Login Register

Firefighters in Gloucestershire go on strike over pensions

By Michael_Yong  |  Posted: December 25, 2013

By Michael Yong

Firefighers strike in Gloucestershire

Firefighers strike in Gloucestershire

Comments (8)

Firefighters in Gloucestershire went on strike last night in their long-running dispute with the Government over pensions.

Fire Brigades Union (FBU) members went on strike as storms hit, causing floods in parts of the county.

FBU officials met Fire Minister Brandon Lewis yesterday to discuss the dispute.

FBU general secretary, Matt Wrack, said: “Firefighters on duty over the festive period don’t have much to celebrate this year and tonight’s strikes will remind the government of the service we provide 24 hour a day, 365 days a year, every year of our careers.

“Nobody wants these strikes but firefighters remain extremely angry over the prospect of being priced out of their pensions and facing the sack owing to the government’s ludicrous pretence that men and women of 60 can meet the same fitness standards as 20 year olds.

“The government at Westminster has acknowledged our concerns but not done anything to seriously address them, so we welcome the chance to meet the government and hope this afternoon’s meeting provides a genuine dialogue.”

Gloucestershire Fire and Rescue Service is once again reassuring communities that a professional service will be maintained in the county during the strikes.

A spokesman for Gloucestershire Fire and Rescue Service said: “GFRS has contingency plans in place which mean that it will largely be business as usual, despite the strikes.

“However, local people and businesses should make sure they do everything they can to stay safe in their homes or workplace.”

Do you have something to say? Leave your comment here...

max 4000 characters


  • supernova1  |  December 27 2013, 11:18AM

    Willow-Wisp..........................of course I know EXACTLY what I am talking about, they are facts, nothing more, nothing less. They are not opinions, so like science, are proven. By all means disagree, I like a good debate, but don't come on here and say I don't know what I'm talking about, as I plainly do, just look at the reds and greens.

    Rate   3
  • raidermanuk  |  December 26 2013, 10:21AM

    These working age requirements have been part of new firefighter contracts since 2007. They and the FBU accepted this at the time as being reasonable and workable and there is no reason that the arrangements are any less workable for pre 2007 firefighters. Stop squealing like stuck pigs and get back to work.

    Rate   24
  • Kay_Powell  |  December 25 2013, 11:50PM

    P---C: "I was in the forces" - but were you a squaddie at the age of 59? Or did you get some sort of a pension and retire at a younger age?

    Rate   -6
  • norman937  |  December 25 2013, 8:05PM

    OK boys,weve done our bit,we have aknowledged our concerns,go back to sleep.Oh! wake me when we get out extrta £10,000.Just what else are they doing.Unless they are hoping to fight fires with a bunch of servicemen waiting for their P45s,who have just lost all their pension entitlements. It does seem that virtualy every pension scheme for the peasants in this country is little more than a racket,and this Governments policy appears to be.If you cannot get in on the racket,then break it.

    Rate   -8
  • P---C  |  December 25 2013, 7:33PM

    "ludicrous pretence that men and women of 60 can meet the same fitness standards as 20 year olds." nothing ludicrus abot that requirement. It's aphysical job, I'd exoect you to be able to climb that ladder and drag my out of a blazing building,. If you can't do that, then what the heck are you doing in the fire service... I was in the forces, I was expected to be able to yomp for miles with a backpack and weapon and still fight the enemy... the fire service is a physical occupation... deal with it...

    Rate   11
  • Willow_Wisp  |  December 25 2013, 12:39PM

    "Supernova1"....you...don't actually know what you're talking about, do you? Less a supernova, more of a damp squib, I think...

    Rate   -13
  • supernova1  |  December 25 2013, 11:32AM

    The world has changed, yet dinosaurs still exist in some quarters. I have been paying into a private pension for twenty odd years, and I know already that my payout will be nowhere near what I was expecting. Add to this another two years onto my state pension date, and we have what is known as a 'moving feast'. My wife's state pension is going to be SIX YEARS later. So her plans have been re-arranged..........by working longer. The public sector has had a cushioned existence far too long. In particular, firefighters, and they lost the support of the public quite a few years ago. And in a nutshell, they want to retire at fifty five, while many female manual workers have to work until they are SIXTY SIX or SEVEN. Well lads, I hope you think that's big and clever, as you cruise around fitting smoke alarms, and other extremely light duties, that you can't possibly do when you're too old. But of course that job in security or van driving will serve you well. Me, I'm self-employed, and moving three tonnes of parcel per day, and will HAVE to do so until I'm almost seventy. ****s.......................!

    Rate   16
  • norman937  |  December 25 2013, 10:58AM

    Quiet simply,they based their retirement on their pensions.Out of curiosity sake,when did the MPs last take industrial action over their pensions.or their over inlflated pay rises.Sadly this lot will treat them like the servicemen,and kick in with mass redundancies hoping to silence them just beore pension entitlement is due.Just aknowledging their concerns in Westminster is simply not the answer,or anything like good enough.

    Rate   -10