FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Age appropriate jobs .....
Age appropriate jobs .....
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
In light of todays 4 hr strike of our fire service ,in respect of pension and the age they are expected to work....
What other jobs should be "age appropriate" ?????  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
i was 19, working in the community as a HCA and a gentleman refused me to help him as i was younger than his grandchildren.
Made me think if i was in the right profession.
Luckily all the other ladies and gents i see too saw me as a breath of fresh air and just appreciated i was there to assist them at home. No other issues since. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
What i mean is............
Are there certain jobs that should only be for certain ages of people.......a legal limt so to speak...
Just as the fire service are saying......who would want a load of old unfit people trying to save them from a fire etc...if they are made to work until they are 60 ...
If i was still working with old folk etc, my pension age is 66yrs....
so then you have the old looking after the old.........seems daft but then, some are fitter as they age. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"In light of todays 4 hr strike of our fire service ,in respect of pension and the age they are expected to work....
"
I don't agree with that strike at all.
The whole country is in the same boat.
The way I read it is that they don't want to still be working at 60.
They do an absolutely admirable job but...
...Join the F'ng club! Nobody does. 
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In light of todays 4 hr strike of our fire service ,in respect of pension and the age they are expected to work....
I don't agree with that strike at all.
The whole country is in the same boat.
The way I read it is that they don't want to still be working at 60.
They do an absolutely admirable job but...
...Join the F'ng club! Nobody does.
"
its not about the age though there are serious questions around that..
it about the fact (Governments own research)that if a Firefighter is unable to pass the fitness assessments either due to being 'unfit' or ill health (cancer, mental health etc)..
then the Fire Authority will dismiss the individual under capability and their pension is frozen till 65..
early ill health retirement whereby the individual would receive a reduced pro rata pension will be taken away..
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think judges should retire at 50....some of the old farts have lost their marbles totally  "
To busy thinking of young boy's.
Whilst dressed in sussy's n playing with their gravel's.
Public school upbringing
"dont ya know"
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Paramedics, as a nation we are all getting heavier. Can a 60 year old lift a person safely? "
anyone who has been doing that job or nursing for any length of time will have probably picked up injuries over the years..
knees and backs are common..
my answer would probably be not likely.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"In light of todays 4 hr strike of our fire service ,in respect of pension and the age they are expected to work....
I don't agree with that strike at all.
The whole country is in the same boat.
The way I read it is that they don't want to still be working at 60.
They do an absolutely admirable job but...
...Join the F'ng club! Nobody does.
"
Its not just that Ben, I just copied and pasted this because I couldn't be arsed to type it!
The facts are these, Firefighters pay 14% into their pension, £400 per month (feel free to compare that to what any of you pay). The Gov are changing the pension and are going to make firefighters work an EXTRA 10years to receive a LOWER pension, making them work until they are 60. Over that 10years they will pay an EXTRA £45,000 into their pension, and receive less per year than they would of under the current scheme! If they are lucky to live until they are 80 then this change will cost them over £100,000!Would you want a 60 year old male or female firefighter coming into your home to rescue you and yourfamily?On top of this, they are bringing in a new scheme, that if Firefighters don't meet their fitness standards at 50-60, they can dismiss them and keep ALL their pension until they are 67. So the 40 odd years of paying £400 a month into the scheme, they would keep! The Gov themselves had an independent review done that found it would be highly unlikely for FFs to carry out the duties or meet the fitness standards at age 60. They are now ignoring their own review!It's true that under the current scheme Firefighters retire at 50 having worked 30 years. That might seem early to many people, but it's because they pay in the 14% and accumulate enough money to be able to retire at an earlier age. Maybe its a small perk for working Christmas Days, family Birthdays, Weekends and Evenings, and New Years days etc for the 30 years as well as putting the publics safety before my own.This Government are obsessed with tearing the public sector apart, this is the start. Take heed that in a few years there will be talk of privatising the Fire Brigade and other public services. A way for the Government to make money off other people's misery. There are no poor Politicians! Firefighters need support, please ignore the medias spin on the facts. Firefighters DO NOT want to strike, but the Gov has the Fire Service against the wall and are unwilling to listen to its concerns.... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"In light of todays 4 hr strike of our fire service ,in respect of pension and the age they are expected to work....
I don't agree with that strike at all.
The whole country is in the same boat.
The way I read it is that they don't want to still be working at 60.
They do an absolutely admirable job but...
...Join the F'ng club! Nobody does.
Its not just that Ben, I just copied and pasted this because I couldn't be arsed to type it!
The facts are these, Firefighters pay 14% into their pension, £400 per month (feel free to compare that to what any of you pay). The Gov are changing the pension and are going to make firefighters work an EXTRA 10years to receive a LOWER pension, making them work until they are 60. Over that 10years they will pay an EXTRA £45,000 into their pension, and receive less per year than they would of under the current scheme! If they are lucky to live until they are 80 then this change will cost them over £100,000!Would you want a 60 year old male or female firefighter coming into your home to rescue you and yourfamily?On top of this, they are bringing in a new scheme, that if Firefighters don't meet their fitness standards at 50-60, they can dismiss them and keep ALL their pension until they are 67. So the 40 odd years of paying £400 a month into the scheme, they would keep! The Gov themselves had an independent review done that found it would be highly unlikely for FFs to carry out the duties or meet the fitness standards at age 60. They are now ignoring their own review!It's true that under the current scheme Firefighters retire at 50 having worked 30 years. That might seem early to many people, but it's because they pay in the 14% and accumulate enough money to be able to retire at an earlier age. Maybe its a small perk for working Christmas Days, family Birthdays, Weekends and Evenings, and New Years days etc for the 30 years as well as putting the publics safety before my own.This Government are obsessed with tearing the public sector apart, this is the start. Take heed that in a few years there will be talk of privatising the Fire Brigade and other public services. A way for the Government to make money off other people's misery. There are no poor Politicians! Firefighters need support, please ignore the medias spin on the facts. Firefighters DO NOT want to strike, but the Gov has the Fire Service against the wall and are unwilling to listen to its concerns...."
Im 100% behind the fire service |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *B9 QueenWoman
over a year ago
Over the rainbow, under the bridge |
Me too. It's appalling. These guys regularly risk their lives for us and this is a shitty way of repaying that. If this goes through what incentive would there be for new recruits? It's unfair and short sighted. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Me too. It's appalling. These guys regularly risk their lives for us and this is a shitty way of repaying that. If this goes through what incentive would there be for new recruits? It's unfair and short sighted."
With the H&S rules in place in the fire service, they no longer risk their lives, any fire person injured in work, the shift leader actions are investgated...
Maybe you mean, you are glad to see them when you have a fire or a rescue needing? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Totally behind any action any public sector workers do as they're getting screwed by our government - oh wait that's me! Don't need any meets from here as I'm being fucked daily  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Me too. It's appalling. These guys regularly risk their lives for us and this is a shitty way of repaying that. If this goes through what incentive would there be for new recruits? It's unfair and short sighted.
With the H&S rules in place in the fire service, they no longer risk their lives, any fire person injured in work, the shift leader actions are investgated...
Maybe you mean, you are glad to see them when you have a fire or a rescue needing? "
I'm pretty site going into a burning building is pretty risky despite all the health and safety. Fire doesn't tend to obey our rules. Health and safety minimises risk, it doesn't eliminate it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *B9 QueenWoman
over a year ago
Over the rainbow, under the bridge |
"Me too. It's appalling. These guys regularly risk their lives for us and this is a shitty way of repaying that. If this goes through what incentive would there be for new recruits? It's unfair and short sighted.
With the H&S rules in place in the fire service, they no longer risk their lives, any fire person injured in work, the shift leader actions are investgated...
Maybe you mean, you are glad to see them when you have a fire or a rescue needing? "
H& S rules? Seriously? They are dealing with fire. It doesn't follow rules. There is a risk every time they attend a fire. Firemen are still injured or die in service. How many other jobs does that apply to? Not many. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In light of todays 4 hr strike of our fire service ,in respect of pension and the age they are expected to work....
I don't agree with that strike at all.
The whole country is in the same boat.
The way I read it is that they don't want to still be working at 60.
They do an absolutely admirable job but...
...Join the F'ng club! Nobody does.
"
In part I agree with you, but I had two firemen come to fit fire alarms in my home. When I opened the door and saw them my initial thought was "fuck! Hope I'm never in a fire when these two are on call". Their ages didn't fill me with confidence and the attitude of the "younger" one made me feel uncomfortable in my own house!
Air traffic controllers should retire at 40. You need to have razor sharp senses, old people don't! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *B9 QueenWoman
over a year ago
Over the rainbow, under the bridge |
"In light of todays 4 hr strike of our fire service ,in respect of pension and the age they are expected to work....
I don't agree with that strike at all.
The whole country is in the same boat.
The way I read it is that they don't want to still be working at 60.
They do an absolutely admirable job but...
...Join the F'ng club! Nobody does.
In part I agree with you, but I had two firemen come to fit fire alarms in my home. When I opened the door and saw them my initial thought was "fuck! Hope I'm never in a fire when these two are on call". Their ages didn't fill me with confidence and the attitude of the "younger" one made me feel uncomfortable in my own house!
Air traffic controllers should retire at 40. You need to have razor sharp senses, old people don't!"
I would include pilots too. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Surely it's an ability issue, not age. Some 40 year olds are pretty fit. Some are over the hill and past it.
Lots of jobs are unsuitable for older people- such as very physical jobs.
Ok I meant 60. But typing 40 was funnier. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"In light of todays 4 hr strike of our fire service ,in respect of pension and the age they are expected to work....
I don't agree with that strike at all.
The whole country is in the same boat.
The way I read it is that they don't want to still be working at 60.
They do an absolutely admirable job but...
...Join the F'ng club! Nobody does.
Its not just that Ben, I just copied and pasted this because I couldn't be arsed to type it!
The facts are these, Firefighters pay 14% into their pension, £400 per month (feel free to compare that to what any of you pay). The Gov are changing the pension and are going to make firefighters work an EXTRA 10years to receive a LOWER pension, making them work until they are 60. Over that 10years they will pay an EXTRA £45,000 into their pension, and receive less per year than they would of under the current scheme! If they are lucky to live until they are 80 then this change will cost them over £100,000!Would you want a 60 year old male or female firefighter coming into your home to rescue you and yourfamily?On top of this, they are bringing in a new scheme, that if Firefighters don't meet their fitness standards at 50-60, they can dismiss them and keep ALL their pension until they are 67. So the 40 odd years of paying £400 a month into the scheme, they would keep! The Gov themselves had an independent review done that found it would be highly unlikely for FFs to carry out the duties or meet the fitness standards at age 60. They are now ignoring their own review!It's true that under the current scheme Firefighters retire at 50 having worked 30 years. That might seem early to many people, but it's because they pay in the 14% and accumulate enough money to be able to retire at an earlier age. Maybe its a small perk for working Christmas Days, family Birthdays, Weekends and Evenings, and New Years days etc for the 30 years as well as putting the publics safety before my own.This Government are obsessed with tearing the public sector apart, this is the start. Take heed that in a few years there will be talk of privatising the Fire Brigade and other public services. A way for the Government to make money off other people's misery. There are no poor Politicians! Firefighters need support, please ignore the medias spin on the facts. Firefighters DO NOT want to strike, but the Gov has the Fire Service against the wall and are unwilling to listen to its concerns....
Im 100% behind the fire service "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
All service personnel
ALL people who work on roads, with moving traffic
Policel
Breakdown/recovery people
To name a few groups of people who are above avarage death rates for the role,...
They do not go into any burning building until a dynamic risk assessment has been made. If you have one casualty and get It wrong, a poor show if you end up with more casualties that now need help..... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"In light of todays 4 hr strike of our fire service ,in respect of pension and the age they are expected to work....
I don't agree with that strike at all.
The whole country is in the same boat.
The way I read it is that they don't want to still be working at 60.
They do an absolutely admirable job but...
...Join the F'ng club! Nobody does.
Its not just that Ben, I just copied and pasted this because I couldn't be arsed to type it!
The facts are these, Firefighters pay 14% into their pension, £400 per month (feel free to compare that to what any of you pay). The Gov are changing the pension and are going to make firefighters work an EXTRA 10years to receive a LOWER pension, making them work until they are 60. Over that 10years they will pay an EXTRA £45,000 into their pension, and receive less per year than they would of under the current scheme! If they are lucky to live until they are 80 then this change will cost them over £100,000!Would you want a 60 year old male or female firefighter coming into your home to rescue you and yourfamily?On top of this, they are bringing in a new scheme, that if Firefighters don't meet their fitness standards at 50-60, they can dismiss them and keep ALL their pension until they are 67. So the 40 odd years of paying £400 a month into the scheme, they would keep! The Gov themselves had an independent review done that found it would be highly unlikely for FFs to carry out the duties or meet the fitness standards at age 60. They are now ignoring their own review!It's true that under the current scheme Firefighters retire at 50 having worked 30 years. That might seem early to many people, but it's because they pay in the 14% and accumulate enough money to be able to retire at an earlier age. Maybe its a small perk for working Christmas Days, family Birthdays, Weekends and Evenings, and New Years days etc for the 30 years as well as putting the publics safety before my own.This Government are obsessed with tearing the public sector apart, this is the start. Take heed that in a few years there will be talk of privatising the Fire Brigade and other public services. A way for the Government to make money off other people's misery. There are no poor Politicians! Firefighters need support, please ignore the medias spin on the facts. Firefighters DO NOT want to strike, but the Gov has the Fire Service against the wall and are unwilling to listen to its concerns....
Im 100% behind the fire service "
Totally behind them
My grandad was a fire man and he would not have been fit at 66 or enjoyed his retirement had he worked till then. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"All service personnel
ALL people who work on roads, with moving traffic
Policel
Breakdown/recovery people
To name a few groups of people who are above avarage death rates for the role,...
They do not go into any burning building until a dynamic risk assessment has been made. If you have one casualty and get It wrong, a poor show if you end up with more casualties that now need help....."
But they still go into burning buildings. Into a live fire that doesn't follow what we want it to do, even under dynamic risk assessments. How do you not understand that there is still risks there???
If there wasn't an element of risk any Tom dick or Harry would do it wouldn't they? If your house caught fire would you go back into it or would you wait for the fire fighters tocome out and use ttheir kit, knowledge and expertise? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In light of todays 4 hr strike of our fire service ,in respect of pension and the age they are expected to work....
I don't agree with that strike at all.
The whole country is in the same boat.
The way I read it is that they don't want to still be working at 60.
They do an absolutely admirable job but...
...Join the F'ng club! Nobody does.
Its not just that Ben, I just copied and pasted this because I couldn't be arsed to type it!
The facts are these, Firefighters pay 14% into their pension, £400 per month (feel free to compare that to what any of you pay). The Gov are changing the pension and are going to make firefighters work an EXTRA 10years to receive a LOWER pension, making them work until they are 60. Over that 10years they will pay an EXTRA £45,000 into their pension, and receive less per year than they would of under the current scheme! If they are lucky to live until they are 80 then this change will cost them over £100,000!Would you want a 60 year old male or female firefighter coming into your home to rescue you and yourfamily?On top of this, they are bringing in a new scheme, that if Firefighters don't meet their fitness standards at 50-60, they can dismiss them and keep ALL their pension until they are 67. So the 40 odd years of paying £400 a month into the scheme, they would keep! The Gov themselves had an independent review done that found it would be highly unlikely for FFs to carry out the duties or meet the fitness standards at age 60. They are now ignoring their own review!It's true that under the current scheme Firefighters retire at 50 having worked 30 years. That might seem early to many people, but it's because they pay in the 14% and accumulate enough money to be able to retire at an earlier age. Maybe its a small perk for working Christmas Days, family Birthdays, Weekends and Evenings, and New Years days etc for the 30 years as well as putting the publics safety before my own.This Government are obsessed with tearing the public sector apart, this is the start. Take heed that in a few years there will be talk of privatising the Fire Brigade and other public services. A way for the Government to make money off other people's misery. There are no poor Politicians! Firefighters need support, please ignore the medias spin on the facts. Firefighters DO NOT want to strike, but the Gov has the Fire Service against the wall and are unwilling to listen to its concerns....
Im 100% behind the fire service
"
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Me too. It's appalling. These guys regularly risk their lives for us and this is a shitty way of repaying that. If this goes through what incentive would there be for new recruits? It's unfair and short sighted.
With the H&S rules in place in the fire service, they no longer risk their lives, any fire person injured in work, the shift leader actions are investgated...
Maybe you mean, you are glad to see them when you have a fire or a rescue needing? "
No they still do risk their lives ....say we had another 9/11 how many fire fighters went in there and died?
They would be involved in more than just fires if they were needed to.
Also fires can be unpradictable....they dont know exactly whats in a building when they go in but they go in regardless.....to say they dont take risks and its because people are happy to see them well yes i would be if my house was on fire and my child stuck! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Do a search on the subject, the FBU has a document on the very subject, as does the HSE...
9/11 happened in America, their fire servics is run in a different way and are not striking.
We need a fire and rescue service, it's a job, a role, they are well trained and respected, not to be idolised. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"On top of this, they are bringing in a new scheme, that if Firefighters don't meet their fitness standards at 50-60, they can dismiss them and keep ALL their pension until they are 67. ."
So what's the problem?..
If you're not fit enough your getting dismissed on full pension.
I'm reading that as a win-win for the firefighters and I the general public are safe too. Because that guarantees thatvthe upper age fighter turning up to the fire is fit.
Obviously I don't wanna get dragged into a debate here but as that is straight from the horses mouth I don't see the issue. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"On top of this, they are bringing in a new scheme, that if Firefighters don't meet their fitness standards at 50-60, they can dismiss them and keep ALL their pension until they are 67. .
So what's the problem?..
If you're not fit enough your getting dismissed on full pension.
I'm reading that as a win-win for the firefighters and I the general public are safe too. Because that guarantees thatvthe upper age fighter turning up to the fire is fit.
Obviously I don't wanna get dragged into a debate here but as that is straight from the horses mouth I don't see the issue. "
I read it as the government keep their pension until they're 67, seven years without a pension is a long time! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"On top of this, they are bringing in a new scheme, that if Firefighters don't meet their fitness standards at 50-60, they can dismiss them and keep ALL their pension until they are 67. .
So what's the problem?..
If you're not fit enough your getting dismissed on full pension.
I'm reading that as a win-win for the firefighters and I the general public are safe too. Because that guarantees thatvthe upper age fighter turning up to the fire is fit.
Obviously I don't wanna get dragged into a debate here but as that is straight from the horses mouth I don't see the issue.
I read it as the government keep their pension until they're 67, seven years without a pension is a long time! "
Fair point.
Anyway stop debating me or I'll pull your hair again!    |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
With the H&S rules in place in the fire service, they no longer risk their lives, any fire person injured in work, the shift leader actions are investgated...
"
with respect that is wrong..
yes, safe working practises have led to the job being safer than it was historically which lets be honest is the right thing as at the end of the day any person whatever their position goes to work to earn a living..
not to end up a fatality..
investigations are always carried out post an accident at work, that's commonplace across industry and is standard practise..
on the point about risking lives and without getting into a (this industry is more dangerous etc)the job always has and always will entail risks to personnel by its nature..
no 2 room jobs are the same, no 2 car alights are also the same and all incidents have the potential and sadly over the past Cpl of decades guys have not gone home.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"On top of this, they are bringing in a new scheme, that if Firefighters don't meet their fitness standards at 50-60, they can dismiss them and keep ALL their pension until they are 67. .
So what's the problem?..
If you're not fit enough your getting dismissed on full pension.
I'm reading that as a win-win for the firefighters and I the general public are safe too. Because that guarantees thatvthe upper age fighter turning up to the fire is fit.
Obviously I don't wanna get dragged into a debate here but as that is straight from the horses mouth I don't see the issue. "
the proposed dismissal is under medical capability hence pension frozen at whatever point the decision is made..
that may not happen at 59 and 'only be a Cpl of years', it may happen at 50 so the individual will have paid in for 30 years develop a disease or injury and be dumped..
that's wrong..
on the fitness the Governments own evidence is that about a third of personnel will not pass the 3 yearly medical, the Unions own figures are higher..
however both are based on the starting point that when the individual joins they are in the top 10% of fitness within the country..
that wont happen..
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Me too. It's appalling. These guys regularly risk their lives for us and this is a shitty way of repaying that. If this goes through what incentive would there be for new recruits? It's unfair and short sighted.
With the H&S rules in place in the fire service, they no longer risk their lives, any fire person injured in work, the shift leader actions are investgated...
Maybe you mean, you are glad to see them when you have a fire or a rescue needing?
No they still do risk their lives ....say we had another 9/11 how many fire fighters went in there and died?
They would be involved in more than just fires if they were needed to.
Also fires can be unpradictable....they dont know exactly whats in a building when they go in but they go in regardless.....to say they dont take risks and its because people are happy to see them well yes i would be if my house was on fire and my child stuck!"
I'm sure we didn't Lose any fire fighters in 9/11
The FB do a good JOB but that's all it is look at the facts more roofers have died in the last 10 years than fire fighters are they heros ?
Again working longer is a fact of life we are all living longer so should have to work longer the questions about fitness ect are irrelevant as the same goes for any career if your not capable you get let go.
In my ideal world all emergency services/public sector workers/military would go on strike and get the firemen to cover them for a change with no extra pay little training and on there days off.
In response to the op strippers should retire early and managers should never Be under 30 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I think the fire men are in the right here why should they be shafted in this way when for years they have been running in to burning buildings saving our loved ones now they want them to be doing that at 64 god would love to see our mp's carry a 15 stone person down a ladder even now these men and woman of our fire service have worked there way to get that pention so give them it at the point they become unfit to do the job as keeping them in the job after that point can only cause other problems and taking the pention off them is just ripping them off and shafting them after what they have did for us over the years sorry iv went off the subject but feel strongley about this
Police jobs should have age limits |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The FB do a good JOB but that's all it is look at the facts more roofers have died in the last 10 years than fire fighters are they heros ?
Again working longer is a fact of life we are all living longer so should have to work longer the questions about fitness ect are irrelevant as the same goes for any career if your not capable you get let go.
In my ideal world all emergency services/public sector workers/military would go on strike and get the firemen to cover them for a change with no extra pay little training and on there days off.
In response to the op strippers should retire early and managers should never Be under 30 "
Yes it is a job, no one mentioned 'hero's' at all so why chuck that in..?
on the safety issue, any person who goes to work and doesn't come home is a tragedy for their family, friends and colleagues..
not sure what point you are trying to make about roofers, surely all industries should work to the highest safety standards which the UK fire service do..
whats possibly wrong with that..?
just to clarify, you are happy to be paying 14% of your monthly wage into a pension fund for a term of 40 years but after 30 years you develop a life changing illness and then you think 'ok i'm happy to be told goodbye, we will give you what you accrued in 17 yrs time'..?
if that's the case crack on but don't be surprised if others are not prepared to roll over and be shafted without standing up for themselves and their families.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Would you want a 60 year old male or female firefighter coming into your home to rescue you and your family?"
Yes - assuming they were fit & strong as many people of that age are - along with the years of wisdom and experience they'd have.
I'm not for anybody being shafted on their employment and clearly anybody not physically able should not be doing a physically demanding job. But the fact remains that 60 isn't that old any more. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The FB do a good JOB but that's all it is look at the facts more roofers have died in the last 10 years than fire fighters are they heros ?
Again working longer is a fact of life we are all living longer so should have to work longer the questions about fitness ect are irrelevant as the same goes for any career if your not capable you get let go.
In my ideal world all emergency services/public sector workers/military would go on strike and get the firemen to cover them for a change with no extra pay little training and on there days off.
In response to the op strippers should retire early and managers should never Be under 30
Yes it is a job, no one mentioned 'hero's' at all so why chuck that in..?
on the safety issue, any person who goes to work and doesn't come home is a tragedy for their family, friends and colleagues..
not sure what point you are trying to make about roofers, surely all industries should work to the highest safety standards which the UK fire service do..
whats possibly wrong with that..?
just to clarify, you are happy to be paying 14% of your monthly wage into a pension fund for a term of 40 years but after 30 years you develop a life changing illness and then you think 'ok i'm happy to be told goodbye, we will give you what you accrued in 17 yrs time'..?
if that's the case crack on but don't be surprised if others are not prepared to roll over and be shafted without standing up for themselves and their families.."
I used Roofers as a random example because people keep making comments about how the fire service deserve so much because of the risk but in all honesty it's not as dangerous as a lot of more pedestrian jobs.
Yes it's shit what's going on with their pension but its the same across the board we are all taking hits. So should the whole country go on strike ?
As I've said in numerous posts on this subject they are an emergency service the choose to do that job. They should never go on strike. If they don't like it find another job |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
I used Roofers as a random example because people keep making comments about how the fire service deserve so much because of the risk but in all honesty it's not as dangerous as a lot of more pedestrian jobs.
Yes it's shit what's going on with their pension but its the same across the board we are all taking hits. So should the whole country go on strike ?
As I've said in numerous posts on this subject they are an emergency service the choose to do that job. They should never go on strike. If they don't like it find another job "
its only not as dangerous as tbh it has a strong Union who have for decades pushed for better kit, policies and procedures which benefit both the industry and the community it serves..
yes that costs money and time and therein lies the issue with other industries where corners are cut, people are 'blacklisted' who raise safety concerns..
an individuals life is more important than the profit page on a yearly accounts report, maybe i'm old fashioned in believing that..
the service for years of growth like other public sector jobs has been lower paid but with job security, in the good time blokes earning big money don't want to work unsociable hours etc for less than they can on the lump..
times have as you say changed, yes they have taken a hit with pay freezes, increased pension contributions etc maybe less than some and more than others..
on the no strike will disagree, even the Police Federation recently only just lost a vote on their members wanting the right to strike..
no worker should be a wage slave.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"On top of this, they are bringing in a new scheme, that if Firefighters don't meet their fitness standards at 50-60, they can dismiss them and keep ALL their pension until they are 67. .
So what's the problem?..
If you're not fit enough your getting dismissed on full pension.
I'm reading that as a win-win for the firefighters and I the general public are safe too. Because that guarantees thatvthe upper age fighter turning up to the fire is fit.
Obviously I don't wanna get dragged into a debate here but as that is straight from the horses mouth I don't see the issue.
I read it as the government keep their pension until they're 67, seven years without a pension is a long time!
Fair point.
Anyway stop debating me or I'll pull your hair again! "
That's what I wad hoping |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"On top of this, they are bringing in a new scheme, that if Firefighters don't meet their fitness standards at 50-60, they can dismiss them and keep ALL their pension until they are 67. .
So what's the problem?..
If you're not fit enough your getting dismissed on full pension.
I'm reading that as a win-win for the firefighters and I the general public are safe too. Because that guarantees thatvthe upper age fighter turning up to the fire is fit.
Obviously I don't wanna get dragged into a debate here but as that is straight from the horses mouth I don't see the issue.
the proposed dismissal is under medical capability hence pension frozen at whatever point the decision is made..
that may not happen at 59 and 'only be a Cpl of years', it may happen at 50 so the individual will have paid in for 30 years develop a disease or injury and be dumped..
that's wrong..
on the fitness the Governments own evidence is that about a third of personnel will not pass the 3 yearly medical, the Unions own figures are higher..
however both are based on the starting point that when the individual joins they are in the top 10% of fitness within the country..
that wont happen..
"
In regards to "fitness" criteria and if the government dont want to pay out pensions early.....i presume they will be using "atos" to assess those firefighters who need medicals
god help them |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I honestly cannot believe some of the mind numbingly ridiculous comments posted on this thread
Comparing roofers to firefighters
If roofers, like all industry, followed well planned risk assessments and method statements then there shouldn't be any deaths, the same cannot be said for firefighters.
As for a roofer to be hailed a hero because they don't follow proper RAMS and hence a few die while Firefighters can die trying to save other peoples lives.
Saying a Firefighter shouldn't be classed as a hero or not to be idolized and it's just a role, a job, same thing can be said about the Armed Forces then.
A Firefighter carries your family out of an inferno alive... a roofer fixing a leaky roof... I know who I'd "idolize" 
Bankers bonuses, god, don't get me started.... A Bankers bonus is paid by the bank not YOU... Yes some banks got a bailout in the shape of the Government buying a share of the bank but in time they will probably be paid back one way or another.
Bankers are highly trained people, they got where they are because their good at what they do and if people are so jealous of bankers pay and bonuses then they should have trained in the financial sector and got a job as one and stop bitching because they didn't \ couldn't.
Yes some bankers ended up losing a lot of money, but they've probably gained more over their time previously contributing to the Countries GDP for decades... but moaners don't want to think about that do they.
People in general who bitch and moan because someone somewhere else is earning more than them and getting a better pension than them.... well wakey wakey, you should have put the effort in and trained and got one of those better jobs when you left school and you wouldn't be moaning now
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I honestly cannot believe some of the mind numbingly ridiculous comments posted on this thread
Comparing roofers to firefighters
If roofers, like all industry, followed well planned risk assessments and method statements then there shouldn't be any deaths, the same cannot be said for firefighters.
As for a roofer to be hailed a hero because they don't follow proper RAMS and hence a few die while Firefighters can die trying to save other peoples lives.
Saying a Firefighter shouldn't be classed as a hero or not to be idolized and it's just a role, a job, same thing can be said about the Armed Forces then.
A Firefighter carries your family out of an inferno alive... a roofer fixing a leaky roof... I know who I'd "idolize"
Bankers bonuses, god, don't get me started.... A Bankers bonus is paid by the bank not YOU... Yes some banks got a bailout in the shape of the Government buying a share of the bank but in time they will probably be paid back one way or another.
Bankers are highly trained people, they got where they are because their good at what they do and if people are so jealous of bankers pay and bonuses then they should have trained in the financial sector and got a job as one and stop bitching because they didn't \ couldn't.
Yes some bankers ended up losing a lot of money, but they've probably gained more over their time previously contributing to the Countries GDP for decades... but moaners don't want to think about that do they.
People in general who bitch and moan because someone somewhere else is earning more than them and getting a better pension than them.... well wakey wakey, you should have put the effort in and trained and got one of those better jobs when you left school and you wouldn't be moaning now
"
First and foremost I used roofers as a random example as previously stated and never did I mention that these death had anything to do with not following rules accidents happen.
I also say that members of the armed forces are not heroes because of their job. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
never did I mention that these death had anything to do with not following rules accidents happen.
"
The HSE don't see it like that, in the world of Health & Safety accidents don't just happen, there's always a reason\cause that could of been avoided.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Definition of hero:
a person, typically a man, who is admired for their courage, outstanding achievements, or noble qualities
In my opinion that covers firefighters |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
A hero is an everyday person that does something extraordinary, such as the dinner lady walking home from work who runs into a burning building to save some one not somebody who gets paid to do so |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
never did I mention that these death had anything to do with not following rules accidents happen.
The HSE don't see it like that, in the world of Health & Safety accidents don't just happen, there's always a reason\cause that could of been avoided.
"
Ok so for eg a soldier getting shot who has carried out all the drills he has been taught or a police officer who gets killed in the line of duty this can be avoided ??? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ofakindCouple
over a year ago
Running with Monkeys |
"
In response to the op strippers should retire early and managers should never Be under 30 "
Why shouldn't managers be under 30? I'm a director aged 25... My company was started when I was 23, and I keep around 60/70 people in jobs in 18 different outlets |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
never did I mention that these death had anything to do with not following rules accidents happen.
The HSE don't see it like that, in the world of Health & Safety accidents don't just happen, there's always a reason\cause that could of been avoided.
Ok so for eg a soldier getting shot who has carried out all the drills he has been taught or a police officer who gets killed in the line of duty this can be avoided ???"
yes, people can not carry guns or do things that put people 'doing their job' in dangerous situations.
H&S looks at reducing risk but nothing can eliminate it all together.
i bet even the armed forces will have risk assessments to follow. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
