Should the Fire Service and Blue light services be allowed to Strike?

[Bibs]

They probably get the old folk to do the less physical stuff.

 

But seriously, if more people aren't dying due to a whithering headcount, perhaps they were overstaffed before?

[Whirlybird]

 

But seriously, if more people aren't dying due to a whithering headcount, perhaps they were overstaffed before?

I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case, unfortunately. Although I'm sure another reason would be given.

 

I know (wife is a nurse) that when they cut local A&E staff many years ago and couldn't achieve 'the figures', paperwork was 'manipulated' otherwises budgets were cut.

 

I know that on many occasions police shifts are understaffed. That's ok if you can guarantee that one job will come in after another and you will have time for hours of paperwork in between. But life doesn't work like that.

 

Nobody in the government wants people knowing the above. The thing about statistics is that you can find them for every point of view.

 

As Paul said, these people make a life choice at the start of their career on the information given, they train for a long time to gain the necessary experience. You cant walk into another fire service job (unless near an airport).

 

If, on the other hand, they said that from 2015 all new staff joining would be under the new pension age and existing staff under their original contracts, that gives people a choice.

[Simon350S]

If, on the other hand, they said that from 2015 all new staff joining would be under the new pension age and existing staff under their original contracts, that gives people a choice.

You know that's pretty much exactly what was offered in Royal Mail.

Unions threw it out as unfair on new starters and that they wanted all staff to be on the same terms...

RM said fine, you'll all loose it then.... Thanks CWU, helpful, very helpful.....!

That directly affects my pension.

Staff cuts directly affects the amount of work I personally have to now do as does everyone else there.

Thing is, that amount of work still isn't any where near as much as I've had to get used to the last few years outside of the business. Thrying to get the vast majority of them there to barely scrape a days work is an impossible task......

Could the business cope with less staff? Very much so.

Would the service provided drop? Not if the people left did a full days work.

They will strike to protect their right to not put a great deal of effort in.

Should RM be privatised? They need to do something to stick a rocket up their ass or they are going to fail pronto!

Privatise the hospitals too.... Now I don't want to get into slagging off nurses and doctors, too many people would have their noses put out and a lot of them do a good job, but come on.... Imagine how much better they could all be run? I've been directly involved with that business too and had my eyes well and truly opened!

Fire fighters numbers cut! Why not?

Houses burn down less due to much more stringent regulations.

Cars burn less for the same reason.

Over staffed in the first place? Most likely!

Can we go squandering money around on unefficient public sectors? Hell no.

Morning rant done!

[Advantage]

Although the Fire Service has my sympathies for the potential changes being made to their pension and salary schemes and I support their right to strike over the matter, I don't buy into the argument that their job is so unexpectedly demanding. None have been coerced into joining and all will have known full well what the job entails before even considering signing - some would have joined specifically because of those reasons.

 

The chance of dying is an unspoken accepted risk of the job (even if the employers will protest otherwise), as is the likelihood of seeing dead bodies in various states of decay, varying degrees of burn or having to collect bits of a person scattered liberally over the tarmac or railway track. Old people, tiny babies and all those in between will die, sometimes violently and someone needs to clear up the mess for the benefit of the living. You know this, I know this, so it stands to reason a bloke thinking about donning the uniform will know this too.

 

As has been stated before, if they wanted to not be exposed to this, other better paying jobs are available.

[Kimbers]

I know (wife is a nurse) that when they cut local A&E staff many years ago and couldn't achieve 'the figures', paperwork was 'manipulated' otherwises budgets were cut.

 

I know that on many occasions police shifts are understaffed. That's ok if you can guarantee that one job will come in after another and you will have time for hours of paperwork in between. But life doesn't work like that.

 

 

Totally right, though "On Many Occasions" should be "Mostly" or "All the time" dependant on where you are in the country.

 

Advantage (   ) I understand what you are saying. But, normally pay is dependant on quality of the people wanted for a particular job, suitability, how nasty the job is and level of commitment required. It makes sense that a Senior Manager is paid more than an Office Clerk because he is better qualified, has more responsibility and is expected to work longer hours.

 

So why are the Govt talking about cutting starting salary for a Police Officer to £17500 a year? You pay peanuts and you know what you get! Lets say you are being attacked by 4 men who think you are someone else and you dial 999, would you rather have an 18 year old with no life experience or social know how turn up flap around and make it worse, or a mid to late 20's qualified person who is articulate and knows how to handle the situation? Because at £17500 you aren't going to attract a huge number of the latter!

 

there are certain professions that SHOULD be paid more than others because of the job they do and the situations they have to deal with!

[rizla603104]

Agreed. Completely agree about the phasing in of new conditions - yes - if you go into something with eyes wide open - then you only have yourself to blame - but if you were promised one thing and get another - that's not good. The point is that all of these people have paid into a scheme and are now being told that they have to pay more and that they have to work for longer - with the added bonus of potentially being thrown out for being unfit.

 

The option of lighter duties - normally only applies in larger stations - most town/village stations you have to do everything - drive and fire-fight you don't have specific duties. Having fire engines unable to turn out because there are not enough to crew them is beyond belief. 

 

I know I sound like a militant - I am not - I am a business owner who thrives on the entrepreneurial spirit of free enterprise and capitalism(!) But this is something I am really passionate about. There are pay and conditions being forced upon people who did not sign up to it. I can also understand why people may not be entirely happy with the fact that the fire service are striking.

[andydclements]

At work my pension was changed, and it didn't start out as a 30th scheme, but it's been reduced. I had a choice, either accept the new condition which is to base my "final salary" scheme on an amount that rises at either the rate of my salary increase or a set amount (1.5% IIRC), OR, reject the change and reject my salary increase (the former was a condition of the latter). Given that, I struggle to feel that much sympathy for the Police/ Fire Service etc, given their level of contributions during service.

[USAndretti42]

I think that anything that is promised and then taken away is a poor show on the employers (governments) part. If it were in the private sector - you would have a mutiny on your hands....

 

If you were promised a job where you had retirement at this time, this wage, healthcare, prospect of promotion, benefits and the like and then were told it was all being taken away or changed and removed - you would probably be justified in being angry if this did not happen - or the goalposts were moved.

 

But this has happened in the private sector, over here at least, but no one's kicking up a fuss as no one wants to loose their job.  They just have to lie back and take it.  Companies are no using Obamacare as an excuse to stop providing health benefits or to cut workers' hours and getting away with it because they blame the new law and the economy.

[softlips]

Very few people realise the privatisation of the NHS has actually started. Labour allowed some departments to be taken over by external companies and this is continuing.

[Kimbers]

And everywhere you go in the Police service are signs "Fight Police Privatisation" as G4S are given more and more responsibility. The best thing that happened was the fiasco at the Olympics which made several Forces cancel contracts forced on them by cuts.

[andydclements]

There are some things where you simply don't need a serving police officer to do the job, and an admin role is a prime example, that works as long as the cost of that admin person is less than the lower end of the police pay sale.

[MikieP]

Be very careful what you privatize! Here in the US, profit motives have allowed the health insurance industry to keep 33% and more of our premiums for their boats and beach front properties rather than pay for our care! AND, their proven goal of denying care for further profits is disgusting. The ACA will finally help to limit these overreaches known as the bottom line, but again, be careful what you privatize.

[Kimbers]

There are some things where you simply don't need a serving police officer to do the job, and an admin role is a prime example, that works as long as the cost of that admin person is less than the lower end of the police pay sale.

 

Only true in a few roles within the Police. For example, they tried getting rid of Custody Officers then realised they need full officers in there to make further arrests when they kick off/are violent etc. Likewise with Control room, the staff always have supervisors who are Police Officers because they know the job and what's going on.

[pete]

Only true in a few roles within the Police. For example, they tried getting rid of Custody Officers then realised they need full officers in there to make further arrests when they kick off/are violent etc. Likewise with Control room, the staff always have supervisors who are Police Officers because they know the job and what's going on.

So why not use ex police officers and get them to do work for their early pension

[Kimbers]

And they do bud, quite alot. In Norfolk they use ex officers as Security guards, Special Inspectors and control room staff as well. I know several younger officers who have been injured in the line of duty who do Civilian Jobs as well. But a retired Police officer doesn't have powers of arrest. Only a serving officer can have that. And in Custody you definitely need that sometimes!

[Bibs]

I thought everyone had the power of arrest?

[Kimbers]

Under Common Law yes, but only Police have powers under Statutory Law.

[oneshot]

And the following all have various powers of arrest and detention in England & Wales:

 

SOCA staff (s46 Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005)

PCSO (Common law, s24A Police Criminal Evidence Act 1984, Power to detain under Police Reform Act 2002)

UKBA (28a Immigration Act 1971)

Prison officers, Court bailiffs, Sheriff,  Sergeant at Arms of the House of Commons, Epping Forest keepers, Environment Agency staff, IPCC investigator

[basalte]

The power of arrest "on reasonable suspicion " resides only with a Police Constable

 

(S.24 Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984) .

 

Anyone else who wants to carry out an arrest can do so,  but the person they arrest must either be "in the act" of committing an offence or  be guilty of it, or there must be reasonable suspicion of an "indictable" offence (triable in the Crown Court) 

 

....( an assessment of "guilt" at the time of an arrest is problematic ; store security staff often fall foul of that one, where the arrested person turns out to have a receipt after all...)

[Kimbers]

And then, if you are a Sheriff, member of public, agency staff etc you still need a Police constable to take away their freedom (i.e lock them up).

 

I think only immigration have their own detention cells, is that right Dan? 

 

And the PCSO has a right to detain someone for a short time but then needs a Warranted Officer to arrest them and detain them.

 

In regards to "reasonable suspicion" if you or anyone else hears an alarm go off and someone says they were told it was a man in a green hoody breaking into a shop, if you see a man with a green hoody on walking down the street with some goods, you can't detain him. You can only do so if you see him commit the crime. A Warranted Police Officer can.

 

God I hope that's right.

[Bibs]

What would happen if you did though? I can't imagine you'll do bird for kidnapping?

[basalte]

There is a legal distinction  between "detention" and "arrest" which probably accounts for the immiogration detention measures for example (ie a constable can detain somebody to search them but must have reasonable grounds to do so-however, apart from not being assaulted, a detainee`s rights only kick in when they`re formally arrested. 

 

Successive governments have extended both powers of detention and arrest-I should have added above that under SOCA 2005 Section 110,  the police can arrest you for ANY offence however trivial, if they deem it "necessary" to facilitate the "prompt and effective investigation" of the offence(ie 4 -24 hours in a police cell and maybe an interview,  until they realise the evidence doesn`t stack up). 

 

Needless to say the police repeat "prompt and effective" like a mantra now, to justify the arrest of everyone they arrest, rightly or wrongly. 

[Kimbers]

This says perfectly what I have been trying to get across and TBH it reflects on all the Emergency Services and what they deal with.

 

I would ask that you watch it all. It is oh so true!

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyO1WURjHLI