Should firefighters accept the Bain report?

An 11% rise in firefighters' pay over two years coupled with radical modernisation of their working practices has been proposed by a controversial review of the fire service.

The inquiry, chaired by Sir George Bain, said there was the opportunity for fire brigades to save millions of pounds - but also to make money.

It suggested that insurance firms could be charged to help cover the cost of traffic accidents and that people could be made to pay for false alarms.

The review is not being recognised by the Fire Brigades' Union (FBU) and is expected to fuel the continuing pay dispute - which has already seen three strikes. Two more are planned for the new year.

What do you think of the Bain report? Should the firefighters accept the report's recommendations?

This debate is now closed. Read a selection of your comments below.

---

Your reaction

Let's face it if it comes to higher tax rates to pay for a higher pay rise for the fire fighters then they have no backing from the ordinary workers who are lucky to get the 2% inflation rises. For us then have to pay extra to people who knew what the pay structures were when they took the job with the fire service is just taking the biscuit.
Vicki, UK

If firemen are expected to put up with low wages because there are other people who want their jobs, then the slack time-waster politicians should be on no salary at all. Pay firemen what they are worth. And as for modernisation, pah! Every "modernised" government service is living on the edge of collapse. I pray to God the fire service is never expected to be as "modern" as, for example, the railways.
Kevin, England

The wait for a fire engine could well exceed 15 minutes

Terry, England

Bain's report and the way the press have covered it seems ok at first reading, however, I wonder if the general public have realised that all this modernisation, and job loses means that (1) the Government is heading towards a part time fire service - certainly in rural and less populated areas. (2) The pay offer is still only 4% and 4% of a fire fighters low wage keeps him/her on a low wage (3) and most importantly of all, there will be fewer fire engines which means that the attendance time for fire calls will go up. Some communities will have no fire cover. In larger towns and cities the wait for a fire engine could well exceed 15 minutes and as most people know if anyone needs to be rescued the chances of them coming out alive gets less and less as time increases. Modern self financing fire service? What price life?
Terry, England

The fire fighters have no choice but to move with the times the same as the rest of us. Their initial demands were ludicrous and they need to be more reasonable. There are many people in other jobs who work far harder than fire fighters and for far less money. They should think themselves lucky that they have a worthwhile and satisfying job. Many people don't have this. Everybody wants more money don't they, because money is like a god these days. This can only lead to more misery for everyone. If you want to know what survival really means go to Africa or India. We are creating a nation of spoilt brats.
Laurence, England

All the pro-fire fighter talk of how a dangerous wonderful job the fire service do and yes I wholeheartedly agree, but isn't it ironic that those who have to replace them whilst they strike are on less money and are willing to be killed in times of war! Wake up and smell the coffee or you will be spending a lot more time standing around.
Phil H, England

I thought even if I have to wait an hour for an ambulance, six hours in casualty, wait for the police to turn up if I'm burgled (if they even bother) that at least I could rely on someone turning up if my house was on fire at 3am. It seems not if we "modernise" our fire service as well. Soon, no asylum seekers will want to come here at all.
Fiona, UK

I don't think Bain has gone far enough

Greg, UK

I don't think Bain has gone far enough. We should charge anyone who has a fire and that can be claimed on their house/business insurance. This would make the fire service self financing, we could identify those premises that have valid insurance by placing some kind of plaque on the wall. I don't know if this has ever been done before but it's bound to save money.
Greg, UK

To Greg, UK. Can't you see that your solution of paying for the fire service via each property's insurance policy will cost everyone more by merely increasing each policy by the amount required to fund a fire service? As well as this, what are you going to do to houses or businesses without identification plaques? Let the occupants burn?
Simon Watkins, Wales

Accept - or get replaced by the 55 people who apply for each job under the current pay structure. All organisations have to be prepared to undergo review and modernisation, but when they are funded by the taxpayer, it's even more important. Saying they do a good job is not the same as saying that the current set up is the best it can be.
Mac, Scotland

You get what you pay for... it's a disgrace that we expect people to fight fires, save lives and risk their health and lives in this country when pen-pushers in Westminster and big business owners own well over the £30k firefighters are asking for. These people aren't working for a fast food chain - let's not treat them like they are.
Spencer Gasson, London, UK

It echoes what the government has wanted all along: Job cuts and station closures

Bill Stevenson, UK

Can anybody explain to me why the fire service needs to modernise? In what way is it inefficient? It's not an organisation designed to make a profit, it is there to save lives and property, which it does with 96% efficiency (government figures not mine).
I personally doubt the independence of the Bain report as it echoes too much of what the government has wanted all along: Job cuts and station closures.
Bill Stevenson, UK

Why not let local authorities put all the fire cover contracts out to tender? They did this in the US and the costs are about the same, but the bosses tend to be former firefighters or groups of firefighters and as such prove better suited to managing the industry in a cost effective and harmonious way (usually by retaining the watch system in larger communities where it is most appropriate).
Tom, England

The rest of our government services are failing, so we rip apart the only one that works right? What kind of twisted logic runs this country?
Tom, England

Sir George Bain comes across as an eminently sensible and reasonable man. Why don't these people read his report first? As far as the structure of the fire service is concerned, you may not like this government but in them we have an elected body to decide how things like public services are structured and run. If we don't agree, then we can change the government.
Paul B, Oxfordshire, UK

The FBU really opened Pandora's box with their ridiculous 40% pay claim. They can hardly now complain if decades of restrictive practices and over-manning are exposed and used as a bargaining ploy against them. Much better to have gone for a series of less exorbitant claims over a period of years. But of course it's not the union reps that lose their jobs or have to work harder. Talk about lions led by donkeys!
Tom, UK

I have taken a quick look at the report's recommendations. I agree with the recommendation that most working practices such as matching shift patterns and crewing levels with demand, mixed crews of full-time and retained firemen, greater functional and geographical career mobility, overtime working etc., should be agreed locally. This will ensure that local needs are met more efficiently, whilst at the same time offering the welcome bonus of emasculating the power of the FBU. The firemen should have seen all of this coming and chosen representatives who were astute rather than Luddite.
Chris Klein, England

Why is the fire service so set against reform? Do they do an important, dangerous job? Yes, that has never been in question. Do they play a lot of snooker because of outdated shift systems? Decide what you will but in the frenzy of this dispute, remember some other people who do a dangerous, important job - The life boat men of the RNLI, then remember that they do it for NO pay!
Gary, England

Bain has, in my view, presented an incomplete and flawed report, though it also contains a lot of good points. The out of hand rejection of this report by the FBU, rather than a willingness to use it as a point for starting discussion, shows just how arrogant and out of touch the union leadership have become.
John, England

Bain is just another government spin machine to reduce the costs of fire protection to the country by removing key firefighters and overnight cover. I would not feel safe if the Bain report was implemented. The report should be burnt for all the good it has done.
Peter Finch, England

To suggest that we should cut our fire service by 20% is absolutely crazy. This dispute started as a dispute for fair pay for firefighters but now seems to have developed into a fight for jobs. It may be that the service does require modernising but why does modernisation always result in fewer jobs?
Karen Carpenter, UK

The good people of this country are not going to let these greedy mercenaries win so they may as well shut up and take the present offer. If they don't, then by the time it does get sorted they may find themselves in an even worse off state.
Richard G Hawley, UK

So the FBU doesn't recognise this report, ignore them, they are obviously not acting in the best interests of their members. The longer this dispute goes on the less respect I have for the fire fighters, as they seem to be clinging to outmoded work practices which the rest of us have had to give up years ago, and for less pay than they get.
Ben Christie, UK

Are we really supposed to believe the latest report to be independent?
Alan Rankin, Britain

Bain's report may finish them

Darren Stephens, UK

The report claims that the fire service has fallen behind the standards of best practice in the public and private sector. Let's just step back here: The fire service is the only emergency service with a 100% response rate. It uses funds more effectively than the NHS does and let's not even mention government subsidies for transport. Firemen have to cope with continuous modernisation, adopting new working practices on a regular basis. Stations are now stretched to breaking point anyway. Bain's report may finish them.
Darren Stephens, UK

They should not accept it at all. It just seems to be one insult after another to the firefighters. They need our solidarity and support.
Andrew King, N Ireland

No, the firefighters should not accept the Bain report. It's high time this government, and Blair in particular, learned that they are servants of the public, and the public interest should always come first. In the case of the firemen, the vast majority of the British public think they have a justified need for a decent pay increase.
Adam, England

What this seems to come down to is the bottom line on any public service: the government simply doesn't have enough money to pay reasonable wages. Getting insurance companies to pay out more for accidents is just going to increase the cost of insurance - in effect, just another tax. Making people pay for false alarms is just going to make them afraid of calling in case of a real fire, because if they manage to put it out in time, they could have to pay. This is not the kind of attitude we wish to be fostering now, is it?
Andrew, UK

As long as there are 40+ applicants per firemans job at the current pay I refuse to pay but a penny more towards my council tax. Sounds like very simple economics to me.
Mike, UK