A DISPUTE between airport fire crews and the States as their employer has been rumbling on for two years and has now become intolerable.

As Sunday’s halting of Flybe’s services that day – and the disruption of 800 passengers’ travel plans – has shown, the stakes are high and the risk of damage to the island’s reputation high.

Because the absence of fire cover for landings hinges on the availability of sufficient fire crew, it also leaves the men open to suspicion of closet industrial action when one goes off sick, which is clearly unhelpful.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the situation, this is clearly a problem that needs to be resolved before further disruption is caused and before businesses are affected.

The question islanders will be asking is why it has dragged on for so long.

The six-month deal that expired at the weekend, triggering Sunday’s disruption, was brokered precisely to give time for a permanent solution to be reached. Why wasn’t that sufficient time – and why was the Public Sector Remuneration Committee apparently caught out when it expired?

Information obtained by this newspaper indicates that the fire crew is seeking an increase of close to £7,000 to take their salary up to nearly £34,000 excluding allowances.

That is a huge increase and is either justified or not. In the absence of agreement, the island has clearly laid down industrial disputes procedures and legislation to ensure that settlements can be reached or imposed if necessary.

Some indication of how worrying this has become is obtained from the Airport’s own accounts. Its fire service salary bill was supposed to be £1.48m. but actually jumped by £31,000 to £1.51m.

That is equivalent to the £1,000 each said to have been paid to the fire crews without the approval of PSRC in order to keep them happy while the dispute drags on.

If correct, that raises some significant questions about use of taxpayers’ money, the role of the States own negotiators, just who sanctioned the payments and which budget it actually came from.

Recent events have also raised questions about how negotiations are conducted and this dispute needs to be resolved – and transparently.