Firefighters' strike - right or wrong?

[Saxondale]

What do we think?

 

Should people being paid to provide an emergency service even be allowed to strike?

[Guest MattP]

Non biased options

To the answer, of course it's wrong to strike.

People are living until 85 now, the days of going to work for less years than you spend at school and in retirement are long gone.

Even more so when the taxpayer is expected to fund the pension.

[leicsmac]

Non biased options

To the answer, of course it's wrong to strike.

People are living until 85 now, the days of going to work for less years than you spend at school and in retirement are long gone.

Even more so when the taxpayer is expected to fund the pension.

The option to strike is a key part of collective bargaining, which in turn helps prevent employers potentially abusing their authority.

I think it's an extreme option (especially for an emergency service) but it acts as a key balance.

[MPH]

As a firemen told me the other day when his aging body can not take the strain any more he will be sacked and wont be entitled to his pension because apparently it will be his fault his body cant Take it any more.. they used to be moved into an office job but the government has privatized all that.

[katieakita]

Bornblue sounds like you have never needed the fire brigade perhaps, you need to find someone who has needed them and ask if they are glad they had someone capable of doing their job to rescue them

[pSinatra]

Got a fireman in the family & whilst I supported the dispute they had a few years ago, there is no way I can support their argument this time.

 

They want to protect their right to retire after 30 years service?  So you join at 21 & retire at 51 on an excellent pension?  That same person is expected to live for another 30+ years.

 

The police are no different - able to retire after 30 years service.  I know they pay a higher contribution of their wages into their pension scheme, but have a look around.  I would love to retire at fifty-odd, on a full pension, maybe a part-time job for a little extra pocket money........but it's never going to happen.

[Guest MattP]

The option to strike is a key part of collective bargaining, which in turn helps prevent employers potentially abusing their authority.

I think it's an extreme option (especially for an emergency service) but it acts as a key balance.

Of course, I didn't say it wasn't.

People are living in a fantasy world though if they think everyone who does a dangerous job is goingto be able to spend 35 years in retirement after working for 30 years.

Have a look at what that pension would cost on the private market in terms of monthly payments.

Sure I read once fisherman was the most dangerous job going in relation to deaths to amount of people doing it. They can't hold the government to ransom though.

[DennisNedry]

The public sector is a different world.

 

A very cushy and well paid one at that.

[Guest MattP]

We'll have to get the army to cover again if they go on strike.

Maybe they could all do a job swop for a while providing the regiments don't mind a bit of danger putting out the fires.

[MooseBreath]

More than happy for firefighters to retire early, if they've put aside appropriate private pension. Using public money to pay for it though? Not keen. Can't see why they deserve anything better than an ordinary public sector pension, which will already be generous enough. They're using the fact that people might die as a threat against the public purse. Pretty unethical if you ask me. I heard less than 50% of firefighters even supported this strike. Weed out the leaders and put them away for endangering public safety.

[pSinatra]

We'll have to get the army to cover again if they go on strike.

Maybe they could all do a job swop for a while providing the regiments don't mind a bit of danger putting out the fires.

 

They may be on strike, but that doesn't mean they're not working.  Probably out taxi driving?

 

The person I know had his fireman job & three other jobs on top.  No wonder they want to retire in their 50's.

[leicsmac]

Of course, I didn't say it wasn't.

People are living in a fantasy world though if they think everyone who does a dangerous job is goingto be able to spend 35 years in retirement after working for 30 years.

Have a look at what that pension would cost on the private market in terms of monthly payments.

Sure I read once fisherman was the most dangerous job going in relation to deaths to amount of people doing it. They can't hold the government to ransom though.

Yeah, agree with the reasoning that this particular instance isn't necessarily a reason to strike. Just thought you suggested that the option shouldn't be there.

[Saxondale]

As always, firefighters fall back on the 'look-how-brave-we-are-risking-our-lives' argument.

 

I'd be interested to see the statistics - but I'd bet money that it's not even in the top five most dangerous professions by fatalities.

[Saxondale]

Bornblue sounds like you have never needed the fire brigade perhaps, you need to find someone who has needed them and ask if they are glad they had someone capable of doing their job to rescue them

 

You've entirely missed the point. It's not about at what age they retire - though, as it happens, I don't see why they should retire earlier than all other manual workers - but about them paying their own way when they jack in the trade rather than expecting the state to pay for their long retirement.

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

Why should Fireman get a better deal than nurses, Police, Ambulance.

They do a great job. but are not the only ones. Time to stop being greedy, and pull their weight along with others, who also have to suffer.

Police can't strike, and their job is bloody dangerous, too.

[Rincewind]

I'm not keen on the answer choices.

[Zingari]

We'll have to get the army to cover again if they go on strike.

Maybe they could all do a job swop for a while providing the regiments don't mind a bit of danger putting out the fires.

It said on the TV that they can't now because all the green goddesses have been sold off . Maybe they could commandeer the pumps , but i doubt it. 

[ADK]

Everyone should have the right to strike.

 

I love how the government effortlessly plays off people's jealousy to pit the public against themselves.

 

A lot of professions that are physically demanding retire at 50, if they don't get the pension then they'll need a pay rise while they are working.

[Rincewind]

I didn't realise it till recently I could have started to draw my pension plan at 55. I would have got sod all but still....

[Guest MattP]

Everyone should have the right to strike.

I love how the government effortlessly plays off people's jealousy to pit the public against themselves.

A lot of professions that are physically demanding retire at 50, if they don't get the pension then they'll need a pay rise while they are working.

Yeah I mean a full pension after 30 years is something the average man should look at without a hint of jealousy.

Where are you getting the money from to pay for all these people you think should retire at 50?

[The God Emperor]

Yeah I mean a full pension after 30 years is something the average man should look at without a hint of jealousy.

Where are you getting the money from to pay for all these people you think should retire at 50?

borrow it, print it,  who cares! the next generation can worry about it 

[ADK]

Yeah I mean a full pension after 30 years is something the average man should look at without a hint of jealousy.

Where are you getting the money from to pay for all these people you think should retire at 50?

 

It's been happening for years and we've paid for it. Personally I prefer to do away with pensions and raise salaries. That way you pay people for the work they actually do and then they can do what they like with it. You don't have to worry about people living longer either because that doesn't cost more.

[Rincewind]

Maybe train the younger people. Cut down the unemployed save on JSA.

 

Maybe not but I won't be around in 40 years so we'll just wait and see.

[Saxondale]

It's been happening for years and we've paid for it. Personally I prefer to do away with pensions and raise salaries. That way you pay people for the work they actually do and then they can do what they like with it. You don't have to worry about people living longer either because that doesn't cost more.

 

Yes it has. And it is that very wanton spending from the public purse that has left the country with an incomprehensibly large deficit, which has, in turn, created the need for the very public spending cuts that those striking fundamentally oppose. 

[ADK]

No it was the collapse of several large financial institutions leading to the recession that caused that large deficit. Seriously these schemes have been in place for many years, why is it a big problem now? If it's so good then you should have trained as a firemen I guess.