Tensions between firefighters and the government are continuing to heat up after members of the service unanimously rejected the latest pay deal yesterday.
84% of firefighters took part in the ballot organised by the Fire and Rescue Service Association. If accepted, the deal would have seen their pay unchanged for 2018 and 2019, with a pay increase of RPI (the rate of inflation) plus 1.3% in 2020.
But the Association announced yesterday that 100% of voters had rejected the offer.
They said the "Fast Track Resolution Procedure" will now go ahead with what they described as "binding arbitration" over the imposed two-year award for 2018 and 2019 only.
Result of ballot for 2018/19/20 pay offer to firefighters: 84% return, 100% rejection of offer. The Fast Track Resolution Procedure will now progress this pay dispute to binding arbitration over the imposed 2-year award for 2018 & 2019 only.
— FRSAJersey (@FRSAJersey) April 15, 2019
The offer to firefighters comes amid a long-running battle between their union and the States Employment Board (SEB), which sets workers' pay and terms and conditions, over pensions. They claimed that a recently-introduced scheme would leave them worse off and therefore sought compensation in the Employment Tribunal.
They were successful in this claim, but the SEB attempted to dispute it in the Court of Appeal last month. A decision is expected this week.
The same pay offer was also made to teachers, nurses and midwives, and police officers, and has proven controversial.
While members of the States of Jersey Police Association accepted it, members of the National Education Union (NEU) decisively rejected it and today announced eight days of planned strikes in May.
Pictured: Both nurses unions have now accepted the pay offer.
Members of the Jersey Royal College of Nursing (RCN) voted in favour of the revised pay rise offer, as did the Jersey Nursing Association, with 61% of respondents voting in favour of accepting the deal.
Comments
Comments on this story express the views of the commentator only, not Bailiwick Publishing. We are unable to guarantee the accuracy of any of those comments.