Your Union Your Region Information and views for FBU membership Produced by the Region for the Regional membership Issue 1/2004 Newsline – FBU Southern Region

Changes since last issue in March 2002

The Regional Officials extend apologies for the long awaited next edition of Newsline, as we all know we have gone through quite a traumatic period since our last edition in March 2002 and we have had to adjust to continuing changes both in the union and the fire service. Here are a few changes that we can emphasis;

• Name changed from Newsline 13 to Newsline – FBU Southern Region
  
• FBU Region 13 changed to FBU Region 12, remain as FBU Southern Region comprising of Oxfordshire, Buckinghamshire, Berkshire, Hampshire, Dorset & Isle of Wight.
  
• Fire Brigades renamed Fire & Rescue Services, Fire & Rescue Service Act 2004.
  
• Introduction of Integrated Risk Management Planning from old fire cover standards,
  
• Introduction of New Discipline and Grievance procedures,
  
• Introduction of revised Grey Book

Establishments of Fire & Rescue Service Regional Management Boards for

	Dorset
South West of England		South East of England

Next issue the union and its membership must confront are the Regionalisation of Emergency Fire Controls and Pensions.

We are where we are after the titanic struggle over the pay campaign incurring the wroth of the government, the power of the establishment and the determination of the membership. There are many more struggles and campaigns ahead, the fire service and FBU membership are used to confronting challenges on a daily basis the years ahead are no different.

Changes in Union Officials

It is some 2 ½ years since our last issue of Newsline and in that period a significant number of union officials have retired, resigned or simply stepped down after doing their bit for the union. We should acknowledge their substantial contribution to the union and the fire service and send our appreciation and thank those officials for their time to the FBU and its membership.

	Our campaign requires to continue its momentum. It can be achieved through concentrated campaigning from every member and official from every branch, brigade and region. Highlight the ludicrous proposals to regional fire controls, this decision must be reversed; we are the professionals that work in the service we know the; INCREASE RISK TO PUBLIC SAFETY, INCREASE in DELAYS for services to attend emergency incidents, Effect of LOSS of JOBS, Effects on an overstretched emergency service, MORE JOBS at local level, not LESS JOBS at regional levels, Effects of a CALL HANDLING SERVICE applied to an EMERGENCY SERVICE, WE ASK MEMBERS TO GET INVOLVED Southern Region Currently has 9 Emergency Fire Control Rooms, 1 per Fire Brigade. The Government propose 1 Fire Control for the entire South East Region. 9 into 1 won't work Cuts Cost Lives South West Region 7 into 1 won't work

South West Regional Management Board

Seek Independent Inquiry
.
The South West Regional Management Board agreed at their meeting on the 8th November 2004 unanimously to call for an independent inquiry into the Governmentís plan for a South West regional control centre.

Chairs of all fire authorities expressing deep concerns about the cost and effectiveness of Government plans to regionalise controls on the south west of the country.

They backed a resolution from Avon Fire Authority calling for an independent enquiry.

General Secretary Andy Gilchrist said, "The Government is misrepresenting the business case for regionalising emergency fire controls. Regionalisation will lead to a worse service and it will cost more."

"The Government should listen to those who are responsible for the Fire and Rescue Service and those who deliver it on the ground, and ditch its mad plans."

STOP Regionalisation by;

• Regionalisation of Emergency Fire Controls is a public safety issue effecting every citizen,
  
• Read this leaflet and start a petition, tell colleagues, friends, family and get them to sign the petition,
  
• Write to your MP, Parish, Unitary, Borough and County Councillors,
  
• Write to your Chief Fire Officer, Chair of Fire Authority, Councillors and local newspapers,
  
• Send messages of support to your local Fire Control

If you want more information contact YOUR; Local Emergency Fire Control and/or local Fire Station

Why is Dorset included?

Whatever effects of the new Regional Management Boards of the South East or South West regions Dorset members and officials are represented by the FBU Southern region.

Dorset has been placed on the front cover of this issue to emphasis our continuous support, allegiance and historical connection to them.

At a meeting of the Southern Region Regional Committee it reaffirmed its support to Dorset members and its officials and they should also remain within the Southern Region.

The Government White Paper proposed changes to establish RMB's needless to say without any consultation, CACFOA immediately changed their structure to met the new RMB's.

Reports from Fire Authorities

Oxfordshire VOTE NO

Hampshire VOTE NO

Dorset VOTE NO

to Regional Fire Controls

but the continuing pressure from the Office Of the Deputy Prime Minister continues with a push for their ‘good idea’ of regionalisation without the support of local politicians and the public.

The North East VOTED NO by 78% to an North East Assembly in October

LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE, THE PEOPLE SAID NO

Members should be under no apprehension the documents circulating Brigades and on the FBU and ODPM website are Consultative Documents not any agreed format. The documents require comments and responses to ODPM Office by 14th January 2005 therefore the Region will be submitting a detailed response to FBU Head Office to forward on the FBU response.

The issue of Review of Firefighters Pension Scheme (FPS) has been an on-going issue for a number of years where previously Home Office, DTLR and now ODPM government departments have proposed radical change to the FPS.

In 1998 the then Home Secretary Jack Straw proposed changes which effectively introduced a ‘Ring Fencing’ element to existing members of the FPS to maintaining existing conditions of the FPS. Any new member from a particular date would be required to go onto a new scheme of the FPS, no doubt with different conditions and practices from that of the existing member creating a two tiered pension for serving members, i.e. one on the old, one on the new scheme with differing conditions for those injured on duty.

The proposals announced within this Consultative document are extremely vindictive no doubt caused by our pay campaign and the possibly the withdrawal of political affiliation to the Labour party so the reaction from this government has been too harshly treat existing and future fire service employees. The callous and malicious nature of this government only enforces our opinions and course of our reaction to defend our FPS conditions to the hilt.

The element of ‘Ring Fencing’ has of course advantages for existing members but causes considerable disadvantages for any future member being on a different scheme, surely as a trade union principle we must protect existing members but also protect future members, let us not forget we have only inherited the service to pass it on. This debate will be required amongst the membership and harsh choices are required.

The changes in the FPS over recent years has been dramatic; medical appeal procedure, changes in legal precedent (Mander v Oxon CC) and (Lockwood v West Yorks) forces FRS to use employees in non-operational posts rather than gaining an ill-health retirement, the introduction of capability procedures to dismiss (sack) personnel over sickness related matters without cause to pension entitlements.

This Government is attempting to tackle the high rise in ill-health or early retirements in the public service in particular the Police and Fire Services and civil service. The whole pension issue amongst the electorate is being debated with drastic changes being proposed, increases in the working age for both male and female - meaning work till you drop and then unable to pick your state pension entitlements, the crashes in private insurance pension schemes through the stock market falls, corruption in company schemes, etc. Therefore it’s not the fault of millions of current pension members contributing towards what they believe to be a legally and water-tight pension scheme other elements of corruption and financial greed, maladministration and professional incompetence and clear neglect.

Why should we accept these types of proposals? Drawn up by ODPM officials in consultation with Human Resources managers in FRS who ultimately are extremely envious of the FPS and don’t see why Firefighters are on such beneficial conditions compared to other workers in the civil service. So whilst the knives have been sharpen by George Blain in his 2002 report other detailed work in stabbing Firefighters of all ranks in the back has continued.

Are these the same ODPM and Treasury civil servants that don’t contribute towards their pensions, whilst Firefighters pay 11% of salary, the comparisons can continue but ultimately these proposals are an insult to Firefighters that require a meaningful and thorough membership debate and response?

The pressure from the ODPM & Treasury mean there is little option, accept or reject these proposals. There is a belief that they wanted all existing and new FPS members on the new scheme by 2006 and a 12% contribution rate. The proposals are quite cynical in their intent by dividing current FPS members, no such proposals for Police Officers as they are ‘ring-fencing’ their pensions, no pay and pension protection provisions if personnel are transferred to a civilised post. These proposals simply address the mismanagement of the past with pensions high on the current political agenda, why then penalise existing and new FPS members for the misdemeanours of others.

The Times, front page on 2nd December 2004 highlighted Teachers, Firefighters and Police Officers pensions schemes will be under further threat on ill-health retirements, medical retirements, injury pension adjusted to cease or limit the likelihood of gaining work whilst receiving a pension. This further attack on our pensions has been caused by the mismanagement of Government spending plans therefore the curbs announced by the Chancellor in his post-budget speech means greater hardship for the very people who work for the
government and maintain the best performing public service.

Comparisons between the proposed changes for the Firefighters Pension scheme and the Police Pension scheme are stark and my previous comments are enforced. Why have the Police pension proposals been ‘Ring fenced’? Why are MP’s own pension proposals been improved? Why have Judges creating a storm of protest including mass resignation over their pension reforms on tax avoidance with the Govt. through Constitutional Affairs Minster Lord Faulkner backing down?

We knew the pension explosion was going to happen with the known retirements from 2004 onwards. Government lack of action and no devised strategy is paramount to the circumstances we face today a snail would have been quicker. NO action means NO political will, politicians talk-a-good-talk but that’s all, a good ploy when nothings wants to be done. Where-there-is-a-willthere- is-a-way. The reality is; existing and new FPS members are left to pick the pieces of ill-fated decisions by past-administrators, previous-Politicians,
previous-civil servants, Government Dept’s, County Councils and Fire Services on miss-spent pension contributions/fund, maladministration without the forethought to anticipate the eventuality we currently face.

The stark reality for the future is:

- WORK LONGER – PAY MORE – GET LESS –

To Read the Full Edition of Newsline Please Download in Format (1.2MB)