by Englishman 10 Replies latest jw friends
If the UK firemen go on strike, the army is standing by with it's 827 Green Goddesses. Look:
So why can't the Army simply use the modern fire engines that we have already? It seems nuts to me that they are pulling all these old bangers out of mothballs (most were built in 1956!) when there will be over 3000 modern units lying idle and unused in the fire stations?
Englishman, (who accepts that there is probably something that he is missing here...!)
I asked someone this the other day, and was told it was because the army arent trained to use the modern equipment. It does seem a bit stupid and it likely to cost lives.
Also if the government paid the firefighters a decent wage in the first place we wouldnt be in this mess.
Edited to correct my lowsy spelling!
Edited by - angharad on 23 October 2002 7:43:35
I accept the fact that much of the equipment on a modern fire engine is specialised, such as the "jaws of life" etc, but there's 5 ladders to the GG's one and basic pumping gear that is much more powerful. Plus, there's 3000 modern units available all in the right place. So although much of the equipment would need specialist skills, the rest would still be useable.
Re the salaries of firmen, aren't they on about 25,000 pounds pa, whats that, $38,000? It ain't much is it, although a 40% pay demand seems OTT to me.
Englishman.
That's true. I always imagined that they were on much more money than that considering how dangerous a job they do.
You would think though that if someone wanted a career as a fireman, they would take the poor salaries into consideration, and perhaps go for another career that pays better? This would mean that the fire service would have trouble recruiting, and salaries would have to increase to attract staff. This has happened with teachers, so why hasn't it happened with fire fighters?
I know they do a great job but 40% seems to be a hell of a leap in one go. Were they asking for 20% 5 years ago? Why not? etc ... I think they should be sacking their union leaders if they have allowed their pay to fall so far behind. Having said that, I think this government sucks and they try to do everything on the cheap.
Also, the job *is* dangerous but they may not be in as much danger as we imagine - the main tasks of firemen seems to be road traffic accidents and not fighting fires, even then the training and enquipments makes the job safer than we may imagine.
I do think the police have a much more dangerous job but really I'd have to see facts and figures about injury rates etc ... to be certain - does anyone know what these are?
Re: the green-goddesses I think it's to do which knowing and being trainined on the equipment. It may seem better to have 6 army guys turn up in a shiny red modern engine but if they then get the instruction manual out and start looking at all the levers I'd start to worry.
the army would have to cross picket lines to get the fire engines, i think thats another reason why they dont use them.
It takes 3 months of training before a Trainee Fireman is even allowed to get on a Fire Engine. I agree 40% is a massive pay rise but when you consider what they have to do for it I think they deserve more than 21k. I've noticed Government Ministers and MPs have no problem in voting themselves nice pay rises every time they get the chance. Bunch of grubby self serving ex lawyers. :)
The problem is that everything is now in a rediculous situation.
There is no way the government will give then 40%. They know that if they do they are finished as it will be back to the old labour ways as every public sector worked will also want 40%.
IMHO They should have asked for something more reasonable and maybe gone for a progressive rise over several years.
MPs are a self-serving bunch of hypocrites - they recently voted themselves a big fat raise well above what they were telling everyone else to ask for.
For another double standard: I can claim something like 60p per mile expenses for the first 4,000 miles in a year. MPs get about 85p with no limit to the milage. Nice. Hypocritical.
For another double standard: I can claim something like 60p per mile expenses for the first 4,000 miles in a year. MPs get about 85p with no limit to the milage. Nice. Hypocritical.
Actually that law has just changed and you get even less something like 45p per mile going to 25p after 4000 miles - in an attempt to get cars off the road. I'm pretty sure the MPs rate didnt change though.
A 40% pay rise is a lot, but remember Tony Blair gave himself a rise of 41% and his RISE was more money than most lower paid workers EARN per year.
Public sector (and other) workers have been asked/told for years to keep the wage demands low.
No-one is keeping the cost of living low, go figure.
Pay the firemen what they are worth and we wont need Green Goddesses
searcher.
