bridge too far

For which you pay not one penny yourself, I believe. Whereas firefighters currently contribute 11% of salary and this will rise to 13% if the government gets its way. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11446834

Slightly less than the police, who also don't need qualifications http://www.rbfrs.co.uk/job_ff_wt_pay.html http://www.policeoracle.com/pay_and_conditions/police_pay_scales.html

Oh because you're so bloody hard done by, aren't you - always on here grumbling about how much harder your life is than anyone else's. It takes 2 days to slowly adjust the body clock after a night shift, leaving him 2 days 'free time', just like the rest of the world. Although he has, of course, worked a 48 hour 'week'. Medical studies have shown time and time again that rotating shifts and / or night working have a detrimental effect on the constitution. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4466555.stm

Mr TF works 4 days then has 4 days off then works 4 nights and then has 4 days off. When people rotate day / night shifts, they need the 4 day break to turn their body clocks round. His shifts are 12 hours long. Because of the shift pattern, he works 5 weekends out of 8. He gets a shift allowance for this. Rotating shift working (such as Mr TF, firemen, police, nurses etc) is hard on the constitution and very unsocial - hence the enhanced payments.

I found this very interesting article on the benefits and rates of contribution for the various public sector pension schemes http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11446829

AssetCo, suppliers of fire engines, have had their shares suspended and their former bosses are under investigation. Unfortunately, the link below isn't working at the moment Exclusive: London fire company former bosses investigated as shares suspended davidhencke.wordpress.com so that sort of knocks your idea on the head, sadly.

Is his head getting larger too? Because he's losing the battle to cover up the bald patch.

As I said earlier, I got done for this. Someone hit me (NOT my fault) and I had moved house and given birth within the previous 3 months. The police let the other driver go (he was a soldier - uniforms together eh) even though he was clearly at fault (witnesses statements). I had to produce my licence and I hadn't got round to changing my address. I got a fine - he got away scot free

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/sep/12/fa-drugs-tests-garry-oconnor

I didn't know you were American!

I can understand the hero worship absolutely - but I don't actually work anymore. In fact, I subsist on my meagre NHS pension. Does that knock me off my pedestal?

In your tunnel-visioned world, maybe. In the real world, the majority of public sector works undertake demanding and increasingly stressful jobs (due to staff pruning) and those who are 'desk bound' earn something in the order of £15K a year on average. There aren't that many on wages over £30K (apart from doctors of course).

Reading that article, I see that there will be basic rate tax relief afforded to those who contribute. So I guess that's the public purse helping out.

Not quite: "First, every employer who does not provide a company pension already will have to do so. Normally this will be through a new national private pension scheme called a 'personal account'. Costs are likely to be kept low and choices will be limited. Second, everyone in work aged between 22 and pension age who earns more than around £5,000 a year will be automatically enrolled in the company scheme or the personal account when they begin working. They will have the right to opt out of the scheme, but evidence shows that if joining is automatic, far more people become members of a scheme. People over pension age will not be automatically enrolled but will be able to join the scheme up to the age of 74." From: http://www.saga.co.uk/money/pensions/TheNutsAndBoltsOfTheUKPensionPlanChanges.asp

I think you're right Lord D, in many respects. The thing that worries me more than anything else is that, currently, many young people simply can't afford to pay into a pension scheme, be it public or private. So we'll be stacking up problems long term because, if people haven't been able to afford to plan for the future, then the state will have an even bigger amount to pay out to subsidise those people in their old age in the form of pension credits etc.

You speak well for an 11 year old!

The only way the NHS can be bankrupted is by not giving it any money. However, chickens may well come home to roost because of the ridiculous PFI experiment and with the proposed commercialisation of the NHS.

I got done many years ago for failing to advise DVLC of a change of address.

The NHS, over the past decade, has become one of the most efficient national health service in the world, delivering best value for money of most other countries. http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/nov/18/nhs-best-free-access-healthcare http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/aug/07/nhs-among-most-efficient-health-services http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2011/08/08/surprise-report-nhs-most-efficient-healthcare and so on............. The improvement in the healthcare environment has been unparalled, with state-of-the-art buildings and equipment, and research is world-beating.

For once, I'm glad I'm as old as I am! Being able to retire at a (comparitively) young age means I have the time and energy to look after my grandchildren a couple of days a week, so helping their parents to return to work. It would have been touch and go as to whether they could have afforded to do so, given the high cost of childcare, had I and their other grandparents not been able to help out. That's probably one element of a later retirement age that hasn't been thought through (together with the effect on carers of elderly relatives).

Who cares?

A very poignant post.

I was at work and saw the BBC News ticker along the bottom of my PC screen. I remember calling across to a workmate saying 'dreadful accident - a plane's crashed into the WTC' just as the second plane hit. Then the realisation hit. Dreadful day, dreadful events and I was seriously worried about my daughter's friends who worked in the financial district of NY. Thankfully, they were OK. But my daughter had a few very anxious hours.

With regard to the hospital that had its catering outsourced in 1994, there was no real monitoring set up (it was the start of outsourcing and I guess the powers that be at the time hadn't thought about monitoring ) When PFI contracts were let, a major part of the contracts were 'soft' FM - cleaning, catering, maintenance, portering. Those contracts were supposed to be monitored, but hospitals have always been reluctant to appoint back room staff (I know, I know but I'm not kidding). So standards were not really effectively monitored. Also, the very people who had the knowledge and experience to do monitoring were no longer around because they'd been surplus to requirements.. And, in the very early 90s, a lot of money had been spent on 'cook-chill' (the scheme originated in the old Wessex region IIRC). Basically, food was produced off-site and shipped to participating hospitals. This meant the in-house catering equipment was redundant (as were a lot of the cooks) and, I would suggest, led to the tasteless, plastic food being dished up. A bit like school kitchens, once the kit has gone it's very expensive to replace it. QA at Portsmouth used to have good catering and a very sound Catering Manager. But that all went as part of the PFI deal.

Not having been around for a few days, I haven't managed to see the programme. But I do know, from working in 3 very large acute hospitals, that most catering is now outsourced to private companies (often as part of a PFI deal) to companies such as Sodhexo. When I first started working for the NHS in 1991, our hospital had a great restaurant. But it was forced to adopt an outside caterer (it was called 'market testing') in about 1994 and the food went downhill very fast.