The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Personally, I'm in favour of it. These guys put their lives on the line day after day, and they deserve a decent salary for doing it. It must really grate that some footballers get more than double their annual salary in a week, all for kicking a ball around for a maximum of three hours a week.
40% may seem high, but considering they'll probably only get half that (if anything), then it's fair play. They always say you should ask for double what you actually want!
I appreciate that a strike may put lives at risk, but that's something held over them by government - and if they don't strike, they'll continue getting screwed.
40% may seem high, but considering they'll probably only get half that (if anything), then it's fair play. They always say you should ask for double what you actually want!
I appreciate that a strike may put lives at risk, but that's something held over them by government - and if they don't strike, they'll continue getting screwed.
Page:
Mendax Bartender wrote:
> Put their lives on the line day after day?
Yes, because when they go to work, and to each job, they don't know what it will become. When I go to work, getting paid £5.50 an hour (only part time) I know that I will spend my four hours standing around, ansering customers questions, and detering the odd shoplifter or watching them run off with the gear anyway. At the end of my four hours I go home.
One day last year, in another country, fire fighters responded to a simple fire call, that later became something much greater, and over 400 died that day.
We need our firemen and women to be paid well, because we'll never know when we'll need them most. I'm sure the images of 9/11 stay in fire personnel's memory the most.
They run the opposite way in an emergency, whether its a house fire or a major incident. For that they deserve at least £30 000 a year, and more. I can't see why anyone would begrudge them that. And if this rise would mean they get paid more than other services, such as police, teaching, military etc then that says a lot about how much we value them as well. All these services deserve massive pay rises.
As a country which is economically sound and reasonably wealthy, we should be increasing the pay of those who matter most, and that we value. Instead we waste money on committees, planning, MPs, and a host of other pointless things. We don't value many people enough, and until we do those professions will continue to face staff and work problems.
~~Belldandy~~
> Put their lives on the line day after day?
Yes, because when they go to work, and to each job, they don't know what it will become. When I go to work, getting paid £5.50 an hour (only part time) I know that I will spend my four hours standing around, ansering customers questions, and detering the odd shoplifter or watching them run off with the gear anyway. At the end of my four hours I go home.
One day last year, in another country, fire fighters responded to a simple fire call, that later became something much greater, and over 400 died that day.
We need our firemen and women to be paid well, because we'll never know when we'll need them most. I'm sure the images of 9/11 stay in fire personnel's memory the most.
They run the opposite way in an emergency, whether its a house fire or a major incident. For that they deserve at least £30 000 a year, and more. I can't see why anyone would begrudge them that. And if this rise would mean they get paid more than other services, such as police, teaching, military etc then that says a lot about how much we value them as well. All these services deserve massive pay rises.
As a country which is economically sound and reasonably wealthy, we should be increasing the pay of those who matter most, and that we value. Instead we waste money on committees, planning, MPs, and a host of other pointless things. We don't value many people enough, and until we do those professions will continue to face staff and work problems.
~~Belldandy~~
There's just been a firefighter on Question Time. He earns just over £4 an hour after stoppages, and is on £100 a month less than the national average wage.
Also mentioned on Question Time was the fact the MP's are on around £118,000 a year after their own 40% rise, and Angus Deayton was on £50,000 (didn't catch whether that was per week or month) for HIGNFY.
They're only asking for £30,000 a year - and I think that's an acceptable amount for what the do.
Anyway - this is from Ananova.com. It would seem that this man lost his life because some idiot decided to set light to a disused factory.
-----
Colleagues pay tribute to firefighter killed on job
Emotional tributes have been paid to a firefighter who died after tackling a severe blaze at a disused hosiery factory that may have been started deliberately.
Bob Miller, a 44-year-old father-of-two with 26 years' experience in the service, was one of the first of about 90 officers sent to derelict premises in Leicester.
He fell through a floor as he checked the building for occupants and died later of his injuries.
As a tribute, the Union Flag was lowered to half-mast above Eastern Fire Station on Hastings Road, Leicester, where he was based as a member of White Watch.
Officials from the Fire Brigades Union, their supporters and local government representatives also held a minute's silence before the second day of talks aimed at averting a national strike in pursuit of a 40% pay increase for firefighters.
FBU leader Andy Gilchrist said the accident would overshadow negotiations, which were being held in London.
Mr Miller's death is the first in the fire service since 1999 and the first at Leicestershire Fire and Rescue Service since a fire at Oadby, south-west of Leicester, in 1971.
Sub officer Mark Smith, who was called to the scene with Mr Miller, held back tears as he spoke of the respect and affection his colleague and friend of 25 years inspired.
Speaking on behalf of fire crews in the city Mr Smith, 47, said: "It will rip the heart out of the watch but we will carry on as that's what Bob deserves and it will be to honour him that we will carry on."
David Webb, chief fire officer at Leicestershire Fire and Rescue Service, said Mr Miller's death was tragic and described it as like losing a family member.
Also mentioned on Question Time was the fact the MP's are on around £118,000 a year after their own 40% rise, and Angus Deayton was on £50,000 (didn't catch whether that was per week or month) for HIGNFY.
They're only asking for £30,000 a year - and I think that's an acceptable amount for what the do.
Anyway - this is from Ananova.com. It would seem that this man lost his life because some idiot decided to set light to a disused factory.
-----
Colleagues pay tribute to firefighter killed on job
Emotional tributes have been paid to a firefighter who died after tackling a severe blaze at a disused hosiery factory that may have been started deliberately.
Bob Miller, a 44-year-old father-of-two with 26 years' experience in the service, was one of the first of about 90 officers sent to derelict premises in Leicester.
He fell through a floor as he checked the building for occupants and died later of his injuries.
As a tribute, the Union Flag was lowered to half-mast above Eastern Fire Station on Hastings Road, Leicester, where he was based as a member of White Watch.
Officials from the Fire Brigades Union, their supporters and local government representatives also held a minute's silence before the second day of talks aimed at averting a national strike in pursuit of a 40% pay increase for firefighters.
FBU leader Andy Gilchrist said the accident would overshadow negotiations, which were being held in London.
Mr Miller's death is the first in the fire service since 1999 and the first at Leicestershire Fire and Rescue Service since a fire at Oadby, south-west of Leicester, in 1971.
Sub officer Mark Smith, who was called to the scene with Mr Miller, held back tears as he spoke of the respect and affection his colleague and friend of 25 years inspired.
Speaking on behalf of fire crews in the city Mr Smith, 47, said: "It will rip the heart out of the watch but we will carry on as that's what Bob deserves and it will be to honour him that we will carry on."
David Webb, chief fire officer at Leicestershire Fire and Rescue Service, said Mr Miller's death was tragic and described it as like losing a family member.
The firefighters are saying that they put their lives on the line everyday and provide a round the clock non-stop service of life saving. Fair enough, give 'em more money. Then they strike. There's no more round the clock, non-stop life saving service, but instead an unreliable life saving srvice. And people don't hang around forever to have their lives saved. So they are no longer pay rise worthy.
I accept that there is seemingly no other way that the government will pay attention to, but it goes against all their principles and they are no longer providing what they supposedly should be geting the pay rise for. They knew the pay when they signed up. The options are - be happy with the money you've got, get another job on the side, or become a train driver instead (more money).
I accept that there is seemingly no other way that the government will pay attention to, but it goes against all their principles and they are no longer providing what they supposedly should be geting the pay rise for. They knew the pay when they signed up. The options are - be happy with the money you've got, get another job on the side, or become a train driver instead (more money).
Get a pay rise?
For even considering strike action, these people should be shot.
Put their lives on the line day after day?
Please, 95% of their time is spent teaching people basic fire avoidance procedures, note the use of the word basic - since advanced procedures are taught by proper health and safety consultants, not firefighters. the other 5% of their time is largely spent playing cards and waiting for something to happen.
But of course, occaisionally, they do put themselves at risk, so perhaps some form of pay increase is due, but not 40%. 10% maybe.
They certainly do not deserve to be paid more than the police, who are far more at risk far more often and against forces far less predictable than flames.
And after seeing a sign outside my local firestation claiming that "30k = £8 an hour" I can't help but think that what these people need is a mathematical re-education, not a pay increase.
As for their strike action. Who will take their place? 19 year old trainee military fire controllers with no choice in the matter far more likely to get themselves killed than help anyone. Hardly putting the people first.
So yes, for the marginal danger element they face, give them a little more money, and a better waging scheme. But not what they are asking for.
For even considering strike action, these people should be shot.
Put their lives on the line day after day?
Please, 95% of their time is spent teaching people basic fire avoidance procedures, note the use of the word basic - since advanced procedures are taught by proper health and safety consultants, not firefighters. the other 5% of their time is largely spent playing cards and waiting for something to happen.
But of course, occaisionally, they do put themselves at risk, so perhaps some form of pay increase is due, but not 40%. 10% maybe.
They certainly do not deserve to be paid more than the police, who are far more at risk far more often and against forces far less predictable than flames.
And after seeing a sign outside my local firestation claiming that "30k = £8 an hour" I can't help but think that what these people need is a mathematical re-education, not a pay increase.
As for their strike action. Who will take their place? 19 year old trainee military fire controllers with no choice in the matter far more likely to get themselves killed than help anyone. Hardly putting the people first.
So yes, for the marginal danger element they face, give them a little more money, and a better waging scheme. But not what they are asking for.
Blank wrote:
> I KEEP SAYING, I agree that they should get a pay rise. Please listen
> to me.
I know, but you questioned why they should strike, and why if they did should they still get a rise. I answered, and asked a general point about other people pay rises which get less press, yet are far more.
~~Belldandy~~
> I KEEP SAYING, I agree that they should get a pay rise. Please listen
> to me.
I know, but you questioned why they should strike, and why if they did should they still get a rise. I answered, and asked a general point about other people pay rises which get less press, yet are far more.
~~Belldandy~~
Belldandy wrote:
> Anyway, what is wrong with giving them a pay rise, numerous government
> ministers and MP's get pay rises exceeding £30 000 most years
> anyway.
I KEEP SAYING, I agree that they should get a pay rise. Please listen to me.
> Anyway, what is wrong with giving them a pay rise, numerous government
> ministers and MP's get pay rises exceeding £30 000 most years
> anyway.
I KEEP SAYING, I agree that they should get a pay rise. Please listen to me.
Blank wrote:
> Well if you go on strike you no longer provide the service, so why
> should you get paid more?
By going on strike, and proving that their services cannot easily be replaced, they are proving they are vital to the country.
Anyway, what is wrong with giving them a pay rise, numerous government ministers and MP's get pay rises exceeding £30 000 most years anyway.
~~Belldandy~~
> Well if you go on strike you no longer provide the service, so why
> should you get paid more?
By going on strike, and proving that their services cannot easily be replaced, they are proving they are vital to the country.
Anyway, what is wrong with giving them a pay rise, numerous government ministers and MP's get pay rises exceeding £30 000 most years anyway.
~~Belldandy~~
Belldandy wrote:
> Blank wrote:
> I've already said many times that I think they should be paid more.
> My
> beef is with the way they're doing it.
>
> How else are they supposed to do it then ? Faced with a government
> that's happy to let essential services survive on minimum pay, and an
> apathetic public that mostly doesn't care until it gets near strike
> time. 6 Months the government has had to sort this, where was the news
> coverage 6 months ago ? Nowhere.
Well if you go on strike you no longer provide the service, so why should you get paid more?
> Blank wrote:
> I've already said many times that I think they should be paid more.
> My
> beef is with the way they're doing it.
>
> How else are they supposed to do it then ? Faced with a government
> that's happy to let essential services survive on minimum pay, and an
> apathetic public that mostly doesn't care until it gets near strike
> time. 6 Months the government has had to sort this, where was the news
> coverage 6 months ago ? Nowhere.
Well if you go on strike you no longer provide the service, so why should you get paid more?
Blank wrote:
> I've already said many times that I think they should be paid more. My
> beef is with the way they're doing it.
How else are they supposed to do it then ? Faced with a government that's happy to let essential services survive on minimum pay, and an apathetic public that mostly doesn't care until it gets near strike time. 6 Months the government has had to sort this, where was the news coverage 6 months ago ? Nowhere.
~~Belldandy~~
> I've already said many times that I think they should be paid more. My
> beef is with the way they're doing it.
How else are they supposed to do it then ? Faced with a government that's happy to let essential services survive on minimum pay, and an apathetic public that mostly doesn't care until it gets near strike time. 6 Months the government has had to sort this, where was the news coverage 6 months ago ? Nowhere.
~~Belldandy~~
Belldandy wrote:
> All they are asking for is £30, 000 a year for doing a job that
> may kill them any day. The manager where I work gets that for doing
> little more than going to the odd meeting and telling people what to
> do.
I agree that they should get paid more, I just don't think they should do it like this. But then they'll never get the pay rise, so what I'd do is leave and drive a train. More money and easier, I imagine.
> You want them all to quit then ? Firstly, this means you'd have a load
> of training only firefighters with no experience people to help them.
> Secondly, most new recruits are single people, who once they decide
> they want a family, will see that on the current wages that's not
> possible to do comfortably.
I never said I wanted them all to quit, I just said that if they're not happy then that is an option.
> I mean, get some perspective here ! Would you do a job for the pay
> they have now, go to all sorts of emergencies, at all sorts of times,
> and risk your life every time ?
No......that's why I'm not a fireman.
> In America, on 9/11, the emergency
> services ran the opposite direction from everyone else. They ran
> towards the disaster, and many hundreds died trying to save lives. The
> Government has taken them for granted, and has had six months to sort
> this out but hasn't. The Government is actually the body responsible
> for employing people to save lives - the Fire Service is simply the
> agency that is tasked to do that. If the Government cannot supply a
> service without the agency it has tasked then that shows how vital
> those who work in that agency are - so pay them fairly !
I've already said many times that I think they should be paid more. My beef is with the way they're doing it.
> All they are asking for is £30, 000 a year for doing a job that
> may kill them any day. The manager where I work gets that for doing
> little more than going to the odd meeting and telling people what to
> do.
I agree that they should get paid more, I just don't think they should do it like this. But then they'll never get the pay rise, so what I'd do is leave and drive a train. More money and easier, I imagine.
> You want them all to quit then ? Firstly, this means you'd have a load
> of training only firefighters with no experience people to help them.
> Secondly, most new recruits are single people, who once they decide
> they want a family, will see that on the current wages that's not
> possible to do comfortably.
I never said I wanted them all to quit, I just said that if they're not happy then that is an option.
> I mean, get some perspective here ! Would you do a job for the pay
> they have now, go to all sorts of emergencies, at all sorts of times,
> and risk your life every time ?
No......that's why I'm not a fireman.
> In America, on 9/11, the emergency
> services ran the opposite direction from everyone else. They ran
> towards the disaster, and many hundreds died trying to save lives. The
> Government has taken them for granted, and has had six months to sort
> this out but hasn't. The Government is actually the body responsible
> for employing people to save lives - the Fire Service is simply the
> agency that is tasked to do that. If the Government cannot supply a
> service without the agency it has tasked then that shows how vital
> those who work in that agency are - so pay them fairly !
I've already said many times that I think they should be paid more. My beef is with the way they're doing it.
Page: