Fire Brigades Union:

To: ALL MEMBERS SOUTHERN REGION

From: DEAN MILLS

MEMBERS UPDATE: 11th NOVEMBER 2002

Tonight it looks as if we may well be forced into taking strike action on Wednesday. The Bain Inquiry has said we are not worth a fair rate of pay and have to put up with a rate which does not pay us for all the changes we have undergone since 1977.

It offers a small increase IF we undergo even more changes to the service which will put the public at greater risk. We cannot allow the public to be put at greater risk by a lack of funding for the Fire Service and by this governments refusal to implement the Fire Cover Review. This ‘offer’ is an insult and is designed to provoke members into industrial action.

I and I know our members believe we should have a Fire Service based and funded on life risk not property risk. We also must have the staff of that service paid fairly for the work we do.

Tomorrow the Employers meet us at the NJC. The employers have a choice. Protect the public who elect them or continue to put them at risk. There is of course the argument that strike action puts the public at increased risk. That is true all the time we are forced to strike. However by refusing to properly fund us and to enable us to better protect the public this Government are putting the public at risk 24 hours a day 365 days a year and they still want to have Firefighters paid on the cheap.

The ‘offer’, if it is actually what the employers suggest; amounts to a rise of around 24p an hour for a qualified Firefighter after 4 years training after stoppages this year. What an insult. It is far from the £8:50 an hour take home we have said is a professional starting point. It also means any formula for professional pay is frankly of little use if the starting point itself is not at a professional rate.

Bain also said “The challenge is not to find ways to improve existing arrangements but to ensure that this time, reforms are carried through and a new, modern Fire Service emerges as a result.”

In return for implementing reform, pay should rise for the individual firefighter. The Review proposes a two stage increase, with a total of 11% overall. The first, 4%, should be paid with effect from November 2002, as soon as the Review’s first strand of proposals are agreed. The second, 7%, would be paid on completion of the other two strands.

I sincerely trust the employers make a realistic and fair offer tomorrow and act in a manner which will improve the UK fire service not divide it. We don’t wish to strike but this ‘offer’ is not only so low as not to register with Firefighters and Control Staff, but to openly admit to not wishing to find ways to improve existing arrangements is arrogance in the extreme, and shows utter contempt for the work ability and dedication Firefighters of every rank have given to the service and the public.

Bain:

1. The Fire Service is an impressive public body and deserves much credit for its performance and devotion to duty. Its professionalism in responding to incidents is beyond compare. The Review Team has been impressed by the quality of the service that it gives to the community. Many of the submissions made to us have stressed the high value the public places on the Fire Service. We have seen many examples of good practice by fire brigades and their fire authorities; and they are often happy to go the extra mile to deliver the best.

2. Many Fire Service personnel, at all levels, have told us that change is required. The service is achieving improvements in performance despite, rather than because of, its organisation and structure, which can no longer meet the full range of demands placed upon it by the local community. The legislative basis upon which the service is established dates from 1947; society and the requirements it places on a modern Fire Service have changed enormously since then. The Fire Service as an institution has not changed in turn. Many have seen the need for change, and we have been impressed by the readiness of individuals, politicians, officers and firefighters themselves to tackle the requirements of overdue reform and to grasp the opportunities that are offered. There are many constructive ideas as to what is required and how it can be achieved.

3. We have been dismayed, however, to discover the lack of progress that has been made. Report after report has recommended change and modernisation. Modest changes have taken place but the major reforms required in form, function, legislative backing and management have all been neglected.

4. We have found clear evidence of some fire authorities promoting change and innovation against the obstacles of unhelpful legislation, and funding their local Fire Service well in excess of central provision. Individual Chief Officers have achieved significant improvements on the ground without the support they deserve. And individual firefighters and their union have conducted impressive local community campaigns to encourage better fire safety. They know what needs to be done to change the Fire Service and are trying their best to deliver it.

5. At a national level, however, the Fire Service has not changed significantly, and all the principal stakeholders - the Government, the Local Authority Employers, senior management of the Fire Service and the Fire Service unions - must take their share of the blame. Ministers have failed to give the leadership required, and those who advise them have failed to tackle obvious deficiencies in legislation and structural constraints. There has been an almost total lack of real political engagement in the Fire Service since the last firefighters’ strike in 1977. The 1947 Act is hopelessly outdated. Local Authority employers of fire brigades have in general shown a lack of leadership and purpose especially when acting together to negotiate pay and conditions. The Fire Brigades Union, while professing its enthusiasm for change, has shown no real commitment to make it happen from the centre and in many parts of the service has mounted sustained and energetic opposition to change. The senior management of the Fire Service has shown a collective lack of leadership.

6. Against that background, we have concluded that a radical programme of reform is required to change the Fire Service into a modern institution which can truly deserve the trust, confidence and respect which the public places in it. Significant new money cannot, and should not, be made available without this reform.

7. Together with our recommendations for urgent action, we propose a timetable for implementation and we stand ready to assist in this process. This position paper, and the final report which we will present, must not be allowed to gather dust on the shelf like so many of their predecessors. There is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for fundamental change. The challenge must be accepted.

8. Our recommendations cover the whole of the UK Fire Service but we recognise that some aspects will have different implications for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. We will consider these regional variations in more detail in our full report.

To Recap:

Its professionalism in responding to incidents is beyond compare.
The Review Team has been impressed by the quality of the service that it gives to the community.
Many of the submissions made to us have stressed the high value the public places on the Fire Service.
Individual Chief Officers have achieved significant improvements on the ground without the support they deserve.
Individual Firefighters and their union have conducted impressive local community campaigns to encourage better fire safety.
Local Authority employers of fire brigades have in general shown a lack of leadership and purpose.
Some aspects will have different implications for Scotland, Wales and Northern

So we are professional and impressive and we run impressive local community campaigns and encourage better fire safety.

The fire service is poorly led by the employers who also lack direction according to Bain.

They also get well paid for their duties. Well they can prove him wrong now by implementing a fair pay adjustment for Firefighters and Control Staff

Bain says we are professional, and beyond compare.

So why is the pay offer so low?

The Rt Hon John Prescott MP
Deputy Prime Minister
26 Whitehall
London
SW1A 2AW

Dear Deputy Prime Minister,

Independent Review of the Fire Service: position paper

Sir Michael Lyons, Sir Tony Young and I have now begun to firm up our views on the future of the Fire Service. We do this on the basis of the visits we have made, the oral presentations that have been made to us, and the written evidence that has been submitted to our Review. In the light of the discussions currently underway between the Fire Brigade employers and unions, we thought it would be helpful for us to indicate to you, and through you to them, the general thrust of some of our findings. I therefore attach a position paper setting out our views on what needs to be done to deliver a modern fire service. We will, of course, be submitting a full report in December.

The paper sets out our proposals on reform, our ideas on a process to negotiate the fundamental changes required and our views on what this should mean for the paybill. We believe these three elements are closely interconnected: the challenge is not to find ways to improve existing arrangements but to ensure that, this time, reforms are carried through and a new modern Fire Service emerges as a result.

Reform
We have received many good ideas on how to reform the current fire service and seen many impressive examples of local initiatives. The service itself is already producing ideas for major reform. In particular, there are proposals currently under discussion on a new competence-based HR structure known as IPDS (“Integrated Personal Development System”). The Fire Cover Review is looking at changing the whole basis for allocating resources away from a 1930s model based on building types to a new, flexible, quantitative risk-based assessment. And across the UK there is a gradual move to invest in community safety programmes, to tackle the causes of fires and prevent them, rather than just putting them out when they do occur. Our recommendations are aimed at supporting these and other initiatives, making sure that the implications are followed through into all aspects of fire service delivery. The outcome must be a more broadly-based service with multiple roles offering a wider range of services and expertise. It is also a single service, which does away with old distinctions between whole-time and retained or volunteer, control staff and firefighters, uniformed and support, and values the contribution each individual can make.

Process
These reforms amount to a major change to existing arrangements and will take time to negotiate and deliver. Because of this, we are proposing a four-strand approach to negotiations, under which discussions begin on the whole package of reforms at the same time, but are completed over different time scales. The first strand, consisting of measures which can be implemented quickly, should, we think, be completed in a period of four to eight weeks. Strand two, which includes measures on which further policy development is required (in particular, design of a new reward structure), should be complete in around six months. Strand three, which includes measures requiring organisational and structural reform, should take around one year to complete. There will also be a fourth strand to address issues which need to be taken forward with local and central government. There will need to be arrangements to manage the overall process to ensure coherence and ensure that progress remains consistent with the Review’s original proposals. In the longer term, more permanent institutions will no doubt be required.

Pay
We need to give members of the Fire Service some indication of what this might mean for them. We believe that they will gain dramatically from the new, broader and more flexible service we propose. This will have room for a more diverse workforce, a wider range of career paths and increased scope for modern, family-friendly ways of working. A move to a reward structure built around IPDS will allow expertise to be properly rewarded and, over time, individuals who perform well can aspire to significantly higher salaries.

In addition, we recognise that in return for implementing reform, the paybill should rise. Any increase must of course be consistent with the Government’s public sector pay policy and be justified by efficiency savings. Given the scale of the reforms we are proposing, we are confident that the benefits will more than offset any implications for the paybill.

We propose that any pay increase should be divided into two stages. The first, which would be paid with effect from November 2002, would be released as soon as the Strand one reforms are agreed. The second would be paid on completion of the other two strands. We think that four per cent for the first stage and seven per cent for the second would be a fair increase, given trends in the wider economy and the period over which the increase will apply. The question of a longer-term uprating mechanism must also be dependent on implementation of the reform package and we will return to this in our full report.

The attached position paper is not intended to deal with the full range of issues covered by the Review, and we still intend to produce a full report by the middle of December. This will address the reform process in more detail and will bring forward proposals on ways of enhancing brigade resources to support and manage change. It will also tackle HR issues, such as pensions, senior staff and long-term structures, which are not covered by the position paper.

We have produced this paper in response to the widely expressed desire for this Review to make its views available to the negotiations now under way. The paper is not an interim report, but it describes the first steps in a major programme of reform. Action to begin this programme need not be delayed until our final report. I commend the paper to you.
I am sending copies of this letter and the attachment, to Ted George at the Fire Brigades National Employers and to Andy Gilchrist at the Fire Brigades Union.

Sir George Bain

Chairman
Independent Review of the Fire Service

Dean Mills
Regional Secretary

Thank you for taking the time to read this. If you have any queries or want any more information please contact me on:

Mob: 07956 502585

Regional Office: 01494 513034

email:deanmills@hotmail.com

Y...because we're worth it!