The Fire Brigades Union (FBU) has hit the headlines in recent weeks with a series of walkouts over a long running pension dispute. But why exactly have its members chosen industrial action?

Should they even be allowed to strike and is it about time to consider a new model for the service? SIMON HERBERT, East Sussex FBU chairman answers your questions.

Mr Baxter, online: When will you have the guts to call an all-out strike, rather than these frankly pathetic four-hour strikes?

Simon Herbert (SB): This dispute is not about guts, it is about protecting the public safety, firefighters’ safety and firefighters’ pensions.

The FBU has taken a professional and measured approach towards the government proposals and our action towards it. We have also submitted evidence to back up our arguments.

I hope that an all-out strike can be avoided and that the government enter into proper negotiations with the FBU and the dispute can be brought to an agreed end.

Mr Busy, online: I’d like to know more about the strike. Why is it happening, who is the dispute with and how long will it likely last?

(SB): Firefighters have been forced to take strike action to protect their pensions and public and firefighter safety.

The dispute is with Westminster, it is not with our local employers.

The government has decided, without any agreement from firefighters, to rip up our pension contracts and are now attempting to force through a new, unaffordable and unworkable pension scheme.

When firefighters joined the Fire Service they were promised their pension scheme was safe and protected. In good faith firefighters have, over many years and decades, paid into the scheme. Now government are not honouring their side of the bargain.

Firefighters pay £320 per month into their pension, making it one of the most expensive in the public or private sector.

Many firefighters are now being priced out of the scheme due to the yearly increases in contributions.

This is the third year of increases with further proposals to increase contributions.

The proposed new scheme expects firefighters to work until they are 60. A firefighter who joins at 20 and works until 60 would receive a pension of around £19,000.

But evidence shows that most firefighters will not be able to work until 60.

Should a firefighter retire at 55 then they would receive a pension of £9,000. They would lose over 47% of their pension just for retiring five years early which is unacceptable.

Basically, just for getting old, we could lose about 50% of our pension after paying about £4,000 per year into it and serving the public for 35 years.

We do not know how long the dispute will last, we had hoped to avoid strike action and that the government would listen to our evidence and also the evidence from their own experts.

Unfortunately they have chosen not to.

Instead they are trying to force through these changes. Firefighters deserve a pension that reflects the occupation they do, one that is affordable and workable and recognises that firefighters, like everyone else, will age and that fitness will decline.

All these aspects need addressing in any new pension scheme regulations.

So far they have not.

Steven Henry, Shoreham: A recent report stated fewer firefighters were now needed as the number of incidents has dropped dramatically. Is this the case? Should we really get rid of firefighters?

(SB): Incidents of fire may have declined, however we do so much more than attend fires.

We attend many other types of emergencies, for example road traffic collisions, floodings, chemical incidents and animal rescues.

We also carry out education and fire prevention and inspection. Also, regarding the numbers of firefighters needed, just because the number of fires may have reduced, that does not mean that a fire can be fought with fewer firefighters.

A fire still needs a certain amount of firefighters to safely deal with it.

Due to cuts already made to the fire service, response times nationally and locally have increased, therefore firefighters are often faced with a more severe fire.

When a fire occurs, every second really does matter, both for members of the public who may be at risk and also for firefighters.

If you cut the number of firefighters then they will have further to travel to incidents meaning that members of public will have to wait longer to be rescued.

I would suggest that anyone who has a fire at their home would want the fire service to attend as quickly as possible to save them and extinguish the fire.

You really do not want to be waiting extra minutes because local stations have been closed or downgraded.

Anonymous, online: In France the fire and ambulance services are combined and are extremely busy. Countrywide, 80% of French fire service personnel are volunteers (similar to retained fire fighters here) with only the major towns and cities having permanent full-time staff. Would you support this type of system in the UK?

(SB): In the UK a firefighter is a firefighter no matter what duty system they work. The Fire Brigades Union have worked extremely hard to promote and win the same rights for retained firefighters as whole-time firefighters.

They receive the same level of training. They are not volunteers with a lower level of training or expertise. I would not wish to see some communities protected by firefighters who have received less training or having inferior equipment just to save a bit of money.

We need fully equipped, fully trained firefighters who can arrive at emergencies in sufficient numbers to safely deal with any incident they face.

I believe the public deserve and expect this from their fire service.

Harry Corbett, West Sussex: The police are not allowed to strike. Why should the fire service be allowed?

(SB): The police have not had the right to strike or join a trade union since the early 1900s. There has been recent debate as to whether they should once again be afforded the right to strike. Firefighters currently are allowed to join unions, and therefore have the right to take lawful strike action.

This dispute has been running for more than three years. Large amounts of evidence has been submitted but the government has not listened to that evidence.

They have failed to enter into meaningful negotiations and have recently withdrawn recent improvements made.

During the strikes thus far we have received a massive amount of public support; they understand our dispute and understand that asking a firefighter to wear breathing apparatus and run up and down ladders rescuing people is both dangerous for the public and firefighters.

It is a real shame that government do not appear to share the public’s concerns.

Dawn Radcliffe, Hove: We are forever hearing that firemen have second jobs, so what’s the problem?

(SB): Some firefighters do have secondary jobs, others do not. Some need to take secondary jobs to support their families. The cost of living is increasing as it is for everyone, bills are going up, our pension contributions are going up.

However our wages are not. So in real terms each year as inflation goes up at a higher rate than wages, we effectively get a pay cut. I would suggest many people are also forced to take secondary employment and it is not just firefighters.

Alice Hall, Hassocks: Public sector workers are still a lot better off than those in the private sector. We all have bear the brunt of this – why can’t those in the public sector just accept their lot?

(SB): This is not a race to the bottom or to see who can have the worst working conditions or pensions. This is about making sure the public receive the service they deserve and pay their taxes for.

It is about firefighters being fit enough to do the job, being rewarded sufficiently for doing the job and, when they are no longer able to do the job, that they receive a suitable pension that reflects the work they have done.

People do not become firefighters to become rich, they become firefighters to serve the public, to put other people first, to risk their lives to save others.

Is it not right that when they retire they should receive the pension they were promised when they joined?

After all they have kept their promise and paid into the pension scheme for the whole of their careers.

They have also kept their promise and saved lives, and put others’ needs before their own.

Katherine McDonald, East Sussex: During this ongoing action what would your message to the public be?

I’m fully supportive of your action but I fear many don’t understand.

(SB): Firstly, many thanks for your support. It is most appreciated. The amount of public support we have received has been amazing. Please continue to support your local firefighters. 

The message to the public would be to be extra-vigilant during any industrial action. All fire services have had to draw up contingency plans for periods of industrial action by firefighters who are members of the Fire Brigades Union who are in dispute with the government to protect the public and their pensions.

Every service has had to supply the fire minster Brandon Lewis with their contingency plans and he has stated that he is content with all fire and resuce services’ ability to deal with emergencies during periods of industrial action. However, cover will be reduced, so I would still advise the public to take extra care.

One of the simplest and cheapest things the public can do is to make sure they have a working smoke alarm in their homes and that they test them regularly.

Patrick Casey: I’m a union man but I fear unions are weaker than ever before. What is the future of the FBU?

Can the union still be influential and make a difference?

(SB): Unions are only as strong their members. Everyone can make a difference and together people can make a bigger difference. If you all stand together, then you will stand stronger. Regarding the future of the FBU, we have seen many new joiners as the dispute rolls forward, so I would suggest we are getting stronger as a union. Our dispute is legitimate, our arguments are sound and our resolve is strong. We are fighting to protect public safety, firefighter safety and make sure that any future pension scheme is affordable and sustainable.

What is being forced through by government is neither affordable nor sustainable. Making firefighters work until they are 60 is not safe. If all firefighters stand together then I am sure we can make a difference to protect the public and firefighter safety.

I would finally ask the public to support your local firefighters. I hope you never need them in an emergency situation, but if you do then you will appreciate all they do and all they are fighting for.