Rochdale Observer

Firefighte­rs told they had to pay for damage to engines

- Neal.keeling@men-news.co.uk @NealKeelin­gMEN

BOSSES caused uproar among firefighte­rs when they issued a notice saying they would have to pay for any ‘negligent’ damage caused to engines by drivers.

Crews in Greater Manchester were furious over the proposal and management quickly backed down.

Chiefs insist it was just an error and ‘should not have been included in the document’.

A line was included in what appeared to be a routine check-list for fire appliances.

The form included items to be checked such as oil/water in engine; road horn; door locks; brakes; CCTV maintenanc­e; mirrors; tyres; and wheels.

But a line at the bottom of the form said: “GMFRS reserves the right to charge you for the cost of repairing any damage to the vehicle caused as result of your negligence.”

One firefighte­r said: “This caused havoc over the past few days.

“All the blue light drivers threatened to stop driving. We all said we don’t get paid to drive, so here’s your keys back.

“It took a few days, but threats from the drivers and people refusing to sign it made them rethink and withdraw it. They say it is a mistake, but someone proof-read this, then it was printed.”

The spat comes as brigade chiefs are trying to rebuild morale amongst crews which is at rock bottom following the debacle of the fire service response to the Manchester Arena bombing.

Fire crews did not attend the scene of the atrocity for two hours six minutes.

Last week new fire chief Dawn Docx apologised ‘unreserved­ly’ for the failings of the brigade during the region’s ‘darkest hour’.

A review by Lord Kerslake concluded ‘poor communicat­ion and poor procedures’ were to blame with the then County Fire Officer, Peter O’Reilly, having ‘played a key role’ in the delays.

After the latest row over the checklist, Assistant Chief Fire Officer Leon Parkes, of GMFRS, said: “Following the issuing of a new driver’s handbook last week, it was immediatel­y brought to our attention that one section included a sentence referring to liability for vehicle damage.

“I want to assure all our firefighte­rs and staff that the sentence should not have been included in the document and the relevant page of the handbook has been amended and reissued. We have also been liaising with the FBU and they are satisfied with the action we have taken.”

Karl Sorfleet, of the Fire Brigades Union, said: “It did raise a few eyebrows. When the crews brought it to our attention we had to intervene.

“We had a frank discussion with management and it was immediatel­y withdrawn.” ●●The Drivers’ Vehicle checklist which included a line saying drivers of fire engines would have to pay for any damage they caused to the vehicle. It has now been ammended

 ??  ??
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom