Guest The Ropey HOFF Posted September 25, 2013 Share Posted September 25, 2013 Firefighters Go On Strike In Row Over Pensions Firefighters stage the first national stoppage in more than 10 years in protest at plans to make them work until they are 60.5:46pm UK, Wednesday 25 September 2013 Firefighters across England and Wales have walked out on strike in a bitter row with the Government over pensions. Members of the Fire Brigades Union (FBU) left their stations and set up picket lines as they started a four-hour protest at midday. The union is campaigning against changes it says will force firefighters to work longer, pay more into their pensions and receive less in retirement. The move will also see firefighters having to work on frontline duties until they are 60 which could put the public at risk, the union argues. The Government maintains that the changes are fair and will still give firemen and women decent pensions when they retire. A war of words raged between the Government and the FBU as the strike went ahead. Fire minister Brandon Lewis insisted the pensions package was still "one of the most generous" schemes in the public sector. Firefighters earning £29,000 and retiring at 60 after a full career would receive a £19,000-a-year payout, rising to £26,000 with the state pension, he said. "An equivalent private sector pension pot would be worth over half a million pounds and require firefighters to contribute twice as much," he added. "The firefighter pension age of 60 was introduced in 2006 and is in line with the police and armed forces. "We have been clear with the Fire Brigades Union our pension reforms are not introducing a national fitness standard. "Firefighter fitness remains a local fire and rescue authority matter. Government is helping local employers and the union to work together on this issue." General secretary Matt Wrack countered: "This initial strike is a warning shot to government. Firefighters could not be more serious about protecting public safety and ensuring fair pensions. "It is ludicrous to expect firefighters to fight fires and rescue families in their late 50s: the lives of the general public and firefighters themselves will be endangered. "None of us want a strike, but we cannot compromise on public and firefighter safety." TUC general secretary Frances O'Grady added: "There won't be many members of the public who would feel confident about being rescued from a serious fire if the only route out of the inferno was down a ladder on the back of a firefighter who was about to turn 60." Almost 80% of FBU members voted in favour of industrial action and union bosses have not ruled out further steps if the dispute continues. Not certain I fully agree with the Firemen on this occasion, being able to retire at 60 is a good deal IMO. They have just raised the age that Prison Officer can retire to 68 which is a joke as far as I'm concerned, it doesn't effect me, I can retire at 60, which I think is right, but 68 ???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Ropey HOFF Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 it's now the teachers turn, is this the start of a concerted public sector strike action? Thousands of teachers are taking part in strike action in a continued row over pay, pensions and working conditions. Tens of thousands of schoolchildren are expected to be affected by the walkout, which is taking place across four English regions. The industrial action, the latest in a wave of regional strikes, has been organised by two of England’s biggest teaching unions, the National Union of Teachers (NUT) and the NASUWT. The walkout will affect schools in 49 local authorities in the east of England, the East Midlands, West Midlands and Yorkshire and Humberside. NASUWT general secretary Chris Keates said: ‘Strike action is a last resort, teachers have been left with no choice but to demonstrate their anger and frustration in the face of their genuine concerns being dismissed and trivialised.’ Chris Keates said strike action was a ‘last resort’ for teachers (Picture: File) A Department for Education spokeswoman said a recent poll found that 61 per cent of those questioned backed linking teachers’ pay to performance, a key government reform currently being introduced. ‘It is disappointing that the NUT and NASUWT are striking over the government’s measures to allow heads to pay good teachers more,’ she said. ‘All strikes will do is disrupt parents’ lives, hold back children’s education and damage the reputation of the profession.’ The first regional walkout took place in the north-w est on June 27, and further strikes are expected to take place on October 17 in the north-east, south-east, south-west and London. Plans for a national one-day walkout before Christmas have also been announced by the two unions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest littlesarah Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 The firefighters' strike has been a long time coming - the changes to their pension scheme were introduced a couple of years ago, I think. Firefighters pay additional pension contributions into the scheme out of their salary, which contributes to the increased cost of their lower retirement age (not sure how it works for teachers). My brother-in-law tells me that the firefighters he works with who will be affected by the changes are concerned about how they will cope with the physical demands of the job as they get into their late 50s, rather than being worried about how their finances will be. As for teachers, I'm not sure why it is that they have historically been able to retire at 55 - I know the usual cited reason is the stress of the job, but lots of public service jobs include a high level of stress yet have a normal retirement age of 60. Given that people are living longer, working longer seems to me almost inevitable really (the only alternative being for us all to contribute more into our super, which of course means we'd be working for less take-home pay). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Ropey HOFF Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 The firefighters' strike has been a long time coming - the changes to their pension scheme were introduced a couple of years ago, I think. Firefighters pay additional pension contributions into the scheme out of their salary, which contributes to the increased cost of their lower retirement age (not sure how it works for teachers). My brother-in-law tells me that the firefighters he works with who will be affected by the changes are concerned about how they will cope with the physical demands of the job as they get into their late 50s, rather than being worried about how their finances will be. As for teachers, I'm not sure why it is that they have historically been able to retire at 55 - I know the usual cited reason is the stress of the job, but lots of public service jobs include a high level of stress yet have a normal retirement age of 60. Given that people are living longer, working longer seems to me almost inevitable really (the only alternative being for us all to contribute more into our super, which of course means we'd be working for less take-home pay). The thing is, the retirement age has risen to 68 for most folk and firefighters can retire at 60, so they retire 8 years early. I think you make a valid point over the physical demands, I think a wind down of front line services, going in to buildings to carry bodies out for instance, should be left to the younger fitter firefighters. It's not an easy situation to resolve, but with the teachers going on strike and others talking about it, I think things are starting to happen in regards to discontent leading to direct action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ErmintrudeMcMoo Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 My dad was a firefighter for 30 odd years, he retired at 50 I think, the problem is the job is very physically demanding, it's ok to say let the youngster do the physically demanding stuff but with numbers in a crew being what they are that isn't always possible and certainly when my dad was in ( which I admit was a long time ago now) there weren't really any desk jobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Ropey HOFF Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 My dad was a firefighter for 30 odd years, he retired at 50 I think, the problem is the job is very physically demanding, it's ok to say let the youngster do the physically demanding stuff but with numbers in a crew being what they are that isn't always possible and certainly when my dad was in ( which I admit was a long time ago now) there weren't really any desk jobs. It is difficult with physically demanding jobs, it's similar to being a Screw, we have had our retirement age raised to 68 and we are expected to roll around the floor grappling with 21 year old muscle bound lunatics, I'm lucky I'm Hench and just smash them, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simmo Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 I don't think firefighters HAVE to work untill 60 do they. They could always take out a private pension and retire on what thay have invested in there own future if the tax payer funded pension isn't enough. Thousands of other people do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Ropey HOFF Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 I don't think firefighters HAVE to work untill 60 do they. They could always take out a private pension and retire on what thay have invested in there own future if the tax payer funded pension isn't enough. Thousands of other people do. From 2015 any pensionable years accrued after that can only be drawn at 60 unless the individual concerned is willing to lose a lot of their pension, which isn't viable to most, they also pay a lot already towards their pension each month, so paying extra again isn't viable to most, that's part of why they went on strike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simmo Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 From 2015 any pensionable years accrued after that can only be drawn at 60 unless the individual concerned is willing to lose a lot of their pension, which isn't viable to most, they also pay a lot already towards their pension each month, so paying extra again isn't viable to most, that's part of why they went on strike. what's "a lot" in real money? https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CDcQFjAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.gov.uk%2Fgovernment%2Fuploads%2Fsystem%2Fuploads%2Fattachment_data%2Ffile%2F224506%2FFirefighters__pension_scheme_reforms_factsheet.pdf&ei=TARPUqvqA8y20wW5mIDoCw&usg=AFQjCNGTB942xxI_ag-bjXLcKiOA-FQYXg&sig2=L-gbuZqRfd2W_YN9XkvVuA&bvm=bv.53537100,d.Yms&cad=rja I just read this and it seems pretty fair to me, same as military and police... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Ropey HOFF Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 what's "a lot" in real money?https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CDcQFjAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.gov.uk%2Fgovernment%2Fuploads%2Fsystem%2Fuploads%2Fattachment_data%2Ffile%2F224506%2FFirefighters__pension_scheme_reforms_factsheet.pdf&ei=TARPUqvqA8y20wW5mIDoCw&usg=AFQjCNGTB942xxI_ag-bjXLcKiOA-FQYXg&sig2=L-gbuZqRfd2W_YN9XkvVuA&bvm=bv.53537100,d.Yms&cad=rja I just read this and it seems pretty fair to me, same as military and police... Like I said in my opening post, I'm not certain I agree with them, but like someone has said , it's the physicalities of the job, not what they are actually getting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie83 Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 Hi guys. Im a firefighter here in the uk. Ill just shed some light on why we are striking. In 2015 the government want to increase our contributions to 15%, this will slso be uncapped so whrnever they want they csn raise our % to whatever they choose. A firefighter has to work 30 years to accumulate a full pension. Retirement age is set at 55. The reason why we can retire at 55 is because we pay such a large amount of wages into the pension. The physical stresses of the job are immense, it is difficult for anyone not in the fire service to appreciate these. Thr government have said that if you do not pass your fitness test at 55 you will be sacked on capability issues. We would then not be entitled to our pension until 68. So I could be sacked with no income or job until im 68?!!! The fitness test is to be changed so that at 55 I would have to achieve a vo2 max of 42 (the amount of o2 a person uses to body weight). 42 is what a person of 35 can achieve, vo2 max decreases naturally with age. The vo2 max for a 55 year old is 37!!! So not only is this highly unlikely to achieve if you are a woman then you have no chance as their vo2 max is lower still with genetics. Look at someone you know who is 60, do you think they could enter a burning building with full firefighting gear on, temps around 600-1000 degree c, carrying charged hose (which you need to hanfle to appreciate the weight), zero visibility and locate a casualty and rescue them? I currently get paid 28100 pa. I pay in total deductions 47%. That is more than the high earner threshold. I chose this job I dont do it for the wages as they arent great but I love my job and the variety it brings and challenges. We arent wanting more we are just trying to protect what we signed up for. If these changes go through I will lose £60000 from my pension fund. I will pay more and receive less as the extra payments are going straight into the governments pockets. The government say a firefighter gets a pension of 26000, lies. 7000 of this figure is from state pension which you get at 68 not 55/60. The actual amount of pension is 13000. Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Ropey HOFF Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 Hi guys. Im a firefighter here in the uk. Ill just shed some light on why we are striking. In 2015 the government want to increase our contributions to 15%, this will slso be uncapped so whrnever they want they csn raise our % to whatever they choose. A firefighter has to work 30 years to accumulate a full pension. Retirement age is set at 55. The reason why we can retire at 55 is because we pay such a large amount of wages into the pension. The physical stresses of the job are immense, it is difficult for anyone not in the fire service to appreciate these. Thr government have said that if you do not pass your fitness test at 55 you will be sacked on capability issues. We would then not be entitled to our pension until 68. So I could be sacked with no income or job until im 68?!!! The fitness test is to be changed so that at 55 I would have to achieve a vo2 max of 42 (the amount of o2 a person uses to body weight). 42 is what a person of 35 can achieve, vo2 max decreases naturally with age. The vo2 max for a 55 year old is 37!!! So not only is this highly unlikely to achieve if you are a woman then you have no chance as their vo2 max is lower still with genetics. Look at someone you know who is 60, do you think they could enter a burning building with full firefighting gear on, temps around 600-1000 degree c, carrying charged hose (which you need to hanfle to appreciate the weight), zero visibility and locate a casualty and rescue them? I currently get paid 28100 pa. I pay in total deductions 47%. That is more than the high earner threshold. I chose this job I dont do it for the wages as they arent great but I love my job and the variety it brings and challenges. We arent wanting more we are just trying to protect what we signed up for. If these changes go through I will lose £60000 from my pension fund. I will pay more and receive less as the extra payments are going straight into the governments pockets. The government say a firefighter gets a pension of 26000, lies. 7000 of this figure is from state pension which you get at 68 not 55/60. The actual amount of pension is 13000. Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk 2 Well said mate, it's disgraceful what this lying government are doing, I wasn't certain you were right to strike before, but you have convinced me you are. Best of luck mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie83 Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 Thanks mate. Believe me strike is our last option. No one wants to but we hsve to fight for our rights or they would destroy us more. Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.