Journal isorox's Journal: Firefighters terrorise the UK 17
Are the firefighters right to hold the country to ransom for more money?
The first deaths, and probably not the last. But why are firefighters holding the country to ransom like that? For a political motive. They want a 40% pay increase.
But percentages dont say much really do they. Lets look at the figures and compare it to a university graduate.
Typical Firefighter:
Starts work at 16, earning £4 an hour flipping burgers. Total income £8300 p.a.
Joins Fire service at 18, after earning £16,000. Spends next 4 years training (and being paid £17,000).
Becomes fully trained at age of 22. Total Earnings to date: £84,000
Fully trained at age of 22, earns £21,500.
By the age of 30, lifetime earnings are £256,000
Compare to average student.
Starts A-Levels at age 16. Starts Uni at age 18. Graduates at Age 21, or 22.
Starts earning at age 22.
Graduates with average of £5,300 debt. (In my case for sure this is way higher)
Graduates with average wage of £13,700
After 5 years, expects to be earning £26,300
At age 22: Total lifetime earnings: -£5,300
At age 23: Total lifetime earnings: £8400
Over next 7 years, assume generous average wage of £26,300. Total lifetime earnings: £192,500
To match a firefighters total wage at age 30, a graduate would have to earn £28,500 a year, every year, from graduating after a 3 year course.
Instead the average graduate earns £63,500 less then a firefighter by the age of 30.
Risks
there arent many firefighters dying. Over 12 years, there were 5 firefighter deaths in London, with approximatly 6500 personel. Thats a 1 in 15,600 chance of dying each year as a firefighter in London. Over a 40 year carreer theres a 1 in 400 chance of dying in the line of duty.
If you smoke, you have a 1 in 4 chance of dying from smoking by the time you each middle age.
Admittably there is only a 1 in 100,000 chance of dying in a normal job each year, or arround 6 1/2 times less likely then a firefighter. However that doesnt include deaths on roads of people like Sales reps, taxi drivers and other high risk professions.
Are the firefighters right to hold the country to ransom for more money?
No, they're not.
Re: the firefighters (Score:1)
Re: the firefighters (Score:1)
Let me guess, your a fucking student?
Re: the firefighters (Score:2)
Nobody is forcing people to go to University. If you can't stick the 4 years without money then don't fucking go - get a fucking job instead
Yes, I could go and get a job. If firefighters cant stick a low wage, why dont they do the same as everyone else and go get a fucking (high paid) job? Obviously theres something good about firefighters - when you have 40 applicants for each place that usually means its a decent job.
They should give them an ultimatum. Go back to work or get sacked - there are plenty of people willing to take the job.
If you think firefighters get a raw deal (awwwww), fine. No excuse to hold the country to ransom though. Dont negotiate with terrorists.
Agreed (Score:1)
Not usually into the whole media hysteria thing, but this whole situation pisses me off mightily. Probably because i don't even earn 30k.
Enough talk. I'm off to throw some stones at protesting ungrateful grunts. Who's with me?
Re:Agreed (Score:2)
Same goes for those workshy underground drivers that are skiving off in sympathy. Oops sorry, sympathy action is not allowed, the poor darlings are scared of fires. How much training does it take to drive a tube? They all seem to be sitting on their arses reading the Sun to me! And getting >30k into the bargin!
Re:Agreed (Score:1)
Please explain to me why a train driver should get 40%-50% more pay than a fireman? (Actually don't bother, I tire of this selfish crap)
Not necessarily agreeing one way or the other but (Score:1)
5 days out of 7 = 71%
2 days out of 8 = 25%
25 is approx 35% of 71, therefore if the jobs were directly comparable (and they are *not*) then a tube driver should be paid at least double (and more nearly three times) the wage of a fireman.
I don't know enough of the details to be able to say whether the firemen "deserve" more pay. I do agree that the pay they get (whether it is for 2 days out of 8 or not) isn't enough to live on in London (but then that is pretty much true for train drivers also, particularly if you want to buy a house! Average house price is now over 100k, this means that you need an income of at least 30k to get a mortgage (unless you have large savings).)
It seems to me (and again I put in the disclaimer that I neither know the full facts nor have the time/incentive to research them all) that the firefighters current contracts mean that they don't earn enough. The Bain report has suggested changing those contracts and recommends a small pay increase (11% over two years, less than 5% this year). It could be that firemen shouldn't be asked to do more hours because they won't be able to maintain the level of service required of them
I have a desk job, my greatest chance of death is from stress and bad eating. However I regularly work 50 to 60 hour weeks and earn more than a firefighter.
The figures that were quoted for university graduates seem to assume that they are lazy layabouts that won't get a job during the summer or other vacations and won't get bar jobs or whatever in the evenings, and didn't do Saturday supermarket jobs from the age of 16 (like I did) Otherwise there is additional lifetime income that isn't counted.
Re:Not necessarily agreeing one way or the other b (Score:1)
A degree isnt worth much. To get a chance at most jobs now, you need a degree. Unfortunatly everyone has a degree so you have to put in more effort into extra curricular activities. I spend another 30 hours a week (at least) doing stuff for the uni TV station. This is essential to get a job at the end of the course. Thats 85 hours - arround 12 hours a day, 7 days a week. That sound about right.
Now its true that we get loads (22 weeks) of holidays. What you dont mention is the lack of employment opportunities for students. Most companies dont want to know - as you'll only be arround for 4 weeks at christmas or 5 at easter. You also get thousands of students going for the same temporary jobs. In adition you are expected to work in the "holidays" - 3rd years on my course should put about 10 hours a week in at christmas, and full time hours revising for finals at easter. Over summer you can put in 10 weeks work, thats arround £2,000. A 5 year ALevel/uni course would pay my fees and part of my loan.
However if you can expect "lazy" students to work through A-Levels and University (40 hours a week *minimum*), why cant firefighters be expected to work outside their main job?
I choose to go to uni. I choose to crawl into (personally) £10,000 debt, and parental contribution of another £10,000. I do this to increase my earning potential at the end of uni. A degree (apparently) makes me more worthwhile to companies. A small supply and large demand for graduate jobs means a higher wage. Simple supply and demand. Primary schoool level economics.
Firefighters have an enourmous supply, microscopic demand (comparitvly). This means the equilibrium price of the service goes down. Factors like unions change the fundamental basis of capitalism.
The fundamental problem is the cost of living in the south - spread out companies (tax breaks for companies employing people outside the south east, massive peanilisation of corporations inside london). Sort that out, then cost in london reduces. As it is the FBU want firefighteres in the scottish highlands earning £30,000. Average wage in that area of the country is arround £12,000 - not vary fair is it?
Respect to the firefighters that do as any decent human being would do when confronted with a problem - try to help. However when the FBU say "hopefully not many people will die thanks to our action", I want to throw their leaders off the nearest bridge. Theres tons of more dangerous, lower paid, harsher conditioned professions, the military being the obvious one.
Dont underestimate that stress you get behind your desk. Also feel for your sales reps that drive tens of thousands of miles each year - thats much more dangerous then firemen.
Again, if you dont like the pay, dont do the job. Just leave, dont stop others doing the job (picket lines), give in your notice, and leave. There are people that want the job, if we were allowed to emply them without an outcry from the left, that would be great.
People here at uni, from the hardened right wing to the anarchist left, do not support a firefighter strike. Imagine if the military went on strike because they only got paid £15,000 for 6 months service under fire in afganistan?
*GRIN* this could be fun ... (Score:1)
I was lucky that when I did my degree I managed to get *ONE* job offer within four months of leaving uni (not a job I wanted, but I wanted a job so I took it, and it lead directly on to what I'm doing now, 14 years later)
But I *did* work in Sainsbury's when I was in sixth form (and then in a hifi shop, for 20 pounds a day and no benefits aside from cheap hifi)
I also did a little while at McDonald's in my first year of uni and found security work during my summer breaks (the pay was lousy, but still it was money)
I put in more than 10 hours a week on my "hobbies" now, even with my full time job (and I'm studying for my MSc part time!) so I do know that it's difficult
My friends in the US who've gone through university all had either evening/weekend work or large debts at the end
Re:Not necessarily agreeing one way or the other b (Score:1)
They dont like the pay, so they aren't doing the job.
However there are several other points to make, the average wage in the UK is about £25k they currently earn about 20k after 30 years of work, they start on much less. They also do a far more dangerous job, and yet they earn less.
The figures for university graduates against fire fighters are innaccurate. A university graduate does earn substantialy more over his lifetime than a firefighter. You assumed that the firefighter would immediately be paid at the current maximum compared with in reality about 13-15k.
Furthermore, if you think that is bad, a nurses starting salary is £12,000 for A grade, before rising to £25,000 at I grade (the highest.
All our public servants do not get paid nearly enough for the vitaly important jobs which they do.
The Tube strike however, is blackmail and for £31,000 a year I would expect them to work come hell or hight water, whether there is a bloody fire fighters strike or not.
Re:Not necessarily agreeing one way or the other b (Score:1)
Either my brain or your logic is faulty. (Score:2)
On the general subject, do they really only work 2 days out of 8? If so they seem well paid. Its like teachers who are always whining but have 3+ months leave per year.
One problem (I hear) is that T Blair gave himself 40% rise, so why can't everyone else get that. I dunno if its true ^_^.
Re:Either my brain or your logic is faulty. (Score:2)
Re:Either my brain or your logic is faulty. (Score:2)
Shame, I thought you might have been on to something.
Re:Either my brain or your logic is faulty. (Score:2)
Do you read The Sun? (Score:1)
This was brewing for ages, with demonstrations and discussions with the government. Which nobody reported at the time.
The firefighters asked for 40%, but that does not necessarily mean they expected 40%. They have already stated they would be willing to accept a no-strings 16% rise. That is pretty reasonable, considering their pay was set many years ago, linked to pay in the manufacturing industry. Manufacturing has since declined dramatically. Papers released show that the government had considered 16% long ago [July?] but some people high up stamped on it.
The only reason the government has let this get so bad is to give unions bad press and turn public opinion against them. That is what the government wants, because the government loves Big Business and privatisation.
For the record, Andy Gilchrist is invariably shown sitting at his desk with a picture of "Che" Guevara behind him on his wall. What is not shown is the picture of him shaking hands with Tony Blair...
Ali