Bromley fire service cuts will leave people in burning buildings for longer says union

The London Fire Brigade Service is facing £64m of cuts

Nine fire stations in south-east London have been earmarked for closure

Tina Hunwick

First published in Bromley by , News Reporter

CUTS to Bromley’s fire services will leave people stranded in burning buildings for longer, according to a fire union secretary.

Bromley Fire Brigades Union secretary Eddie Thompson says closures to stations around Bromley would "dramatically impact" on call out times. London Mayor Boris Johnson has told London’s fire service it needs to cut £64m from its two year budget.

London Fire Commissioner Ron Dobson has already highlighted £14m of possible back office cuts, but further savings need to be made elsewhere.

The London Fire Brigade has submitted a range of possible proposals to the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority (LFEPA) highlighting areas where the axe could fall.

One example recommends the closure of fire stations at Bexley, Greenwich, Biggin Hill, Deptford, Downham, Eltham, New Cross, Lee Green and Woolwich.

It also suggests adding a fire engine to Orpington, Lewisham and East Greenwich but removing one from Bromley.

Another suggestion is closing Biggin Hill, New Cross, Lee Green, Downham and Deptford fire stations.

This would include fire engines being added to Orpington but engines being removed from Bromley, Hayes, Erith and Sidcup.

London Fire Brigade has a target time of six minutes to get one fire engine to a fire and eight minutes for a second fire engine to arrive.

Mr Thompson said: "If Orpington gets a call and the appliances are out in Biggin Hill, it won’t be able to meet the attendance time it’s as simple as that.

"A second appliance might have to come from a different station further away.

"We are not allowed to enter a building to save someone until the second appliance has arrived.

"I know people who have been given warnings for doing that.

"Firefighters will have to decide whether they go in and save someone’s life or play by the rules.

"We don’t want that dilemma.

"The Bromley public won’t be able to get the service they deserve."

He added: "The real question we need to ask is if there’s another 7/7 in 2016 when all these cuts come in, will we be able to deal with it?

"The answer is no in my opinion."

Tina Hunwick, who watched her house go up in flames in February, said the cuts would make an "astronomical difference".

The 43-year-old, who now lives in Hillview Drive in Orpington, had to be re-housed when her previous home, in Petersham Drive, was destroyed by fire.

She said: "If it had been the case when it happened to me, they wouldn’t have been able to get there in time. "It would have been much worse for us.

"We were told if we’d been in the house another five minutes longer, we would have died."

London Fire Brigade Commissioner Ron Dobson said: "Having spent 33 years as a firefighter serving the capital during events including the bombing of Canary Wharf, the 7 July terrorist attacks and last summer’s civil disturbances, I will not propose anything that would put the lives of Londoners, or firefighters, at risk.

"It is important that the debate about the future of London’s fire service is based upon facts about the actual amount of savings the brigade needs to make and the proposals that will be published once this is known. "On going reports of individual stations closing are nothing but unfounded, sensationalised scare stories."

Formal proposals are expected to be submitted to the LFEPA in January.

Comments (42)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

5:56pm Mon 26 Nov 12

Gypo.Joe says...

More scare mongering from the Fred Kites at the Union.
More scare mongering from the Fred Kites at the Union. Gypo.Joe
  • Score: 0

7:55pm Mon 26 Nov 12

Outandabout says...

I actually hope you are right. See I don't care if the cuts come and nothing changes. I spend many years in that job and gt involved at a level where attendance times nationally were looked at and I was part of that team. I have seen the service stretched. Since those days there have been many cuts and I know of incidents that never got publicity where people died because the service was stretched and mistakes made. They just haven't been in great enough numbers to 'matter'. The ting is everyone is cutting and when one service, say London transport police, cut then another, say Met Police get busier but all services are cutting. Once these cuts are in we need one major incident with black bags lining the kerb. then everyone will say 'I told you so' and people will just accuse them of making capital out of a disaster. That will then deflect the debate. It will take bodies on the kerbside and crews saying 'we didn't have the people to get in and rescue them, we could hear them screaming but we didn't have the people to fight the fire and rescue. I hope I am wrong but cuts across the board will kill people.
I actually hope you are right. See I don't care if the cuts come and nothing changes. I spend many years in that job and gt involved at a level where attendance times nationally were looked at and I was part of that team. I have seen the service stretched. Since those days there have been many cuts and I know of incidents that never got publicity where people died because the service was stretched and mistakes made. They just haven't been in great enough numbers to 'matter'. The ting is everyone is cutting and when one service, say London transport police, cut then another, say Met Police get busier but all services are cutting. Once these cuts are in we need one major incident with black bags lining the kerb. then everyone will say 'I told you so' and people will just accuse them of making capital out of a disaster. That will then deflect the debate. It will take bodies on the kerbside and crews saying 'we didn't have the people to get in and rescue them, we could hear them screaming but we didn't have the people to fight the fire and rescue. I hope I am wrong but cuts across the board will kill people. Outandabout
  • Score: 0

9:43pm Mon 26 Nov 12

Guess who ;) AGAIN ! says...

Who is Fred Kite ?
Who is Fred Kite ? Guess who ;) AGAIN !
  • Score: 0

8:34am Tue 27 Nov 12

Chrisbitz says...

Maybe they should go on strike again? It must be coming up to 12 months since the last one?

Whenever any change is mentioned, the only argument put forward is safety, as they know nobody can argue against that. Same with the underground drivers too.

Why not go on strike until there's a fireman on every single street corner in the country. Anything less is a reduction in safety, and puts lives genuinely at risk.

I'm sorry firemen, I used to have the greatest respect for you and your positions, BEFORE you became militant, and went on strike every other week at the drop of a hat. Unfortunately now, anything important you have to say just gets ignored, because you betrayed our respect and trust.
Maybe they should go on strike again? It must be coming up to 12 months since the last one? Whenever any change is mentioned, the only argument put forward is safety, as they know nobody can argue against that. Same with the underground drivers too. Why not go on strike until there's a fireman on every single street corner in the country. Anything less is a reduction in safety, and puts lives genuinely at risk. I'm sorry firemen, I used to have the greatest respect for you and your positions, BEFORE you became militant, and went on strike every other week at the drop of a hat. Unfortunately now, anything important you have to say just gets ignored, because you betrayed our respect and trust. Chrisbitz
  • Score: 0

9:02am Tue 27 Nov 12

Rightly so says...

Chrisbitz wrote:
Maybe they should go on strike again? It must be coming up to 12 months since the last one?

Whenever any change is mentioned, the only argument put forward is safety, as they know nobody can argue against that. Same with the underground drivers too.

Why not go on strike until there's a fireman on every single street corner in the country. Anything less is a reduction in safety, and puts lives genuinely at risk.

I'm sorry firemen, I used to have the greatest respect for you and your positions, BEFORE you became militant, and went on strike every other week at the drop of a hat. Unfortunately now, anything important you have to say just gets ignored, because you betrayed our respect and trust.
Why let the facts get in the way of a good rant?

Please let me know how many times London firefighters have been on strike in the last 30 years. Maybe you should research your argument before you decide to share it with everyone.

If you want to make a comment on this forum, don't resort to trite inaccurate statements.
[quote][p][bold]Chrisbitz[/bold] wrote: Maybe they should go on strike again? It must be coming up to 12 months since the last one? Whenever any change is mentioned, the only argument put forward is safety, as they know nobody can argue against that. Same with the underground drivers too. Why not go on strike until there's a fireman on every single street corner in the country. Anything less is a reduction in safety, and puts lives genuinely at risk. I'm sorry firemen, I used to have the greatest respect for you and your positions, BEFORE you became militant, and went on strike every other week at the drop of a hat. Unfortunately now, anything important you have to say just gets ignored, because you betrayed our respect and trust.[/p][/quote]Why let the facts get in the way of a good rant? Please let me know how many times London firefighters have been on strike in the last 30 years. Maybe you should research your argument before you decide to share it with everyone. If you want to make a comment on this forum, don't resort to trite inaccurate statements. Rightly so
  • Score: 0

9:17am Tue 27 Nov 12

Chrisbitz says...

Rightly so wrote:
Chrisbitz wrote:
Maybe they should go on strike again? It must be coming up to 12 months since the last one?

Whenever any change is mentioned, the only argument put forward is safety, as they know nobody can argue against that. Same with the underground drivers too.

Why not go on strike until there's a fireman on every single street corner in the country. Anything less is a reduction in safety, and puts lives genuinely at risk.

I'm sorry firemen, I used to have the greatest respect for you and your positions, BEFORE you became militant, and went on strike every other week at the drop of a hat. Unfortunately now, anything important you have to say just gets ignored, because you betrayed our respect and trust.
Why let the facts get in the way of a good rant?

Please let me know how many times London firefighters have been on strike in the last 30 years. Maybe you should research your argument before you decide to share it with everyone.

If you want to make a comment on this forum, don't resort to trite inaccurate statements.
If you wanted to skew the facts more, you should have mentioned number of strikes over the last 100 years!

Whats more relevant, if you'd read my comment, I said SINCE they'd become militant. Why don't you tell me how many days have firemen in general been on strike in the last 5 - 10 years? More than two days, and you can hold your head in shame for trying to mislead the public.
The fact remains, the firemen are militant now, and strike too often for such an important public service.
[quote][p][bold]Rightly so[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chrisbitz[/bold] wrote: Maybe they should go on strike again? It must be coming up to 12 months since the last one? Whenever any change is mentioned, the only argument put forward is safety, as they know nobody can argue against that. Same with the underground drivers too. Why not go on strike until there's a fireman on every single street corner in the country. Anything less is a reduction in safety, and puts lives genuinely at risk. I'm sorry firemen, I used to have the greatest respect for you and your positions, BEFORE you became militant, and went on strike every other week at the drop of a hat. Unfortunately now, anything important you have to say just gets ignored, because you betrayed our respect and trust.[/p][/quote]Why let the facts get in the way of a good rant? Please let me know how many times London firefighters have been on strike in the last 30 years. Maybe you should research your argument before you decide to share it with everyone. If you want to make a comment on this forum, don't resort to trite inaccurate statements.[/p][/quote]If you wanted to skew the facts more, you should have mentioned number of strikes over the last 100 years! Whats more relevant, if you'd read my comment, I said SINCE they'd become militant. Why don't you tell me how many days have firemen in general been on strike in the last 5 - 10 years? More than two days, and you can hold your head in shame for trying to mislead the public. The fact remains, the firemen are militant now, and strike too often for such an important public service. Chrisbitz
  • Score: 0

9:20am Tue 27 Nov 12

Chrisbitz says...

Just thought - I should have added Or threatened to strike - it's just as irresponsible, especially around bonfire night.
Just thought - I should have added Or threatened to strike - it's just as irresponsible, especially around bonfire night. Chrisbitz
  • Score: 0

9:34am Tue 27 Nov 12

Rightly so says...

Chrisbitz,

You are the one ranting about Firefighter's apparent militancy. It is therefore down to you to back up your statements with facts. I would be interested to know exactly when the militancy started. Are you talking about London Firefighters, or are you talking nationally?

If it helps you, London Firefighters have had two disputes over the last 30 years which have resulted in the withdrawal of their labour. If that is militancy to you, we had better not get you started on the RMT!

What you, and a number of other contributors to the current debate have got wrong is that as Firefighters, the proposed cuts will actually mean more incidents will be attended, which will suit some as that is what they joined up for. However, as London residents, they can see that delayed attendances WILL have an impact on people's lives and property. If you are happy with that, fine. We obviously have to settle for a level of cover, and people will always disagree as where that level should be.

Join in the debate by all means, but don't resort to infantile mud slinging about supposed militancy, when it is fairly obvious, you don't really know what you are talking about.
Chrisbitz, You are the one ranting about Firefighter's apparent militancy. It is therefore down to you to back up your statements with facts. I would be interested to know exactly when the militancy started. Are you talking about London Firefighters, or are you talking nationally? If it helps you, London Firefighters have had two disputes over the last 30 years which have resulted in the withdrawal of their labour. If that is militancy to you, we had better not get you started on the RMT! What you, and a number of other contributors to the current debate have got wrong is that as Firefighters, the proposed cuts will actually mean more incidents will be attended, which will suit some as that is what they joined up for. However, as London residents, they can see that delayed attendances WILL have an impact on people's lives and property. If you are happy with that, fine. We obviously have to settle for a level of cover, and people will always disagree as where that level should be. Join in the debate by all means, but don't resort to infantile mud slinging about supposed militancy, when it is fairly obvious, you don't really know what you are talking about. Rightly so
  • Score: 0

11:01am Tue 27 Nov 12

Gypo.Joe says...

Chrisbitz I'm with you here. I'm over listening to these firepeople whine safety everytime cuts are mentioned.

We all know it their cushy jobs they are really bothered about.

If you're all so concerned with response times why not every shift, all shift have your gear on sit ya arse in the engine and be ready to do the off. Take a flask, sandwiches and a bottle to p1ss in to work with you. That's what most LGV drivers do.
Chrisbitz I'm with you here. I'm over listening to these firepeople whine safety everytime cuts are mentioned. We all know it their cushy jobs they are really bothered about. If you're all so concerned with response times why not every shift, all shift have your gear on sit ya arse in the engine and be ready to do the off. Take a flask, sandwiches and a bottle to p1ss in to work with you. That's what most LGV drivers do. Gypo.Joe
  • Score: 0

12:07pm Tue 27 Nov 12

PaulErith says...

Gypo.Joe wrote:
Chrisbitz I'm with you here. I'm over listening to these firepeople whine safety everytime cuts are mentioned. We all know it their cushy jobs they are really bothered about. If you're all so concerned with response times why not every shift, all shift have your gear on sit ya arse in the engine and be ready to do the off. Take a flask, sandwiches and a bottle to p1ss in to work with you. That's what most LGV drivers do.
I don't understand your comments to be honest. Whether your viewpoint is that the firefighters are only trying to protect their jobs or that they are genuinely worried about saftey doesn't really matter. It doesn't change a basic fact. If you have less fire stations, then it's going to take longer in some situations for them to get to a call-out. I don't really see how anyone can possibly argue anything different! If my local fire station is currently 5 mins away, and it changes so that it's 20 mins, then you couldn't possibly say that it's not going to take longer. On that basis, clearly it will affect people's safety, and more people will die in fires.
[quote][p][bold]Gypo.Joe[/bold] wrote: Chrisbitz I'm with you here. I'm over listening to these firepeople whine safety everytime cuts are mentioned. We all know it their cushy jobs they are really bothered about. If you're all so concerned with response times why not every shift, all shift have your gear on sit ya arse in the engine and be ready to do the off. Take a flask, sandwiches and a bottle to p1ss in to work with you. That's what most LGV drivers do.[/p][/quote]I don't understand your comments to be honest. Whether your viewpoint is that the firefighters are only trying to protect their jobs or that they are genuinely worried about saftey doesn't really matter. It doesn't change a basic fact. If you have less fire stations, then it's going to take longer in some situations for them to get to a call-out. I don't really see how anyone can possibly argue anything different! If my local fire station is currently 5 mins away, and it changes so that it's 20 mins, then you couldn't possibly say that it's not going to take longer. On that basis, clearly it will affect people's safety, and more people will die in fires. PaulErith
  • Score: 0

12:13pm Tue 27 Nov 12

Chrisbitz says...

PaulErith wrote:
Gypo.Joe wrote:
Chrisbitz I'm with you here. I'm over listening to these firepeople whine safety everytime cuts are mentioned. We all know it their cushy jobs they are really bothered about. If you're all so concerned with response times why not every shift, all shift have your gear on sit ya arse in the engine and be ready to do the off. Take a flask, sandwiches and a bottle to p1ss in to work with you. That's what most LGV drivers do.
I don't understand your comments to be honest. Whether your viewpoint is that the firefighters are only trying to protect their jobs or that they are genuinely worried about saftey doesn't really matter. It doesn't change a basic fact. If you have less fire stations, then it's going to take longer in some situations for them to get to a call-out. I don't really see how anyone can possibly argue anything different! If my local fire station is currently 5 mins away, and it changes so that it's 20 mins, then you couldn't possibly say that it's not going to take longer. On that basis, clearly it will affect people's safety, and more people will die in fires.
I think the whole point is that somewhere, a line has to be drawn between safety and cost effectiveness.

Costs have to be reduced across the country, and since all hell breaks loose when fireman pay freezes are mentioned, how else can cuts be made?
[quote][p][bold]PaulErith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Gypo.Joe[/bold] wrote: Chrisbitz I'm with you here. I'm over listening to these firepeople whine safety everytime cuts are mentioned. We all know it their cushy jobs they are really bothered about. If you're all so concerned with response times why not every shift, all shift have your gear on sit ya arse in the engine and be ready to do the off. Take a flask, sandwiches and a bottle to p1ss in to work with you. That's what most LGV drivers do.[/p][/quote]I don't understand your comments to be honest. Whether your viewpoint is that the firefighters are only trying to protect their jobs or that they are genuinely worried about saftey doesn't really matter. It doesn't change a basic fact. If you have less fire stations, then it's going to take longer in some situations for them to get to a call-out. I don't really see how anyone can possibly argue anything different! If my local fire station is currently 5 mins away, and it changes so that it's 20 mins, then you couldn't possibly say that it's not going to take longer. On that basis, clearly it will affect people's safety, and more people will die in fires.[/p][/quote]I think the whole point is that somewhere, a line has to be drawn between safety and cost effectiveness. Costs have to be reduced across the country, and since all hell breaks loose when fireman pay freezes are mentioned, how else can cuts be made? Chrisbitz
  • Score: 0

12:22pm Tue 27 Nov 12

Gypo.Joe says...

"cost effectiveness" BINGO !!

How dare you mention that to our socialist bretheren. They all live in this utopia. I'm just off to pick some twenty pound notes off my tree, would anyone like some while I'm there.
"cost effectiveness" BINGO !! How dare you mention that to our socialist bretheren. They all live in this utopia. I'm just off to pick some twenty pound notes off my tree, would anyone like some while I'm there. Gypo.Joe
  • Score: 0

12:30pm Tue 27 Nov 12

Rightly so says...

Chrisbitz,

Remind me again "when all hell broke loose when firemen pay freezes were mentioned" ? I must have missed that, unless of course, it is another one of your uncorroborated facts.

As for Gypo.Joe's comments. Yet another anti firefighter rant/troll which is becoming rather boring. Something in your history which has so embittered you? I can think of many possibilies.
Chrisbitz, Remind me again "when all hell broke loose when firemen pay freezes were mentioned" ? I must have missed that, unless of course, it is another one of your uncorroborated facts. As for Gypo.Joe's comments. Yet another anti firefighter rant/troll which is becoming rather boring. Something in your history which has so embittered you? I can think of many possibilies. Rightly so
  • Score: 0

12:31pm Tue 27 Nov 12

screw_your_loaf says...

There are so right idiots on here especially "thicko.joe"
Your arrogance is overwhelming,
We have been on strike three times in 30 years, and all three times on safety ground that affect **** like you, do some research, get down to you local fire station and find out what is really going on instead of beleiving all the dribble in the press!
There are so right idiots on here especially "thicko.joe" Your arrogance is overwhelming, We have been on strike three times in 30 years, and all three times on safety ground that affect **** like you, do some research, get down to you local fire station and find out what is really going on instead of beleiving all the dribble in the press! screw_your_loaf
  • Score: 0

12:48pm Tue 27 Nov 12

Chrisbitz says...

I think you lost your right to claim anything about safety, when you last held the country to ransom by threatening to strike on Bonfire night. In all honesty, I can't think of ANYTHING more contrived and disgusting as that.
Tell me, what sort of safety were you concerned about then?
I think you lost your right to claim anything about safety, when you last held the country to ransom by threatening to strike on Bonfire night. In all honesty, I can't think of ANYTHING more contrived and disgusting as that. Tell me, what sort of safety were you concerned about then? Chrisbitz
  • Score: 0

1:09pm Tue 27 Nov 12

PaulErith says...

screw_your_loaf wrote:
There are so right idiots on here especially "thicko.joe" Your arrogance is overwhelming, We have been on strike three times in 30 years, and all three times on safety ground that affect **** like you, do some research, get down to you local fire station and find out what is really going on instead of beleiving all the dribble in the press!
I'm guessing that these people slagging off the fire brigade have never had to call them in an emergency. Wait until that happens, and then see how their attitudes change. If one of their relatives dies in a fire because their local station was closed, I wonder whether they'll still have the same view point.
[quote][p][bold]screw_your_loaf[/bold] wrote: There are so right idiots on here especially "thicko.joe" Your arrogance is overwhelming, We have been on strike three times in 30 years, and all three times on safety ground that affect **** like you, do some research, get down to you local fire station and find out what is really going on instead of beleiving all the dribble in the press![/p][/quote]I'm guessing that these people slagging off the fire brigade have never had to call them in an emergency. Wait until that happens, and then see how their attitudes change. If one of their relatives dies in a fire because their local station was closed, I wonder whether they'll still have the same view point. PaulErith
  • Score: 0

1:11pm Tue 27 Nov 12

screw_your_loaf says...

The treat of a strike on bonfire night, made the employers get around the table to negotiate, and ultimately reach an agreement on the issues of concern. If Santa went on strike what day do you think he would choose, Easter Sunday or Christmas Eve/day?
It's a no brainer really, resent disputes have be over privatisation of fire engines and equipment, ( the very thing that has change owners 3 times in as many years, one firm went bust, and then the entire fleet was sold for £2!!!) another issue was changes to the legislation to enable the closure stations and get rid of fire engines, guess what, some are going!
We are trying to protect a public service that you pay for, if should not be a business venture were individuals make money is put profit I front of safety.
Yes we have raise trade disputes over pay and pensions, but with a pay freeze for 3 years and having your monthly pension contributions put up from £300 a month to around £450 a month whilst having the benefits of the scheme greatly reduced wouldn't you be a little put out!!!!
The treat of a strike on bonfire night, made the employers get around the table to negotiate, and ultimately reach an agreement on the issues of concern. If Santa went on strike what day do you think he would choose, Easter Sunday or Christmas Eve/day? It's a no brainer really, resent disputes have be over privatisation of fire engines and equipment, ( the very thing that has change owners 3 times in as many years, one firm went bust, and then the entire fleet was sold for £2!!!) another issue was changes to the legislation to enable the closure stations and get rid of fire engines, guess what, some are going! We are trying to protect a public service that you pay for, if should not be a business venture were individuals make money is put profit I front of safety. Yes we have raise trade disputes over pay and pensions, but with a pay freeze for 3 years and having your monthly pension contributions put up from £300 a month to around £450 a month whilst having the benefits of the scheme greatly reduced wouldn't you be a little put out!!!! screw_your_loaf
  • Score: 0

1:14pm Tue 27 Nov 12

PaulErith says...

Chrisbitz wrote:
PaulErith wrote:
Gypo.Joe wrote: Chrisbitz I'm with you here. I'm over listening to these firepeople whine safety everytime cuts are mentioned. We all know it their cushy jobs they are really bothered about. If you're all so concerned with response times why not every shift, all shift have your gear on sit ya arse in the engine and be ready to do the off. Take a flask, sandwiches and a bottle to p1ss in to work with you. That's what most LGV drivers do.
I don't understand your comments to be honest. Whether your viewpoint is that the firefighters are only trying to protect their jobs or that they are genuinely worried about saftey doesn't really matter. It doesn't change a basic fact. If you have less fire stations, then it's going to take longer in some situations for them to get to a call-out. I don't really see how anyone can possibly argue anything different! If my local fire station is currently 5 mins away, and it changes so that it's 20 mins, then you couldn't possibly say that it's not going to take longer. On that basis, clearly it will affect people's safety, and more people will die in fires.
I think the whole point is that somewhere, a line has to be drawn between safety and cost effectiveness. Costs have to be reduced across the country, and since all hell breaks loose when fireman pay freezes are mentioned, how else can cuts be made?
I do understand your argument about costs having to be reduced across the country. However, my personal opinion is that cuts to the emergency services (that's not just fire) should be the last resort as they obviously do impact safety. Whether it's police, hospitals or fire, cuts clearly affect lives.

There's a number of areas that could be targetted to make cuts. Target benefit scroungers, immigration, foreign aid just to name a few. Foreign aid in particular is the one that really gets me annoyed. If we can afford it, then giving aid to third World countries is great. However, if it's at the expense of our own vital services, I don't see how it's justified.
[quote][p][bold]Chrisbitz[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PaulErith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Gypo.Joe[/bold] wrote: Chrisbitz I'm with you here. I'm over listening to these firepeople whine safety everytime cuts are mentioned. We all know it their cushy jobs they are really bothered about. If you're all so concerned with response times why not every shift, all shift have your gear on sit ya arse in the engine and be ready to do the off. Take a flask, sandwiches and a bottle to p1ss in to work with you. That's what most LGV drivers do.[/p][/quote]I don't understand your comments to be honest. Whether your viewpoint is that the firefighters are only trying to protect their jobs or that they are genuinely worried about saftey doesn't really matter. It doesn't change a basic fact. If you have less fire stations, then it's going to take longer in some situations for them to get to a call-out. I don't really see how anyone can possibly argue anything different! If my local fire station is currently 5 mins away, and it changes so that it's 20 mins, then you couldn't possibly say that it's not going to take longer. On that basis, clearly it will affect people's safety, and more people will die in fires.[/p][/quote]I think the whole point is that somewhere, a line has to be drawn between safety and cost effectiveness. Costs have to be reduced across the country, and since all hell breaks loose when fireman pay freezes are mentioned, how else can cuts be made?[/p][/quote]I do understand your argument about costs having to be reduced across the country. However, my personal opinion is that cuts to the emergency services (that's not just fire) should be the last resort as they obviously do impact safety. Whether it's police, hospitals or fire, cuts clearly affect lives. There's a number of areas that could be targetted to make cuts. Target benefit scroungers, immigration, foreign aid just to name a few. Foreign aid in particular is the one that really gets me annoyed. If we can afford it, then giving aid to third World countries is great. However, if it's at the expense of our own vital services, I don't see how it's justified. PaulErith
  • Score: 0

1:15pm Tue 27 Nov 12

Rightly so says...

Chrisbitz wrote:
I think you lost your right to claim anything about safety, when you last held the country to ransom by threatening to strike on Bonfire night. In all honesty, I can't think of ANYTHING more contrived and disgusting as that.
Tell me, what sort of safety were you concerned about then?
Before you start posing new questions, can I have an answer to my question please?

I am waiting to be reminded how all hell breaks loose on the mention of fire-fighter pay freezes.

Come on, put me out of my misery. Dates? Incidents?
[quote][p][bold]Chrisbitz[/bold] wrote: I think you lost your right to claim anything about safety, when you last held the country to ransom by threatening to strike on Bonfire night. In all honesty, I can't think of ANYTHING more contrived and disgusting as that. Tell me, what sort of safety were you concerned about then?[/p][/quote]Before you start posing new questions, can I have an answer to my question please? I am waiting to be reminded how all hell breaks loose on the mention of fire-fighter pay freezes. Come on, put me out of my misery. Dates? Incidents? Rightly so
  • Score: 0

1:32pm Tue 27 Nov 12

screw_your_loaf says...

Rightly so wrote:
Chrisbitz wrote:
I think you lost your right to claim anything about safety, when you last held the country to ransom by threatening to strike on Bonfire night. In all honesty, I can't think of ANYTHING more contrived and disgusting as that.
Tell me, what sort of safety were you concerned about then?
Before you start posing new questions, can I have an answer to my question please?

I am waiting to be reminded how all hell breaks loose on the mention of fire-fighter pay freezes.

Come on, put me out of my misery. Dates? Incidents?
I think someone got theirselves a little confused, after all no hell broke loss over pay freeze at all,

Chrisbitz obviously meant that hell MIGHT break loss if fire stations close and more people start dying in fires and lets not forget all the other situations they find theirselves in.

Must be horrible not knowing what your talking about......bless
[quote][p][bold]Rightly so[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chrisbitz[/bold] wrote: I think you lost your right to claim anything about safety, when you last held the country to ransom by threatening to strike on Bonfire night. In all honesty, I can't think of ANYTHING more contrived and disgusting as that. Tell me, what sort of safety were you concerned about then?[/p][/quote]Before you start posing new questions, can I have an answer to my question please? I am waiting to be reminded how all hell breaks loose on the mention of fire-fighter pay freezes. Come on, put me out of my misery. Dates? Incidents?[/p][/quote]I think someone got theirselves a little confused, after all no hell broke loss over pay freeze at all, Chrisbitz obviously meant that hell MIGHT break loss if fire stations close and more people start dying in fires and lets not forget all the other situations they find theirselves in. Must be horrible not knowing what your talking about......bless screw_your_loaf
  • Score: 0

1:36pm Tue 27 Nov 12

screw_your_loaf says...

Opps silly typo ( bloody predictor text ) should read LOOSE not LOSS
Opps silly typo ( bloody predictor text ) should read LOOSE not LOSS screw_your_loaf
  • Score: 0

1:36pm Tue 27 Nov 12

screw_your_loaf says...

Opps silly typo ( bloody predictor text ) should read LOOSE not LOSS
Opps silly typo ( bloody predictor text ) should read LOOSE not LOSS screw_your_loaf
  • Score: 0

1:45pm Tue 27 Nov 12

Chrisbitz says...

PaulErith wrote:
Chrisbitz wrote:
PaulErith wrote:
Gypo.Joe wrote: Chrisbitz I'm with you here. I'm over listening to these firepeople whine safety everytime cuts are mentioned. We all know it their cushy jobs they are really bothered about. If you're all so concerned with response times why not every shift, all shift have your gear on sit ya arse in the engine and be ready to do the off. Take a flask, sandwiches and a bottle to p1ss in to work with you. That's what most LGV drivers do.
I don't understand your comments to be honest. Whether your viewpoint is that the firefighters are only trying to protect their jobs or that they are genuinely worried about saftey doesn't really matter. It doesn't change a basic fact. If you have less fire stations, then it's going to take longer in some situations for them to get to a call-out. I don't really see how anyone can possibly argue anything different! If my local fire station is currently 5 mins away, and it changes so that it's 20 mins, then you couldn't possibly say that it's not going to take longer. On that basis, clearly it will affect people's safety, and more people will die in fires.
I think the whole point is that somewhere, a line has to be drawn between safety and cost effectiveness. Costs have to be reduced across the country, and since all hell breaks loose when fireman pay freezes are mentioned, how else can cuts be made?
I do understand your argument about costs having to be reduced across the country. However, my personal opinion is that cuts to the emergency services (that's not just fire) should be the last resort as they obviously do impact safety. Whether it's police, hospitals or fire, cuts clearly affect lives.

There's a number of areas that could be targetted to make cuts. Target benefit scroungers, immigration, foreign aid just to name a few. Foreign aid in particular is the one that really gets me annoyed. If we can afford it, then giving aid to third World countries is great. However, if it's at the expense of our own vital services, I don't see how it's justified.
I totally agree with you PaulErith, that's a fair point. However I resent the country being held to ransom every time the firefighters aren't happy with something.
If only they could have the same deal the Police have where they can't strike.
Then they'd get the respect of the country back, but you can tell by the angry tone of the firefighters here, that this wont be a rational discussion.

I've never been in a Union in my life, and if I don't like something, I get another job. The thought of going on strike just isn't part of my culture.

To the firefighters on here, I feel that threatening the safety and lives of people who disagree with you is belittling your cause.
[quote][p][bold]PaulErith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chrisbitz[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PaulErith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Gypo.Joe[/bold] wrote: Chrisbitz I'm with you here. I'm over listening to these firepeople whine safety everytime cuts are mentioned. We all know it their cushy jobs they are really bothered about. If you're all so concerned with response times why not every shift, all shift have your gear on sit ya arse in the engine and be ready to do the off. Take a flask, sandwiches and a bottle to p1ss in to work with you. That's what most LGV drivers do.[/p][/quote]I don't understand your comments to be honest. Whether your viewpoint is that the firefighters are only trying to protect their jobs or that they are genuinely worried about saftey doesn't really matter. It doesn't change a basic fact. If you have less fire stations, then it's going to take longer in some situations for them to get to a call-out. I don't really see how anyone can possibly argue anything different! If my local fire station is currently 5 mins away, and it changes so that it's 20 mins, then you couldn't possibly say that it's not going to take longer. On that basis, clearly it will affect people's safety, and more people will die in fires.[/p][/quote]I think the whole point is that somewhere, a line has to be drawn between safety and cost effectiveness. Costs have to be reduced across the country, and since all hell breaks loose when fireman pay freezes are mentioned, how else can cuts be made?[/p][/quote]I do understand your argument about costs having to be reduced across the country. However, my personal opinion is that cuts to the emergency services (that's not just fire) should be the last resort as they obviously do impact safety. Whether it's police, hospitals or fire, cuts clearly affect lives. There's a number of areas that could be targetted to make cuts. Target benefit scroungers, immigration, foreign aid just to name a few. Foreign aid in particular is the one that really gets me annoyed. If we can afford it, then giving aid to third World countries is great. However, if it's at the expense of our own vital services, I don't see how it's justified.[/p][/quote]I totally agree with you PaulErith, that's a fair point. However I resent the country being held to ransom every time the firefighters aren't happy with something. If only they could have the same deal the Police have where they can't strike. Then they'd get the respect of the country back, but you can tell by the angry tone of the firefighters here, that this wont be a rational discussion. I've never been in a Union in my life, and if I don't like something, I get another job. The thought of going on strike just isn't part of my culture. To the firefighters on here, I feel that threatening the safety and lives of people who disagree with you is belittling your cause. Chrisbitz
  • Score: 0

1:52pm Tue 27 Nov 12

PaulErith says...

Chrisbitz wrote:
PaulErith wrote:
Chrisbitz wrote:
PaulErith wrote:
Gypo.Joe wrote: Chrisbitz I'm with you here. I'm over listening to these firepeople whine safety everytime cuts are mentioned. We all know it their cushy jobs they are really bothered about. If you're all so concerned with response times why not every shift, all shift have your gear on sit ya arse in the engine and be ready to do the off. Take a flask, sandwiches and a bottle to p1ss in to work with you. That's what most LGV drivers do.
I don't understand your comments to be honest. Whether your viewpoint is that the firefighters are only trying to protect their jobs or that they are genuinely worried about saftey doesn't really matter. It doesn't change a basic fact. If you have less fire stations, then it's going to take longer in some situations for them to get to a call-out. I don't really see how anyone can possibly argue anything different! If my local fire station is currently 5 mins away, and it changes so that it's 20 mins, then you couldn't possibly say that it's not going to take longer. On that basis, clearly it will affect people's safety, and more people will die in fires.
I think the whole point is that somewhere, a line has to be drawn between safety and cost effectiveness. Costs have to be reduced across the country, and since all hell breaks loose when fireman pay freezes are mentioned, how else can cuts be made?
I do understand your argument about costs having to be reduced across the country. However, my personal opinion is that cuts to the emergency services (that's not just fire) should be the last resort as they obviously do impact safety. Whether it's police, hospitals or fire, cuts clearly affect lives. There's a number of areas that could be targetted to make cuts. Target benefit scroungers, immigration, foreign aid just to name a few. Foreign aid in particular is the one that really gets me annoyed. If we can afford it, then giving aid to third World countries is great. However, if it's at the expense of our own vital services, I don't see how it's justified.
I totally agree with you PaulErith, that's a fair point. However I resent the country being held to ransom every time the firefighters aren't happy with something. If only they could have the same deal the Police have where they can't strike. Then they'd get the respect of the country back, but you can tell by the angry tone of the firefighters here, that this wont be a rational discussion. I've never been in a Union in my life, and if I don't like something, I get another job. The thought of going on strike just isn't part of my culture. To the firefighters on here, I feel that threatening the safety and lives of people who disagree with you is belittling your cause.
And again, I will totally agree with you on the union thing. I work in the private sector, and if I have an issue, then I try to sort it out. I wouldn't expect my colleagues to get involved. If I don't like the terms, then look elsewhere. I am totally opposed to unions.
[quote][p][bold]Chrisbitz[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PaulErith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chrisbitz[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PaulErith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Gypo.Joe[/bold] wrote: Chrisbitz I'm with you here. I'm over listening to these firepeople whine safety everytime cuts are mentioned. We all know it their cushy jobs they are really bothered about. If you're all so concerned with response times why not every shift, all shift have your gear on sit ya arse in the engine and be ready to do the off. Take a flask, sandwiches and a bottle to p1ss in to work with you. That's what most LGV drivers do.[/p][/quote]I don't understand your comments to be honest. Whether your viewpoint is that the firefighters are only trying to protect their jobs or that they are genuinely worried about saftey doesn't really matter. It doesn't change a basic fact. If you have less fire stations, then it's going to take longer in some situations for them to get to a call-out. I don't really see how anyone can possibly argue anything different! If my local fire station is currently 5 mins away, and it changes so that it's 20 mins, then you couldn't possibly say that it's not going to take longer. On that basis, clearly it will affect people's safety, and more people will die in fires.[/p][/quote]I think the whole point is that somewhere, a line has to be drawn between safety and cost effectiveness. Costs have to be reduced across the country, and since all hell breaks loose when fireman pay freezes are mentioned, how else can cuts be made?[/p][/quote]I do understand your argument about costs having to be reduced across the country. However, my personal opinion is that cuts to the emergency services (that's not just fire) should be the last resort as they obviously do impact safety. Whether it's police, hospitals or fire, cuts clearly affect lives. There's a number of areas that could be targetted to make cuts. Target benefit scroungers, immigration, foreign aid just to name a few. Foreign aid in particular is the one that really gets me annoyed. If we can afford it, then giving aid to third World countries is great. However, if it's at the expense of our own vital services, I don't see how it's justified.[/p][/quote]I totally agree with you PaulErith, that's a fair point. However I resent the country being held to ransom every time the firefighters aren't happy with something. If only they could have the same deal the Police have where they can't strike. Then they'd get the respect of the country back, but you can tell by the angry tone of the firefighters here, that this wont be a rational discussion. I've never been in a Union in my life, and if I don't like something, I get another job. The thought of going on strike just isn't part of my culture. To the firefighters on here, I feel that threatening the safety and lives of people who disagree with you is belittling your cause.[/p][/quote]And again, I will totally agree with you on the union thing. I work in the private sector, and if I have an issue, then I try to sort it out. I wouldn't expect my colleagues to get involved. If I don't like the terms, then look elsewhere. I am totally opposed to unions. PaulErith
  • Score: 0

1:55pm Tue 27 Nov 12

Rightly so says...

Chrisbitz wrote:
PaulErith wrote:
Chrisbitz wrote:
PaulErith wrote:
Gypo.Joe wrote: Chrisbitz I'm with you here. I'm over listening to these firepeople whine safety everytime cuts are mentioned. We all know it their cushy jobs they are really bothered about. If you're all so concerned with response times why not every shift, all shift have your gear on sit ya arse in the engine and be ready to do the off. Take a flask, sandwiches and a bottle to p1ss in to work with you. That's what most LGV drivers do.
I don't understand your comments to be honest. Whether your viewpoint is that the firefighters are only trying to protect their jobs or that they are genuinely worried about saftey doesn't really matter. It doesn't change a basic fact. If you have less fire stations, then it's going to take longer in some situations for them to get to a call-out. I don't really see how anyone can possibly argue anything different! If my local fire station is currently 5 mins away, and it changes so that it's 20 mins, then you couldn't possibly say that it's not going to take longer. On that basis, clearly it will affect people's safety, and more people will die in fires.
I think the whole point is that somewhere, a line has to be drawn between safety and cost effectiveness. Costs have to be reduced across the country, and since all hell breaks loose when fireman pay freezes are mentioned, how else can cuts be made?
I do understand your argument about costs having to be reduced across the country. However, my personal opinion is that cuts to the emergency services (that's not just fire) should be the last resort as they obviously do impact safety. Whether it's police, hospitals or fire, cuts clearly affect lives.

There's a number of areas that could be targetted to make cuts. Target benefit scroungers, immigration, foreign aid just to name a few. Foreign aid in particular is the one that really gets me annoyed. If we can afford it, then giving aid to third World countries is great. However, if it's at the expense of our own vital services, I don't see how it's justified.
I totally agree with you PaulErith, that's a fair point. However I resent the country being held to ransom every time the firefighters aren't happy with something.
If only they could have the same deal the Police have where they can't strike.
Then they'd get the respect of the country back, but you can tell by the angry tone of the firefighters here, that this wont be a rational discussion.

I've never been in a Union in my life, and if I don't like something, I get another job. The thought of going on strike just isn't part of my culture.

To the firefighters on here, I feel that threatening the safety and lives of people who disagree with you is belittling your cause.
Obviously backing up your comments with facts is also "not part of your culture"

Presumably you are Mr Brave when it comes to presenting your view on line, but if you don't like something at your job, you stay quiet and leave!

Don't believe everything GypoJoe tells you. Unions are not responsible for everything that is wrong with this world. If everyone ran scared and changed job, just because they didn't like something, millions would be wasted on training. Get yourself a backbone, and start backing up your arguments with something more substantial.
[quote][p][bold]Chrisbitz[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PaulErith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chrisbitz[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PaulErith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Gypo.Joe[/bold] wrote: Chrisbitz I'm with you here. I'm over listening to these firepeople whine safety everytime cuts are mentioned. We all know it their cushy jobs they are really bothered about. If you're all so concerned with response times why not every shift, all shift have your gear on sit ya arse in the engine and be ready to do the off. Take a flask, sandwiches and a bottle to p1ss in to work with you. That's what most LGV drivers do.[/p][/quote]I don't understand your comments to be honest. Whether your viewpoint is that the firefighters are only trying to protect their jobs or that they are genuinely worried about saftey doesn't really matter. It doesn't change a basic fact. If you have less fire stations, then it's going to take longer in some situations for them to get to a call-out. I don't really see how anyone can possibly argue anything different! If my local fire station is currently 5 mins away, and it changes so that it's 20 mins, then you couldn't possibly say that it's not going to take longer. On that basis, clearly it will affect people's safety, and more people will die in fires.[/p][/quote]I think the whole point is that somewhere, a line has to be drawn between safety and cost effectiveness. Costs have to be reduced across the country, and since all hell breaks loose when fireman pay freezes are mentioned, how else can cuts be made?[/p][/quote]I do understand your argument about costs having to be reduced across the country. However, my personal opinion is that cuts to the emergency services (that's not just fire) should be the last resort as they obviously do impact safety. Whether it's police, hospitals or fire, cuts clearly affect lives. There's a number of areas that could be targetted to make cuts. Target benefit scroungers, immigration, foreign aid just to name a few. Foreign aid in particular is the one that really gets me annoyed. If we can afford it, then giving aid to third World countries is great. However, if it's at the expense of our own vital services, I don't see how it's justified.[/p][/quote]I totally agree with you PaulErith, that's a fair point. However I resent the country being held to ransom every time the firefighters aren't happy with something. If only they could have the same deal the Police have where they can't strike. Then they'd get the respect of the country back, but you can tell by the angry tone of the firefighters here, that this wont be a rational discussion. I've never been in a Union in my life, and if I don't like something, I get another job. The thought of going on strike just isn't part of my culture. To the firefighters on here, I feel that threatening the safety and lives of people who disagree with you is belittling your cause.[/p][/quote]Obviously backing up your comments with facts is also "not part of your culture" Presumably you are Mr Brave when it comes to presenting your view on line, but if you don't like something at your job, you stay quiet and leave! Don't believe everything GypoJoe tells you. Unions are not responsible for everything that is wrong with this world. If everyone ran scared and changed job, just because they didn't like something, millions would be wasted on training. Get yourself a backbone, and start backing up your arguments with something more substantial. Rightly so
  • Score: 0

2:01pm Tue 27 Nov 12

screw_your_loaf says...

You just don't get it do you, firefighters going on strike is very rare, and a last resort. I am in the FBU ( fire brigade union) and I have voted yes to go on strike twice in my career, and it was a hard and painfully decision to make.
I have been on strike to prevent changes to the service that would be detrimental to you the public and the service as a whole.
Going on strike weighed heavily on me as an individual and I hope that I never have to do it again.
I can't expect you to know the working of the fire service nor to understand the effect that the changes made by the government will have on the service we provide.
That why you have to listen to the people in the know, the comment s on here form"people that are NOT in the service are all about how good we have it, ect ect,
The comments from the firefighters themselves are about defending the service and the terrible effect the cut will have and the risk to life!
Please listen to the people that know how it works. Once the stations and fire engines are gone they will not come back and life's will be Lost.....FACT
You just don't get it do you, firefighters going on strike is very rare, and a last resort. I am in the FBU ( fire brigade union) and I have voted yes to go on strike twice in my career, and it was a hard and painfully decision to make. I have been on strike to prevent changes to the service that would be detrimental to you the public and the service as a whole. Going on strike weighed heavily on me as an individual and I hope that I never have to do it again. I can't expect you to know the working of the fire service nor to understand the effect that the changes made by the government will have on the service we provide. That why you have to listen to the people in the know, the comment s on here form"people that are NOT in the service are all about how good we have it, ect ect, The comments from the firefighters themselves are about defending the service and the terrible effect the cut will have and the risk to life! Please listen to the people that know how it works. Once the stations and fire engines are gone they will not come back and life's will be Lost.....FACT screw_your_loaf
  • Score: 0

4:15pm Tue 27 Nov 12

Biggin Hill Resident says...

I'd like to know how long it will take to make a 999 call in say Cudham or Downe, the call be dispatched and following travelling time, what the arrival time would be>
And how many houses would burn to the ground in that time.
I'd like to know how long it will take to make a 999 call in say Cudham or Downe, the call be dispatched and following travelling time, what the arrival time would be> And how many houses would burn to the ground in that time. Biggin Hill Resident
  • Score: 0

5:19pm Tue 27 Nov 12

Gypo.Joe says...

I have an idea seeing as all the 'fire persons' ( note the PC **** ) are so concerned for our safety and response times. Let them all take a pay cut and also only get paid for when they do something. No pay while laying in bed, playing pool, or loafing in an armchair. When cleaning etc only minimum wage.
That way we can keep them all in their jobs and also the station remain open.

Happy days all round.
I have an idea seeing as all the 'fire persons' ( note the PC **** ) are so concerned for our safety and response times. Let them all take a pay cut and also only get paid for when they do something. No pay while laying in bed, playing pool, or loafing in an armchair. When cleaning etc only minimum wage. That way we can keep them all in their jobs and also the station remain open. Happy days all round. Gypo.Joe
  • Score: 0

7:41pm Tue 27 Nov 12

Rightly so says...

Gypo.Joe wrote:
I have an idea seeing as all the 'fire persons' ( note the PC **** ) are so concerned for our safety and response times. Let them all take a pay cut and also only get paid for when they do something. No pay while laying in bed, playing pool, or loafing in an armchair. When cleaning etc only minimum wage.
That way we can keep them all in their jobs and also the station remain open.

Happy days all round.
I have an idea too. Harness all the hot air you provide and heat the local swimming pool.
You are as boring as you are predictable.
[quote][p][bold]Gypo.Joe[/bold] wrote: I have an idea seeing as all the 'fire persons' ( note the PC **** ) are so concerned for our safety and response times. Let them all take a pay cut and also only get paid for when they do something. No pay while laying in bed, playing pool, or loafing in an armchair. When cleaning etc only minimum wage. That way we can keep them all in their jobs and also the station remain open. Happy days all round.[/p][/quote]I have an idea too. Harness all the hot air you provide and heat the local swimming pool. You are as boring as you are predictable. Rightly so
  • Score: 0

8:00pm Tue 27 Nov 12

Gypo.Joe says...

Rightly so wrote:
Gypo.Joe wrote:
I have an idea seeing as all the 'fire persons' ( note the PC **** ) are so concerned for our safety and response times. Let them all take a pay cut and also only get paid for when they do something. No pay while laying in bed, playing pool, or loafing in an armchair. When cleaning etc only minimum wage.
That way we can keep them all in their jobs and also the station remain open.

Happy days all round.
I have an idea too. Harness all the hot air you provide and heat the local swimming pool.
You are as boring as you are predictable.
What and you're not ! LOL

Its all going to change, if you dont like it GTF out.
[quote][p][bold]Rightly so[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Gypo.Joe[/bold] wrote: I have an idea seeing as all the 'fire persons' ( note the PC **** ) are so concerned for our safety and response times. Let them all take a pay cut and also only get paid for when they do something. No pay while laying in bed, playing pool, or loafing in an armchair. When cleaning etc only minimum wage. That way we can keep them all in their jobs and also the station remain open. Happy days all round.[/p][/quote]I have an idea too. Harness all the hot air you provide and heat the local swimming pool. You are as boring as you are predictable.[/p][/quote]What and you're not ! LOL Its all going to change, if you dont like it GTF out. Gypo.Joe
  • Score: 0

8:13pm Tue 27 Nov 12

bizzymum says...

PaulErith wrote:
Chrisbitz wrote:
PaulErith wrote:
Chrisbitz wrote:
PaulErith wrote:
Gypo.Joe wrote: Chrisbitz I'm with you here. I'm over listening to these firepeople whine safety everytime cuts are mentioned. We all know it their cushy jobs they are really bothered about. If you're all so concerned with response times why not every shift, all shift have your gear on sit ya arse in the engine and be ready to do the off. Take a flask, sandwiches and a bottle to p1ss in to work with you. That's what most LGV drivers do.
I don't understand your comments to be honest. Whether your viewpoint is that the firefighters are only trying to protect their jobs or that they are genuinely worried about saftey doesn't really matter. It doesn't change a basic fact. If you have less fire stations, then it's going to take longer in some situations for them to get to a call-out. I don't really see how anyone can possibly argue anything different! If my local fire station is currently 5 mins away, and it changes so that it's 20 mins, then you couldn't possibly say that it's not going to take longer. On that basis, clearly it will affect people's safety, and more people will die in fires.
I think the whole point is that somewhere, a line has to be drawn between safety and cost effectiveness. Costs have to be reduced across the country, and since all hell breaks loose when fireman pay freezes are mentioned, how else can cuts be made?
I do understand your argument about costs having to be reduced across the country. However, my personal opinion is that cuts to the emergency services (that's not just fire) should be the last resort as they obviously do impact safety. Whether it's police, hospitals or fire, cuts clearly affect lives. There's a number of areas that could be targetted to make cuts. Target benefit scroungers, immigration, foreign aid just to name a few. Foreign aid in particular is the one that really gets me annoyed. If we can afford it, then giving aid to third World countries is great. However, if it's at the expense of our own vital services, I don't see how it's justified.
I totally agree with you PaulErith, that's a fair point. However I resent the country being held to ransom every time the firefighters aren't happy with something. If only they could have the same deal the Police have where they can't strike. Then they'd get the respect of the country back, but you can tell by the angry tone of the firefighters here, that this wont be a rational discussion. I've never been in a Union in my life, and if I don't like something, I get another job. The thought of going on strike just isn't part of my culture. To the firefighters on here, I feel that threatening the safety and lives of people who disagree with you is belittling your cause.
And again, I will totally agree with you on the union thing. I work in the private sector, and if I have an issue, then I try to sort it out. I wouldn't expect my colleagues to get involved. If I don't like the terms, then look elsewhere. I am totally opposed to unions.
Chris 'in' bitz,I'd love to read your c.v - how many employers have you actually worked for?

And what's your beef with 'bonfire night' - I'm more concerned about the job firefighters do when they have to pull people out of their burning homes the other 364 days a year. It's not nice.
[quote][p][bold]PaulErith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chrisbitz[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PaulErith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chrisbitz[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PaulErith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Gypo.Joe[/bold] wrote: Chrisbitz I'm with you here. I'm over listening to these firepeople whine safety everytime cuts are mentioned. We all know it their cushy jobs they are really bothered about. If you're all so concerned with response times why not every shift, all shift have your gear on sit ya arse in the engine and be ready to do the off. Take a flask, sandwiches and a bottle to p1ss in to work with you. That's what most LGV drivers do.[/p][/quote]I don't understand your comments to be honest. Whether your viewpoint is that the firefighters are only trying to protect their jobs or that they are genuinely worried about saftey doesn't really matter. It doesn't change a basic fact. If you have less fire stations, then it's going to take longer in some situations for them to get to a call-out. I don't really see how anyone can possibly argue anything different! If my local fire station is currently 5 mins away, and it changes so that it's 20 mins, then you couldn't possibly say that it's not going to take longer. On that basis, clearly it will affect people's safety, and more people will die in fires.[/p][/quote]I think the whole point is that somewhere, a line has to be drawn between safety and cost effectiveness. Costs have to be reduced across the country, and since all hell breaks loose when fireman pay freezes are mentioned, how else can cuts be made?[/p][/quote]I do understand your argument about costs having to be reduced across the country. However, my personal opinion is that cuts to the emergency services (that's not just fire) should be the last resort as they obviously do impact safety. Whether it's police, hospitals or fire, cuts clearly affect lives. There's a number of areas that could be targetted to make cuts. Target benefit scroungers, immigration, foreign aid just to name a few. Foreign aid in particular is the one that really gets me annoyed. If we can afford it, then giving aid to third World countries is great. However, if it's at the expense of our own vital services, I don't see how it's justified.[/p][/quote]I totally agree with you PaulErith, that's a fair point. However I resent the country being held to ransom every time the firefighters aren't happy with something. If only they could have the same deal the Police have where they can't strike. Then they'd get the respect of the country back, but you can tell by the angry tone of the firefighters here, that this wont be a rational discussion. I've never been in a Union in my life, and if I don't like something, I get another job. The thought of going on strike just isn't part of my culture. To the firefighters on here, I feel that threatening the safety and lives of people who disagree with you is belittling your cause.[/p][/quote]And again, I will totally agree with you on the union thing. I work in the private sector, and if I have an issue, then I try to sort it out. I wouldn't expect my colleagues to get involved. If I don't like the terms, then look elsewhere. I am totally opposed to unions.[/p][/quote]Chris 'in' bitz,I'd love to read your c.v - how many employers have you actually worked for? And what's your beef with 'bonfire night' - I'm more concerned about the job firefighters do when they have to pull people out of their burning homes the other 364 days a year. It's not nice. bizzymum
  • Score: 0

10:36pm Tue 27 Nov 12

rarecockneyguvnor says...

Ey ey, we know what you're after bizzymum.
Ey ey, we know what you're after bizzymum. rarecockneyguvnor
  • Score: 0

11:16pm Tue 27 Nov 12

screw_your_loaf says...

Gypo.Joe wrote:
I have an idea seeing as all the 'fire persons' ( note the PC **** ) are so concerned for our safety and response times. Let them all take a pay cut and also only get paid for when they do something. No pay while laying in bed, playing pool, or loafing in an armchair. When cleaning etc only minimum wage. That way we can keep them all in their jobs and also the station remain open. Happy days all round.
Oh deary me gypo.joe,
Please note the comment above, this is clearly a statement from someone with utter contempt of those it is aimed at, the nativity of its content is something to be admired.
An option that has no substance, show a lack of complete understanding and unmeasurable arrogance.
The Complete drivel shows the lack of intelligence need to post worthless content.
I would laugh but find myself sympathising instead!
[quote][p][bold]Gypo.Joe[/bold] wrote: I have an idea seeing as all the 'fire persons' ( note the PC **** ) are so concerned for our safety and response times. Let them all take a pay cut and also only get paid for when they do something. No pay while laying in bed, playing pool, or loafing in an armchair. When cleaning etc only minimum wage. That way we can keep them all in their jobs and also the station remain open. Happy days all round.[/p][/quote]Oh deary me gypo.joe, Please note the comment above, this is clearly a statement from someone with utter contempt of those it is aimed at, the nativity of its content is something to be admired. An option that has no substance, show a lack of complete understanding and unmeasurable arrogance. The Complete drivel shows the lack of intelligence need to post worthless content. I would laugh but find myself sympathising instead! screw_your_loaf
  • Score: 0

1:55am Wed 28 Nov 12

Gypo.Joe says...

screw_your_loaf wrote:
Gypo.Joe wrote:
I have an idea seeing as all the 'fire persons' ( note the PC **** ) are so concerned for our safety and response times. Let them all take a pay cut and also only get paid for when they do something. No pay while laying in bed, playing pool, or loafing in an armchair. When cleaning etc only minimum wage. That way we can keep them all in their jobs and also the station remain open. Happy days all round.
Oh deary me gypo.joe,
Please note the comment above, this is clearly a statement from someone with utter contempt of those it is aimed at, the nativity of its content is something to be admired.
An option that has no substance, show a lack of complete understanding and unmeasurable arrogance.
The Complete drivel shows the lack of intelligence need to post worthless content.
I would laugh but find myself sympathising instead!
I'm guessing here 'screw_your_loaf', you're a fireman and part time village idiot. Well someone has to be one and you fit the bill.


Come back to me when you correct your spelling. OK.
[quote][p][bold]screw_your_loaf[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Gypo.Joe[/bold] wrote: I have an idea seeing as all the 'fire persons' ( note the PC **** ) are so concerned for our safety and response times. Let them all take a pay cut and also only get paid for when they do something. No pay while laying in bed, playing pool, or loafing in an armchair. When cleaning etc only minimum wage. That way we can keep them all in their jobs and also the station remain open. Happy days all round.[/p][/quote]Oh deary me gypo.joe, Please note the comment above, this is clearly a statement from someone with utter contempt of those it is aimed at, the nativity of its content is something to be admired. An option that has no substance, show a lack of complete understanding and unmeasurable arrogance. The Complete drivel shows the lack of intelligence need to post worthless content. I would laugh but find myself sympathising instead![/p][/quote]I'm guessing here 'screw_your_loaf', you're a fireman and part time village idiot. Well someone has to be one and you fit the bill. Come back to me when you correct your spelling. OK. Gypo.Joe
  • Score: 0

8:07am Wed 28 Nov 12

screw_your_loaf says...

Gypo.Joe wrote:
screw_your_loaf wrote:
Gypo.Joe wrote: I have an idea seeing as all the 'fire persons' ( note the PC **** ) are so concerned for our safety and response times. Let them all take a pay cut and also only get paid for when they do something. No pay while laying in bed, playing pool, or loafing in an armchair. When cleaning etc only minimum wage. That way we can keep them all in their jobs and also the station remain open. Happy days all round.
Oh deary me gypo.joe, Please note the comment above, this is clearly a statement from someone with utter contempt of those it is aimed at, the nativity of its content is something to be admired. An option that has no substance, show a lack of complete understanding and unmeasurable arrogance. The Complete drivel shows the lack of intelligence need to post worthless content. I would laugh but find myself sympathising instead!
I'm guessing here 'screw_your_loaf', you're a fireman and part time village idiot. Well someone has to be one and you fit the bill. Come back to me when you correct your spelling. OK.
Full time village idiot, part time firefighter!
The need to personally insult and the need to highlight some spelling mistakes, only reinforces the points I make.

I have no need to insult you, your comment indicate exactly the type of person you are.

Please continue to grace this site with your comments, it is highly entertaining.
[quote][p][bold]Gypo.Joe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]screw_your_loaf[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Gypo.Joe[/bold] wrote: I have an idea seeing as all the 'fire persons' ( note the PC **** ) are so concerned for our safety and response times. Let them all take a pay cut and also only get paid for when they do something. No pay while laying in bed, playing pool, or loafing in an armchair. When cleaning etc only minimum wage. That way we can keep them all in their jobs and also the station remain open. Happy days all round.[/p][/quote]Oh deary me gypo.joe, Please note the comment above, this is clearly a statement from someone with utter contempt of those it is aimed at, the nativity of its content is something to be admired. An option that has no substance, show a lack of complete understanding and unmeasurable arrogance. The Complete drivel shows the lack of intelligence need to post worthless content. I would laugh but find myself sympathising instead![/p][/quote]I'm guessing here 'screw_your_loaf', you're a fireman and part time village idiot. Well someone has to be one and you fit the bill. Come back to me when you correct your spelling. OK.[/p][/quote]Full time village idiot, part time firefighter! The need to personally insult and the need to highlight some spelling mistakes, only reinforces the points I make. I have no need to insult you, your comment indicate exactly the type of person you are. Please continue to grace this site with your comments, it is highly entertaining. screw_your_loaf
  • Score: 0

11:05am Wed 28 Nov 12

Gypo.Joe says...

screw_your_loaf wrote:
Gypo.Joe wrote:
screw_your_loaf wrote:
Gypo.Joe wrote: I have an idea seeing as all the 'fire persons' ( note the PC **** ) are so concerned for our safety and response times. Let them all take a pay cut and also only get paid for when they do something. No pay while laying in bed, playing pool, or loafing in an armchair. When cleaning etc only minimum wage. That way we can keep them all in their jobs and also the station remain open. Happy days all round.
Oh deary me gypo.joe, Please note the comment above, this is clearly a statement from someone with utter contempt of those it is aimed at, the nativity of its content is something to be admired. An option that has no substance, show a lack of complete understanding and unmeasurable arrogance. The Complete drivel shows the lack of intelligence need to post worthless content. I would laugh but find myself sympathising instead!
I'm guessing here 'screw_your_loaf', you're a fireman and part time village idiot. Well someone has to be one and you fit the bill. Come back to me when you correct your spelling. OK.
Full time village idiot, part time firefighter!
The need to personally insult and the need to highlight some spelling mistakes, only reinforces the points I make.

I have no need to insult you, your comment indicate exactly the type of person you are.

Please continue to grace this site with your comments, it is highly entertaining.
Full time village idiot, well I'm not at all surprised really. It does show, you do know that though don't you.

Tell me do you just 'do' one village or can you handle a few ?

Have you thought about "revamping" yourself at all ?
[quote][p][bold]screw_your_loaf[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Gypo.Joe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]screw_your_loaf[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Gypo.Joe[/bold] wrote: I have an idea seeing as all the 'fire persons' ( note the PC **** ) are so concerned for our safety and response times. Let them all take a pay cut and also only get paid for when they do something. No pay while laying in bed, playing pool, or loafing in an armchair. When cleaning etc only minimum wage. That way we can keep them all in their jobs and also the station remain open. Happy days all round.[/p][/quote]Oh deary me gypo.joe, Please note the comment above, this is clearly a statement from someone with utter contempt of those it is aimed at, the nativity of its content is something to be admired. An option that has no substance, show a lack of complete understanding and unmeasurable arrogance. The Complete drivel shows the lack of intelligence need to post worthless content. I would laugh but find myself sympathising instead![/p][/quote]I'm guessing here 'screw_your_loaf', you're a fireman and part time village idiot. Well someone has to be one and you fit the bill. Come back to me when you correct your spelling. OK.[/p][/quote]Full time village idiot, part time firefighter! The need to personally insult and the need to highlight some spelling mistakes, only reinforces the points I make. I have no need to insult you, your comment indicate exactly the type of person you are. Please continue to grace this site with your comments, it is highly entertaining.[/p][/quote]Full time village idiot, well I'm not at all surprised really. It does show, you do know that though don't you. Tell me do you just 'do' one village or can you handle a few ? Have you thought about "revamping" yourself at all ? Gypo.Joe
  • Score: 0

2:13pm Wed 28 Nov 12

screw_your_loaf says...

I can only do one village at a time, generally each village has its own idiot, and I wouldn't want to tread on anyone's ties,
I haven't thought of revamping, I was going along the lines of promotion to a complete general idiot but it appears that that role is being for field on here already!!!
I can only do one village at a time, generally each village has its own idiot, and I wouldn't want to tread on anyone's ties, I haven't thought of revamping, I was going along the lines of promotion to a complete general idiot but it appears that that role is being for field on here already!!! screw_your_loaf
  • Score: 0

2:55pm Wed 28 Nov 12

Gypo.Joe says...

screw_your_loaf wrote:
I can only do one village at a time, generally each village has its own idiot, and I wouldn't want to tread on anyone's ties,
I haven't thought of revamping, I was going along the lines of promotion to a complete general idiot but it appears that that role is being for field on here already!!!
Do me a favour FFS. You really think there's other idiots like your goodself that post on the Shopper.

Well I'd never of thunk it. My flabber is aghast. I need a couple of shots of the potcheen.
[quote][p][bold]screw_your_loaf[/bold] wrote: I can only do one village at a time, generally each village has its own idiot, and I wouldn't want to tread on anyone's ties, I haven't thought of revamping, I was going along the lines of promotion to a complete general idiot but it appears that that role is being for field on here already!!![/p][/quote]Do me a favour FFS. You really think there's other idiots like your goodself that post on the Shopper. Well I'd never of thunk it. My flabber is aghast. I need a couple of shots of the potcheen. Gypo.Joe
  • Score: 0

3:14pm Wed 28 Nov 12

screw_your_loaf says...

The gypo, does make me chuckle,
I'm sure our paths will cross again, in the mean time happy trolling.
The gypo, does make me chuckle, I'm sure our paths will cross again, in the mean time happy trolling. screw_your_loaf
  • Score: 0

3:17pm Wed 28 Nov 12

Gypo.Joe says...

I'm sure will will cross paths again, perhaps under the same bridge.

;)
I'm sure will will cross paths again, perhaps under the same bridge. ;) Gypo.Joe
  • Score: 0

7:09pm Wed 28 Nov 12

Gypo.Joe says...

Did you spot my stut stut stutter there ?
Did you spot my stut stut stutter there ? Gypo.Joe
  • Score: 0

1:58pm Fri 30 Nov 12

PaulErith says...

Rightly so wrote:
Chrisbitz wrote:
PaulErith wrote:
Chrisbitz wrote:
PaulErith wrote:
Gypo.Joe wrote: Chrisbitz I'm with you here. I'm over listening to these firepeople whine safety everytime cuts are mentioned. We all know it their cushy jobs they are really bothered about. If you're all so concerned with response times why not every shift, all shift have your gear on sit ya arse in the engine and be ready to do the off. Take a flask, sandwiches and a bottle to p1ss in to work with you. That's what most LGV drivers do.
I don't understand your comments to be honest. Whether your viewpoint is that the firefighters are only trying to protect their jobs or that they are genuinely worried about saftey doesn't really matter. It doesn't change a basic fact. If you have less fire stations, then it's going to take longer in some situations for them to get to a call-out. I don't really see how anyone can possibly argue anything different! If my local fire station is currently 5 mins away, and it changes so that it's 20 mins, then you couldn't possibly say that it's not going to take longer. On that basis, clearly it will affect people's safety, and more people will die in fires.
I think the whole point is that somewhere, a line has to be drawn between safety and cost effectiveness. Costs have to be reduced across the country, and since all hell breaks loose when fireman pay freezes are mentioned, how else can cuts be made?
I do understand your argument about costs having to be reduced across the country. However, my personal opinion is that cuts to the emergency services (that's not just fire) should be the last resort as they obviously do impact safety. Whether it's police, hospitals or fire, cuts clearly affect lives. There's a number of areas that could be targetted to make cuts. Target benefit scroungers, immigration, foreign aid just to name a few. Foreign aid in particular is the one that really gets me annoyed. If we can afford it, then giving aid to third World countries is great. However, if it's at the expense of our own vital services, I don't see how it's justified.
I totally agree with you PaulErith, that's a fair point. However I resent the country being held to ransom every time the firefighters aren't happy with something. If only they could have the same deal the Police have where they can't strike. Then they'd get the respect of the country back, but you can tell by the angry tone of the firefighters here, that this wont be a rational discussion. I've never been in a Union in my life, and if I don't like something, I get another job. The thought of going on strike just isn't part of my culture. To the firefighters on here, I feel that threatening the safety and lives of people who disagree with you is belittling your cause.
Obviously backing up your comments with facts is also "not part of your culture" Presumably you are Mr Brave when it comes to presenting your view on line, but if you don't like something at your job, you stay quiet and leave! Don't believe everything GypoJoe tells you. Unions are not responsible for everything that is wrong with this world. If everyone ran scared and changed job, just because they didn't like something, millions would be wasted on training. Get yourself a backbone, and start backing up your arguments with something more substantial.
Just to say, I totally back the fire service when it comes to the belief that cuts will cost lives.

However, away from this particular issue, people are entitled to their beliefs on unions. I totally oppose unions and believe they should be outlawed. It's not a case that anyone is brave online but stays quiet, and I don't believe that anyone has failed to put across a substantial argument. My viewpoint is that I fight my own battles. I certainly have a backbone and can be very vocal if I'm not happy with things at work. I'll tell senior managers my opinions and they may not always like what they hear. However, I wouldn't expect my colleagues to walk out to support me.
[quote][p][bold]Rightly so[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chrisbitz[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PaulErith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chrisbitz[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PaulErith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Gypo.Joe[/bold] wrote: Chrisbitz I'm with you here. I'm over listening to these firepeople whine safety everytime cuts are mentioned. We all know it their cushy jobs they are really bothered about. If you're all so concerned with response times why not every shift, all shift have your gear on sit ya arse in the engine and be ready to do the off. Take a flask, sandwiches and a bottle to p1ss in to work with you. That's what most LGV drivers do.[/p][/quote]I don't understand your comments to be honest. Whether your viewpoint is that the firefighters are only trying to protect their jobs or that they are genuinely worried about saftey doesn't really matter. It doesn't change a basic fact. If you have less fire stations, then it's going to take longer in some situations for them to get to a call-out. I don't really see how anyone can possibly argue anything different! If my local fire station is currently 5 mins away, and it changes so that it's 20 mins, then you couldn't possibly say that it's not going to take longer. On that basis, clearly it will affect people's safety, and more people will die in fires.[/p][/quote]I think the whole point is that somewhere, a line has to be drawn between safety and cost effectiveness. Costs have to be reduced across the country, and since all hell breaks loose when fireman pay freezes are mentioned, how else can cuts be made?[/p][/quote]I do understand your argument about costs having to be reduced across the country. However, my personal opinion is that cuts to the emergency services (that's not just fire) should be the last resort as they obviously do impact safety. Whether it's police, hospitals or fire, cuts clearly affect lives. There's a number of areas that could be targetted to make cuts. Target benefit scroungers, immigration, foreign aid just to name a few. Foreign aid in particular is the one that really gets me annoyed. If we can afford it, then giving aid to third World countries is great. However, if it's at the expense of our own vital services, I don't see how it's justified.[/p][/quote]I totally agree with you PaulErith, that's a fair point. However I resent the country being held to ransom every time the firefighters aren't happy with something. If only they could have the same deal the Police have where they can't strike. Then they'd get the respect of the country back, but you can tell by the angry tone of the firefighters here, that this wont be a rational discussion. I've never been in a Union in my life, and if I don't like something, I get another job. The thought of going on strike just isn't part of my culture. To the firefighters on here, I feel that threatening the safety and lives of people who disagree with you is belittling your cause.[/p][/quote]Obviously backing up your comments with facts is also "not part of your culture" Presumably you are Mr Brave when it comes to presenting your view on line, but if you don't like something at your job, you stay quiet and leave! Don't believe everything GypoJoe tells you. Unions are not responsible for everything that is wrong with this world. If everyone ran scared and changed job, just because they didn't like something, millions would be wasted on training. Get yourself a backbone, and start backing up your arguments with something more substantial.[/p][/quote]Just to say, I totally back the fire service when it comes to the belief that cuts will cost lives. However, away from this particular issue, people are entitled to their beliefs on unions. I totally oppose unions and believe they should be outlawed. It's not a case that anyone is brave online but stays quiet, and I don't believe that anyone has failed to put across a substantial argument. My viewpoint is that I fight my own battles. I certainly have a backbone and can be very vocal if I'm not happy with things at work. I'll tell senior managers my opinions and they may not always like what they hear. However, I wouldn't expect my colleagues to walk out to support me. PaulErith
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree