow Nationally recognised guidelines and there shouldn't be much ambiguity.

BOON

[graham142] 16/11/2002 09:46

I am NOT in favour of a 40% increase in pay for firemen - the reasons are:

They knew what the conditions and pay were when they applied for the job, it was satisfactory then and they should be satisfied with a graduated rise relative to the same restrictions as other trades.
They state earnings are 20k but that is BASIC Pay only. Tell us the average annual figure after overtime etc.
Many prefer the shifts as it enables them to MOONLIGHT without paying tax. (Why doesn't the inland revenue follow a few of these chaps after hours to see what jobs are being done for cash?)
NO ONE twisted their arm and told them they must do this job. I didn't like the one I was doing years ago - SO I GOT OUT - instead of winging.
Firemen putting their life on the line every day is nonsense - please supply accurate figures of fatalities whilst "doing the job" and compare it with the national average of other occupations - ie the veterinary practice for example.
Is it not the case that a fire is attended not only by ordinary fire fighters but also by officers with superior experience who's job it is to TAKE CHARGE of a situation and organise the deployment of the men in his/her watch? Do you really expect the public to be so naive that we beleive you turn up like a marauding rabble and all try to be the first into an inferno without any regard for your own safety? Give us a break!!!
The on duty fire cheif has a duty to ensure the safety of the men under his control and I cannot beleive for one moment that he is going to allow a firefighter to knowingly enter a life threatening situation without first analyzing the potential risks for that person. If this were not the case he would be prosecuted out of the industry.
There are fire prevention advisors within the industry paid to visit premises and give recommendations/inspect premises. They are unprofessional as a visit from one fire officer will very often raise totally different aspects compared to a visit prior or after by a different officer. There is uniformity in the standard but not in the way it is implemented and carried out in practice.
By all means apply for an increase in wages and better conditions - but - DO NOT TRY TO CON PEOPLE INTO BELEIVING WHAT IS NOT TRUE.

[gypsy king] 16/11/2002 01:07

They will soon be back..........no money ..........no food........

[verulamium] 16/11/2002 01:05

Of course they won't get paid (unless they weren't scheduled to be at work) striking would be much more popular if you got paid for it....

A bit of respect for them though - you may be wanting one of them to save your life sometime.

[gypsy king] 16/11/2002 01:01

Good point !

Scum , let them starve !

[gypsy king] 16/11/2002 01:00

Tony has beaten the scum !

Long live Tony !

Hoorah !

[jaxaxe] 16/11/2002 00:11

Boon,
your facts are not quite near the truer picture.The engines that the squaddies are training on are the reserve engines,however,the reason for the training on these is so that the gallant members of our wonderful armed forces,who have so often been denied access to the red fire appliances due to not having had training on them before can now be in a position to use the ones stood idle in the fire stations up and down the length and breadth of the country.Our armed forces personell are being trained by the brave volunteers and retained firemen who refused to go on strike.I spoke wth some Royal Navy firemen last night who have already driven the red appliances-they all agreed that the engines were far easier to manouver and use than the green goddeses.The morale of the armed forces is sky high...they cant wait to get in the driving seats...One said if we can drive tanks we can drive anything...these are are a doddle!`
It rather looks like(dare I say,)my earler predictions were true,the strikers are now looking to Gilchrist for his plan B....sadly it seems he doesnt have one....
jack levi

[jaxaxe] 15/11/2002 23:50

.Verulalim,
thanks for a very well researched post,itsjust a shame the resident idiot has been granted home leave;I suspect that the reason for his frequent use of te computor keyboard is the total ban on any sharp instruments by his nursing staff.
jack levi