Seems as if the media are playing down the very serious consequences of a national fire fighters strike, over the age of retirement, and local councils are currently training people to drive fire engines and squirt water, as they have a legal duty to provide some sort of cover.

So should some fire personel be allowed to retire early due to not being able to reach fitness levels required for their jobs, or should they be just be handed a p45.andif theyre given special treatment terms who will be next to say they need to retire early,but very few skilled jobs have the clout of the fire service.

So should some fire personel be allowed to retire early due to not being able to reach fitness levels required for their jobs

if that’s what they signed up for yes.

Lots of folk have to look for other jobs once they aren’t fit/able, but still not at pension age – and pay taxes so that Firemen can retire (very) early on a decent-enough pension.

I’m afraid it’s reality.

Although most other jobs don’t have such a high risk of being killed or injured.

Lots of folk have to look for other jobs once they aren’t fit/able, but still not at pension age – and pay taxes so that Firemen can retire (very) early on a decent-enough pension.

I’m afraid it’s reality.

its also the reality that they can go on strike to protect their interests

Although most other jobs don’t have such a high risk of being killed or injured.

Where would Firefighter be on this list ?

The top four on that list (blue bars) need a reasonable level of fitness too.
They don’t get to retire early just because they get middle aged and fat.

Glad they are striking. They do a harder job than most, get shit on more than most and pay tons into their pension scheme (so deserve them).

This link suggests UK firefighters fatality rate was 2.7 per 100’000 in 2004-2007. So safer than the average in the chart above.

http://www.firetactics.com/IRMP_MODERNIZATION.htm

Lots of folk have to look for other jobs once they aren’t fit/able, but still not at pension age

That’s hardly relevant is it ?

I mean a lot of folk don’t have a job, a lot of folk are up to their eyeballs in debt, a lot of folk don’t have anywhere to live, a lot of folk are hungry.

Should we therefore conclude that it would be absolutely fine if firefighters lost their jobs, got up to their eyeballs in debt, became homeless, and went hungry ?

The top four on that list (blue bars) need a reasonable level of fitness too.
They don’t get to retire early just because they get middle aged and fat.

a fat old construction worker will just build my house slower a fat old firefighter might not get me and my family out of that house when its on fire in time.

The top four occupations? There’s an awful lot of overweight lorry drivers, excavator operatives, tractor drivers and number 4, just one thing to say to that Eric Pickles! Since 2006 construction industry deaths have been declining steadily (except 2008, I think).

So what are the actual proposals compared to the current system?

Will they be striking in their second jobs too? 😈

Are they not striking because theyre being asked/told to contribute four times their current employee contributions but for smaller lump sums and an older retirement age?
Still, at least they’re classed as an emergency service, the ambulance service is only classed as an “essential” service! Because of this and CMD’s latest “reforms” I’ll probably still be working when im 68 which should be a right laugh going to a job 4 flights up, never mind having to get the pt back down..
Still, back to the OP, fair play to them- at least they seem to have a union that cares about them!
Re the chart above- where are emergency responders? It also foesnt take into acvount health problems caused or exacerbated because of their occipation; bad backs, gubbed knees etc..

Conflicted on this, not least because my brother is a firefighter. I’m almost always anti strikes based on pay and conditions- if you think you’re worth more then find someone who will pay you more. However, the pension/retirement age thing here does seem to be closely linked to a genuine safety concern. If nothing else I’m glad an important issue will get some close scrutiny.

if you think you’re worth more then find someone who will pay you more.

kind of tricky with that particular job

20 years ago I invested in a pension scheme paying 11% of my salary, recently increased to 12%, which equates to well over £300 a month, considerably more than most public/private pension schemes. This was on the proviso that I could retire after 30 years service in a very physical and mentally demanding job. We are now being forced to work to 60yo and face sacking therefore loss of pension if we don’t meet minimum fitness standards. Wouldn’t you feel a little short changed?

I’d feel motivated to stay fit.

Wouldn’t you feel a little short changed?

I’d be right pissed off.

A person’s health isnt always something you can control though is it? You can be as fit as a fiddle in your fifties onwards but it wont matter for shit if some wee tosser chucks a half brick at you at a job though eh?

Don’t worry, by the time you reach 60 H&S will have stopped you from entering a blazing building anyway, so you won’t have to stay fit 😉

If I’ had known how much the public hated the fire service I would never have joined. I thought I was doing the right thing in transferring 12 years of my previous pension into the firefighters scheme, now it turns out I’m a greedy lazy bastard for thinking I should receive it when I was promised.

now it turns out I’m a greedy lazy bastard for thinking I should receive it when I was promised.

some people here hate anyone striking, this place will go nuclear when I go on strike later in the year!!!

You’d think after the last strike they’d learn a lesson, public perception changed of the fire service changed massively when the world continued to spin. After that is when the changes snowballed. It’s a necessary service but it costs a lot of money. The juicy pension scheme of old was crazy but nice for those that got it.

Yes I’d be annoyed at the pension part as I am with ours but if your not fit enough to do your job then you shouldn’t be doing it.

If I’ had known how much the public hated the fire service I would never have joined. I thought I was doing the right thing in transferring 12 years of my previous pension into the firefighters scheme, now it turns out I’m a greedy lazy bastard for thinking I should receive it when I was promised.

Quite a lot of the public are stupid, so don’t worry about it 🙂

Should we therefore conclude that it would be absolutely fine if firefighters lost their jobs, got up to their eyeballs in debt, became homeless, and went hungry ?

No, but since its us the taxpayer (or is that me, the taxpayer Ernie?) that will be paying – why are we subsidising them over and above what we can get.

Well I’ve lost 7 years of pension due to my previous employer folding, taking their pension scheme with them and I’m not striking……

why are we subsidising them over and above what we can get.

I’m sure you could have been a firefighter if you had tried hard enough.

Well I’ve lost 7 years of pension due to my previous employer folding, taking their pension scheme with them and I’m not striking……

are you in a union? You should write to your MP or something, or did you just role over and take it? Just because you haven’t done anything to protect your interests doesn’t mean others shouldn’t.

but since its us the taxpayer (or is that me, the taxpayer Ernie?)

Why are you asking me if I pay taxes ? Why wouldn’t I be ?

Were you struggling and thought that insinuating that I might not be paying my taxes would be a useful, although rather desperate, distraction ?

Good luck to them …I have never really understood why it’s legal for employerd to change terms of a contract after signing it but if an employee tries to that’s illegal

Should they strike Ernie? Do they have your support?

No, but since its us the taxpayer (or is that me, the taxpayer Ernie?) that will be paying – why are we subsidising them over and above what we can get.

Another way of looking at that would be why can’t private sector pensions match the public sector offerings.

It might also be pertinent to add that not being a firefighter means you can get more than they get. You just have to make the right choices. So why not make yours and let other people make theirs.

‘Yes I’d be annoyed at the pension part as I am with ours but if your not fit enough to do your job then you shouldn’t be doing it’

I have no worries about my own fitness, not withstanding illness or a brick to the head, but it’s not just about me and **** everyone else is it?
would you want two 59yo men or women (yes that is very possible) attempting to rescue your family from a house fire?
not me pal

how come crikeys comment was ignored it’s the most relevant comment in the whole thread.

they do just fine in my experience .

i have an issue with this ‘early ‘ retirement question.. the govt says i can have a retirement pension at 68 so thats when i can retire and yet some ( mostly public sector workers) seem to think they have the right to retire and claim a full index linked pension from as early 47. and then go back to work elsewhere or even return to there old role or one similar.

if you have to be 68 to retire the govt should nt have to pay any pensions until your 68 until then pull your socks up and dont expect someone else to support your golfing holidays..

When I joined at 20 I was able to complete my 30 years service and retire at an age I could enjoy my pension, the pension age was changed to 55 and now 60, I’m still in the same scheme I joined in 2001, they’ve just changed goalposts again and again.

The required fitness levels for a 50+ year old male will be incredibly hard to achieve, for a female firefighter they will be impossible. Don’t believe me? Look at the governments own report!

Therefore you fail your fitness you’re sacked on capability, so now my pension is deferred to my 65th birthday?

Add onto that we are the second highest contributors in any public sector scheme and the contributions continue to increase, I’ll be working longer for less and unlikely to retire by completing my full service.

I love my job, truly I do, I put my heart and soul into providing as professional service as I can, I have placed myself in danger to save others and I’ve lost colleagues who did the same. I’ve cut people from vehicles and given them another chance in this world and I’ve dealt with the ones that were sadly too far gone.

All I’m asking is the pension I signed up to and have paid into, planned my family’s life around is continued not raped to support the governments coffers while they look after themselves.

Firefighters to strike in september, over working hours

Really? Its got nothing to do with hours worked.

It about being robbed of a pension that I and the government agreed to.

we dont get a gold plate pension, if you want to see gold plated look no futher than your local MP. I currently pay approx 13.2% a month £350ish for my pension how much are you paying?

The physical stress on a person inside a fire compartment @ 800c + wearing full fire kit. Now it is well documented the the body does deteriorate with older age that is a fact that not even you could argue. To ask a 60yr old person to do this is madness.

I’m 48 and reasonably fit but I’m finding it continually harder and harder to recover from this.

Williams report that the government commissioned but ignored the findings

Summary of the expected effects of health on the ability of firefighters
to serve beyond age 55
7.8.1 A mortality rate of around 7 per thousand per annum is expected for men
firefighters aged 55-59 and 3.2 per thousand for women firefighters per annum.
7.8.2 Heart disease is expected to lead to around 5 per 1000 men retiring per annum
age 55-59, an increase of around 3 per 1000 in age group 50-54. For women it is
expected to lead to around one per 1000 retiring per annum age 55-59, an
insignificant increase from age group 50-54.
7.8.3 Stroke expected to lead to around 1 per 1000 men retiring per annum age 55-
60, an insignificant increase from age group 50-55. For women it is expected to lead
to around one per 1000 retiring per annum, an insignificant increase from age group
50-55.
7.8.4 Cancers are expected to lead to around 0.6 per 1000 men retiring per annum
age 55-59, an increase of around 0.3 per 1000 in age group 50-54. For women it is
expected to lead to around 0.3 per 1000 retiring per annum, no increase from age
group 50-55.
7.8.5 Respiratory diseases are expected to lead to around 3 per 1000 firefighters
retiring per annum age 55-59, an insignificant increase from age group 50-54.
7.8.6 Hip osteoarthritis is expected to lead to around 0.5 per 1000 firefighters retiring
per annum age 55-59, an insignificant increase from age group 50-54.
7.8.7 Knee osteoarthritis expected to lead to more ill health retirements than hip
osteoarthritis but the rate cannot be estimated from population statistics. The
available statistics suggest an increase of 25% between age group 50-54 and age
group 55-59.
7.8.8 Back problems are not expected to lead to any significant change in ill health
retirements between age groups 50-54 and 55-59.
7.8.9 Shoulder problems are not expected to lead to any significant change in ill
health retirements between age groups 50-54 and 55-59.
7.8.10 Common mental disorders are not expected to lead to any significant change in
ill health retirements between age groups 50-54 and 55-59.
7.8.11 PTSD is not expected to lead to any significant change in ill health retirements
between age groups 50-54 and 55-59.
7.8.12 Alcohol and drug abuse is not expected to lead to any significant change in ill
health retirements between age groups 50-54 and 55-59

So if you become unfit before age 60, under the new scheme you can kiss goodbye to your pension. until you reach the state retirement age you will lose £000’s

What would you do put up a fight or roll over and get a shafting whilst doffing your hat to the thieving ConDems?

@ crikey, so what if I have a 2nd job? I pay taxes on this. Is there a law against 2nd jobs? Many Mps have more than 3 or 4 jobs apart for being an MP. This dispute is about pension not about wages or hrs worked

As I learned from the last strike 2003 joe public/ STW’ers just believe the government/red top spin machine, already the lies are being spouted forth. Remember when its in the tabloids it may not all be true!

Presently I have 6.5 yrs to go or 11.5yrs and an extra £21K in pension contributions to go.

When I joined at 20 I was able to complete my 30 years service and retire at an age I could enjoy my pension, the pension age was changed to 55 and now 60, I’m still in the same scheme I joined in 2001, they’ve just changed goalposts again and again.

The required fitness levels for a 50+ year old male will be incredibly hard to achieve, for a female firefighter they will be impossible. Don’t believe me? Look at the governments own report!

Therefore you fail your fitness you’re sacked on capability, so now my pension is deferred to my 65th birthday?

Add onto that we are the second highest contributors in any public sector scheme and the contributions continue to increase, I’ll be working longer for less and unlikely to retire by completing my full service.

I love my job, truly I do, I put my heart and soul into providing as professional service as I can, I have placed myself in danger to save others and I’ve lost colleagues who did the same. I’ve cut people from vehicles and given them another chance in this world and I’ve dealt with the ones that were sadly too far gone.

All I’m asking is the pension I signed up to and have paid into, planned my family’s life around is continued not raped to support the governments coffers while they look after themselves.

You forget that the people here complaining don’t give a monkeys about what you’ve said. All they care about is how you are costing them PERSONALLY.

This country is full of turds who think this way.