Fire crews battle through the night to tackle waste firm blaze

Firefighters trying to keep yesterday evening’s blaze at bay

A firefighter swathed in smoke as he tackles the blaze t Averies Recycling at Marshgate

Huge flames visible over the fence of the waste firm at Marshgate as wood, rubber and plastic burns

First published in News
Last updated
The Wiltshire Gazette and Herald: Photograph of the Author by , @Michael_Benke

Firefighters have worked through the night battling a major fire at a recycling plant which sent thick black smoke across the town.

The blaze started shortly before 6pm yesterday evening, in the middle of the last night of the firefighters strike over pay and pensions.

A 1,000 tonne pile of household rubbish caught fire at Averies Recycling near Greenbridge.

As the smoke which could be seen from as far away as Devizes blew across into Walcot, standby crews from Royal Wootton Bassett, Cricklade and Marlborough attended the scene.

When the FBU strike action ended at 7pm as originally intended, they were joined by crews from Stratton as it quickly became apparent the fire was not going to be quickly contained.

No one was hurt in the incident but paramedics were in attendance for the safety of the firefighters as the heat of the day made the blaze harder to tackle.

The police were also at the scene to cordon the site off and to keep people away as the smoke was at ground level.

Fire crews spent the night dousing the fire in water but are expecting to be there until the middle of the week.

The pile of waste included wood, plastic and rubber. A skip lorry and pieces of machinery were also caught up in the blaze.

Acting Inspector Barry Reed, from Wiltshire Police, said: “We have a large fire which the fire brigade are dealing with from a number of different angles, but due to the nature of the event, it is being considered a major incident and we are expecting to be here for several days. 

“At this stage, we haven’t even started looking at the cause, we are just dealing with the incident. We’re not ruling anything out or in.”
Averies Recycling, owned by Lee Averies, deals with large amounts of general waste and is located next to a number of other yards, including one which houses a large quantity of tyres.

As a result, police were preparing to empty the yard of the tyres in case the fire spread to prevent a major environmental incident.

A warning was also issued to the residents of Walcot to take extra care due to the high level of smoke.

A spokesman for Wiltshire Fire and Rescue warned: “Large amounts of black smoke are rising from the site and local people have been advised to keep doors and windows closed if they are concerned about the plume, especially if they have a pre-existing respiratory condition.”

Comments (17)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:10am Tue 22 Jul 14

Blind Fury says...

Firefighters were NOT on strike over pay, just being robbed of pensions they have paid for.....get it right Adver!!
Firefighters were NOT on strike over pay, just being robbed of pensions they have paid for.....get it right Adver!! Blind Fury
  • Score: 4

7:15am Tue 22 Jul 14

swindondad says...

"Firefighters abandoned strike action"

"When the strike action ended at 7pm, they were joined by crews from Stratton"

So which was it did they leave the picket line to fight the fire or wait for 7pm it can't be both.
"Firefighters abandoned strike action" "When the strike action ended at 7pm, they were joined by crews from Stratton" So which was it did they leave the picket line to fight the fire or wait for 7pm it can't be both. swindondad
  • Score: 15

7:38am Tue 22 Jul 14

John~R says...

Blind Fury wrote:
Firefighters were NOT on strike over pay, just being robbed of pensions they have paid for.....get it right Adver!!
Have they actually put enough money into their pension fund to pay for the pensions? If so what is all the fuss about? The books need to be balanced before they retire so that there is no ongoing need for taxpayers to continue subsidising the pensions.
[quote][p][bold]Blind Fury[/bold] wrote: Firefighters were NOT on strike over pay, just being robbed of pensions they have paid for.....get it right Adver!![/p][/quote]Have they actually put enough money into their pension fund to pay for the pensions? If so what is all the fuss about? The books need to be balanced before they retire so that there is no ongoing need for taxpayers to continue subsidising the pensions. John~R
  • Score: 10

7:38am Tue 22 Jul 14

Blind Fury says...

swindondad wrote:
"Firefighters abandoned strike action"

"When the strike action ended at 7pm, they were joined by crews from Stratton"

So which was it did they leave the picket line to fight the fire or wait for 7pm it can't be both.
The industrial action finished at 7pm. The whole time fire crews then went out to the incident. No, they did not abandon the picket line.
Typical Adver inaccurate reporting again!!
[quote][p][bold]swindondad[/bold] wrote: "Firefighters abandoned strike action" "When the strike action ended at 7pm, they were joined by crews from Stratton" So which was it did they leave the picket line to fight the fire or wait for 7pm it can't be both.[/p][/quote]The industrial action finished at 7pm. The whole time fire crews then went out to the incident. No, they did not abandon the picket line. Typical Adver inaccurate reporting again!! Blind Fury
  • Score: 9

7:41am Tue 22 Jul 14

Blind Fury says...

John~R wrote:
Blind Fury wrote:
Firefighters were NOT on strike over pay, just being robbed of pensions they have paid for.....get it right Adver!!
Have they actually put enough money into their pension fund to pay for the pensions? If so what is all the fuss about? The books need to be balanced before they retire so that there is no ongoing need for taxpayers to continue subsidising the pensions.
Yes, their pension is sustainable...the government are just making a point of driving on with their unfounded claims, so as not to look weak and stupid. In the bigger picture, it is pennies to the billions the government squander.....firefig
hters save people, not banks!!
[quote][p][bold]John~R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Blind Fury[/bold] wrote: Firefighters were NOT on strike over pay, just being robbed of pensions they have paid for.....get it right Adver!![/p][/quote]Have they actually put enough money into their pension fund to pay for the pensions? If so what is all the fuss about? The books need to be balanced before they retire so that there is no ongoing need for taxpayers to continue subsidising the pensions.[/p][/quote]Yes, their pension is sustainable...the government are just making a point of driving on with their unfounded claims, so as not to look weak and stupid. In the bigger picture, it is pennies to the billions the government squander.....firefig hters save people, not banks!! Blind Fury
  • Score: 0

8:36am Tue 22 Jul 14

house on the hill says...

Blind Fury wrote:
Firefighters were NOT on strike over pay, just being robbed of pensions they have paid for.....get it right Adver!!
You clearly know nothing about final salary pensions. To provide the same level of pension income you will receive when you retire early you would need to save around 25 - 30% of your salary each month to build that level of pension pot to have a 2/3rds pension from 55 based on current interest rates and life expectancies. So even if you pay in 11% the tax payer is still contributing around 15% extra each year for you on top of what you pay. Employers pension schemes pay in 6% per year. Exactly why is it you think you are so important that you should receive nearly 3 times what others receive?

As for this "it was in my contract" millions of private sector workers had final salary pension schemes when they signed up that no longer exist. When I started work my contract gave me a non contributary final salary scheme, subsidised mortgages and loans, profit sharing, xmas bonus, share options etc. Due to the economic recession that hasnt had any effect on public sector workers, 99% of private sector final salary schemes are closed and most of the millions affected will have to work far longer than they planned for less of a pension.

I am sorry, but I hate this arrogance of the public sector that they see themselves as some sort of special case immune to real world economics expecting the taxpayer to endlessly contribute to their pay and conditions. And as others have said, if you dont like your terms, then do what millions of others have done and find another job, more to another town, learn a new skill and take control of their own lives instead of expecting others to bail you out endlessly.

Sorry no sympathy for anyone who has the option to change but chooses not to because the public sector is finally catching up the the private sector with no pay rises and a cut in terms and conditions.
[quote][p][bold]Blind Fury[/bold] wrote: Firefighters were NOT on strike over pay, just being robbed of pensions they have paid for.....get it right Adver!![/p][/quote]You clearly know nothing about final salary pensions. To provide the same level of pension income you will receive when you retire early you would need to save around 25 - 30% of your salary each month to build that level of pension pot to have a 2/3rds pension from 55 based on current interest rates and life expectancies. So even if you pay in 11% the tax payer is still contributing around 15% extra each year for you on top of what you pay. Employers pension schemes pay in 6% per year. Exactly why is it you think you are so important that you should receive nearly 3 times what others receive? As for this "it was in my contract" millions of private sector workers had final salary pension schemes when they signed up that no longer exist. When I started work my contract gave me a non contributary final salary scheme, subsidised mortgages and loans, profit sharing, xmas bonus, share options etc. Due to the economic recession that hasnt had any effect on public sector workers, 99% of private sector final salary schemes are closed and most of the millions affected will have to work far longer than they planned for less of a pension. I am sorry, but I hate this arrogance of the public sector that they see themselves as some sort of special case immune to real world economics expecting the taxpayer to endlessly contribute to their pay and conditions. And as others have said, if you dont like your terms, then do what millions of others have done and find another job, more to another town, learn a new skill and take control of their own lives instead of expecting others to bail you out endlessly. Sorry no sympathy for anyone who has the option to change but chooses not to because the public sector is finally catching up the the private sector with no pay rises and a cut in terms and conditions. house on the hill
  • Score: 15

9:21am Tue 22 Jul 14

Robh says...

It is a very easy way to get rid of the excess recycling. Isn't it about time we realised there is no longer the demand for recycled material. It was a good idea to recycle but we can never achieve the targets because it is too costly and the markets are flooded out with the stuff.
It is a very easy way to get rid of the excess recycling. Isn't it about time we realised there is no longer the demand for recycled material. It was a good idea to recycle but we can never achieve the targets because it is too costly and the markets are flooded out with the stuff. Robh
  • Score: 7

9:36am Tue 22 Jul 14

Alex English says...

How can potentially paying a person a final salary pension for more years than they actually paid into it ever be remotely sustainable?
How can potentially paying a person a final salary pension for more years than they actually paid into it ever be remotely sustainable? Alex English
  • Score: 8

10:07am Tue 22 Jul 14

adsinibiza says...

house on the hill wrote:
Blind Fury wrote:
Firefighters were NOT on strike over pay, just being robbed of pensions they have paid for.....get it right Adver!!
You clearly know nothing about final salary pensions. To provide the same level of pension income you will receive when you retire early you would need to save around 25 - 30% of your salary each month to build that level of pension pot to have a 2/3rds pension from 55 based on current interest rates and life expectancies. So even if you pay in 11% the tax payer is still contributing around 15% extra each year for you on top of what you pay. Employers pension schemes pay in 6% per year. Exactly why is it you think you are so important that you should receive nearly 3 times what others receive?

As for this "it was in my contract" millions of private sector workers had final salary pension schemes when they signed up that no longer exist. When I started work my contract gave me a non contributary final salary scheme, subsidised mortgages and loans, profit sharing, xmas bonus, share options etc. Due to the economic recession that hasnt had any effect on public sector workers, 99% of private sector final salary schemes are closed and most of the millions affected will have to work far longer than they planned for less of a pension.

I am sorry, but I hate this arrogance of the public sector that they see themselves as some sort of special case immune to real world economics expecting the taxpayer to endlessly contribute to their pay and conditions. And as others have said, if you dont like your terms, then do what millions of others have done and find another job, more to another town, learn a new skill and take control of their own lives instead of expecting others to bail you out endlessly.

Sorry no sympathy for anyone who has the option to change but chooses not to because the public sector is finally catching up the the private sector with no pay rises and a cut in terms and conditions.
I agree fully with your sentiments but would make one correction - the reason why most private sector final salary schemes disappeared has little if anything to do with the recession - they disappeared before that when the last Labour Government conducted a multi-billion pound tax raid on pension funds thereby making final salary schemes no longer financially viable.

Given that the Unions are a major part of the Labour party and their paymasters it is rank hypocrisy that they are now complaining about what is happening to pensions in the public sector.

What makes this worse is that the Unions were silent when Blair and Brown were making this tax raid - perhaps because it was used to fund more public sector jobs!

Had the unions spoken up at that time and stopped Blair and Brown from destroying what was arguably the best pension system in the world myself and others may have a little more sympathy with them and their concerns regarding their pensions now!
[quote][p][bold]house on the hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Blind Fury[/bold] wrote: Firefighters were NOT on strike over pay, just being robbed of pensions they have paid for.....get it right Adver!![/p][/quote]You clearly know nothing about final salary pensions. To provide the same level of pension income you will receive when you retire early you would need to save around 25 - 30% of your salary each month to build that level of pension pot to have a 2/3rds pension from 55 based on current interest rates and life expectancies. So even if you pay in 11% the tax payer is still contributing around 15% extra each year for you on top of what you pay. Employers pension schemes pay in 6% per year. Exactly why is it you think you are so important that you should receive nearly 3 times what others receive? As for this "it was in my contract" millions of private sector workers had final salary pension schemes when they signed up that no longer exist. When I started work my contract gave me a non contributary final salary scheme, subsidised mortgages and loans, profit sharing, xmas bonus, share options etc. Due to the economic recession that hasnt had any effect on public sector workers, 99% of private sector final salary schemes are closed and most of the millions affected will have to work far longer than they planned for less of a pension. I am sorry, but I hate this arrogance of the public sector that they see themselves as some sort of special case immune to real world economics expecting the taxpayer to endlessly contribute to their pay and conditions. And as others have said, if you dont like your terms, then do what millions of others have done and find another job, more to another town, learn a new skill and take control of their own lives instead of expecting others to bail you out endlessly. Sorry no sympathy for anyone who has the option to change but chooses not to because the public sector is finally catching up the the private sector with no pay rises and a cut in terms and conditions.[/p][/quote]I agree fully with your sentiments but would make one correction - the reason why most private sector final salary schemes disappeared has little if anything to do with the recession - they disappeared before that when the last Labour Government conducted a multi-billion pound tax raid on pension funds thereby making final salary schemes no longer financially viable. Given that the Unions are a major part of the Labour party and their paymasters it is rank hypocrisy that they are now complaining about what is happening to pensions in the public sector. What makes this worse is that the Unions were silent when Blair and Brown were making this tax raid - perhaps because it was used to fund more public sector jobs! Had the unions spoken up at that time and stopped Blair and Brown from destroying what was arguably the best pension system in the world myself and others may have a little more sympathy with them and their concerns regarding their pensions now! adsinibiza
  • Score: 8

12:54pm Tue 22 Jul 14

EastleazeRed says...

adsinibiza wrote:
house on the hill wrote:
Blind Fury wrote:
Firefighters were NOT on strike over pay, just being robbed of pensions they have paid for.....get it right Adver!!
You clearly know nothing about final salary pensions. To provide the same level of pension income you will receive when you retire early you would need to save around 25 - 30% of your salary each month to build that level of pension pot to have a 2/3rds pension from 55 based on current interest rates and life expectancies. So even if you pay in 11% the tax payer is still contributing around 15% extra each year for you on top of what you pay. Employers pension schemes pay in 6% per year. Exactly why is it you think you are so important that you should receive nearly 3 times what others receive?

As for this "it was in my contract" millions of private sector workers had final salary pension schemes when they signed up that no longer exist. When I started work my contract gave me a non contributary final salary scheme, subsidised mortgages and loans, profit sharing, xmas bonus, share options etc. Due to the economic recession that hasnt had any effect on public sector workers, 99% of private sector final salary schemes are closed and most of the millions affected will have to work far longer than they planned for less of a pension.

I am sorry, but I hate this arrogance of the public sector that they see themselves as some sort of special case immune to real world economics expecting the taxpayer to endlessly contribute to their pay and conditions. And as others have said, if you dont like your terms, then do what millions of others have done and find another job, more to another town, learn a new skill and take control of their own lives instead of expecting others to bail you out endlessly.

Sorry no sympathy for anyone who has the option to change but chooses not to because the public sector is finally catching up the the private sector with no pay rises and a cut in terms and conditions.
I agree fully with your sentiments but would make one correction - the reason why most private sector final salary schemes disappeared has little if anything to do with the recession - they disappeared before that when the last Labour Government conducted a multi-billion pound tax raid on pension funds thereby making final salary schemes no longer financially viable.

Given that the Unions are a major part of the Labour party and their paymasters it is rank hypocrisy that they are now complaining about what is happening to pensions in the public sector.

What makes this worse is that the Unions were silent when Blair and Brown were making this tax raid - perhaps because it was used to fund more public sector jobs!

Had the unions spoken up at that time and stopped Blair and Brown from destroying what was arguably the best pension system in the world myself and others may have a little more sympathy with them and their concerns regarding their pensions now!
Its not all about attacking there final salary pension schemes , its also about putting the retirement age up to 60 and making them work longer . You ever tried running up 20 flights of stairs with full B.A. on . Most 20:year olds couldn't manage it let alone someone in their 50s.
[quote][p][bold]adsinibiza[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]house on the hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Blind Fury[/bold] wrote: Firefighters were NOT on strike over pay, just being robbed of pensions they have paid for.....get it right Adver!![/p][/quote]You clearly know nothing about final salary pensions. To provide the same level of pension income you will receive when you retire early you would need to save around 25 - 30% of your salary each month to build that level of pension pot to have a 2/3rds pension from 55 based on current interest rates and life expectancies. So even if you pay in 11% the tax payer is still contributing around 15% extra each year for you on top of what you pay. Employers pension schemes pay in 6% per year. Exactly why is it you think you are so important that you should receive nearly 3 times what others receive? As for this "it was in my contract" millions of private sector workers had final salary pension schemes when they signed up that no longer exist. When I started work my contract gave me a non contributary final salary scheme, subsidised mortgages and loans, profit sharing, xmas bonus, share options etc. Due to the economic recession that hasnt had any effect on public sector workers, 99% of private sector final salary schemes are closed and most of the millions affected will have to work far longer than they planned for less of a pension. I am sorry, but I hate this arrogance of the public sector that they see themselves as some sort of special case immune to real world economics expecting the taxpayer to endlessly contribute to their pay and conditions. And as others have said, if you dont like your terms, then do what millions of others have done and find another job, more to another town, learn a new skill and take control of their own lives instead of expecting others to bail you out endlessly. Sorry no sympathy for anyone who has the option to change but chooses not to because the public sector is finally catching up the the private sector with no pay rises and a cut in terms and conditions.[/p][/quote]I agree fully with your sentiments but would make one correction - the reason why most private sector final salary schemes disappeared has little if anything to do with the recession - they disappeared before that when the last Labour Government conducted a multi-billion pound tax raid on pension funds thereby making final salary schemes no longer financially viable. Given that the Unions are a major part of the Labour party and their paymasters it is rank hypocrisy that they are now complaining about what is happening to pensions in the public sector. What makes this worse is that the Unions were silent when Blair and Brown were making this tax raid - perhaps because it was used to fund more public sector jobs! Had the unions spoken up at that time and stopped Blair and Brown from destroying what was arguably the best pension system in the world myself and others may have a little more sympathy with them and their concerns regarding their pensions now![/p][/quote]Its not all about attacking there final salary pension schemes , its also about putting the retirement age up to 60 and making them work longer . You ever tried running up 20 flights of stairs with full B.A. on . Most 20:year olds couldn't manage it let alone someone in their 50s. EastleazeRed
  • Score: 2

1:11pm Tue 22 Jul 14

Grimsbygal says...

I am absolutely astounded at the ignorance of these people commenting. I for one, back 100% firefighters and their decision to strike.
They risk their lives for all of you ignoramuses, which none of you do, sat at your desk, commenting on things you know little about.
They deserve their pensions which they have paid into, they will not even get that if the government have their way, is that fair?
And don't give me any rubbish about the private sector pensions, most of you probably earn more than a firefighter but you don't realise that either.
A firefighter (or any other publice service) is providing a service to your community, rescuing you from a fire,cutting you out of a car, helping you 24 hours a day if required 365 a year. All they ask is for the pension they have signed up for and that the retirement age is not extended to 60. I would not want a 60 year old man/woman rescuing me from a fire. You should all get off your high horses, and all of you stupid people who comment with no idea on the details of the reason behind the stirkes, and hope that one day you don't need their help!
I am absolutely astounded at the ignorance of these people commenting. I for one, back 100% firefighters and their decision to strike. They risk their lives for all of you ignoramuses, which none of you do, sat at your desk, commenting on things you know little about. They deserve their pensions which they have paid into, they will not even get that if the government have their way, is that fair? And don't give me any rubbish about the private sector pensions, most of you probably earn more than a firefighter but you don't realise that either. A firefighter (or any other publice service) is providing a service to your community, rescuing you from a fire,cutting you out of a car, helping you 24 hours a day if required 365 a year. All they ask is for the pension they have signed up for and that the retirement age is not extended to 60. I would not want a 60 year old man/woman rescuing me from a fire. You should all get off your high horses, and all of you stupid people who comment with no idea on the details of the reason behind the stirkes, and hope that one day you don't need their help! Grimsbygal
  • Score: -1

1:17pm Tue 22 Jul 14

M4 Bypass says...

Is this the same Averies that was fined with total costs of £75k last autumn for dust pollution

This fire reminds me of the Cheney Manor fire at Swindon Skips recycling centre last Nov/Dec
Is this the same Averies that was fined with total costs of £75k last autumn for dust pollution This fire reminds me of the Cheney Manor fire at Swindon Skips recycling centre last Nov/Dec M4 Bypass
  • Score: 6

2:01pm Tue 22 Jul 14

Smokin Joe says...

house on the hill wrote:
Blind Fury wrote:
Firefighters were NOT on strike over pay, just being robbed of pensions they have paid for.....get it right Adver!!
You clearly know nothing about final salary pensions. To provide the same level of pension income you will receive when you retire early you would need to save around 25 - 30% of your salary each month to build that level of pension pot to have a 2/3rds pension from 55 based on current interest rates and life expectancies. So even if you pay in 11% the tax payer is still contributing around 15% extra each year for you on top of what you pay. Employers pension schemes pay in 6% per year. Exactly why is it you think you are so important that you should receive nearly 3 times what others receive?

As for this "it was in my contract" millions of private sector workers had final salary pension schemes when they signed up that no longer exist. When I started work my contract gave me a non contributary final salary scheme, subsidised mortgages and loans, profit sharing, xmas bonus, share options etc. Due to the economic recession that hasnt had any effect on public sector workers, 99% of private sector final salary schemes are closed and most of the millions affected will have to work far longer than they planned for less of a pension.

I am sorry, but I hate this arrogance of the public sector that they see themselves as some sort of special case immune to real world economics expecting the taxpayer to endlessly contribute to their pay and conditions. And as others have said, if you dont like your terms, then do what millions of others have done and find another job, more to another town, learn a new skill and take control of their own lives instead of expecting others to bail you out endlessly.

Sorry no sympathy for anyone who has the option to change but chooses not to because the public sector is finally catching up the the private sector with no pay rises and a cut in terms and conditions.
"If you don't like your terms, do what millions of others have done and find another job...."

You've purposely missed out an alternative - fight it. Just because you personally rolled over and accepted all the cuts to your conditions, doesn't mean everyone else has to.

Look, a contract of employment is just that - a contract, an agreement between two parties. A worker agrees to perform certain tasks, come in on time, etc, etc, in exchange for a certain level of pay and perks, ie, a pension. If one side unilaterally decides to change those conditions, (which were agreed when the employee decided to take on the job), then I consider the contract (morally, if not legally) to be broken. In that case the worker should have every right to withdraw their labour - their one bargaining chip in negotiations.

If you entered into a contract to do some work for someone and then during the work they unilaterally decided to change their side of the deal (ie, cut what they were paying you) without negotiation, would you fight it? Or would you say - 'Ok, never mind, I'll just find another job, move to another town, and learn a new skill?' Of course you wouldn't.
[quote][p][bold]house on the hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Blind Fury[/bold] wrote: Firefighters were NOT on strike over pay, just being robbed of pensions they have paid for.....get it right Adver!![/p][/quote]You clearly know nothing about final salary pensions. To provide the same level of pension income you will receive when you retire early you would need to save around 25 - 30% of your salary each month to build that level of pension pot to have a 2/3rds pension from 55 based on current interest rates and life expectancies. So even if you pay in 11% the tax payer is still contributing around 15% extra each year for you on top of what you pay. Employers pension schemes pay in 6% per year. Exactly why is it you think you are so important that you should receive nearly 3 times what others receive? As for this "it was in my contract" millions of private sector workers had final salary pension schemes when they signed up that no longer exist. When I started work my contract gave me a non contributary final salary scheme, subsidised mortgages and loans, profit sharing, xmas bonus, share options etc. Due to the economic recession that hasnt had any effect on public sector workers, 99% of private sector final salary schemes are closed and most of the millions affected will have to work far longer than they planned for less of a pension. I am sorry, but I hate this arrogance of the public sector that they see themselves as some sort of special case immune to real world economics expecting the taxpayer to endlessly contribute to their pay and conditions. And as others have said, if you dont like your terms, then do what millions of others have done and find another job, more to another town, learn a new skill and take control of their own lives instead of expecting others to bail you out endlessly. Sorry no sympathy for anyone who has the option to change but chooses not to because the public sector is finally catching up the the private sector with no pay rises and a cut in terms and conditions.[/p][/quote]"If you don't like your terms, do what millions of others have done and find another job...." You've purposely missed out an alternative - fight it. Just because you personally rolled over and accepted all the cuts to your conditions, doesn't mean everyone else has to. Look, a contract of employment is just that - a contract, an agreement between two parties. A worker agrees to perform certain tasks, come in on time, etc, etc, in exchange for a certain level of pay and perks, ie, a pension. If one side unilaterally decides to change those conditions, (which were agreed when the employee decided to take on the job), then I consider the contract (morally, if not legally) to be broken. In that case the worker should have every right to withdraw their labour - their one bargaining chip in negotiations. If you entered into a contract to do some work for someone and then during the work they unilaterally decided to change their side of the deal (ie, cut what they were paying you) without negotiation, would you fight it? Or would you say - 'Ok, never mind, I'll just find another job, move to another town, and learn a new skill?' Of course you wouldn't. Smokin Joe
  • Score: -1

3:02pm Tue 22 Jul 14

adsinibiza says...

EastleazeRed wrote:
adsinibiza wrote:
house on the hill wrote:
Blind Fury wrote:
Firefighters were NOT on strike over pay, just being robbed of pensions they have paid for.....get it right Adver!!
You clearly know nothing about final salary pensions. To provide the same level of pension income you will receive when you retire early you would need to save around 25 - 30% of your salary each month to build that level of pension pot to have a 2/3rds pension from 55 based on current interest rates and life expectancies. So even if you pay in 11% the tax payer is still contributing around 15% extra each year for you on top of what you pay. Employers pension schemes pay in 6% per year. Exactly why is it you think you are so important that you should receive nearly 3 times what others receive?

As for this "it was in my contract" millions of private sector workers had final salary pension schemes when they signed up that no longer exist. When I started work my contract gave me a non contributary final salary scheme, subsidised mortgages and loans, profit sharing, xmas bonus, share options etc. Due to the economic recession that hasnt had any effect on public sector workers, 99% of private sector final salary schemes are closed and most of the millions affected will have to work far longer than they planned for less of a pension.

I am sorry, but I hate this arrogance of the public sector that they see themselves as some sort of special case immune to real world economics expecting the taxpayer to endlessly contribute to their pay and conditions. And as others have said, if you dont like your terms, then do what millions of others have done and find another job, more to another town, learn a new skill and take control of their own lives instead of expecting others to bail you out endlessly.

Sorry no sympathy for anyone who has the option to change but chooses not to because the public sector is finally catching up the the private sector with no pay rises and a cut in terms and conditions.
I agree fully with your sentiments but would make one correction - the reason why most private sector final salary schemes disappeared has little if anything to do with the recession - they disappeared before that when the last Labour Government conducted a multi-billion pound tax raid on pension funds thereby making final salary schemes no longer financially viable.

Given that the Unions are a major part of the Labour party and their paymasters it is rank hypocrisy that they are now complaining about what is happening to pensions in the public sector.

What makes this worse is that the Unions were silent when Blair and Brown were making this tax raid - perhaps because it was used to fund more public sector jobs!

Had the unions spoken up at that time and stopped Blair and Brown from destroying what was arguably the best pension system in the world myself and others may have a little more sympathy with them and their concerns regarding their pensions now!
Its not all about attacking there final salary pension schemes , its also about putting the retirement age up to 60 and making them work longer . You ever tried running up 20 flights of stairs with full B.A. on . Most 20:year olds couldn't manage it let alone someone in their 50s.
That is a reasonable and fair comment about increasing the retirement age and I do recognise that fire fighters do a dangerous and difficult job and need recognition for that.

However the facts still remains the same - the trade union backed labour government wrecked private sector final salary schemes which will make life much harder for an awful lot of people when they retire - and those same people are the ones who pay taxes to fund public sector final salary pension schemes.

The trade unions stood by and did nothing to stop this from happening.

So yes - make your valid point about retirement age - and I agree that 50 plus is too old to be a fire fighter given the physical demands (or a paramedic for that matter) - but any public sector employee who is a member of a trade union is being hypocritical if they still expect to receive a final salary based pension
[quote][p][bold]EastleazeRed[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]adsinibiza[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]house on the hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Blind Fury[/bold] wrote: Firefighters were NOT on strike over pay, just being robbed of pensions they have paid for.....get it right Adver!![/p][/quote]You clearly know nothing about final salary pensions. To provide the same level of pension income you will receive when you retire early you would need to save around 25 - 30% of your salary each month to build that level of pension pot to have a 2/3rds pension from 55 based on current interest rates and life expectancies. So even if you pay in 11% the tax payer is still contributing around 15% extra each year for you on top of what you pay. Employers pension schemes pay in 6% per year. Exactly why is it you think you are so important that you should receive nearly 3 times what others receive? As for this "it was in my contract" millions of private sector workers had final salary pension schemes when they signed up that no longer exist. When I started work my contract gave me a non contributary final salary scheme, subsidised mortgages and loans, profit sharing, xmas bonus, share options etc. Due to the economic recession that hasnt had any effect on public sector workers, 99% of private sector final salary schemes are closed and most of the millions affected will have to work far longer than they planned for less of a pension. I am sorry, but I hate this arrogance of the public sector that they see themselves as some sort of special case immune to real world economics expecting the taxpayer to endlessly contribute to their pay and conditions. And as others have said, if you dont like your terms, then do what millions of others have done and find another job, more to another town, learn a new skill and take control of their own lives instead of expecting others to bail you out endlessly. Sorry no sympathy for anyone who has the option to change but chooses not to because the public sector is finally catching up the the private sector with no pay rises and a cut in terms and conditions.[/p][/quote]I agree fully with your sentiments but would make one correction - the reason why most private sector final salary schemes disappeared has little if anything to do with the recession - they disappeared before that when the last Labour Government conducted a multi-billion pound tax raid on pension funds thereby making final salary schemes no longer financially viable. Given that the Unions are a major part of the Labour party and their paymasters it is rank hypocrisy that they are now complaining about what is happening to pensions in the public sector. What makes this worse is that the Unions were silent when Blair and Brown were making this tax raid - perhaps because it was used to fund more public sector jobs! Had the unions spoken up at that time and stopped Blair and Brown from destroying what was arguably the best pension system in the world myself and others may have a little more sympathy with them and their concerns regarding their pensions now![/p][/quote]Its not all about attacking there final salary pension schemes , its also about putting the retirement age up to 60 and making them work longer . You ever tried running up 20 flights of stairs with full B.A. on . Most 20:year olds couldn't manage it let alone someone in their 50s.[/p][/quote]That is a reasonable and fair comment about increasing the retirement age and I do recognise that fire fighters do a dangerous and difficult job and need recognition for that. However the facts still remains the same - the trade union backed labour government wrecked private sector final salary schemes which will make life much harder for an awful lot of people when they retire - and those same people are the ones who pay taxes to fund public sector final salary pension schemes. The trade unions stood by and did nothing to stop this from happening. So yes - make your valid point about retirement age - and I agree that 50 plus is too old to be a fire fighter given the physical demands (or a paramedic for that matter) - but any public sector employee who is a member of a trade union is being hypocritical if they still expect to receive a final salary based pension adsinibiza
  • Score: 0

3:17pm Tue 22 Jul 14

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man says...

Grimsbygal wrote:
I am absolutely astounded at the ignorance of these people commenting. I for one, back 100% firefighters and their decision to strike.
They risk their lives for all of you ignoramuses, which none of you do, sat at your desk, commenting on things you know little about.
They deserve their pensions which they have paid into, they will not even get that if the government have their way, is that fair?
And don't give me any rubbish about the private sector pensions, most of you probably earn more than a firefighter but you don't realise that either.
A firefighter (or any other publice service) is providing a service to your community, rescuing you from a fire,cutting you out of a car, helping you 24 hours a day if required 365 a year. All they ask is for the pension they have signed up for and that the retirement age is not extended to 60. I would not want a 60 year old man/woman rescuing me from a fire. You should all get off your high horses, and all of you stupid people who comment with no idea on the details of the reason behind the stirkes, and hope that one day you don't need their help!
Just because someone disagrees with your opinion does not make them an "ignoramus". In fact with the many assumptions you have written here, you could in fact be labelled the same way.

1) They haven't paid enough into their pensions. Therefore they are heavily subsidised by the tax payer. How is that fair?
2) Of course they deserve their pensions. Everyone that has paid into one does. That does not mean the terms and conditions of the contract cannot change, it happens to everyone from time to time and there is usually provision in the contract for that. If contracts could not change you would never get a pay raise.
3) Firefighters earn significantly more than the national average wage, so "most of us earning more than a firefighter" is a complete fallacy.
4) "All they ask"? - They have a pension that is under funded as people live longer and fitter than ever before. Perhaps if there was any evidence that the firefighter life expectancy was worse than anyone else you might have a point.
5) A 60 year old would not be rescuing me from a fire. The proposal is to retire at 60 - still some 8-10 years short of when most other people will be able to do so. Do you also think brickies, fishermen, steel workers and all manner of other jobs that are just as physically demanding should be able to retire earlier at the tax payers expense too?
[quote][p][bold]Grimsbygal[/bold] wrote: I am absolutely astounded at the ignorance of these people commenting. I for one, back 100% firefighters and their decision to strike. They risk their lives for all of you ignoramuses, which none of you do, sat at your desk, commenting on things you know little about. They deserve their pensions which they have paid into, they will not even get that if the government have their way, is that fair? And don't give me any rubbish about the private sector pensions, most of you probably earn more than a firefighter but you don't realise that either. A firefighter (or any other publice service) is providing a service to your community, rescuing you from a fire,cutting you out of a car, helping you 24 hours a day if required 365 a year. All they ask is for the pension they have signed up for and that the retirement age is not extended to 60. I would not want a 60 year old man/woman rescuing me from a fire. You should all get off your high horses, and all of you stupid people who comment with no idea on the details of the reason behind the stirkes, and hope that one day you don't need their help![/p][/quote]Just because someone disagrees with your opinion does not make them an "ignoramus". In fact with the many assumptions you have written here, you could in fact be labelled the same way. 1) They haven't paid enough into their pensions. Therefore they are heavily subsidised by the tax payer. How is that fair? 2) Of course they deserve their pensions. Everyone that has paid into one does. That does not mean the terms and conditions of the contract cannot change, it happens to everyone from time to time and there is usually provision in the contract for that. If contracts could not change you would never get a pay raise. 3) Firefighters earn significantly more than the national average wage, so "most of us earning more than a firefighter" is a complete fallacy. 4) "All they ask"? - They have a pension that is under funded as people live longer and fitter than ever before. Perhaps if there was any evidence that the firefighter life expectancy was worse than anyone else you might have a point. 5) A 60 year old would not be rescuing me from a fire. The proposal is to retire at 60 - still some 8-10 years short of when most other people will be able to do so. Do you also think brickies, fishermen, steel workers and all manner of other jobs that are just as physically demanding should be able to retire earlier at the tax payers expense too? The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man
  • Score: 2

4:56pm Tue 22 Jul 14

Localboy86 says...

Fire fighters do not have ratings applied to their life insurance where say fishermen do, does that entitle fishermen to have state funded final salary pensions because their job is clearly more dangerous?
Fire fighters do not have ratings applied to their life insurance where say fishermen do, does that entitle fishermen to have state funded final salary pensions because their job is clearly more dangerous? Localboy86
  • Score: 2

9:51pm Tue 22 Jul 14

Robh says...

Why don't they put the recyclable waste into a land fill site then set light to it? We seem to have thousands of tons of recycling waste stored above ground because of the land fill tax .


Bugger Europe put it in the ground and burn it.
Why don't they put the recyclable waste into a land fill site then set light to it? We seem to have thousands of tons of recycling waste stored above ground because of the land fill tax . Bugger Europe put it in the ground and burn it. Robh
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree