A burning debate

As you’re probably aware, there has been a series of strike action by firefighters in the last year and the latest took place over three days on May Day bank holiday weekend.

In essence, the government wants to make workers pay more into their pensions and work longer and then add insult to (often actual) injury to also make it easier to sack firefighters who fail to maintain the required level of fitness.

Most firefighters who take home approximately £1,650 a month already pay a hefty £320 or more into their pensions so naturally, they are furious about the prospect of a further proposed rise in pension contributions.

From April 2014, under the current government, this would rise - for the third year in a row - to over £340 a month. Many face a fourth rise of 2.2 percent in 2015. The new scheme also expects firefighters to work until they are 60—a five year hike from the previous 55.

And on top of this, a large section of firefighters face an additional threat to their pensions as the government ignores long standing agreements. As a result, they will not receive the pension they were promised, despite paying into their scheme for years. Tory Fire Minister Brandon Lewis has also withdrawn an offer he made in June for pension contributions to be an average of 13.2 per cent of firefighters’ wages.

There are many reasons why the government shouldn't be pressing ahead with these unfair and ill-thought out changes, with concerns about the likely impact on safety surely top of the list. Being able to save people from burning buildings or rescue them from the scene of a multiple vehicle pile-up requires not just bravery, but a good deal of physical strength too.

There won't be many members of the public who would feel confident about being rescued from a serious fire if the only route out of the inferno was down a ladder on the back of a firefighter who was about to turn 60. Yet that is exactly what the FBU fears could happen if the government gets its way. Ministers might say that they'd move older staff off frontline duties but the reality is likely to be very different. The government's own figures show that thousands of firefighters in their 50s could face the sack without much of a pension, simply because they would no longer be able to meet the required fitness standard.

Government inaction is at the heart of the latest Fire and Rescue Service dispute. Firefighters have genuine concerns about the impact of increasing the normal retirement age to 60 – and not just for themselves. The government’s own research showed that this was a legitimate concern and their failure to respond to the Williams Report demonstrates a lack of will to resolve the issues it raises. If the government was genuine about wanting to end this dispute they would be talking to firefighters about these concerns, not ignoring them.

Beth Farhat

Regional Secretary Northern TUC