[Crimson Dynamo]

Britain’s fire service is too male and too white, a report has claimed.

The report, which was commissioned by the National Fire Chiefs Council
(NFCC), found that the fire service was “institutionally racist, misogynistic and
homophobic”.

It said firemen in Britain were not “diverse” enough because the service’s
proportion of women and ethnic minorities is less than in wider society.

Produced by an advisory group focused on improving diversity, equality and
inclusion in the fire service, the report found that 9.3 per cent of firefighters
were women and 5.4 per cent belonged to ethnic minorities as of March 2024.

The review said: “The common ‘image’ of a firefighter is, for the most part, of
a white heterosexual male turning out in a fire engine to fight fires… The
diversity of the service needs to be much more reflective of the communities
it serves and the wide range of services it delivers.

It goes on to say that “harassment, abuse and discrimination” is rife among
the fire service, including the use of “microaggressions”.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...cism-misogyny/

[Mystic Mock]

Tbh I don't care what group that the person is apart of.

As long as they help people in hazardous fire scenarios, then all is good imo.

They even could all be Villa fans for all I care.

[Cherie]

Does anyone care who is coming to get you out of that car wreck or fire as long as they are competent, what an insult to the fire service

[Livia]

The London Fire Brigade has recruited black males and females over white males going back at least 30 years. My brother applied fifteen years ago and was told not to bother, he had no chance because he is a white male.

[Kate!]

Too male and too white? Utter garbage.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Paul Embery, a former executive council member of the Fire Brigades Union (FBU), told The Telegraph that fire chiefs should focus on putting out fires rather than “manipulating the workforce demographic”.

He said: “Public services should of course ensure that individuals from all backgrounds are able to join their ranks and prejudice must be tackled where it exists.

“But when they set arbitrary targets for recruitment, it crosses over into social engineering.

“There are all sorts of reasons why particular groups might not enter certain trades – there are, for example, few male midwives and hardly any female refuse collectors.”

Mr Embery added: “Most of the time it has little to do with prejudice. Some individuals and groups are attracted to jobs that hold little appeal for others – that’s just a fact of life.

“We should stop fixating on manipulating the workforce demographic in certain public services and concentrate more on ensuring that these services perform better for the public.”

[Oliver_W]

The only characteristics that should be considered are things like height and fitness.

[UserSince2005]

Scared little pussy when there is actually a fire. I just say get rid of the lot of them. Paid to sit around on their asses

[rusticgal]

Originally Posted by Livia

The London Fire Brigade has recruited black males and females over white males going back at least 30 years. My brother applied fifteen years ago and was told not to bother, he had no chance because he is a white male.

My Nephew was too because he was a straight white male...

[rusticgal]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

The only characteristics that should be considered are things like height and fitness.

yup...my nephew ticked both those boxes

[Redway]

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock

Tbh I don't care what group that the person is apart of.

As long as they help people in hazardous fire scenarios, then all is good imo.

They even could all be Villa fans for all I care.

Indeed. I just can’t get with the racist claims in this instance. It’s irrelevant.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Redway

Indeed. I just can’t get with the racist claims in this instance. It’s irrelevant.

You don't feel it's racist to exclude one group of people based solely on the colour of their skin?

[Redway]

Originally Posted by Livia

You don't feel it's racist to exclude one group of people based solely on the colour of their skin?

“I can’t get with the racist claims” - i.e., of the institute, making out that people other than white men are unfairly disadvantaged. I’m agreeing with the general sentiment of this thread, that claims of institutional racism here are BS.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Redway

“I can’t get with the racist claims” - i.e., of the institute, making out that people other than white men are unfairly disadvantaged. I’m agreeing with the general sentiment of this thread, that claims of institutional racism here are BS.

Ahhh I see. Thanks for clarifying, I got the wrong end of the stick.

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by Redway

“I can’t get with the racist claims” - i.e., of the institute, making out that people other than white men are unfairly disadvantaged. I’m agreeing with the general sentiment of this thread, that claims of institutional racism here are BS.

But then of course it loops right back around and becomes potentially actually institutional racism, if they do exclude people for being white.

[Redway]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

But then of course it loops right back around and becomes potentially actually institutional racism, if they do exclude people for being white.

Institutional reverse-racism. Yes. Anyone who pays attention to my posts knows how anti-racism I am but the race-card claims at the slightest chance-circumstances are almost equally ridiculous. I’m not on-board with that.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Redway

Institutional reverse-racism. Yes. Anyone who pays attention to my posts knows how anti-racism I am but the race-card claims at the slightest chance-circumstances are almost equally ridiculous. I’m not on-board with that.

Reverse racism is a stupid concept. Racism already covers this

[user104658]

The reasons for diverse hiring criteria are often very valid and the need for diversity in some workforces is part of what might make one candidate the best person for the job. Trying to boil down successful hiring to "just always hire the most technically competent individual and that will be the right choice strategically" is, simply, incorrect from an organisational perspective and (frankly) usually comes from people who have never actually done any nuanced hiring.

If there's a small gap in experience and technical ability that's more than compensated for by the strategic benefits of a more diverse set of views within the workforce, then the choice leaning towards diversity is often the better choice, pragmatically, not just out of "woke morals".

I'm not sure how this would apply to fire fighting, to be fair, HOWEVER I'm not going to pretend to know the ins and outs of it as a career path... So can't say it's not valid.

It is (for example) a very valid stance for policing, when plenty of people would happily see police forces stacked with white men "if they tested better". It's really not how strategic hiring works.

[bots]

I can see the usefulness of it in policing and probably the ambulance service too, but fire fighting requires very specific attributes. I did some training as part of an offshore readiness course, and believe me, it's not something that is suitable for those who are not strong and very, very fit. I can see the point in having people who can speak multiple languages these days, but fit and strong trump anything else

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Reverse racism is a stupid concept. Racism already covers this

I agree, but an eyeroll-worthy term is better than pretending to think racism can't go a certain way.

Originally Posted by Quantum Boy

The reasons for diverse hiring criteria are often very valid and the need for diversity in some workforces is part of what might make one candidate the best person for the job. Trying to boil down successful hiring to "just always hire the most technically competent individual and that will be the right choice strategically" is, simply, incorrect from an organisational perspective and (frankly) usually comes from people who have never actually done any nuanced hiring.

If there's a small gap in experience and technical ability that's more than compensated for by the strategic benefits of a more diverse set of views within the workforce, then the choice leaning towards diversity is often the better choice, pragmatically, not just out of "woke morals".

I'm not sure how this would apply to fire fighting, to be fair, HOWEVER I'm not going to pretend to know the ins and outs of it as a career path... So can't say it's not valid.

It is (for example) a very valid stance for policing, when plenty of people would happily see police forces stacked with white men "if they tested better". It's really not how strategic hiring works.

For policing it's understandable, if we assume the police are meant to play a role in the communities ... maybe even paramedics, if (makes up a hyperbolic apocryphal example) a duo of male paramedics would be barred entry from a sex-segregated mosque while a woman is dying.

But something as physically demanding and urgent as fire and rescue shouldn't kowtow to anything, apart from physical strength etc.

[Crimson Dynamo]

the day they allowed Policemen to apply under 6 foot was the day they fcked it up

now they are a woke laughing stock

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Crimson Dynamo

the day they allowed Policemen to apply under 6 foot was the day they fcked it up

Only reason that would be true is because it's the insecure short kings who are the angriest.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Quantum Boy

Only reason that would be true is because it's the insecure short kings who are the angriest.

https://www.tiktok.com/@ukjokes.1/vi...480161?lang=en

stop posting nonesense for "facebook likes"

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Crimson Dynamo

https://www.tiktok.com/@ukjokes.1/vi...480161?lang=en

stop posting nonesense for "facebook likes"

I don't use social media at all Trumpet, we don't all spend our afternoons whacking one out over Elon Musk's Nazi tweets.

[Crimson Dynamo]