New independent pensions report for firefighters

Matt Wrack, FBU general secretary said: “As part of our campaign to defend firefighter pensions the union has been building up solid arguments and evidence so that we can put forward a challenge to the case put by government against us. It is therefore with great pleasure that I commend this independent report to you. The authors, Tony Cutler and Barbara Waine, have already written some excellent papers on pensions – most recently on the Hutton report.

“The FBU believes that the report should be widely read and the arguments in this paper should be discussed by all stakeholders in the fire and rescue service. I hope that this document which broadly supports the arguments put forward by the union also helps to raise the level of discussions on pensions.”

Election of B&EMM National Secretary

CIRCULAR 2011HOCO475MW
29th September 2011
TO: ALL MEMBERS

C.c. Executive Council Members
Regional & Brigade Officials
B&EMM National Committee

Dear Brother/Sister,

I am pleased to inform you that the only other candidate having declined to accept nomination, Sister Carole Brown has been elected unopposed to the above position.

Best wishes.

Yours fraternally,

MATT WRACK
General Secretary
MW/PW/JW

Hands off our pensions’: FBU’s initial submission results in an invitation to meet the clg fire minister

CIRCULAR 2011HOC0465MW
23 September 2011
TO: ALL MEMBERS

Dear Brother/Sister

The Executive Council met last week and discussed the ongoing ‘Hands Off Our Pensions’ campaign. Since our last discussion:

• There has been a move to scheme specific talks in relation to each public sector pensions scheme;
• The Union has registered trade dispute letters covering all parts of the UK;
• The union has submitted initial comments to Ministers and civil servants covering Fire Service pensions in England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales;
• The TUC has called a day of action for 30 November;
• The Union has received an invitation from the CLG Fire Minister for detailed discussions around the various areas of concern we have raised in relation to our pensions;
• The Scottish Government has announced its intention to introduce the proposed pension contribution increases for the NHS, teachers, police and fire schemes in Scotland.

Scheme specific talks

Central discussions continue between a team from the TUC and the Westminster Ministers leading on this issue for Government. These discussions are intended to address issues of broad principle. It was recently agreed through the TUC, that scheme specific talks should also be set up i.e. talks for each individual pension scheme. The FBU did not support this move since core issues of principle had not been resolved in the central discussions (e.g. the shift from RPI to CPI; increasing retirement age; contribution rate increases etc.). However, once this decision (to enter scheme specific talks) had been made the FBU has proceeded to prepare a detailed and thorough case on all the issues as they affect the schemes for FBU members.

As previously reported, the Union registered trade disputes in all parts of the UK on 14 September. Following this step, a brief outline of our key arguments was presented to each relevant Minister in all parts of the UK. As a result of this the CLG Fire Minister (covering England) has invited the Union to make further presentations and has agreed to meet to discuss our various concerns. In this letter Bob Neill acknowledged that the Union had obtained a range of expert advice which will require thorough discussion. We hope and expect that similar discussions will be set up with the Ministers and their advisors elsewhere.

Steps have been taken to arrange initial meetings which will supplement those already arranged as the issue continues to be treated with the utmost importance and the Union remains committed to defending Fire Service pensions.

Continue to prepare for action

The TUC call for action on the 30 November recognises that this will take various forms, from strike action in some cases to demonstrations, rallies and protest meetings – depending on the circumstances within each sector and each Union. The Executive Council affirmed that the FBU will take part in these various events and will discuss the details of this at subsequent meetings. We are liaising closely with officials in other trade unions about all these developments.

It is import at to note that despite the CLG Fire Minister’s welcome offer to meet and discuss there has been no indication that the Westminster Government will deviate from its plans or its timeframe of imposing an employee contribution increase from April 2012 and closing all schemes and replacing them with inferior ones by April 2015 – our campaign continues.

Scotland

Members should note that on 21 September the Scottish Finance Secretary, John Swinney, made a statement to the Scottish Parliament covering issues of public spending. In this he set out the Scottish Government’s intention to introduce the proposed contribution increases to public sector workers in the NHS, teachers, police and fire pension schemes.

This is clearly disappointing. The FBU believes that the Scottish Government did have – and continues to have – a clear choice to address these issues differently from Westminster but has so far chosen not to do so.

This re-confirms our position agreed at Annual Conference. We are fighting a UK-wide campaign to defend the pensions of all our members, whichever part of the UK they work in. Despite our preparations for industrial action we hope that we can engage with Ministers and civil servants in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. We are extremely confident that our arguments and evidence are robust and will hold up to scrutiny.

In the light of all of the above it is essential that Branches continue the consultation with members and maintain all the preparations for national strike action.

Further updates will be given as more information becomes available through circulars, bulletins, magazines and via the FBU website www.fbu.org.uk but it is essential that members also make every effort to attend Branch meetings to discuss this issue and to vote on the model resolution.

Best wishes.

Yours fraternally,

MATT WRACK
GENERAL SECRETARY

Pensions: Employers proposals to Government for savings from Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS)

CIRCULAR 2011HOC0466MW
23 September 2011
TO: ALL MEMBERS (CONTROL)

Dear Brother/Sister

On Friday 23 September 2011 we attended the latest meeting of the Trade Unions who represent members in the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) – which applies to FBU members in Emergency Fire Controls.

This was one of a regular series of meetings where Unions meet to give and receive updates and to discuss coordinated campaigning. The main focus of this meeting however was to discuss the latest position in relation to discussions with LGPS Employers and Government on the proposed attacks on our pensions.

Members will be aware that the LGPS has been separated somewhat from the main talks on contribution increases primarily because of the fact that it is a funded scheme. Talks on contributions have been ongoing although to-date there has been no discussion on the second part of the proposals i.e. the Hutton proposals from April 2015.

A report was given from a meeting between the Local Government Group (LGG) and Union representatives on 9 September 2011 where the LGG gave a commitment to maintaining the scheme and attempting to prevent opt outs but reiterated the position of making the £900million savings between 2012 and 2014. They put this position on behalf of Local Government Employers in England and Wales.

The Treasury had previously indicated that alternative proposals to an increase in contributions may be considered but reiterated that they would still have to deliver the £900 million savings over the same timeframe.

At a further meeting on 21 September the LGG presented a number of alternative proposals for the Employee’s side to consider. It is important to note that these proposals are from the Employers group only at this point and that they had not been submitted to officials from the Department for Communities and Local Government (CLG) or HM Treasury. The Employers cannot amend any rules of the scheme so these proposals would not have any standing without approval from CLG and/or the Treasury.

Employers’ proposals for savings

The proposals are covered in detail in a letter to the Secretary of State by the Chair of the Employers group dated 21 September 2011 along with the associated paperwork.

In summary the proposal is in 3 stages;

1. Increase retirement age from 65 to 66 from 1 April 2014 – this would be for all future service and would impact on the rule of 85 people by also extending the working life by one year. The Employers state that this would generate £330 million.
2. Increase contribution rates on 1 April 2014 by 2-2.5% for earners over £21,000. Employees earning less than £15,000 will see no increase and those earning between £15,000-21,000 will see a 1.5% increase. The Employers state that this would generate £605 million.
3. From 1 April 2014 employees earning below £15,000 will retain an accrual of 60ths while those earning above this amount will have a worse accrual of 68ths. A certain amount of flexibility is proposed whereby those earning below £15,000 can reduce their contribution rate by opting for the worse accrual rate of 68ths while those earning above £15,000 can retain the accrual rate of 60ths by upping contribution rates.

In addition to these three main proposals consideration would be given to changing the vesting period (the period before a member is entitled to benefits from the scheme rather than re-payment of contributions) from three months to two years and to changing the actuarial reduction applied for early leavers.

(For these proposals the LGG have assumed total salary costs of £30billion).

It must be stressed that these proposals are all intended to raise the £900 million between 2012-14 and would not impact on the Hutton proposals for a new scheme being introduced by April 2015. It would however mean that there would be no changes until 1 April 2014.

The Trade Unions present on 23 September agreed that it would be advisable to await a reaction to the letter before giving any view on any of the proposals as the status of the proposals is unclear at this time.

The group also agreed to produce a further joint Union’s bulletin and to write again to the Treasury highlighting that, despite their insistence to the contrary, past savings must be considered in relation to any savings target.

Scotland and Northern Ireland

It is important to note that these proposals would not affect Scotland or Northern Ireland who have devolved powers on pension issues and as such would require separate consultation processes.

To-date there has been no decision made in Northern Ireland but in Scotland the Finance Secretary John Swinney said in a statement to Scottish Parliament on Wednesday September 21 2011 as follows (our emphasis):

We believe the UK Government is taking the wrong course of action and we re-iterate our call for them to change direction. Should the UK Government refuse to change its position, the Scottish Government will have no choice but to apply the increases in Employee Pension Contributions for NHS, teachers, police and fire schemes in Scotland. We will put in place protection for the low paid and we will leave decision making on the Local Government Pension Scheme to those who manage that Scheme. We will not impose on Local Government in Scotland what the UK Government has imposed on us.

The developing position in relation to pensions is complex. It is further complicated by the impact of devolution on the discussions and on the process of decision making. Members will be provided with as much information as possible in order to ensure an informed debate on these developments.

All members are advised to attend Branch meetings to hear the latest developments on these issues and are urged to support the call for all members to prepare for industrial action should it become necessary.

Best wishes.

MATT WRACK
GENERAL SECRETARY

FBU Raise Concerns About Secretive Fire Authority Meeting

MEDIA RELEASE
22 September 2011

The Fire Brigades Union in Berkshire has expressed concerns about the increased range of Royal Berkshire Fire Authority business that is being conducted behind closed doors.

At a meeting of the Fire Authority Management Committee on the 19^th September the FBU questioned why several issues of public interest were subject to the exclusion of the public.

Among the issues dealt with in Part 2 of the meeting, which excludes the public, were:

• Agenda item 18 – Resilience – verbal update from the Chief Officer
• Agenda item 19 – The sale of Cookham fire station
• Agenda item 21 – RBFRS Restructure
• Agenda item 22 – Windsor crewing options – a”Local Fire Engine”. 

Berkshire FBU chair, Maurice Whyte, said ‘We appear to be entering a regime of secrecy, which greatly concerns the FBU – the fire service is a public service and should be held publicly accountable. Any restructure of the Brigade will inevitably alter the way it functions and the public have a right to know how this will affect them. ’

He added ‘The people of Cookham deserve to know what is happening with the sale of their fire station and what impact this will have on their community. The people of Windsor deserve to know the nature of their fire service provision. In particular, Royal Berkshire Fire Authority should inform them of its ongoing discussions with councilors in the Royal Borough. Windsor already has a local fire engine and the FBU feels that the public should be consulted if this is going change in any way’.

***ENDS***

Media contacts:

Maurice Whyte – Brigade Chair – 07917 065867            

Mark Stollery – Brigade Secretary - 07917 065868                  

Paul Watts – Brigade Organiser – 07917 065869                   

Link to full Agenda of the meeting: http://library.rbfrs.co.uk/public_agendas/ai0lab00.doc

Election of CSNC National Secretary

CIRCULAR 2011HOC0456MW                                                         
22^nd September 2011 
TO: ALL MEMBERS

Dear Brother/Sister,

I wish to advise you, in accordance with the Rules of the Union, that the Executive Council has decided to conduct an election for the position of Control Staff National Committee Secretary.

The current holder of the post, Sister Sue Offland, is eligible for re-election.

Nomination forms will be dispatched by Head Office to All Brigade Committees in the near future.

Best wishes.

Yours fraternally,

MATT WRACK
General Secretary
MW/PW/JW

Prescott should take the blame for FiReControl failure, not firefighters

MEDIA RELEASE

The Fire Brigades Union has dismissed John Prescott’s remarks on Radio 4 this morning, blaming firefighters and civil servants for the failure of the FiReControl project. Matt Wrack, FBU general secretary said: “Only a minister who doesn’t know what’s going on blames others. Prescott has no excuse. He was told by the FBU, among others. He was clearly not doing his job properly.

“Instead of accepting his own central role in authoring and driving this disastrous project, he prefers to blame those who work in the service and pass the buck.

“The central failing of FiReControl was political. Prescott was the prime mover and the Secretary of State who could have ended the project at any point. The FBU was the only organisation to have warned from the beginning that the project was flawed.

“Certainly senior civil servants did continue to implement the project when they knew it was failing. Certainly, the private technology providers ripped off the public purse, as did the owners of the PFI-financed control rooms. But Prescott ignored our warnings.

“Now the current government is making the same mistake. It is closing control rooms, seeking to privatise the fire service and cutting firefighter jobs. It needs to learn the same lesson – stop these attacks and listen to the professional voice of the fire and rescue service – the FBU.”

***ENDS***

Contact:

FBU communications 0208 541 1765

Notes

FBU press release, 4 January 2005 – “This dangerous plan will axe all our excellent command and control centres and be a financial burden on the fire service and council tax payers for years to come. It’s expensive, it’s risky, it won’t save a single life and could end in total failure.”

FBU press release, 11 October 2005 – “This Project has lost all credibility within the fire service. Everyone else knows this Project is already a disaster but the Government wants to plough on regardless.”

The FBU gave evidence to the CLG Select Committee, to civil servants and to ministers directly over the eight years of the project.

Day of Action Announced Over Public Service Pensions

Follow the link bellow for further information

http://strongerunions.org/2011/09/14/day-of-action-announced-over-public-service-pensions/

Berkshire Circular: Contingency Contract letter – Retained update

BERKSHIRE CIRCULAR
August 2011

Dear FBU member,

In informal discussions with your FBU brigade officials, Royal Berkshire Fire and Rescue Service (RBFRS) announced its intention to write to all operational staff. It intends to issue a letter that may request that you indicate your availability to work during certain events affecting brigade resilience, such as industrial action. However, it is possible that the request may not specifically mention industrial action, but will instead be shrouded in other terminology, such as asking for your willingness to respond to civil contingencies like spate conditions or pandemic flu. Please be aware that you are under no obligation to respond to this letter and that if you do respond in the affirmative, you may be entering into a legally-binding contract with RBFRS.

It is likely that the letter will state that RBFRS is looking to ensure its business continuity and that the Fire Authority is seeking to comply with its statutory obligations. The FBU fully supports contingency planning for emergency incidents, such as large-scale flooding or terrorist attacks, and has actively campaigned for increased resources to respond to these incidents. However, apart from its general obligation to provide a fire and rescue service, it should be noted that RBFRS is under no statutory obligation to devise business continuity plans specifically for industrial action.

At present the FBU has not seen the letter that RBFRS may send to its staff. Nevertheless, your union believes that the letter will inevitably lack sufficient information to allow you to make an informed decision. We would advise you to read all FBU literature on the issue and to attend branch meetings to discuss the matter with your fellow members and representatives. It is important to recognize that by entering into a contingency contract you may be agreeing to work during an industrial dispute. The FBU would expect ALL members to abide by any democratic ballot for industrial action. Please be assured that such a ballot would only occur following a complete breakdown of communication between RBFRS and the FBU or due to irreconcilable differences over a specific issue.

Your union is concerned that if RBFRS does issue the letter, it will subject FBU members to an unacceptable, unnecessary and unjustified amount of direct organizational pressure. There is also the danger that, in presenting the letter to its employees, RBFRS will seek to undermine the ability of your FBU brigade officials to negotiate a satisfactory outcome on your behalf. Indeed, the letter and subsequent continuity plan may perversely make industrial action more likely. We would stress that the FBU will always strive to reach a negotiated settlement with RBFRS, but believe that such a letter will hinder that process in the event of industrial unrest.

The Fire Brigades Union would remind members that you are under no obligation to respond to the proposed RBFRS letter.

The Fire Brigades Union has campaigned actively on your behalf, both nationally and locally, and can only continue to do so with your support.

Nationally, Royal Berkshire Fire Authority (RBFA) was one of the two fire authorities that the FBU took to court to win you pay parity with your Whole-time colleagues – your employer did not want you to have this money or to receive benefits which are equivalent to those RBFA offers to its Whole-time employees. The FBU has consistently argued that a fire-fighter is a fire-fighter and that the type of duty system worked is irrelevant. The result of the union’s hard-won victory was the Part-time Workers Settlement. This saw all fire-fighters at last operate under the same national terms and conditions of employment. However, the FBU is still pursuing the compensation owed to you. It believes that many more fire-fighters are eligible for this award than have been put forward by their employers. As a result, there has been a delay in payment of the compensation while Popularis checks all relevant records.

As part of the same successful campaign, the FBU also won you access to the Modified Pension Scheme. It is therefore frustrating that the Government has so far failed to bring the scheme into being. As a result, your union has, advised the Government that the FBU will pursue a further legal challenge, if necessary, to secure its members’ pension rights.

It is important to note that, throughout the FBUs 10 year campaign to win you parity with your Whole-time colleagues, both the national employers and Government have sought to deny you part-time worker status or to allow you access to the Firefighters’ Pension Scheme. Your continued support is therefore essential to realize these gains.

Locally, your union has worked very hard to make your voice heard. It has represented you on every IRMP project that involves the RDS and engages with management and the Fire Authority on your behalf. For instance, the FBU has requested greater flexibility in the Dual Contract Policy in a bid to improve appliance availability, and is at present in negotiations on this policy. It has also argued strenuously against the implementation of the Low Risk Incidents Policy. We secured concessions prior to this policy ‘going live’ and will continue to lobby for its repeal. Your support in this campaign has so far been outstanding, but we shall require more of the same in the months ahead. If you have not done so already, the FBU is urging you to become active and stay active. Let your brigade officials know how the brigade’s management is affecting you. Come to FBU meetings. Attend its lobbies.

Despite its warm words, recent years have seen RBFRS attack the Retained establishment. Sometimes these attacks have been centred solely on the RDS, such as the closure of stations (actual and proposed) and detrimental changes to turn-out times. Sometimes they involve both our Retained and Whole-time members, such as the AFA call challenge policy and altered PDAs to road traffic collisions. The effect of these attacks is to play one group off against another – whether this is Retained against Whole-time or, as with the Low Risk Incidents Policy, the RDS at one end of the County against their fellow RDS at the other. We can only defeat these attacks if we stand together. Please bear this in mind if RBFRS sends you its proposed letter.

The Fire Brigades Union would remind members that you are under no obligation to respond to the proposed RBFRS letter.

Yours in unity,

Mark Stollery (Brigade Secretary)                        

Maurice Whyte (Brigade Chair)          

Paul Watts (Brigade Organiser)

Berkshire Circular: Contingency Contract letter – Wholetime update

BERKSHIRE CIRCULAR
August 2011

Dear FBU member,

In informal discussions with your FBU brigade officials, Royal Berkshire Fire and Rescue Service (RBFRS) announced its intention to write to all operational staff. It intends to issue a letter that may request that you indicate your availability to work during certain events affecting brigade resilience, such as industrial action. However, it is possible that the request may not specifically mention industrial action, but will instead be shrouded in other terminology, such as asking for your willingness to respond to civil contingencies like spate conditions or pandemic flu. Please be aware that you are under no obligation to respond to this letter and that if you do respond in the affirmative, you may be entering into a legally-binding contract with RBFRS.

It is likely that the letter will state that RBFRS is looking to ensure its business continuity and that the Fire Authority is seeking to comply with its statutory obligations. The FBU fully supports contingency planning for emergency incidents, such as large-scale flooding or terrorist attacks, and has actively campaigned for increased resources to respond to these incidents. However, apart from its general obligation to provide a fire and rescue service, it should be noted that RBFRS is under no statutory obligation to devise business continuity plans specifically for industrial action.

At present the FBU has not seen the letter that RBFRS may send to its staff. Nevertheless, your union believes that the letter will inevitably lack sufficient information to allow you to make an informed decision. We would advise you to read all FBU literature on the issue and to attend branch meetings to discuss the matter with your fellow members and representatives. It is important to recognize that by entering into a contingency contract you may be agreeing to work during an industrial dispute. The FBU would expect ALL members to abide by any democratic ballot for industrial action. Please be assured that such a ballot would only occur following a complete breakdown of communication between RBFRS and the FBU or due to irreconcilable differences over a specific issue.

Your union is concerned that if RBFRS does issue the letter, it will subject FBU members to an unacceptable, unnecessary and unjustified amount of direct organizational pressure. There is also the danger that, in presenting the letter to its employees, RBFRS will seek to undermine the ability of your FBU brigade officials to negotiate a satisfactory outcome on your behalf. Indeed, the letter and subsequent continuity plan may perversely make industrial action more likely. We would stress that the FBU will always strive to reach a negotiated settlement with RBFRS, but believe that such a letter will hinder that process in the event of industrial unrest.

The Fire Brigades Union would remind members that you are under no obligation to respond to the proposed RBFRS letter.

The Fire Brigades Union has campaigned actively on your behalf, both nationally and locally, and can only continue to do so with your support.

Nationally, the union is fighting hard to win a decent pay settlement for you and was dismayed that that the national employers decided to freeze your pay ahead of other public sector workers. Even if we receive a pay rise next year, it is likely to be less than the rate of inflation. Effectively, you will have received a hefty pay cut in real terms over a three year period. The FBU is also making a legal challenge to protect your pension – it is taking the Government to court over its decision to change the way it uprates your pension, which will see your benefits reduce by as much as 15% over the life of the scheme. Your pension is your deferred wages, so this alteration by the Government is another way that your pay has been cut. The Government is also proposing to replace your scheme with one based on increased contributions and a later retirement age, with career-average defined benefits at the end of it – put simply, pay more, work longer, get less. Your union will need your support if it is to protect your pay and pension.

Locally, we have seen and fought hard against the cuts to the service that we deliver to the public. Do you think we provide as good a service as we did ten, even five, years ago? It is important to emphasize to your family and friends, and to members of the general public, that the FBU is actively campaigning for their better protection in the future. In recent years we have seen the Fire Authority –

• Agree to a reduction in the number of Officers
• Look into the provision of Brigade Control, with its potential relocation outside of Berkshire
• Close Cookham fire station
• Agree to the closure of Windsor fire station at night
• Agree to the removal of the London Fringe Allowance (i.e. London weighting – more money out of the pockets of our members!)
• Agree to the switch-crewing of the HRU, with its accompanying loss of 12 fire-fighter posts, possible relocation to Reading and potential loss of Slough’s RSV

In addition, we are seeing a dilution of fire-cover through an increased rate of standby moves and the application of the Low Risks Incidents Policy. The latter policy can only be seen as a thinly-veiled attack on our Retained members, and the effect of all these attacks is to play one group off against another. Your brigade officials have campaigned actively against every single one of the above. They have also been involved in numerous consultations and negotiations on brigade policy on your behalf, such as sickness and absence management, discipline procedure and TOIL. They need your support to stave off future attacks on your service and local terms and conditions. If you have not done so already, the FBU is urging you to become active and stay active. Let your brigade officials know how the brigade’s management is affecting you. Come to FBU meetings. Attend its lobbies. We are a Union and are only strong if we stay United. Please bear this in mind if RBFRS sends you its proposed letter.

The Fire Brigades Union would remind members that you are under no obligation to respond to the proposed RBFRS letter.

Yours in unity,

Mark Stollery (Brigade Secretary)             

Maurice Whyte (Brigade Chair) 

Paul Watts (Brigade Organiser)

Next Page »