Firefighter Strike

[BRASH]

I`ll be in touch dude.

Cool

 

[Grizu]

I think this explains why Firefighters are going on strike again and covers all the relevant information, its also written by a person outside of the fire service. Good luck to the FFs, I hope they get a decent outcome this time although the 2002/3 strike left a bitter pill for the general public to swallow a second time.

http://dasbeardsblog.wordpress.com/2013/09/25/support-your-fire-fighters/

 

[barratt1988]

I think this explains why Firefighters are going on strike again and covers all the relevant information, its also written by a person outside of the fire service. Good luck to the FFs, I hope they get a decent outcome this time although the 2002/3 strike left a bitter pill for the general public to swallow a second time.

http://dasbeardsblog.wordpress.com/2013/09/25/support-your-fire-fighters/

Ive read the 1st paragraph and i alreadt disagree with it all. When I started work thi was set to retire at 65 and had a final salary pension... now im to retire at 68 and my pension is lost. But im not putting peoples lives at risk for it all. We are all greatful forwhat the firemen do but in this climate do they really thing they would still only have to work till 55? Maybe things would be different if the government wasnt ran by idoit who are out of touch with the country

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Ive read the 1st paragraph and i alreadt disagree with it all. When I started work thi was set to retire at 65 and had a final salary pension... now im to retire at 68 and my pension is lost. But im not putting peoples lives at risk for it all. We are all greatful forwhat the firemen do but in this climate do they really thing they would still only have to work till 55? Maybe things would be different if the government wasnt ran by idoit who are out of touch with the country

So in essence the changes to your situation means that everyone should have to suffer the same "in this climate"?

So do you want firemen rescuing people at 68?

Are "contracts" no longer worth being entered into?

I would suggest that you focus your ire at the "idiots" and not those who sometimes, and thankfully not too often, do lay down their lives for others.

http://www.firetactics.com/fbu_fatalities_report.pdf

Sorry but there are jobs tha wear people out and wreck health too. 55 years old with a full pension - As a tax payer - I am OK with it. After sll it was what was offered and accepted - an agreement supposedly determined in law.

60 year old squaddies in a war zone perhaps?

S

 

[barratt1988]

So in essence the changes to your situation means that everyone should have to suffer the same "in this climate"?

So do you want firemen rescuing people at 68?

Are "contracts" no longer worth being entered into?

I would suggest that you focus your ire at the "idiots" and not those who sometimes, and thankfully not too often, do lay down their lives for others.

http://www.firetactics.com/fbu_fatalities_report.pdf

Sorry but there are jobs tha wear people out and wreck health too. 55 years old with a full pension - As a tax payer - I am OK with it. After sll it was what was offered and accepted - an agreement supposedly determined in law.

60 year old squaddies in a war zone perhaps?

S

No its not acceptable and that contracts are now worth nothing. And I know about doing crap shift that wreck your life and health but the argument isnt about the fitness of the people as they claim its purely financial. They should finish service at 55 and be put into other public service positions. Hell for all I care make them bin men.

 

[ding76uk]

Hell for all I care make them bin men.

There's the problem. This me me me attitude is the problem. My life's **** so everyone else's should be. It is part of the way they have turned everyone against the public sector. No one cares about doctors, nurses, teachers, firefighters etc. until they need them. Then all the BS about they have it easy suddenly goes out of the window.

 

[barratt1988]

There's the problem. This me me me attitude is the problem. My life's **** so everyone else's should be. It is part of the way they have turned everyone against the public sector. No one cares about doctors, nurses, teachers, firefighters etc. until they need them. Then all the BS about they have it easy suddenly goes out of the window.

I dont think you should mention teachers as they are always complaining about something. No job is easy, the public sector has always had more protection than the private. Difference is the private sector doesnt make the news. I was recently involved in strike talks which affected 500people it doesnt make the news. Yes the firemen arent being treated well but to say they signed a contract many years ago and it shouldnt change is daft because im sorry but that piece of paper is worth nothing regardless of who you work for

 

[Hugh Jarse]

No its not acceptable and that contracts are now worth nothing. And I know about doing crap shift that wreck your life and health but the argument isnt about the fitness of the people as they claim its purely financial. They should finish service at 55 and be put into other public service positions. Hell for all I care make them bin men.

The deal is for 55

Slavery (put them into other work?? PUT?? What planet are you visiting us from?) was abolidhed in the 19th century (1833 to be precise). Public service is a Job not a conscription.

Try OFFER them other work If they want and after they get their pensions.

Change the contract for new fireman but non-negotiated changes just forced on.people is not accrptable.

S

 

[barratt1988]

The deal is for 55

Slavery (put them into other work?? PUT?? What planet are you visiting us from?) was abolidhed in the 19th century (1833 to be precise). Public service is a Job not a conscription.

Try OFFER them other work If they want and after they get their pensions.

Change the contract for new fireman but non-negotiated changes just forced on.people is not accrptable.

S

Put offer call it what you like. But if you really think that retirings from work at 55 is ok when others have to work till 68 your off your head. Yes finish working for the fireservice at 55 but that isnt the age they should be claiming there pension. Sorry to tell you the economic climate has changed over the last few years.

How can you say change the contract for new firemen? A minute ago people where saying o no cant have anyone over 55 and now you can... just shows its all about money and nothing more

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Put offer call it what you like. But if you really think that retirings from work at 55 is ok when others have to work till 68 your off your head. Yes finish working for the fireservice at 55 but that isnt the age they should be claiming there pension. Sorry to tell you the economic climate has changed over the last few years.

How can you say change the contract for new firemen? A minute ago people where saying o no cant have anyone over 55 and now you can... just shows its all about money and nothing more

You still miss the point and explaining the word CONTRACT to you is not going to change your viewpoint so enjoy the logic of jealousy and stay bitter.

If new contracts SAY 70 (which is where anyone starting work now will go - like 50 YEARS WORK) before a pension I would suggest you aim your invective towards MPs who are in gold plated jobs with huge pensions after minimal years of comfy well fed work.

I won't get my state pension till I am 67. Am I bemoaning that? Try the women that were due to get thrirs at 60 now pushed back to 65/66/67 etc

Why not retrain to get a new better paid job

A 50 year old guy I know has left a job as a driving instructor and has gone to university to study law to be a lawyer..... never too late.

S

 

[barratt1988]

You still miss the point and explaining the word CONTRACT to you is not going to change your viewpoint so enjoy the logic of jealousy and stay bitter.

If new contracts SAY 70 (which is where anyone starting work now will go - like 50 YEARS WORK) before a pension I would suggest you aim your invective towards MPs who are in gold plated jobs with huge pensions after minimal years of comfy well fed work.

I won't get my state pension till I am 67. Am I bemoaning that? Try the women that were due to get thrirs at 60 now pushed back to 65/66/67 etc

Why not retrain to get a new better paid job

A 50 year old guy I know has left a job as a driving instructot and has gone to universiyy to study law to be a lawyer..... ndver too late.

S

Jealous? Haha no I don't thing so im in a well paid job and have a half decent pension ive worked for myself now despite my contract being changed.

And if I had 5minutes with mps things would be different. But if they arent happy ill give them a lift to the job center.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Jealous? Haha no I don't thing so im in a well paid job and have a half decent pension ive worked for myself now despite my contract being changed.

And if I had 5minutes with mps things would be different. But if they arent happy ill give them a lift to the job center.

Yawn

Good for you. Live live and prosper.

S

 

[nilagin]

You still miss the point and explaining the word CONTRACT to you is not going to change your viewpoint so enjoy the logic of jealousy and stay bitter.

If new contracts SAY 70 (which is where anyone starting work now will go - like 50 YEARS WORK) before a pension I would suggest you aim your invective towards MPs who are in gold plated jobs with huge pensions after minimal years of comfy well fed work.
I won't get my state pension till I am 67. Am I bemoaning that? Try the women that were due to get thrirs at 60 now pushed back to 65/66/67 etc

Why not retrain to get a new better paid job

A 50 year old guy I know has left a job as a driving instructor and has gone to university to study law to be a lawyer..... never too late.

S

Firemen chose their profession and MP's chose theirs. I dare say a fireman could be an MP if he chose too, but they chose a profession where it seems their only thought was retiring early with a pension and possibly not what the job would actually fully entail. Still nothing to stop anyone becoming an MP at anytime in their working life.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Firemen chose their profession and MP's chose theirs. I dare say a fireman could be an MP if he chose too, but they chose a profession where it seems their only thought was retiring early with a pension and possibly not what the job would actually fully entail. Still nothing to stop anyone becoming an MP at anytime in their working life.

No argument but suggesting that early retirement is why people become firemen (and firewomen) is early retirement is trite. It's what the job was offered at. When I was interviewed for the London FB 40 years ago the wages and retirement age was last thing on my mind. I wanted to join an organisation that offered a job where those joining had opportunities to rise through the ranks and to learn other skills (in my case fire investigation and dealing with chemical fire issues was on my radar) were the drivers. I was offered a contract and after thinking about it chose to take up a place at university instead. One thing that stayed with me was the respect and awe we all held firemen in during those days.

When over the years they undertook strike action I was with them and still am. I make no secret of the fact that I am with tbem and I shall not countenece any forced change of contract. I will support the introduction of new agreed contracts for new recruits. A contract that is fair and reasoned in its Ts and Cs.

As for MPs there are 635 of them. It is a closed shop limited by party executives except for the odd independent. Best of luck getting one.

For many MPs I have met most are types I would not **** on if they were on fire. Luckily we have firemen who would put out the fire.

I note comments that their jobs are a lot easier these days - they are not. The 9/11 attack cost the lives of 341 fire fighters and it is still not impossible for a similar incident befall this country. How would we feel as citizens to face losses of people who would turn up and seek to save others citizens in such a situation. A job just for the pension? You can be a traffic warden if that was the case.

S

 

[barratt1988]

No argument but suggesting that early retirement is why people become firemen (and firewomen) is early retirement is trite. It's what the job was offered at. When I was interviewed for the London FB 40 years ago the wages and retirement age was last thing on my mind. I wanted to join an organisation that offered a job where those joining had opportunities to rise through the ranks and to learn other skills (in my case fire investigation and dealing with chemical fire issues was on my radar) were the drivers. I was offered a contract and after thinking about it chose to take up a place at university instead. One thing that stayed with me was the respect and awe we all held firemen in during those days.

When over the years they undertook strike action I was with them and still am. I make no secret of the fact that I am with tbem and I shall not countenece any forced change of contract. I will support the introduction of new agreed contracts for new recruits. A contract that is fair and reasoned in its Ts and Cs.

As for MPs there are 635 of them. It is a closed shop limited by party executives except for the odd independent. Best of luck getting one.

For many MPs I have met most are types I would not **** on if they were on fire. Luckily we have firemen who would put out the fire.

I note comments that their jobs are a lot easier these days - they are not. The 9/11 attack cost the lives of 341 fire fighters and it is still not impossible for a similar incident befall this country. How would we feel as citizens to face losses of people who would turn up and seek to save others citizens in such a situation. A job just for the pension? You can be a traffic warden if that was the case.

S

So what do you suggest goes into the contract for new starters? Because alot of people on here are voicing the issue that a firefighter cant do the job at 60?

 

[Hugh Jarse]

So what do you suggest goes into the contract for new starters? Because alot of people on here are voicing the issue that a firefighter cant do the job at 60?

And I respect that opinion too.

A new style contract could include any number of checks and balances that allow retirement to be staged and so the US style of Fire Departments also provide ambulance and aramedic services.

Pension plans can be supplemented by Firemen who train as paramedics, currently a university course with on the job training but that could be a choice and not a requirement.

Other facets of the skills they have and develop could be used in community based projects that link to enhancing their pension on a realistic sliding scale.

These are "back of the envelope" ideas and not worked up plans. There will be metrics that determine remuneration and it should match commercial pension plans that is likely to affect new public and private sectors until/if these so called cash strapped "current times" ever change.

So back to my original precept. Contracts are determinable in England and Wales by English Law. Changes are not one sided but can and must be agreed by BOTH PARTIES.

It is far more equitable for a new employment contract to be introduced with a more flexible and realistic set of terms that reaches value for money and is fair to both sides.

I do not think that MP s who have just seen their pay authority suggest a rise in salary of up to £10K, which the majority will in all likelihood accept, occupy a moral high ground to cast down the reasonable request to get employers to negotiate extant contravts so that those on them get what they were offered and accepted.

So I take it you have other ideas on new contracts? Or not?

Steve

 

[barratt1988]

And I respect that opinion too.

A new style contract could include any number of checks and balances that allow retirement to be staged and so the US style of Fire Departments also provide ambulance and aramedic services.

Pension plans can be supplemented by Firemen who train as paramedics, currently a university course with on the job training but that could be a choice and not a requirement.

Other facets of the skills they have and develop could be used in community based projects that link to enhancing their pension on a realistic sliding scale.

These are "back of the envelope" ideas and not worked up plans. There will be metrics that determine remuneration and it should match commercial pension plans that is likely to affect new public and private sectors until/if these so called cash strapped "current times" ever change.

So back to my original precept. Contracts are determinable in England and Wales by English Law. Changes are not one sided but can and must be agreed by BOTH PARTIES.

It is far more equitable for a new employment contract to be introduced with a more flexible and realistic set of terms that reaches value for money and is fair to both sides.

I do not think that MP s who have just seen their pay authority suggest a rise in salary of up to £10K, which the majority will in all likelihood accept, occupy a moral high ground to cast down the reasonable request to get employers to negotiate extant contravts so that those on them get what they were offered and accepted.

So I take it you have other ideas on new contracts? Or not?

Steve

I have my ow ideas but non that are worth sharing here as on one actually listens to any reason so ill save my time typing... didnt you just say though that its never to late to learn something? In reference to the lawyer so why not impliment some of your stated changed now with senior firefighters?

 

[Hugh Jarse]

I have my ow ideas but non that are worth sharing here as on one actually listens to any reason so ill save my time typing... didnt you just say though that its never to late to learn something? In reference to the lawyer so why not impliment some of your stated changed now with senior firefighters?

Might be an idea but firstly one voice against a corporation that has the media fully in tow is like banging your head on concrete. Secondly I was involved in politics at a local level and is still, apart from a few good people, as corrupt, dishinest and ****less as the thieves in Westminster, thirdly there are too many people that are completely taken in by the lies and misinformation put out that has blamed the ills of the country on an underclass that is noow seen as the cause of the destruction of industry, the finance and banking sector, the rising cost of everything whilst the culprits swig champagne and count their free money (sorry bonuses) lastly for now, I have gone back to university and retrained four times, built my own business up and got to a point where I don''t need to depend on a pension but realise others do so will write and argue against changes that are unfair.

So perhaps putting your ideas forward might just trigger the necessary spark to make things all right? So your solutions without going down the path of actual politics as opposed to generic points about those in political dogma itself might strike a chord - I am happy to be convinced and follow your concepts.

S

 

[Ian D J]

And now, a lighthearted comedy break courtesy of me as I have done this modern version of a previous doodle . . .

I think it has got to a point where as soon as you see my name appear in a political-type thread, you just know it's going to involve a cartoon.

EDIT: Hi Nod! I've put in a different link, it now should show up.

 

[Nod]

Not showing for me Ian (which is a shame since it was purely your name that got me visiting this politically based thread...)

 

[Ruffy]

but the argument isnt about the fitness of the people as they claim its purely financial. Hell for all I care make them bin men.

What a misinformed Staff Edit: Insult removed

 

[barratt1988]

What a misinformed Staff Edit: Insult removed

Aww has someone spat there dummy out? Read the thread then you will see what people are saying and it all adds up to it bein about money.

 

[TriggerHappy]

How does it add up to being solely about money?

You start a job with the belief that at 55 your time is done and you make substantial payments accordingly. Part way through your career somebody new comes into power and decides to completely change the terms that you signed up to originally. Are you going to be impressed?

Then factor in that the nature of the work is often hugely physical and people well beyond middle age (sorry folks over 55 ) are being asked to continue in highly demanding roles. Would you be happy with someone in their 60's going in to rescue one of your loved ones from a blazing inferno?

The principle of the matter is utterly and completely immoral.

It genuinely amazes me that people can be so antipathetic towards other peoples' careers. Everyone seems to believe that they have it worse than everyone else..but worse there's almost a willing that other people should be made to suffer too. We've reached a stage where there's absolutely no compassion for anyone else who's being made to struggle. It disgusts me.

 

[Tringa]

Good post, Jamie.

Dave

 

[Ruffy]

Aww has someone spat there dummy out? Read the thread then you will see what people are saying and it all adds up to it bein about money.

What people are saying at what the facts are, are 2 different things....I suggest you pop down your local station and talk to the guys and girls and find out what it's really about and as far as dummy spitting goes, maybe I did but that's because of people like you who jump on the band wagon when you don't know the facts !

Mods: sorry for outburst but not sorry for who it was aimed at

 

[BRASH]

What people are saying at what the facts are, are 2 different things....I suggest you pop down your local station and talk to the guys and girls and find out what it's really about and as far as dummy spitting goes, maybe I did but that's because of people like you who jump on the band wagon when you don't know the facts !

Mods: sorry for outburst but not sorry for who it was aimed at

Ignorance (in the true sense of the word) is very difficult to argue against. Keep up the good work

 

[Ruffy]

Ignorance (in the true sense of the word) is very difficult to argue against. Keep up the good work

Thank you for your support !

If this was about the money then I would not be striking, I earn enough as far as I am concerned and I too would be supporting all the haters but the fact is it's not about that and I just wish people would understand

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Thank you for your support !

If this was about the money then I would not be striking, I earn enough as far as I am concerned and I too would be supporting all the haters but the fact is it's not about that and I just wish people would understand

Ruffy

You don't need to be told that a campaigb of blame and untruths is being waged against all the Public Service in order to split the NHS, Police, Teachers, Fire Service etc. To also remove hard fought for terms of employment so the legal aid and employment tribunal processes ard being torn apart.

Thus the impoverishment of any whose pay and service conditions are derived from taxes etc is the ongoing programme.

Schools are given ridiculous timescsles to change while maintaining the status quo on reducing budgets under the warped concept of "increased efficirncy" is a clear example of a self fulfilling prophecy. This at s time ehdn the schools building programme has been scrapped yet the birth eate is already increasing and tbe forecast is of there not being enough school spaces. Already happening locally to me. Halls and dining areas have been converted into extra clsss rooms for the growing number of children.... packed lunch time.

Doctors and Nurses have been through the wringer

The Police foo

Ambulance re-organisation ditto

But eventually it all comes down to a progrsmme of destruction designed to promote the transfer to the private sector.

Now its the Fire Service.....

Aided by the demonisation promoted by certain media sources and we start to see parrot fashion of the doctrine.... teachers with long holidays, overpaid GPs and condultants, and now feather bedded fireman.....

Spread propaganda, divisive whispering campaigns, blame to cloud the truth, and it is working....

Its a very big picture and history shows how the blame game worked for thd Nazis.

So no this is not about money grabbing by fireman, but is very much about destruction of internal structures to reduce central cost. Long term we will all psy more.

S

 

[Nod]

Only a matter of time before Godwin's got invoked!

 

[big soft moose]

Only a matter of time before Godwin's got invoked!

only a Nazi would say something like that

 

[TopBanana]

Couple of genuine questions:
Have the fire fighters put forward a compromise suggestion or is it a straight up 'no' to the proposal.
Do the government proposals include more than upping the pension age to 60 or is that just the headline statement of the changes?

 

[Ruffy]

Few facts !

Public sector pension reform began with a paragraph, became a 200 page report, later passed through parliament and this year became law. For firefighters, however, this hasn't turned out to be the end of the story.
Instead, last month the Fire Brigades Union (FBU), which represents 85% of uniformed staff of the UK fire and rescue service, voted to strike over the government's position on firefighters' pensions.
The FBU opposes the pension reforms that have been put forward, saying it involves "unaffordable and unfair contribution rates", "a totally unrealistic retirement age for firefighters" and "an unsustainable scheme for the fire service".
Meanwhile, the government argues it's a generous offer. Minister Brandon Lewis was quoted as saying:
"After two years of discussions and improved terms, firefighters will still get one of the most generous public service pensions available - £26,000 a year, when including the £7,000 state pension."
£26,000 - generous?
Many people would consider this sum - roughly equivalent to the median annual earnings for an employee - as generous for a pension, and more so when considering a 'competent' (fully trained) firefighter can expect an annual salary of just under £28,500.
But a closer reading suggests this is an unrealistic sum for most firefighters. First of all, £7,000 in state pension has been added, but the State Pension is only payable at state pension age (65 and rising), whereas the government's current proposals suggest an occupational retirement age of 60. So in reality, the government's example firefighter would only be getting £19,000 a year when they actually retire.
So a better question is whether £19,000 is a 'normal' pension for a firefighter.
£19,000 - normal?
That's where things get tricky - currently most firefighters will be under one of two schemes - the Firefighters Pension Scheme (1992) and the New Firefighters Pension Scheme (2006). Two-thirds of scheme members find themselves in the former.
A firefighter under the 1992 scheme gets a pension worth a fraction of their final salary, dependent on their length of service. The most they can get is 2/3 of their salary. Someone earning £28,500 retiring with 20 years of service would receive a pension of £9,500 a year, but a colleague on the same salary who had spent 30 years as a firefighter would get an annual income of £19,000. The only way a firefighter could receive a pension larger than £19,000 per year is through additional contributions from their own income.
The 2006 scheme changed this so that the pensions pot accrued more slowly - after 30 years the pot would only be worth £14,250 (with no additional contributions) but goes up to £19,000 after 40 years (and can still grow after 40 years).
So at the moment, a firefighter gets the kind of pension the government is talking about if they serve 30-40 years and have a final salary of around £28,500 (though some will finish on higher salaries if they're promoted to managers, and so get higher pensions anyway).
Under the new proposals, firefighters contribute more, get a pension based on their career average earnings rather than final salary, and accrue their pot at a slightly faster rate for each year of service. For long-serving staff, the outcomes are similar: a firefighter serving for 40 years earning about £28,500 on average over the course of their career gets about £19,000 per year for a pension.
40 years service - realistic?
Serving 40 years without any reduction for early retirement normally means joining the fire service not much later than age 20 and working up to the proposed retirement age of 60 (the same as the 2006 scheme but five years higher than the 1992 scheme).
Figures on what a 'normal' service length is aren't readily available, although the government suggested in 2011 that only 1% currently work past age 55. The FBU and others have argued that since uniformed ocupations such as the fire service require a certain level of physical fitness, the normal pension age shouldn't be this high in the first place - so for most firefighters 40 years would put them beyond adequate fitness for the service.
The evidence they cite is a 2012 review of how firefighters' abilities change with age. The study analysed existing literature and found that, based on data from four fire services, at 50-54 years of age half of firefighters were below a 'minimum standard' of fitness, while two thirds fell below it at 55-60 years (this isn't a universally agreed measure, so the research used existing practices as a benchmark).
The evidence isn't conclusive about exactly how many firefighters can be expected to fall away from fitness standards in their 50s but does suggest this will be an issue for many trying to clock up the 40 years' service required to reach the Minister's example.

 

[Laudrup]

I don't get the whole 'we can't compromise on public safety' angle whilst they sit on strike compromising public safety.

 

[ding76uk]

I don't get the whole 'we can't compromise on public safety' angle whilst they sit on strike compromising public safety.

I don;t get why striking for what you believe has become such a bad term. Well I do, spin and propaganda.

 

[cambsno]

I don't get the whole 'we can't compromise on public safety' angle whilst they sit on strike compromising public safety.

This.

But then look at the teachers. I shouldn't take my kids out if school as it's bad yet they can decide to strike and keep kids out of school. Hypocrites.

 

[ding76uk]

This.

But then look at the teachers. I shouldn't take my kids out if school as it's bad yet they can decide to strike and keep kids out of school. Hypocrites.

I think the parents who say they care about their kids missing a day whilst taking them out for weeks for a cheap holiday are the hypocrites.

Parents could have done something educational with their kids yesterday, I wonder how many did?

We are not babysitters! The education system is being sent down the river to privatisation and we are standing up against this. We are the problem obviously.

Not the fact that I teach ICT for the 2nd year with no curriculum because the DfE can't make up their mind.

The fact that several specialists on education (including several right wingers) have spoken out about the terrible changes that are being brought in by the education secretary in the name of rigour!

The fact GCSE grade boundaries were altered simply to make sure that a set of statistics given to a kid at 11 years old are not proven factually incorrect.

The fact that performance related pay sounds great, but actually disadvantages any kid who does not have the chance of getting a C grade, because that is all any appraisal will be about.

But were are all work shy, lazy, several weeks holiday, blah, bah, blah. If it is that easy a job, how come there is a massive shortage in physics and maths teachers? How come only half of the places for trainee teachers were filled last year? How come teaching is heading for a massive shortage in the near future?

 

[nilagin]

But were are all work shy, lazy, several weeks holiday, blah, bah, blah. If it is that easy a job, how come there is a massive shortage in physics and maths teachers? How come only half of the places for trainee teachers were filled last year? How come teaching is heading for a massive shortage in the near future?

Who in their right mind wants to go into a profession where they keep going on strike and lose money. You go to work to earn money not lose it.
I've been called out on strike about 6 times in 34 years of work, 5 were one day stoppages, and one lasted about two weeks and never recouped the money lost. Our union wanted us to strike this year over redundancy pay from the closure of our plant, but we had too much to lose and too little to win and took what was offered.

 

[big soft moose]

I don't get the whole 'we can't compromise on public safety' angle whilst they sit on strike compromising public safety.

and how did a 4 hour strike during which they still responded to 999 calls compromise public safety ?

 

[Laudrup]

I don't find the 'nobody got hurt this time!' line of reasoning very comforting.

 

[nilagin]

and how did a 4 hour strike during which they still responded to 999 calls compromise public safety ?

and what real difference did it make to their cause other than lose 4hrs pay if they didn't have any 999 calls to answer.