Firefighters ballot 5 December to 23 January

Firefighters in the Fire Brigades Union (FBU) voted to reject their employers’ 5% pay offer by a 79% majority, on a 78% turnout. The FBU has now announced a 5 December — 23 January ballot for industrial action. A firefighter and FBU rep spoke to Solidarity.

The result in the referendum speaks for itself, it’s a huge turnout with a huge majority to reject the offer. In the run-up, some people thought it was going to be closer than it was. But the outcome was clear. It shows there’s a clear appetite for a fight.

There’s obviously a focus now on preparing for the strike ballot from 5 December. The result isn’t a foregone conclusion, but the strength of feeling demonstrated by the pay referendum makes us pretty confident we’ll get the result we need. So we’ll also be using the run-up to the ballot and the ballot period itself to discuss what kind of action we need to take to win.

We’ve started that discussion in union meetings with the various watches on my station already. There’s a definite sense that if we’re going to do this, we should do it properly. People are already talking about striking for several days, or a week, or even taking indefinite action. Proposals on programmes of action will be formulated and agreed in branch meetings in individual stations, which are the basic unit of union democracy. From there they can be sent up to the area organisation, then to the region, and then to the National Executive, which is the body which will ultimately make the decisions on if and when we strike, assuming we do get the ballot result we need.

One tactic also being discussed is hour-long strikes, which has been tried before. Following firefighters’ pay strikes in 2002-3, the Blair government introduced new laws which mandated fire services to provide scab crews during strikes. These crews have to be hired for a flat fee, even if the strike they’re being hired to break only lasts an hour — it’ll cost London £1 million a day. So the thinking is, if we strike for an hour, we only lose an hour’s pay, but it puts financial pressure on the employer by making them shell out for these scab crews. I’m not fully convinced by this tactic, and the consensus in my station so far is that we should name sustained strikes as well or instead.

A potential issue in the dispute is what we’re actually fighting for in terms of a pay increase. The union leadership’s position is that it’s the employer’s responsibility to make us an offer, which will then be put to members, and it’s for the members to decide what’s acceptable. That sounds formally very democratic, but the problem with that is that allows the employer to set the pace. Indeed, that’s why we’re only beginning our strike ballot now, because the employer made a revised offer which was then put to consultation and referendum. Formulating an agreed pay demand amongst the membership would ensure there’s still a democratic process, but we could then pursue that demand proactively rather than responding reactively to employers’ offers. Certainly we shouldn’t be accepting any pay settlement that doesn’t see our pay keep pace with inflation.

The question of coordination with other unions come up in the discussion a lot, and it’s something people are very keen on. We’re conscious that we’re a small workforce, and we don’t want our action to get “drowned out” by other, larger, strikes, but we also see ourselves as part of a wider fight against the Tory government.

As well as the general principles of working-class solidarity, we share an immediate industrial battle with other public sector workers to force the government to agree pay increases.

Coordinated strikes will increase the pressure on the government and make it more likely that we and other workers will get results.