NATS UK ATCO Pay offer: What do you think?

[Tycoon]

Some good things but I think more bad.

The good:

-Hourly pay for OJTI's

The bad:

-It's a three year deal!! They are tying us in longer and longer
-The three non-operational days which are now operational
-The deal is basically inflation plus one spine point in the first year and bupa in the third: not much of a pay increase seeing as this year the company is in profit


A can see a few other problems this creates.

Already at my unit quite disturbing rumours are surfacing in referance to the 3 (now) operational days. Will the year that days fall be a calender, financial or individual leave year.
And one i heard yesterday, one day is taken by truce, but if you don't complete the other two, a day's leave will be taken off you, if this is true i don't see how they can get away with it!!

Anyway just wondered what everyone else thought.

[flower]

Lots of discussion on this in the NATS forum.

[chevvron]

Does nothing for Bands 1 & 2 (doesn't cover cost of living increase) and as usual, bands 4 & 5 are rolling in it innit.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

No... stop it.... I can't stand it.. I retired just a few months before the biggest pay rise in the history of ATC!! Now you people want MORE??? :} :}

[Number2]

You can't imagine them accepting less can you?!

[5milesbaby]

If accepted, some WILL be getting less :mad:

[ukatco_535]

My Thoughts on the pay offer.

In essence, its good, regardless of pay band - we ALL get the uplift in pay spine.

Bad points

OJTi hourly pay - so we gonna sit there all day and make the trainee work his/her b*lls/t*ts off to get more money?? The hourly rate is (I have been informed by a union rep) for doing training over and above the 3hrs 20 per day we need to average to get paid at the moment.
Trainees will suffer as a result - they need time to sit back and consolidate. Try to remember how tiring it was for you as a trainee!!!

Lower pay for new entrants - now theres an idea - lets reduce it so much that the calibre of applicant is reduced (I've heard as low as 10-11K). OK, they may not pass the aptitude tests, but how long will the company accept lower numbers of entrants before 'massaging' the scores needed to join??
They've already bug***ed up the training by going too far at the college. We will end up with people with such a lack of aviation knowledge (I do not mean we need more spotters), that it will be dangerous. How does that tie in with becoming an industry leader???


AAVA why a 6 year tie in?? We will not have any bargaining power to bring management to the table in 3 years time. (Allegedly it's because we will be up to strength ATCO wise in 6 years - yeah, right).


BUPA Why should an ATCO 1 get this straight away for whole family, yet we have to wait for 3 years and it's only for the individual?? They would have been better leaving it as an ATCO 1 perk (like car allowance) instead of insulting us.

Other points

3 days clawback - who gives a stuff if it's operational or not?? It is 3 days we are supposed to be working, full stop. I would rather be busy controlling than stuck listening to some Bull***t TRM lecture, being told what is basically common sense.

Underpinning - Why is the second years January rise not underpinned??

Finally - with regards to the student ATCO pay - here's a radical though on how to save money instead of screwing them over; 2 suggestions.

1. - If a trainee fails to validate at a unit because they are not good enough, then do not back pay them for non productive years when they eventually do validate somewhere.
Start the clock running for them when they start at the new unit to train.
Why should someone who failed get thousands of pounds back pay and an automatic 2 or 3 pay spine jump, just because they have finally made it?? No one gets bonuses for validating quickly and being of use to the company.

2. - Why have an ATCO 1 LAS or GS?? The majority of the time they sit and do diddly squat. Instead, when someone has been valid for, say 5 years (or another figure), they could be trained up and then rostered once every couple of cycles to do it.
They could get paid a monthly or annual bonus for being on the roster (a pay spine??), and just as in instructing, you do not have to do it. You would then end up with a more proactive LAS/GS who has his or her finger on the pulse.

All said, I seriously doubt we qualified ATCOs will get a better deal, the only thing we can probably do is try to improve the lot of others i.e. new entrants. If we accept the deal we are selling them down the river, if we do not accept the deal, we will go into protracted talks for little or no benefit to us.

How long do you think it will take to sort out the mess if we vote 'No'? They have had a couple of years since the last pay round and they still have not got this one done in time for the January pay packet, even if we vote yes!

[White Hart]

ukatco_535

I notice you have made no comment about the effects of a 'yes' vote on the ATSAs in relation to the SAMOS issue contained within the pay offer - is this because you have not seen it?

[ukatco_535]

White Hart

I believe the ATCO pay deal is an entirely separate negotiation/issue from the ATSA one, and neither affects the other.

As such I have not seen the ATSA pay offer, and a couple of ATSA friends here have not either - they do not even know of one being published yet.


I do know that it will probably shaft the ATSAs tho, something which I am not particularly enthralled with.

[SilentHandover]

I guess that answers your question White Hart!

[callyoushortly]

ukatco_535 and silent handover

You both seem to miss white hart's point..... he's not asking if the ATCO's are involved in the ATSA pay deal, he's inquiring about the fact that ATCO's initially had a say in whether ATSA's kept their jobs or not. The SAMOS being moved over to ATCO's implies ATSA redundancies/relocation etc and they have no say in it as it's contained in an ATCO pay deal for all to vote on, including the ATCO's it has no effect whatsoever on.
I mentioned this in the NATS forum but everyone seemed to ignore the point.... we at PH thought it had been removed quick sharp after pay deal publication, but white hart still seems to think it exists. Who's right? Someone's in the dark?

Hope this makes sense.........

[SilentHandover]

I know what White Hart is was asking, it's just that by UKATCo's reply it is obvious that they had no idea of the SAMOS issue in the ATCO pay deal. The PDF briefing we recieved at Gatwick made no mention of this part of the deal at all.

[ukatco_535]

Sorry to show my ignorance here,

but SAMOS?? Semi automatic Met Observation system??

Only one I know with that acronym... I am an area controler, so please enlighten me if I am wrong.

[callyoushortly]

ukatco

I guess you prove the point entirely!
SAMOS is semi-automated met obs system and at the airports it's done by the ATSA's, there was an initial management proposal for ATCO's to vote whether to take on this job on night shifts for a 2% sweetner thus rendering 1/3 of the ATSA shifts not needed anymore.

It was a part of the deal but seems to have been removed as far as we were aware, probably due to PCS having a fit (an assumption on my part)
It also seems crazy that all ATCO's get to vote anyway seeing as it doesn't affect the majority, they'd just take home the extra 2%

White Hart is understandably hacked off!!!!

Silent Handover : interesting, roadshow hasn't come this far north yet, so we'll see!

[ukatco_535]

Yep,

I am a qualified met observer from my days flying from ships in the military, hence why I knew the acronym, but wanted to be sure we were on the same wavelength.

As an area bod, it does not affect me (it's an airport thing), so that is maybe why I did not know that it was to be added to ATCOs (even if it has since been removed)

I do not think the unions would or should allow such divisive things like this to be entertained, even tho we have separate negotions.

That said, please don't take this the wrong way as I have many friends that are ATSAs at both area and airports, but being able to make a forecast using SAMOS is not a great bargaining chip for ATSAs.

I agree it is one part of your job, but you should be making more of the fact that you are an integral part of the system, and a vital safety aspect.

if on top of normal duties and nothing else, an extra pair of eyes is always needed; heck, if a cleaner told me I was about to have an airmiss, I would thank them - some ATCOs have a superiority complex tho, unfortunately.

Hope this reads ok as I am rushing out the door!!

[White Hart]

As of yesterday (13th) it was still part of the offer - there is no reissued paperwork or statements from Management/Prospect or even PCS to indicate removal of this most contentious of items from the ATCO pay offer.

It has to be made clear to all ATCOs just exactly what is going on here, and exactly what you are being asked to vote for with regard to the ATSA/SAMOS issues.

and as for saying that 'its no big bargaining chip' - at Heathrow it will be just about the only thing we have got to bargain with - you can forget all that old b*lls about how 'valuable' we are, or 'essential part of the team' cr*p - Management and unfortunately many ATCOs have long given up on that concept. If they hadn't, and we're that 'valuable' to you and the job itself, then we wouldn't be facing this situation today. The ATCOs would (should) be showing full support for us - not voting to take away our jobs for a poxy 2% increase on their pay deal.

[5milesbaby]

SAMOS is part of the current pay deal, it was part of the presentation given to us yesterday by the Prospect reps, but as we are area controllers they said very little on the subject.

[callyoushortly]

hmmm interesting that our rep said within a day or two of conference that it'd been removed.......
I'd love to hear what our ATSA's had to say about his!!! Talk about wool and eyes!!! :mad:

[ukatco_535]

Unfortunately,

the handout we saw at TC did not show anything about SAMOS :confused:

We are still awaiting a brief

[jonny B good]

I am a 'REP at a busy southern airport, and I think this is the worst deal I have ever seen Prospect recommend (Yes, Conference endorsed the deal and it is recommended by the union and will be encouraged during the visits planned to explain its content). In the meantime, here's my view, for all it is worth...

Pay increase over 3 years is simply inflation based, underpinned by the on off spine point given in April 2006 and the 0.65% 2007 (approx 4.85%). This means an actual pay increase of about 1.5% per year.

SOAL/TOIL/AAVA....is like finding rocking horse s..t. Makes no difference to salary at an airport.

Reduction of future Trainee salaries...maybe ok to a point, but upon validation, they should be straight onto the ATCO scale as they will be doing the same job as the rest of us. (oh, and while on T&D did you know they won't get BUPA membership!)

New Salary Points for ATCO 1's....Again, some getting more than others. Not many ATCO1 posts at the airfields!

BUPA....ATCO 1 and above get Family membership from day 1, while the rest of use get the scraps of individual in 2008, thanks for that one....ALSO,it is not 'free', it is a taxable perk , for every £100 it costs, you will have £40 deducted from your salary in tax...can we opt out of this or is it compulsory??

Reduced Pension Contributions for ATCO1+.....does NATS pay extra into the fund to make up the contributions or do the rest of us subsidise ATCO1+'s from our pensions....I bloody hope not!!!

OJTI Hourly Performance....Ok, as an active OJTI we still get the 3%, but if you have 3 OJTIs on watch and 1 trainee, even doing all hours you can (4/3=1.3hrs per day) you will max at an additional 3% give or take..not such a great bonus for training and always putting your licence at risk!

4% for verifiers etc....No problems, extra work, extra rewards BUT..it should only be for Verifiers,Competency Checkers and Assessors..NOT WM's just because they think they should get it too!!

UHP/NOS.......why should NOS (mon-fri, 9-5) be the full UHP when someone working weekends and no nights or vice versa, recieve a reduced UHP This really isn't fair.

MET, the bit they conveniently left out of the Prospect Brief to members!! We are agreeing to take ATSA jobs (ie..peple lose their job, no work, unemployed etc) when management said Met at nights would not lead to ATSA job loses...we just did all their dirty work for the(EXTRA 2%??)...Well Done Prospect.

Almost done now. I have spent my career with an Atsa as an integral part of my watch/team. I can't believe how callously we are treating them, it really does appear that Management have divided the unions and are now dividing the ATCO grades. Please draw a line in the sand and send a message back to Prospect. When we were told a 2 year deal was the exception, I never thought it meant we were going for 3 yr deals with bonuses for the 'rich' and scraps for the 'poor'.

Please ask lots of questions and think about everyone when you eventually cast your vote. Being a union used to mean we looked after everyone equally, especially those most vulnerable. You decide how many people without a job in the future is worth you 1.5% pay rise each year...what if it was you!!!!

Thanks

Almost forgot...a point made earlier. MET observations only effect Airfields not TC, Area, College etc. Even if we at the airports voted against the deal it could still be implemented by people who it has no effect upon.This most definetly should not be a part of any pay deal

[5milesbaby]

You forgot to mention that students will not get any UHP/NOS/whatever the real acronym is no matter what position they are UNTIL they are actually valid. So they will be working nights/bank holidays/530am spins/late afternoons/weekends/christmas/easter etc on the basic pay only.

[jonny B good]

IDEA CONCERNING THE SAMOS ISSUE

Now that it is abundently clear where things are heading with ATCO's replacing the ATSA's providing MET OBS, may I suggest those ATCO's at Airports that really are concerned about the lose of ATSAs to make a strong statement in the following way.....

ATCO'S who agreed to provide Met Contingency should withdraw from the scheme and force a re evaluation of the whole SAMOS issue.

Yes, it may cost a few pounds from ones salary but lets be honest, they aren't paying us that much to begin with! I believe it would force management to drop the ATCO SAMOS condition from the Pay Deal.

Someone needs to make a start so guess I'm gonna be the sacraficial lamb. We need to do more than just talk a good fight. I hope some of you out there will do the same. If it is dropped from Pay Deal we can agree to night contingency again. If not, at least we have made our feelings strongly felt and sent a clear signal to management.

[chevvron]

What if you don't have SAMOS installed and there are no plans to do so?

[White Hart]

As a non-SAMOS Unit ATCO, you won't ever be in receipt of the additional 2% , so therefore I, for one, am asking you to consider the impact your 'yes' vote is going to have on the ATCOs, and most particularly the ATSAs, at stations where SAMOS is in place and is an issue of concern.

If you (and others) still vote yes for the pay offer as it stands, then the likelihood is that a number of Aerodrome ATSAs will end up losing their jobs because of it - time for a 'co-worker loyalty reality check' perhaps?

I know money is king, but I'd like to think that even in this self centred, me-me-me day and age, certain (old-fashioned?)principles will still hold firm.

[chevvron]

Personally I'll be voting in the negative anyway irrespective of the ATSA issue. Not that it'll make much difference 'cos the Band 4/5 units will always have an unfair advantage in 'democratic' votes of this nature.

[Dan Dare]

Well said jonny & White,

If you greedy lot vote for deals like this that screw the lowest paid of the team and put people out of work you will not be doing yourselves any favours either. IF management can encourage people to work for such tiny starting salaries and keep whittling away at our time off work (thats another extra 2% extra days worked per year) then what message does that give them for the future?

Please vote no.

[tired-flyboy]

Ok so as a student, what do i get or more importantly LOSE with this deal.

According to some of the blurb, TATC's and T&D scales will be reduced from March 2006.

Does this mean that being at the college (after the initial reduction) working my socks off i'm gonna lose out when i leave the college (AGAIN!!!!!)

How are TATCs supposed to live down here when the cost of rent etc is so high - Are NATS going to supply accomodation or do you pick up a tent when you go to the induction week???

Nobody explains anything to students!! Go on give us a clue

Rant Over

[055166k]

Previous deals have been pushed through by voting power at the Centres. NATS could have shot themselves in the foot this time; the deal is appalling, and the use of non-op days means that in real terms I am funding my own pay-rise. There is real and identifiable strategy to divide the ATCO workforce into "us" and "them" i.e. ATCO1 and above as management, and the rest as workers.
Vote NO....some things are more important than money.

[5milesbaby]

tired-flyboy, if you have already started at the college then no need to panic, you will follow the current scale you are on and it may even increase by the percentages in both January's. You should also receive UHP once posted to a unit. The new student pay will be given to those that haven't started yet and haven't been given a contract, so basically the course in March time.

Many collegues I've spoken to have uttered the "no" word once or twice too, don't be too fearful of the centres this time..... :suspect:

[Lookatthesky]

. - If a trainee fails to validate at a unit because they are not good enough, then do not back pay them for non productive years when they eventually do validate somewhere.

Hear Hear

This alone would save millions, it is an absolute scandal that NATS rewards failure with a big 'bonus'. As you rightly pointed out, what benefit is there to validate in quick time? Yet we all know people who have had tens of thousands of pounds in backpay because they failed at one unit then validated at another.

:yuk:

[BOBBLEHAT]

What about the units that already have SAMOS and have been using it for ages?

What about the inevitable introduction of FAMOS? because it's coming.............. whether you like it or not.

So,you might as well take 2% before you have no choice.

Can I just urge caution for everyone. Who will negotiate this deal if it is a NO vote? Your current PROSPECT BEC won't be involved that's for certain.

What WILL you settle for? Almost double RPI over 3 years is the offer - without giving up much. Baron has always said that you get nothing for giving up nothing. He also says that NATS is run for profit now. The good old days are gone. PROSPECT could get you alot more money but you would have to do alot more work. Make your choice boys (and girls)

As for cutting students pay. As someone involved in the recruitment process I can tell you that some candidates are astonished that they are being paid at all to be trained. Compare it to flying training......... There is a strong argument that we may just get better motivated candidates who aren't here for the cash.

I suspect I shall get a bit of grief for all this. Merry Xmas.

[White Hart]

Bobblehat

'So,you might as well take 2% before you have no choice.'

At least we know where YOUR loyalties lie:mad:

With regard to your ATSA colleagues, I also have no doubt that you will continue to hide behind a cloak of anonimity should the 'yes' vote prevail :hmm:

Big enough to say it on here, but at work ........ ???

[BOBBLEHAT]

Whitehart,

Unfortunately, it is naive to work on the basis that if we vote no to this deal that SAMOS won't be introduced at the airfields (will the ones already doing it stop all of a sudden??)

Don't confuse people that this vote is about loyalty to ATSA's - this will happen regardless of the outcome. You can't stop progress and cost savings, particularly in a company that has to save 50m quid in the next 5 years.

It's xmas - i don't want a fight........

[055166k]

Interesting last sentence.....
We did not ask for pay negotiations to run Jan-Dec, that agreement played into management hands hook-line-and-sinker.
The pay offer is structured around the financial year anyway, with the April percentage kick-in.
Clever management [pay negotiation management course human factors level 5] anticipate that with a mid-December salary payment and a huge gap to fill before a January salary payment coupled with those hideous post-Christmas bills, that a yes vote is likely for just about anything.
If you have any doubts as to the harmony between the union and management I ask you to recall the "Bill and Joe" show on radio 4 some time ago...never again please!
-As for the need to save £50million over 5 years----don't cloud the issue ---it took me 15 minutes and a calculator to save £63million over 3 years.

[jonny B good]

BobbleHat

Remember, the company is set up as 2 individual 'companies'. It is not the airports that are required to make masive savings under CP2 now is it? Any savings made under SAMOS will not count towards the 50 million. . Strange that the area that needs to make the savings is the sector recieving the greatest pay rises and perks.

[Tycoon]

Gutted.

Wrote a massive reply about all the issues discussed.

Previewed reply

:mad: ing lost everything

More angry about that than this pay deal at the moment!!!

I will re-do it when I have stopped fuming and kicking the dog!!

[chevvron]

On the issue of ATCO's verifying SAMOS met obs; when are the ATCO's going to be sent on Met Observer Courses when we can't all get our leave in anyway 'cos we're perenially short staffed. What sort of timescale are we talking about for the takeover. Do management realise how much a Met Observer Course costs including allowances?
NB For those Area bods who don't know, SAMOS obs. need to be verified by a person who is also a qualified Met Observer.

[SilentHandover]

Chevvron, to use SAMOS you do not need the full met observers course, it is a one day affair with then some OJT.

[White Hart]

bobblehat

'Don't confuse people that this vote is about loyalty to ATSA's ...'

Why should asking fellow workers for support be 'confusing'? Except to you, maybe?

My point is that Prospect has made our position exceedingly difficult by adopting this tactic. The long and short of it is that, in the event of a 'yes' vote, people I neither know, see, nor work with, will ultimately influence the future for the ATSAs at Heathrow and other stations. In exchange for a pittance, you, and many like you (who will not even be involved in Aerodrome SAMOS) are being asked to agree in principle to take over some of our tasks, thereby opening the door for Management to reduce the ATSA workforce - are you honestly telling us all on here that this is fair and above board? So presumably, if it were to happen to you, then you're OK with it, too? Yeah, right.. :mad:

You should be adult enough :rolleyes: to see and understand our predicament. To come on here and tell all you might as well just take the 2%, and thus consign a number of ATSAs to a very uncertain future, and then have the gall to say that I am 'confusing the issue' when looking for support ... well, what the hell did you expect me to say in response to that crass line of thought?

You would do well to take time out to ask yourself if you REALLY would like to be facing the same situation as we are at this moment?

No, I didn't think so :hmm:

[tribekey]

As a non nats guy watching this argument it seems to me that 10% over three years looks pretty generous (as someone pointed out it's around double the inflation rate).

Also,didn't you all vote to accept privatisation three or four years ago? Surely (and apologies if that's not the case) it can't be too surprising that nats is now trying to 'trim' the pay/perks/staff in exactly the way several people warned they would when privatisation took place.

Welcome to the outside world.

[Arkady]

The only vote we got on privitisation was the oppurtunity to vote for Tony Blair and his "our skies are not for sale " manifesto promise. He lied, we got sold. I'll never make that mistake again.

[eastern wiseguy]

you all vote to accept privatisation three or four years ago?


NO WE DID NOT!

The staff have no say over whether or not "our air was for sale"'
The pay rise is seen as being "generous" but as usual it is devisive,and IMHO another indication of Prospects' total disregard for the airfields.....

[White Hart]

tribekey

there's a whole world of difference between a Company trimming down surplus staff numbers using the applicable 'standard methods', and the same Company using a large Union to get (bribe?) their members to effectively vote another smaller Union's members out of a job by tying the big Union's pay offer to the little Union's staffing issues.

This below-the-belt tactic becomes even more despicable when many of those who vote for such a move will not be in eventual receipt of the applicable cash incentive themselves - they have to vote in favour of the entire deal - even the bits that don't apply to them, or they don't agree with - or they don't get the bit of the pay deal that does relate to them!

Its bad enough that the Management has stooped so low, but it's even worse that some members of the same Company workforce think so little of their colleagues as to even entertain the idea of voting in favour. Irrespective of whether the deal being offered to the ATCOs is good or bad, IT SHOULD NOT BE TIED IN TO ATSA STAFFING ISSUES! Some ATCOs don't even seem to think that what's going on here is morally wrong - this just totally sucks.

[Gonzo]

Did we vote to accept privatisation?

News to me!:confused:

[Banana Split]

tribekey, you seem to have completely grasped the wrong end of a stick. the only votes made on PPP were fixed at the Houses of Parliament. this deal sucks for a number of reasons, the ATCO1 deals, the SAMOS/ATSA underhandedness, BUPA separatism, 3 years and a whole lot more - we must vote NO

[viaEGLL]

I will be giving it my best effort to convince everybody on my watch at TC to VOTE NO.Come on guys and gals we are in the best position ever , 3 year deal what!!! AAVA agreed for the next 6yrs and not inflation linked!!!The company is running on AAVA's at the moment.As for meeting staffing requirements we 238 students through the college by 2008!!! i don't think so we have never achieved this before and with tougher selection on the way it's not going to improve.TC in the summer was using 40 yes 40 AAVA a week so that shows how many we are short, as for no money in the pot "delays are down and traffic is up by roughly 7%and that means 7% more profit for the company.
Waisting money!!! try the cost of building CTC for example thats where its all going!!!!!!!!
Over and out

[250 kts]

OK-let's assume the deal is kicked out. What credibiity/mandate do you think the negotiating boys and girls would have having already recommended this as the best available?

Having attended a fairly lively meeting the other day, the reps indicated the importance of this not being linked to the £50m savings imposed by CAA and also that this was a deal for all ATCOs despite the fact that NATS made it clear that they wanted NSL increases to be at an absolute minimum.

I'm just at a loss to think that in the present climate thery could have done significantly better than they have. At the end of the day it could be,say,1%-2% better over the period and maybe much more divisive than this deal appears to be.

[tribekey]

thanks to those who answered, sorry if i made a mistake over the original 'vote' for privatisation-the info came from someone in nats. I also take the point about the deal effecting nats atsa's, as several have said you all need to stand together on that point, however, we've been in exactly the same situation(at non nats unit), all staff saying they would only accept a deal if the atsa's benefit too but when it comes to the crunch this doesn't happen.

[White Hart]

tribekey

'they would only accept a deal if the atsa's benefit too but when it comes to the crunch this doesn't happen.'

The history of ATCO support for ATSAs within NATS doesn't make for good reading. Judging by the responses tabled on here and in the NATS forum, with a few notable exceptions (a level of support for the ATSA position?), I would expect the ATCOs overall to vote out the offer - but it won't be anything to do with the ATSA job issue that decides it for them. The bit that's dividing them (as always) is that some stand to do better than others within their own ranks.

Leopards don't change their spots..........

What I'm concerned about now is how my own Union is going to tackle the issue:ugh: :ugh:

[Scott Voigt]

Interesting thread... I wish you all luck...

We are going through contract negotiations over here on the other side of the pond too and ours is looking somewhat bleak right now...

The govt. wants to cut back and there is NOTHING about any sort of increase. Right now if the govt. has thier way with us, we are looking at a five year pay freeze with NO cost of living increases at all as well as no incentive bonuses for doing well. The also want to do away with all of our differentials (additional pay to our base pay, what I think you are refering to when you say spine.). They want to do away with night differential which is 10% for working between 1800 and 0600. (All differentials in the US are paid for actual time worked by the minute.) Training differential which is 10% and is only for time plugged in, which is normally in the five hour or plus range for a day. Sunday pay which is 25% for working the sunday. CIC pay which is controller in charge which you get if working the supervisors position, this is also 10%.

On top of this they want to start a B-scale for new hires to come in at a lesser pay band which will always be lower than what we get today. The new hires at the academy used to get GS-7 pay plus what we call per diem for when you travel. Today the folks get GS-1 with no per diem. They are elligible for govt. assistance for the poor while working there to give you an indication what the pay is like...

I feel for y'all's plight both in pay and with the ATSA issue. (We did away with most of our ATSA's long ago as they weren't deemed as useful as having a full controller by the FAA.)

Take care and Merry Christmas to all of you...

regards

Scott

[5milesbaby]

Scott, our pay ladder points are aka spine points, and you can jump an extra point for being an OJTI and examiner. Our differentials for nights/shifts is UHP which is about to be renamed and changed to cover those that no longer do nights or weekends or both due to being part time or at a non-24 hr unit. Someone able for the full normal palete of shifts will get exactly the same, someone doing permenant nights gets 125% of current, and those not able for something will get either 75% or 50% of current payment. The current payment is about £4500 per year for all grades gross and thats for weekends, nights, bank holidays, Christmas, New Year, Easter, starting any shift before 7am and finishing any shift after 8pm and is paid currently to everybody who falls under any or all of the catergories listed. We do however get compensated extra days leave every year for working the bank holidays etc (8 days for everybody usually).
Everybodies pay increases by one spine point every April 1st until you reach the top of the scale.

But the new deal needs voting in yet.......... :E

[bagpuss lives]

With regard to the issue involving the transferral of SAMOS duties from ATSAs to ATCOs - is this to enable airfields to get rid of ATSA cover during night shifts only?

Or something more sinister?

I'm surprised that PCS have colluded with this seemingly?

[nats]

Only an observationm but....,may I remind that in the last two decades that some NATS staff took on the jobs of Met Office Observers.This caused inter union discussions on a large scale because of the obvious job reductions that ensued for one group of workers to the benefit of the ATSA grade.Many reasoned arguments both pro/con were put forward at the time.Is it not history repeating itself ?
Can the staff wishing to repeal the current proposals hand on heart say, that if time were reversed that they wouldn't have taken on these extra duties.

[Standard Noise]

Well, all our ATCO's here at Brizzel, are Met rated so we do it anyway, and the ATSA's don't do nights. God help you all if they use us as an example. Still, an extra 2% for doing met sounds nice.

[chevvron]

Funny someone brings up the subject of a 'vote' on privatisation; way back in the mid '70's when it was proposed to set up the CAA, all NATS employees (NATCS as it was then) were offered the chance to sign for the CAA or remain in the D of T who actually 'owned' NATS then. A lot of people actually did choose to remain in the civil service, and were found jobs there.
I don't recall any such option being made available when NATS split from the CAA.

250kt:

maybe the 'negotiating boys and girls' should have gone for a vote before telling NATS Management 'yes'.

[chiglet]

nats,
A lot of ATCOs I know are Qualified Met Observers. [One guy went on a course as an ATCO [non NATS] then went on a Met course as a NATS ATSA :confused:
As you may or may not know, the Met was done by the MoD, hence the "switch" to ATC[ers]
At Manch, the Met Observer stayed "on site" [on the a/f] for quite a while until the ATSAs were "qualified"....[as SAMOS] met obs.
On "single manning", i.e. one ATSA at night, the ATSA is allowed a "Two hour responibity free break", so SAMOS goes "automatic" for two hours.
Also, [at Manch] we do not have any ATCOs currently valid/qualified on SAMOS.
As to "The training"
wot I got....was
A few hours in the Training Section....
8 hours OJTI [16 wx obs] with the Training Section
A "Test" with a Qualified Met/SAMOS examiner
That is how I got my SAMOS certificate. NOTE, not a Met Observers Cert .
I was trained by ATSAs.......will I train an ATCO?????
watp,iktch

[radar707]

Chiglet,

as I understand it the ATCO's undergo a CBT met observer /samos course and are then assessed by a man from the met office

[White Hart]

chiglet

'I was trained by ATSAs.......will I train an ATCO?????'

Unfortunately, you won't be asked to - they will appoint in-house mentors (same as appeared recently at LL ; 2 from CC and 1 from KK), and the Met Office guys will do the check-out at the end.

For this task, sadly, the question as to whether the station ATSAs will/will not train ATCOs is irrelevent - management will find a way around it.

Anyway, if we did, we'd want paying for it!:rolleyes:

[VectorLine]

Well, seeing as this has spilled out of the NATS forum, I may as well make it relevant to the Non-Nats peeps out there.

This pay deal also allows for a Band Zero. Ask Luton, Southampton (and Brizzel?) what Band One is like compared to five?

Anyway, the new band zero/base band is to allow NATS to continue its foray into airport contracts with lower bids. So when NATS comes in and nabs the contract at your aerodrome, you will be on the most derogatory pay scale imaginable - a pay scale rated as ZERO!


VL
VOTING NO

[chevvron]

Vector line - that's a new one I hadn't heard.
And our supposed union reps actually agreed to all this? (on top of the union demanding a 20% increase in subscriptions)

[250 kts]

chevvron,

Have they told management "yes"? I doubt it.
What I think they will have stated is that they believe they have gone as far as they can in terms of a negotiation and that the deal can be recommended to the members but would need to be balloted upon. Now I certainly don't profess to know as much as any of the negotiating team on the state of the company or what their objectives for an overall package were but I have to say that their arguments in favour of the deal were very strong and logical.

White hart.

Didn't all permanent ATSAs recieve a payment earlier this year to allow non permanent staff to be recruited into the grade so it would be a last in 1st out system? Sounds like you took a bung to help ensure you wouldn't be 1st in line to lose your job. Do we have any evidence any where in the country of ATSAs having been forced into redundancy?? My impression is that NATS are an excellent employer in that respect but no doubt I'll be given numerous examples in the coming few days to prove me wrong.

[White Hart]

250kts

'Didn't all permanent ATSAs recieve a payment earlier this year to allow non permanent staff to be recruited into the grade so it would be a last in 1st out system? Sounds like you took a bung to help ensure you wouldn't be 1st in line to lose your job. Do we have any evidence any where in the country of ATSAs having been forced into redundancy?? '

A payment was made to serving full time ATSA2s as part of a deal concerning staffing reductions NATS-wide as outlined under the 2005 Business Plan. For EGLL this meant a reduction of 5 ATSA posts (30 down to 25). Since the payment was agreed, there has never been any proposal or plan placed in front of us as to explain or identify exactly how this would be achieved - except that it all had to be completed before the move to the New VCR in Oct06. We are still at least 2 ATSAs over the agreed number of 25. There is absolutely no chance of VCA ATSAs being recruited into LL Tower doing the same job as myself as things stand, so, no, I would say that we didn't take a 'bung' to save our own positions. Based on the fact that over the last decade, the promotional prospects for LL ATSA2s has been probably the poorest within the Company, I'd say that we all knew without a doubt that some of us will be leaving via the back door before too long.

As to evidence of ATSA redundancy, I can only speak for what I have seen at LL. No redundancies as yet - BUT, with the above issue still to be resolved, no sufficient prospects of promotion within LL (there never has been!), other stations/centres facing a similarly identified overburden of ATSA posts in the not too distant future (iFacts, MACC etc), the issue of new staffing levels to be decided for our new VCR (the local proposal is for 20, but the target for management is 15 - can be achieved by getting ATCOs to do nights' SAMOS, no less!) - and a resounding message from Senior Management at our ATSA open meeting last July that there will be no pay-offs, and little or no chance of meaningful redeployment - you tell me how all this is going to be sorted without recourse to redundancy?

In the face of such difficulties, I find it very hard to see how the problem will be resolved without redundancy figuring somewhere in the equation, but, with regard to the issue being debated here, I am not prepared to stand aside quietly and just let another group of workers vote me out of a job for a paltry 2% in their paypackets.

I expect my Union to do EXACTLY what is required here - oppose such a move, and secure the best deal it can for the members it is supposed (!) to represent. As soon as this happens, and I see proof positive that the ATCO 'threat' has been removed, I shall put the soapbox away until next time........ and I'm sure there will be a next time :hmm:

[DC10RealMan]

I have been reading White Harts genuine concerns with some interest. How would ATCOs feel if the management in their negotiations with PCS agreed that PCS grades could "do" the GMP position at LHR or the planners position on night shifts at Swanwick without reference to either Prospect or its members. I would suggest that ATCO colleagues would be rightly outraged. The fact that this has been agreed behind PCS colleagues backs and for such a derisory amount is insulting to everyone concerned.

Tony Fallows
Swanwick

[radar707]

Perhaps we hould reserve our discussions for the NATS forum.

aIf you don't have access e-mail your user name and staff number to PPRUNERADAR and he will arrange access to the forum for you.

This is an important topic and not one best discussed in the public domain.

[Scott Voigt]

Awww man, I enjoy reading about what is going on over there. Helps give perspective as to what is going on with us...

regards

Scott

[AyrTC]

I do not remember a huge outcry from CPSA/PCS when they " took over " the ATCO's FIR jobs at the Centres. What goes around comes around,

AyrTC

[055166k]

The FIR job is not controlling as such, and as an ATCO that did the job for years I fully supported the transfer of task.
ATSA's are far better at providing the service than a significant number of controllers were:-
-much wider knowledge base, not sector-specific
-genuine zeal for the job, not somewhere to read the paper
-improved and more-specialised service due expertise and continuity
In the context of this thread, the FIR thing is a red herring, however the real point is the depth and amount of detail in the proposed offer that has not been explained at the various Prospect presentations....it is very apparent that different units have been given a sanitised and unit-specific positive gloss.
Does anyone doubt the value of Pprune?....the truth will be known.

[DC10RealMan]

Ayr TC,

The most important difference is that the ATCOs were given a vote by Prospect on whether to transfer the task to the ATSA grade which was carried by a majority vote. In the situation regarding the SAMOS task the ATSAs who do it now are not being given that choice.

[viaEGLL]

Anyway back to the original post ' NATS UK ATCO pay offer and start your own topic for the hard done by atsa's if you want!!!!

[White Hart]

viaEGLL

The thread is about the ATCO pay offer, and the ATSA/SAMOS issue is part of that offer until we are informed officially that its not. Therefore, my/our input to this topic is relevant.

So, if you are as upfront with your comments to peoples' faces at work as you are on here, and you work at LL, you will know which ATSAs to speak to about this - perhaps you'd like to make yourself known to us and discuss your views in person?:hmm:

[DC10RealMan]

viaEGLL,

I am sure that it wasnt meant to be flippant, but your remark about the "hard done by ATSAs" comes across like that. The "hard done by ATSAs" are not some anonymous group of people, but colleagues who you have worked with for years, who are individuals with wives/partners/children/mortgages and who are very concerned for their futures because of those great responsibilities. In a few years when with the advent of new technologies ATCOs are being made redundant I would like to think that I would be a little more sensitive to their plight.

Tony Fallows
Swanwick

[viaEGLL]

i wasnt being flippent to those atsa's just making a point about the topic being discussed and how things spirral out of control . As far as i am concerned i was totally unaware of atsa's restructure being part of our deal so White Hart perhaps you should start up your own little topic as you seem to have plenty of views to air !!! Face to face or not as i said i have wife/children etc so i want the best deal for myself so i will know how you feel but some atsa's have had a pretty good number for many years and also a chip on there shoulders as if they are owed something:mad: :mad: :mad:
Over and Out

[BEXIL160]

Ahem,

Back to the main topic.

I shall be voting no.

Why? Simply Too many strings and too long a deal.

Rgds BEX

[White Hart]

viaEGLL

Looks like somebody got out of bed the wrong side today! I much prefer 'face to face', but hey! it's late, and you started it, so .......

' I wasnt being flippent to those atsa's just making a point about the topic being discussed and how things spirral out of control '

So what has 'spirraled (sic) out of control'? Your ability to understand what's being discussed in both the pay offer and on here, or your efforts to restrain yourself from showing your obvious disdain for your ATSA 'colleagues'? I shall use the word 'colleagues' guardedly here, because I suspect that if/when your anonimity is blown at your workplace, and the ATSAs learn just what you think of them, they will be your 'colleagues' no more.

'so White Hart perhaps you should start up your own little topic as you seem to have plenty of views to air !!!'

I certainly have no need to start a 'little topic' about the 'us and them' syndrome - you are SO eloquently demonstrating it on here, there's no need! :p Those of us who work as ATSAs for NATS know ALL about that, as now do those people from outside NATS reading this thread! And yes, I do have plenty of views to air - and I have every right to do so - particularly on any subject that has the potential to affect me and my family on a personal level. If you don't like my point of view, then that's your prerogative - but it would be preferable if you refrained from attempting to belittle or intimidate either myself or any of my ATSA colleagues on here, or anywhere else for that matter. Keep it civil, and we'll keep it likewise. Being an ATCO doesn't bestow you with super powers or automatic intellectual superiority over others - its just a job title, and you're just another ATCO.

'Face to face or not as i said i have wife/children etc so i want the best deal for myself so i will know how you feel but some atsa's have had a pretty good number for many years and also a chip on there shoulders as if they are owed something'

I accept that you want the best deal - but so do I, and that doesn't include allowing people like you to determine my fate. As for knowing how I 'feel' - don't make me laugh! It's not your job that's potentially on the line here! And as for being 'owed something' - yes, perhaps we are! After years of being ignored on a professional level, regarded as second rate by people with a similar mentality to yourself - we're regarded as the menials of the Company - too bl**dy right we're owed something! For starters, how about a fair deal and a bit of honesty from the Company that employs us; some tangible support, (rather than just a free diary every year), from the Union that happily takes our dues every month; and maybe, just maybe, a little mutual respect from others with whom we work in ATC - and that includes you! :mad:

'As far as i am concerned i was totally unaware of atsa's restructure being part of our deal'

And that one statement speaks volumes! It highlights EXACTLY why our Union should speak up on behalf of the ATSAs with regard to this pay offer. By your own admission, you have absolutely NO IDEA about the impact of all of the issues on which you are about to vote; you've obviously made no attempt to look at it in any detail, except the bottom line - how much more cash you can cram in your already overstuffed wallet. I am sure that there will be others out there just like you, and it is this complete ignorance and disinterest of anybody and anything else that makes the pay offer, and those that promote it, so utterly despicable. At the end of the day, all you will be interested in is what YOU stand to gain at somebody else's expense - ultimately, maybe even mine! Selfish, selfish, bl**dy selfish! :mad:

'Over and Out'

Correct - as far as I am concerned (and probably any other ATSAs reading this) you most definitely are!!

Jeez .... I need a beer :sad:

[Mr Chips]

Permission to intrude, speaking as an EX NATS employee, and an ATSA when I was...

Whilst I appreciate that this thread was started as an "ATCO Pay Deal" thread, why do SOME Atcos seem to have such a problem discussing ATSA issues as well?

Cushy number? Chips on shoulders? I can NAME a multitude of ATCOs who have had a cushy number from NATS, many of whom seemed to think that they were owed a living because once upon a time they were valid at a unit somewhere. Don't try and lump that one purely on ATSAs

Pay deals affect all staff, be it in a morale sense, a team work sense, or a taking of jobs sense. FIR - no ATCOs lost their jobs over that, likewise Flow being transferred. If the SAMOS issue has the potential to cost ATSA jobs, then yes, everyone should be aware of the outcome, and not just think its 2% with no comeback.

Most experienced ATCOs value the input from experienced ATSAs. Most experienced ATCOs know that "Over and Out" is incorrect R/T phraseology and would never ever use it, even in jest.

Mr Chips
Ex Area Control ATSA
Ex TC
Ex NATS

[viaEGLL]

White Hart,

Point taken but i was just giving my view about the topic not them and us syndrome!!!
As you have issues with the union and the paydeal structure and to advise you the handout i received from the union is the only reference that anybody where i work has seen and been briefed on..
I have every respect for my atsa colleagues and do have a lot of atsa friends , so i do know their high working standards.
However, i have seen atsa with a chip on their shoulder just as you probalbly have seen atco's with the same .

So, as i originally said it was only the topic i was getting back too and if i had of been fully briefed by the wonderful union i am a member of i would probably have a more indepth knowledge.
Well,' read the rest of the post i hear you cry ' ok, when not knowing that it was a direct link to the pay then thats my downfall.
If the pay deal was down to a vote and this included your job on the line i would vote ' no' because in my view your jobs are more important than my extra spine point.
Over and Out was just a little attempt at a bit of humour thanks for the info Mr Chips:ok:
White Hart i think you should make this info more avaible to the uninformed people who are clearly not being given the full picture by the union.

[Mr Chips]

try again WH - cleared out some old stuff!

[White Hart]

For the benefit of any LL ATSAs, JonnyBG, callyoushortly, and any other interested parties - Heathrow PCS has confirmed tonight that Prospect has withdrawn the ATCO/SAMOS issue from their pay negotations.

Mr Chips - the postal service would appear to have resumed - chk yr PMs.. :ok:

[jonny B good]

WH

Many Thanks for the info. Glad it has been withdrawn at last. I can keep doing Met Obs on a last resort contingency basis at night (only if no ATSA available and all overtime refused!)

Good luck in your fight to keep the MET tasks. You do have the support of many controllers at the airports.

MERRY XMAS from JBG:ok:

[White Hart]

jonny

many thanks for that - yes, a very good bit of news. Good luck with your own issues too - and i sincerely hope the Prospect big wigs don't stand on our toes again!! :ok:

I suppose I can put the soapbox away now .......... until next time:E

merry xmas 2 you 2

WH


Arthur J negus - PM for you:ok:

[Dan Dare]

Got my prospectus from the union today, but even though they put a convincing case I'm still feeling the need to vote no.

As I understand it we would be agreeing to 3 extra days work in return for an rpi pay rise (ie keeping the same buying power for 2% extra working days). We would be agreeing to screw the lowest paid workers of the team with the argument that they will eventually be earning loads at the top of the pay scale. That doesn't really help them now does it?

The union says we will not get a better deal than this, but does that mean that we have to accept a redution of conditions at every pay round? Is this the continuation of a slippery slope that will leave us like the pilots with little pay and no pensions? Do I have to worry that they will negotiate away everything I enjoy about our conditions? Should I look for a new career now before its too late? Am I being too melodramatic? What do you think?

[chevvron]

The pay increase won't even cover the increase in my council tax plus I'll lose out on ASAP, so it's definitely no.

[BEXIL160]

Forms recieved, read and returned with an X in the NO box.

Too many strings, too long a deal.

Rgds BEX

[Funk]

Got my prospectus from the union today, but even though they put a convincing case I'm still feeling the need to vote no.

As I understand it we would be agreeing to 3 extra days work in return for an rpi pay rise (ie keeping the same buying power for 2% extra working days). We would be agreeing to screw the lowest paid workers of the team with the argument that they will eventually be earning loads at the top of the pay scale. That doesn't really help them now does it?

The union says we will not get a better deal than this, but does that mean that we have to accept a reduction of conditions at every pay round? Is this the continuation of a slippery slope that will leave us like the pilots with little pay and no pensions? Do I have to worry that they will negotiate away everything I enjoy about our conditions? Should I look for a new career now before its too late? Am I being too melodramatic? What do you think?

smells like the same convoluted rubbish that they got in Australia...more hours, pitiful pay rise, screw the young guys/gals...imho yes it is a slippery slope. No coincidence that the recently departed ATM manager of AsA was from KPMG London.
'trust me I'm an ATS provider manager' :D

[250 kts]

Dan Dare,
You are already being paid for those "3 extra days". If you happen to be at a unit that hasn't needed to use them,well lucky you. All this does is bring all units into line and allow NATS to utilise what they are already paying for.
chevvron, Not much can be done about your council tax I'm afraid. How will you lose out on ASAP? I understand you will be paid according to the roster you actually work. So if you have chosen not to do a full range of shifts why should you receive the same as a colleague who makes themself available for all shifts for that unit?
Bex. How would a shorter deal guarantee a better deal?? Not that many strings from what I was presented with. what would you be asking for if this were to be rejected?

[ukatco_535]

250kts

Good reply; the 3 extra days are used by a lot of units already....

As for shift allowance; I agree - why should units that finish at 10 at night get the same money as 24hr units?? Why should someone who refuses to do nights for 'personal reasons' at a 24hr unit get the full shift allowance?

I don't see too many strings attached - how would we achieve a better pay deal?? We are already screwing the new entrants to £10,000 a year. Any gain for ATCOs will have to come from somewhere.

Yes the company made a profit last year, but in comparison to the amount of outstanding debt, it was not much, especially as we are having to deal with new lower route charges.

I would like more money but I do not know how it is going to be achieved.... If the vote is NO I hope people are prepared for no pay rise this year...... the union has had 2 years to prepare for this one and it is still not implemented on time, even if we return a yes vote it will not be in the pay until March at the earliest - 3 months after the due date.

I personally will be voting no, but not because I think the main offer is rubbish; I think that as a company we are going to go rapidly downhill if we do not attract the right people into the college in the first place (if the college remains much longer - tho thats a different rumour); we cannot pay peanuts if we do not want to attract monkeys.

The other reason I will be voting no is the OJTI training pay. I think it is a very bad idea to encourage unscrupulous OJTIs to train longer and longer to get more money - again, it will not benefit the trainee and that, in turn will not benefit us. There is also a great risk of select individuals being given more training slots if they are mates with the rosterer.

There are watches at certain units that have not validated ab initios for years - we should not encourage these people by giving them more money; they should have their OJTI ticket ripped up.

We could get money savings if we trimmed down some of the most limp wristed and ineffectual management I have ever worked with; and stopped signing up to courses such as TRM. If we do have to do these courses, why not do them in house, instead of wasting £3 million on hotels etc??

[Tycoon]

Recieved my ballot form this morning.

Thought about putting a cross in the YES box but then put it in the NO.

I am band 4 and still bitter.

[ukatco_535]

I would like to think the banding thing would not rear it's ugly head... I am band 5 so it's easy for me to say that (some might say).

However, I wanted a scottish (any) airport as my first choice; I got sent down the area route. I wanted Prestwick; I got TC.

The pay rise is the same percentage regardless of what band people are in. People at Band 1 or 2 units who whinge about the highly manned (and therefore vote powerful) band 5 units should think what their comments are doing.... it will only turn some people against them.

There are plenty of vacancies at Band 5 units, we are screaming out for people... come down and work here. If you're excuse is you like where you live or you like working at your particular unit; then I am afraid I don't have time for peoples whingeing.

There are several people where I work who are dying to move north for various reasons, but we cannot spare them. They know what they would be paid if they moved; they think it is a fair pay.

The banding, although not 100% accurate, is a pretty good system. The 3 Band 5 controlling units are Band 5 for a reason, particularly Swanwick and TC.

[chevvron]

Yeah but, No but; don't you know that band 1 & 2 units are also short of staff? 2 off having babies is a lot of staff to some units.

[ukatco_535]

Chevvron,

I am not saying that band 1 or 2 units are not short of staff; I am certainly not saying they do not deserve more money.

Farnborough for one works it's socks off with IFR traffic against puddle jumpers.

What I am saying is that people at units that have been banded lower than the Band 5 units should not whinge and start saying that high paid Band 5 units will vote for the pay rise because "We're all right Jack"

What I am trying to get across is the point that people who say stupid things like that are alienating units, and certainly not endearing themselves to their 'rich' vote heavy colleagues.

A lucid argument as to why people should vote NO is the way ahead, not a statement along the lines of "if you vote yes you are stitching us up and thinking only of yourselves"

[terrain safe]

ujatco_535 said"As for shift allowance; I agree - why should units that finish at 10 at night get the same money as 24hr units?? Why should someone who refuses to do nights for 'personal reasons' at a 24hr unit get the full shift allowance?"
If you read the offer paper they do:-
100% ASAP paid to qualifying ATCOs whose shift rosters include night duties AND weekend working OR ATCOs whose anticipated shift rosters normally require a minimum of 203 annual attendances.
So those who do shirk nights still get the same.
You've gotta watch these people.....:{

[future atco]

"Lower pay for new entrants - now theres an idea - lets reduce it so much that the calibre of applicant is reduced (I've heard as low as 10-11K). OK, they may not pass the aptitude tests, but how long will the company accept lower numbers of entrants before 'massaging' the scores needed to join??
They've already bug***ed up the training by going too far at the college. We will end up with people with such a lack of aviation knowledge (I do not mean we need more spotters), that it will be dangerous. How does that tie in with becoming ???"

So are you saying that people who want to be ATCO's...........are all spotters and have no idea about aviation or even any commitment to the industry?
As someone who has her apptitude tests on Tuesday, you're doing a very good job of putting me off-after all, who would want to work with people who have an attitude like that?!!
There are too many narrow minded people like this on here..........you should all be a bit more encouraging!!!!

[ukatco_535]

Hi,

I am most definately not saying that!! What I am stating is that due to continual cuts, people may be put off joining the college - in particular, those on a second career.

The courses have more success if there is a good cross section of people.... the older people can bring a bit of maturity to the course,the young ones can get the oldies to lighten up!

The way the college is going now, in my opinion, is a backward step - we are supposed to be the world leader in ATM, yet we are reducing the training time given to students with sometimes detrimental affect.

There is even a rumour that in the future, initial college training will be done abroad, in a means to save money - how can the company do this and claim to be the world leader?

People who apply to NATS should be given the best opportunity to succeed - and at the moment, upper management is not working to this.

'Spotters' et al are more than welcome - but not exclusively so - we need a good cross section of people, to keep the company fresh.

Good luck in what is a great job, workng with a great bunch of people (i.e. the people on the shop floor)

[speedbird2727]

Anyone got any info on trainee salaries? Ive read on adverts that the its circa £17k, but reading some of these posts im now not too sure!

[TATC]

Anyone got any info on trainee salaries? Ive read on adverts that the its circa £17k, but reading some of these posts im now not too sure!

It is about to change with the new pay deal.

Salary while at CATC will be circa £10,000, with a modest living allowance.

On leaving the college sucessfully it will rise to £15,000 and then £16,000 a year later.

[Gonzo]

TATC,

Union literature I have in front of me says that under the new pay deal, 10k at the college, as you say, and then 18k, then 19k a year later.

[AutoP]

TATC,
Union literature I have in front of me says that under the new pay deal, 10k at the college, as you say, and then 18k, then 19k a year later.
Will there still be a £100 wap ON TOP of the new deal of £10,000 at college? Also, I seem to read conflicting/varying accounts of what happens after college with regards to salary, validation etc; can someone please give me a general overview and timescale assuming things go relatively to plan (a big assumption, I know).
Thanks.

[10W]

● Average time at DAT&S (College) for an Area TATC (Trainee) will be around 12 months and average time at DAT&S for an Airport TATC will be around 9 months (includes some element of re-coursing)

● TATC moves onto TP 1 scale on posting to Unit and TP 2 scale after 24 months. LACC/LTCC and Heathrow are Band 5.

● TATC then moves on to V scales after initial validation (no change)

● Holding a student at a Unit will increase length of time spent on revised scales



DAT&S £10K (Tax efficient)

TP1

Band Base £15K
Band 1 £15K
Band 2 £15K
Band 3 £15K
Band 4 £16.5K
Band 5 £18K

TP2 (24mths)

Band Base £16K
Band 1 £16K
Band 2 £16K
Band 3 £16K
Band 4 £17.5K
Band 5 £19K

[Gonzo]

Ahh, that's where I was getting confused! I didn't realise the TP scales were dependent upon banding. Thanks 10W:ok:

[AutoP]

Thanks very much, 10W.

Any idea about the £100 payment at college?

[GT3]

It is about to change with the new pay deal.
Salary while at CATC will be circa £10,000, with a modest living allowance.
On leaving the college sucessfully it will rise to £15,000 and then £16,000 a year later.

Only if there is a Yes vote.

[Nick Falzone]

good to see there are so many good samaritans worried about trainee pay, it is a good idea to give them something to work to, and thn the money shoots up, people don't get paid much more than peanuts at law college, or as trainee accountants, but when they qualify they are rewarded, as are we.

the pay deal has its ups and downs

banding will never be fixed, but when will you listen, people cannot transfer to your band 5 places, it is not allowed, and there are no VNs

TC is a broad term, the area controllers in there are worth paying band 6, as they are far busier than NERC with less people, but I still have to wonder about the controller on thames radar sat in the same room on top whack wages.

funny old game

let's go on strike!!

[BEXIL160]

Words twice

Far busier than http://www.nerc.ac.uk/ ..... yeah, well they would be, wouldn't they;)

BEX

[TATC]

banding will never be fixed, but when will you listen, people cannot transfer to your band 5 places, it is not allowed, and there are no VNs
TC is a broad term, the area controllers in there are worth paying band 6, as they are far busier than NERC with less people, but I still have to wonder about the controller on thames radar sat in the same room on top whack wages.
funny old game
let's go on strike!!

Just a little note- before christmas there was a VN issued for TC Approach function - isnt that a VN for a band 5 unit.

[Nick Falzone]

Area validation isn't likely to hold much sway with an Approach VN

Just a little note.

[GT3]

And what about the long term LHR VN??

[radar707]

Nick Falzone,

An area validation holds for an approach unit, just ask anyone who went for the last lot of jobs at EGCC.

[Nick Falzone]

So you think that an area validation would help when applying for VN to approach only at TC? There's a guy at EGCC approach (ie wouldnt need to be sent to the college to do an approach course, unlike people with are validations) who has been waiting more than a year thus far to get released to TC.

And don't get me started on the last VN for EGCC tower/approach..... pleeeeease!

The only point I was trying to make was that transfer requests do not work out of MACC, not that I personally wish to, so whenever people from NERC shout about having plenty vacancies, come and have a go etc, it isnt that simple, as a lot of people would rather be there than have an impending move to Scottish.

I am more than happy with my lot, although more money would never be turned down.

[YourFriendlyATCO!]

TC should be band 6 as they are far busier than NERC with fewer people???

Ha ha, i love the arrogance and ignorance in this job sometimes!! Pathetic

[ukatco_535]

YourFriendlyATCO

That was postyed by a MACC controller if you read carefully - so arrogance does not come in to it.

Ignorance?? Well NERC is busier than TC - it's busiest unit in Europe, TC is 4th - according to a recent report.

However, that is based solely on number of flights, including overflights and does not include complexity.

Banding is an emotive issue an is difficult to quantify. However when the banding was established - TC and NERC where given the highest scores for complexity/level of traffic, with TC ahead of NERC, both had scores well above 1100 (whatever that scoring meant). Heathrow, the other unit that is Band 5 that has a controlling function, had a score in the mid 900s.

Just to throw the cat amongst the pigeons - was EGLL really a Band 5 unit or was it a Band 4 unit but the powers that be felt they had to put 'the worlds busiest (international) airport' in the Band 5 category?? := :=

[TATC]

"So you think that an area validation would help when applying for VN to approach only at TC? There's a guy at EGCC approach (ie wouldnt need to be sent to the college to do an approach course, unlike people with are validations) who has been waiting more than a year thus far to get released to TC."

the fact that it takes ages to get released from manchester is not the fault of the band 5 units. It is the same the other end of the scale - ie moving from EGLL tower to another unit.
You always have to wait for replacement before you can get released wherever you work and in almost all jobs.

[YourFriendlyATCO!]

I don't really like the banding system. We all do the same job. Plus with us at Swanwick giving more and more airspace to manchester, surely they deserve to be a band 5?? I think there are too many divisions in this job. But thats just me!! Ha ha

[Hootin an a roarin]

Nick Falzone

'And don't get me started on the last VN for EGCC tower/approach..... pleeeeease!'

I wasted time out of my busy life to apply to that self elevated place Manchester. My face obviously didn't fit either or I wasn't the other half of an ATCO1 with no experience in the tower or even an approach rating(How that person got the job I will never know). Just out of interest they are again thinking of taking people direct from the college as they are really short(What a surprise). I have an idea. Stop making valid controllers jump through hoops to get in there and have the indignity of having to be interviewed by 2 self important people when the controllers have the backing of their own G.M. and a recommendation to move in the first place. We aren't applying for a management position! Problem solved!!!!
Also everyone may be interested on the latest rumour of Warton coming into the NATS family. I have no problem with this however the controllers there are currently paid equivalent of a Band4 unit and would have to remain the same if they joined NATS. Flushes the whole banding system and the model/equation down the cr****r and is going to cause uproar and even more resentment if it occurs.

By the way I think the pay deal is ok as a lower band ATCO. Everyone for a change is getting the same %. Extra 3 days we have got away with in the past but are in our contract so can't complain. Not an OJTI as the majority at airports aren't and 15 grand as a student (including allowances) isn't bad. Not as good as before but may attract the people who really want to control rather than those looking for a good wage. It could backfire as I am aware but we will have to wait and see.

Hootin

[Quincy M.E.]

TATC,

Union literature I have in front of me says that under the new pay deal, 10k at the college, as you say, and then 18k, then 19k a year later.

....but if this is the case I will be screwed; I wont be able to afford to train what with my mortgage and all.

I was told at first assesment that we would get 17k basic plus £100 per week living expenses.

[Angrel]

i heard a rumour that this 10000 while trg would be tax free?? any confirmation on that? and what is 'modest living expenses' entail?!?
the other question is, will it be voted in?

[DC10RealMan]

Just out of interest who says that "NATS is a world leader in ATC management". The management thats who!. How do they quantify that?. I am a "worker" and as such I would take issue with that statement. If NATS is a world leader in ATM, then I am glad I dont work for any of the others.

[Nick Falzone]

Nice one!! :ok:

[Widger]

NATS should move the centres, CTC and the college, all to the highlands of Scotland. There's a nice bunker going spare near Aberdeen! Then you would not need a pay rise. If you are going to place everything in the V expensive southern "riviera" then you will have problems paying people enough to live/rent etc.

[ukatco_535]

DC10realman

not arguing with you there - The company and management are pants but the workers are amongst the best.

But if they (management) have any delusions about being the best surely they cannot farm out the basic training?!!!?

[throw a dyce]

Far aboots is iss bunker?There's some nice £600K+ houses going up round the corner.Try getting one of those on Band 2 money? There is an oil industry here but then I don't think anyone in the Saaf has noticed yet;)

[mattcarus]

Hi all,

I'm half-way through the NATS application process and the news of the new pay deal worries me slightly - to the extent that I am seriously considering withdrawing my application.

I was always expecting to take a pay cut to join NATS but £10k is ridiculous, is this final or is the vote yet to take place?

Cheers,
Matt

[Gonzo]

Votes to be in by 8th Feb I believe.

[mattcarus]

Blimy, that was quick, thanks.

[250 kts]

mattcarus,

Do you want to be an ATCO?-if the answer is a resounding "yes" than you will put up with the reduced salary PLUS £100 week living costs. Once you get through the progression up the scale is quick with a salary around £48k after 4 years. This deal is aimed to reward those who get through the course and validate to become a useful and productive controller. Hard I know but unfortunately true in this modern world we live in.

At least you do get trained and paid at the same time-not always the case in some other professions I can think of.

[flower]

I wouldn't today be able to afford to start at the college as a trainee, it was hard enough 15 years ago when we were getting paid more a year (without living expenses admittedly) than the proposal we are voting on. I struggled to keep my head above water financially the whole time I was at Bournemouth as I had earned considerably more prior to becoming an ATCO.
There is no use using the argument oh well if you are only in it for the money what use are you, many of us do not have the financial back up behind us of parents to keep us going as will be the case of students at the college today.

Isn't it great that our students will probably be able to claim income support as they are paid such a low salary or have to do a second job just to keep a roof over their heads and run a car to get them to and from college

[ukatco_535]

Flower

well said - we are going to lose a lot of people joining on second careers. These people are a big help on course bringing a bit of maturity to some of the wet behind the ears school leavers.

Mind you, the youngsters play their part by adding a bit of youthful enthusiasm and spirit. We are in danger of losing that mix with the new student pay levels.

I don't know if you have heard the rumour that management are thinking of putting initial training out to tender (possibly Germany I heard) - this will be another way of putting people off IMHO.

'World leaders in ATM'?? Management are doing a great job to make sure we never live up to this boast they make. If the rumour is true, then how can we claim to be world leaders if we cannot train our own ab-initios from scratch??:rolleyes:

[5milesbaby]

Are the ballot forms being posted to home addresses or picked up at work? I know of at least 5 union members on my watch that haven't received them yet - or is that the idea to get the vote through.................... :mad:

[Gonzo]

Surely it depends which address the Union has for correspondence. I received mine at work, but others had received theirs at home.

[flower]

I received mine at home about 2 to 3 weeks ago but I am aware of others who hadn't had them by last week.

[250 kts]

I guess they can only react to the information each person gives them. If the address isn't up to date than you probably won't get a vote-a bit like any other organisation-they aren't psychic. And even the conspiracists would have trouble thinking that Prospect know who would vote "no" and sending out ballot forms accordingly.:suspect: :suspect: :suspect: :suspect:

[5milesbaby]

Prospect have my correct address, and definately 2 other peoples, and still no ballot forms..........conspiricy????????

[055166k]

Telephone number on reverse of your union membership card.
Voting is by numbered ballot paper and not the double-envelope system which ensures anonymity.

[MancBoy]

5, you can access your contact details that prospect have through their website

www.prospect.org.uk

MancBoy

[ukatco_535]

Cheers for that manc boy - I have informed Prospect using the official form by post twice now with no success -will try the geek net route.

And yes, still waiting for a ballot paper - time running short.

[Quincy M.E.]

mattcarus,
Do you want to be an ATCO?-if the answer is a resounding "yes" than you will put up with the reduced salary PLUS £100 week living costs. Once you get through the progression up the scale is quick with a salary around £48k after 4 years. This deal is aimed to reward those who get through the course and validate to become a useful and productive controller. Hard I know but unfortunately true in this modern world we live in.
At least you do get trained and paid at the same time-not always the case in some other professions I can think of.

It is all well and good preaching that anyone with 'real' desire will overcome all obsticles and take the reduced pay in order to become an ATCO but this is a naive philiosphy.

I am not concerned with taking a pay cut because I enjoy living like a king (I wish) in fact the pay cut would be only a matter of a few hundred pounds a year. My worry is if the new trainee salary is voted in. Just because I am not prepared to break up with my partner and sell our flat to be able to afford to train does not mean I lack drive and determination. I am unable to achieve the impossible.

[5milesbaby]

Cheers for that link Manc, looks like a Prospect problem as the website had a different address for me, suprising as I know I've changed it as I've been receiving all other Prospect related mail. Now who's thinking "conspiricy" :ouch:

[steve_atc]

Im due to start CATC in March and understand there has been a significant pay reduction to £10k, and although im not in this for the money, i will therefore be having to cut my current salary by 50% in order to start my new career.

I wanted to know if you can help me out with a couple of things, so i can be fully prepared for a few lifestyle changes.

1. Will the £100 tax free living allowance be included in the new pay deal or is this besing scrapped?

2. Can someone xplain to me the NATS pay bands once validated,- there are Bands 1-5 i believe, is this dependant on the unit - a smaller/quieter unit being less paid, and Swanwick/Heathrow being a higher paid band? - if so - what are the average pay scales for each of the bands i can be likely to expect?

Thanks for the help.

[MancBoy]

No problem 5

[future atco]

hi

i havent got as far as you yet but i do know that the proposed 10K pay is to be voted on around the 8th Feb so its not definite yet. at the moment it stands at around 15K with £100 week expenses?

The only reason i know this, is that we were told this during our test day last tuesday. So dont panic just yet..........he didnt seem to think it would be voted in but if so, it will be tax free so i guess will work out around £7-800 per month???

hope this is some help!!

Lou

[261A]

A lot of the replies have included something about 'bands'.
What are the bands as in what number for what airport/control centre and what is the range of pay in each band?

Cheers

[250 kts]

Sorry about the reply Quince but that is the way of the world. NATS has for too long had a truly enviable initial package for trainees that until a couple of years ago allowed someone to be earning around £30k/year without them ever having validated. The training bills including salaries were going through the roof with only around 65% validating at their 1st unit. The last pay deal and this one if it goes through will cut salaries in the early stages in return for a faster progression to a much higher final salary.
NATS is no different to any other employer in that it wants value for money whilst training students but rewards those that make it, reasonably well. Airlines often make student pilots pay for their own training and then bond them as well. Well we aren't quite there yet but I think bonding would be a sensible way to go for what is now a profit-making organisation,whether we like it or not.
My understanding is that the salary is £10k PLUS £100/week for living expenses.
The bands do go 1-5.
1 is the quieter units going upto 5 at LACC/LTCC and Heathrow.
If this latest offer goes through then top of the scale at 1 will be around £56k basic and at band 5 around £80k basic. A band 5 after 5 years in the job is over £50k. So you see how it rises quickly provided you pass the course and validate.

[YourFriendlyATCO!]

250Kts

You're living on a different planet. You're right in the fact that you can't do this job purely for the money. However, you also can't survive at the college on 10k. The college is very intense and can be very stressful. To bond with your course, and to relax, which i feel is essential to get through, means going out every now and then with your course mates. On that wage, you wont be able to afford to do anything but work. I wouldn't have got through and validated in that situation. In fact, most of my course wouldn't have.

We may well be saving money, but i believe the pass rate at the college will unbelieveably go down even further than the pathetic figure it's at at the moment. This lower pay will not attract the right people.

[Hootin an a roarin]

YourFriendlyATCO!

"You're living on a different planet. You're right in the fact that you can't do this job purely for the money. However, you also can't survive at the college on 10k. "

This really winds me up. I 'survived' for a number of years (and not that long ago) as an RAF assistant on just over 13 grand a year. I travelled home every weekend and went out on the pop every now and again. 15 grand means you can't go out and get trolleyed every night. TOUGH! Stay in and do bookwork and work hard for a year and occasionally go out and 'bond' with your course.
You may be right and the money might not attract as many applicants however it may just attract the RIGHT person who can see beyond the initial wage and is really interested in becoming a controller and will work their n**s off at the college. The reward for the hard work will soon come back to them.

p.s. 80 grand at band 5 units, different world!

[foghorn]

As someone who joined NATS "of a certain age", I can honestly say that the new pay scheme would put me off applying now.

A year or so on ten grand plus WAP whilst in the college I could manage, although it will no doubt be a barrier to some. For me that's an affordable hit and one definitely worth taking.

It's the removal of the ATCO (T&D) grade for a super-TATC grade whilst unit training that would really put me off. I really could not support my young family on ~£16k pa with no UHP in this part of the world for up to two further years after college. Compare that to the old scale £27k pa gross ATCO T&D pay for those training at certain Thames Valley units.

My own opinion is that these pay plans will change the demographics of applicants to being almost exclusively those in their late teens/early twenties: that seems strange when supposedly NATS is trying to encourage us oldies into the job as we're perceived as a lower training risk.

Therefore I voted no. Sure, the pay's good when you validate, but this whole deal appears to be a reverse Robin Hood: taking an obscenely large percentage from those on the lowest pay, to whom the money matters the most, to give it to the highest paid.

Finally the new pay scales may present NATS with an interesting problem for airports rated trainees. £35 - 40k has been on the table recently at non-state airports for those fresh from college with both ratings. Retention post college could become a real problem for those with certain ratings: leave NATS and your pay more than doubles.

Edited for speeelinggg

[tired-flyboy]

Hootin an a roarin,
Correct me if i'm wrong but if you were living in barracks at your unit then you would have had subsidised accom and food (taken direct from wages). If you weren't in barracks (ie there weren't any) and off camp then you would also be subsidised.
Also you say you travelled home every weekend - true that doesn't cost a lot, but from what i remember you either walked to work (in barracks) or MT was provided if you lived off camp.
you also probably drank in the NAFFI at subsidised rates, etc i could go on forever.
A trainee at the college on £10k who HAS to buy food, pay rent, get to the college etc etc.
I think your argument is a bit ropey!!
Sorry - don't think there is really a comparrison

[GT3]

250Kts

You're living on a different planet. You're right in the fact that you can't do this job purely for the money. However, you also can't survive at the college on 10k. The college is very intense and can be very stressful. To bond with your course, and to relax, which i feel is essential to get through, means going out every now and then with your course mates. On that wage, you wont be able to afford to do anything but work. I wouldn't have got through and validated in that situation. In fact, most of my course wouldn't have.

We may well be saving money, but i believe the pass rate at the college will unbelieveably go down even further than the pathetic figure it's at at the moment. This lower pay will not attract the right people.

Maybe the cut in wages might stop all the going out and getting pissed every night as I have heard is common a la college now.

[Hootin an a roarin]

tired-flyboy

The trainees will get an allowance on top of the 10 grand to pay rent as I did when I was at the college. Rest of the money to do with as they please and if they want to go on the pop then that is up to them. I was simply making the point that not everyone who joins NATS is coming from a background of a well paid job and the whingeing is making it sound like the students are going to be on the breadline. It WILL deter some but I would have still gone down to the college as I always wanted to be a controller and would hope others feel the same way.
Don't get me wrong I am not a fan of this current crop of management and this system may be yet another mistake.

By the way travelling home in the RAF can cost a lot if you are based at Odiham and live in say Sheffield, plus MT transport to camp, I did 6 years in the RAF and never heard of it, you walked or drove. NAAFI prices weren't overly cheap but other bars on camp were but alot of the time we went into town. My point being that I wasn't rolling in cash but I managed and didn't live on the breadline.

[YourFriendlyATCO!]

I said "bond and go out with your course every now and then". I never mentioned anything about drinking. It is possible to do other things to bond as a course than become an alcoholic.

And you want people to study their nuts off doing bookwork every night?? Well, the people on the new courses are doing just that at the moment, and the pass rate has gone down even further to less than 50% getting through every course. On Area One 10 people passed out of a course of 24 i think it is.

[TATC]

10k a year works out at abour £833 a month before deductions, take off 6% for pension leaves £785 per month then take off tax, I reckon you'll be luck to see much over £700 net. (works out as £5.20 an hour for 40 hour week)

Now this is a decent enough amount of monet to live on a month for a single bloke. Assuming you can find somewhere to stay for £100 a week ( when i was at the college the average rent for a decent B&B was already reaching that and will probably be more than that now)

There is now no paid trips home, so if you have an applicant with a family then they will be going home every weekend - part of the responsibilty of being a parent. Depending on where you live that could be very expensive.

Also think about those who would want to apply as a change of career would probably be taking a pay cut. I assume this because 10,000 a year is less than i was earning in a call centre before I joined NATS 6 years ago.

[Nick Falzone]

Pilots, lawyers, teachers, doctors and accountants
All these professions require fine minds (well, the last 4 do!) and all as far as i am aware pay a pittance or less than a pittance (or make you pay them £50,000 and be bonded) until you are fully qualified. Then it is understood that the cash will roll in as you are of some use to the company.
I can see the main beef with the reduction of salary, but no other industry pays people while they train as I am aware to the same extent as NATS, and most of it just gets pi$$ed up the wall in Bournemouth.
The money spent on wasted wages on trainees who didnt make it was always going to be earmarked as an area for sorting out.
let the debate rage on!
as an aside an awful lot of voting slips are sat untouched in the post room in a band 4 centre near old trafford!

[Hooligan Bill]

Finally the new pay scales may present NATS with an interesting problem for airports rated trainees. £35 - 40k has been on the table recently at non-state airports for those fresh from college with both ratings. Retention post college could become a real problem for those with certain ratings: leave NATS and your pay more than doubles.


But more often than not these rates only apply to experienced ATCOs or post validation for those without any experience. Therefore someone coming out of the college would still be on a lower rate initially. The only difference is you would get to the higher rate slightly faster this way than with staying with NATS.

[foghorn]

But more often than not these rates only apply to experienced ATCOs or post validation for those without any experience...

Ah, but will it stay that way now that the supply of Aerodrome-rated chopped-by-NATS people has dried up? Even without any experience or a validation, a dual-rated person comes to a regional with at least £50k invested in them already over someone yet-to-be-trained.

As I said, £35-40k has been on the table recently for those fresh from college with both ratings but no civilian ATC experience nor validations. If it's not an aberration, it could be a sign of the market waking up to the future of not having a steady supply of rated NATS rejects to hire.

Anyway, as has been said, recruitment and retention are really management problems.

[Spamcan defender]

YourFriendlyATCO said:-
"I said "bond and go out with your course every now and then". I never mentioned anything about drinking. It is possible to do other things to bond as a course than become an alcoholic."

Yeah!!, we all know what other things go on at the college in order to bond with ones coursemates :D :D :E

Spamcan

[stranex]

Just to throw some more wood on the fire.....
I heard that the new pay deal also precluded payment of WAP! ie £10k + sod all. Then again....seeing as the union can't even agree on the details of the new OJTI payments (paperwork says 0.05% of QUARTERLY salary per hour, reps say 0.05% of ANNUAL!?!?!) it doesn't surpirse me that there is some uncertainty about it
I agree that 10k will put off A LOT of students who are moving from other jobs, have familes and mortgages to pay. Please stop saying that lawyers/pliots/doctors etc etc have to put up with a pay cut or a bonded period....in the MAJORITY of cases in those industries, the individual is pretty much guaranteed a job at the end of their training.....there's always a risk but would you honestly give up a steady salary, move away from your family and take out a loan just to put yourself through college where, even with all the effort in the world you stand only a 50/50 chance of ending up as a vaild controller? I can't see many doing it....leads to less applicants....with a constant rate at the college leads to lower quality students.....leads to harder OJTI workload and fewer validations.....leads to more work for those of us that are valid and....later retirement :eek:
As an aside.....can you really trust a union that doesn't even know it's own pay deal? I know the negotiators put a lot of time and effort into getting us these deals and I'm sure they honestly believe they are acting with the best will, but maybe it's time to bite the bullet and pay for some professional negotiaters to get us the deal WE want....stand back and light the touchpaper ;)

[Ali Bongo]

I heard that the new pay deal also precluded payment of WAP! ie £10k + sod all

The answer is how pay will be 'paid' to trainees at the college hasn't been finalised yet.

What is known is that it will be a tax efficient maximum of £10, 000. Whether that means it is all paid as a salary of £10k or a salary of £4k with the difference being made up of an allowance is still being finalised by the accountants.

What you can be sure of though is that the £10k recived by a student at CATC will be the 'salary' that accrues the least amount of tax for both NATS and the individual concerend.

[coolbeans]

Nick Falzone
"Pilots, lawyers, teachers, doctors and accountants
All these professions require fine minds (well, the last 4 do!) and all as far as i am aware pay a pittance or less than a pittance (or make you pay them £50,000 and be bonded) until you are fully qualified. Then it is understood that the cash will roll in as you are of some use to the company."

As far as I was concerned the last 4 on your list (dont know much about trainee pilots) would spend the majority of their pre-qualified time at university earning a degree in Law, accounting, medicine or teaching. There they would recieve grants, student loans and in the case of teachers a hefty cash payment to entice them into the job. For the most part these folks will be young, single students and making do on a pittance of an allowance while still finding enough money to go on the pi$$ every 3rd day is an essential skill every student develops.

As Stranex said the majority of these people will have a guaranteed job after uni.

Its all well and good saying that a lower starting salary will attract people who really want to be controllers and can see past the initial salary but 10K is a joke, as its been pointed out a single guy/gal can probably make do if (s)he lives a frugal lifestyle, but there is no way in hell that you could afford to support a family or pay a mortgage on that pittance along with living at the college.
On a different note, does anyone know if students at the college will be eligible to apply for student grants/loans?

[YourFriendlyATCO!]

Spamcan

Aye, that kind of "bonding" can be fun too!!! Ha ha

[Nick Falzone]

Am entirely open to correction, but as I understood it
PILOTS- paid nowt as they train up (for upward of a 1.5 years) and in fact have to find sometimes 50k to pay for their training.
LAWYERS - law degree at uni, then law school (no pay, ok a student loan which you have to pay back, and if you fail then you have no job), then 2 years on a meagre salary to qualify on the job, as it were. once again, if you dont make the grade you will be asked to leave.
TEACHERS - degree at uni. then a pgce course for a year, pittance of a wage, and not much of an increase once you are qualified, if you do not pass you dont get a job.
DOCTORS - 6 year degree course on standard student conditions, if you fail you wont get a job
ACCOUNTANTS - degree at university, then pretty craply paid until qualified which can be upto 2 years until exams are passed, if you dont pass them, you're out.
Grants are based on parents income at uni, so dont count on getting that, loans need paying back.
If ATC was thought of like law college no-one would be moaning.
None of these other careers "guarantee" jobs, and maybe NATS has thought that they would rather attract younger people from uni etc, as they will be a longer return on their investment.
Turn up at the college , work hard, get a half decent wage for being what is essentially a student, then when you pass the sky's the limit.
Anyone considering a later in life career change knows the pitfalls, who would pay a controller even a third of what they earn now if you started a new job?? How could you pay that mortgage? You couldn't, so NATS is no different.
I think with the courses being shorter (and once they are actually working, ad teaching correct foundations) it's not such a hugely bad idea.
Show me the money, Jerry!!

[Mad As A Mad Thing]

Perhaps if they made the training more effective we wouldn't lose so many people in the first place. A union should be there to protect the most vulnerable workers, not just to grab more money from any available source for the highest paid & most influential.

What this comes down to is conscience, & who will be the next vulnerable minority in need of the vaseline?

[NudgingSteel]

sorry, can't let that one pass....
vulnerable workers? get out into the real world, talk about:
ATCO salaries...
allowances...
hours you work and the time off you get...
job security of a valid ATCO...
... to people having to work long hours to feed a family on genuinely low wages in any other employment sector, and ask them how vulnerable they think you are!

[250 kts]

250Kts
You're living on a different planet.
It would appear that there are a few more on "my planet" than I thought.
Great post Nick. Maybe someone else living in the real world.

[YourFriendlyATCO!]

If thats the real world 250kts, you're welcome to it. I'll happily stick to my fantasy one. People are a lot happier there!

Take care of yourself now

[VectorLine]

It is clear that NATS are trying to attract a younger person to the ATCO job. That's understandable because they have more useful years left. With many ATCOs taking retirement in their early 50's - an 18 or 20 year old is going to be more productive than a 30 year old.

OK, the proposed salray isn't great, but for someone just out of 6th form it's not too bad. The college course is dramatically shorter than it used to be, so depending on discipline and unit, you can be out of there in 6 months and valid within another 9. Just over a year and you're on a decent pay scale. It's not even that hard. It's nowhere near as academic as any college or university course I have attended. The only stress is the practical summatives and they are no more nerve wracking than any other exam (unless you are particularly dodgy).

As a concession, maybe those streamed for area or London airports should be on a higher wage to start with?! because of the extra time to validation and the higher banding of those units.

£10k is not a good wage for a career change, but it is clear from this offer that NATS don't really care about attracting that type of applicant anymore.

[I'm not joking sir]

As a concession, maybe those streamed for area or London airports should be on a higher wage to start with?! because of the extra time to validation and the higher banding of those units.
Isn't that why the V scale is there so that those at busier units don't get "penalised" financially because it takes longer to validate? Also, there is still a difference between someone who validates at a "quieter" unit who is operating on their own licence and someone training on an OJTI's licence and that deserves to be recognised paywise.

[055166k]

Your opening paragraph makes good sense. It is unfortunate that such a lesson has taken so long to learn.
I appreciate that the old ways of filling supervisory positions by a time-in-job formula was probably out-dated, but it was replaced by a management selection process that was/is alien to the operational coalface worker; however it favoured the Graduate entrant who not only expected 40-year job security but also that he/she would only control traffic for 5 or 6 years [7 to 8 at the outside] before progressing on the career ladder.
What resulted is an organisation so top-heavy that the severe shortage of operational controllers is hampering the ability to cope with traffic growth.
This can to some extent be camouflaged by the 24/7 nature of the job, because the abnormally large operational workforce associated with it tends to smokesreen the manager/worker ratio.
Of course with several thousand applicants for each intake there is no need to offer more than £10k, the shrinkage in applications may streamline and expedite the selection/training process.

[TATC]

Your opening paragraph makes good sense. It is unfortunate that such a lesson has taken so long to learn.
I appreciate that the old ways of filling supervisory positions by a time-in-job formula was probably out-dated, but it was replaced by a management selection process that was/is alien to the operational coalface worker; however it favoured the Graduate entrant who not only expected 40-year job security but also that he/she would only control traffic for 5 or 6 years [7 to 8 at the outside] before progressing on the career ladder.
What resulted is an organisation so top-heavy that the severe shortage of operational controllers is hampering the ability to cope with traffic growth.
This can to some extent be camouflaged by the 24/7 nature of the job, because the abnormally large operational workforce associated with it tends to smokesreen the manager/worker ratio.
Of course with several thousand applicants for each intake there is no need to offer more than £10k, the shrinkage in applications may streamline and expedite the selection/training process.

the 10k salary is significantly less than most graduate jobs - whic will deter graduate entries and as such people with experience of self learning

It is also a bit less than some school leaver posts in my home area, which will discourage the less ambitious people from applying

those people with a real interest in the job will wish to apply, and with the reatively short time at the college 10k will not put these people off - nor will it put off poeple with ambition. What will be lacking is applicants with experience of self learning - A-levels are still pretty much spoon fed and require little learning and reading outside of the classroom. The same cannot be said of ATC. there is also a steep learning curve - especially on the new courses which has resulted in a high failure rate.

There is the danger of recruiting a lot of youngsters wh will see the time in bournemoth as an excuse to party and lounge on hte beach in stead of doing the required studying - ie a guaranteed income while partying.

As for the V scale compensating those at LTCC or SWanwick etc where the cost of living is higher and time to calidate is longer I dont see it as doing this. Firstly the V scale is paid on validation - which means those training at LTCC will on average be on the 15,000/16,000 salary longer than those going to airports who validate quicker.

[I'm not joking sir]

As for the V scale compensating those at LTCC or SWanwick etc where the cost of living is higher and time to calidate is longer I dont see it as doing this. Firstly the V scale is paid on validation - which means those training at LTCC will on average be on the 15,000/16,000 salary longer than those going to airports who validate quicker.

It's not compensation as such more of a halfway house. If the V scale wasn't there, the pay gap would be a lot bigger as you'd go from T&D to the main scale. However, you can't wait until the guys off your course have all validated before you get any reward for validating and using your licence.

On the other hand, you could say that by extrapolating the "low pay to start for bigger future financial reward" arguement, those at regional airports should be paid full scale when they validate as their salary scales are ultimately lower than their peers at the bigger units.

[Mad As A Mad Thing]

sorry, can't let that one pass....
vulnerable workers? get out into the real world, talk about:
ATCO salaries...
allowances...
hours you work and the time off you get...
job security of a valid ATCO...
... to people having to work long hours to feed a family on genuinely low wages in any other employment sector, and ask them how vulnerable they think you are!

This isn't about how ATCO's are paid or job security relative to other professions. This is about whether you as an individual can justify screwing colleagues at the bottom of the ladder to fund your own payrise.

From your post it would appear that you already feel salaries/job security/time off etc are at least satisfactory compared with other professions. So if you are already doing so well, do you really need that extra few percent so badly? The crucial point being which group of your colleagues will you be screwing in 3 years time to get a few percent more than if the pay deal was to be applied fairly across the board & underpinned by a minimum amount for those for whom an extra 3% is nowhere near the kind of sum those higher up the scale receive.

[250 kts]

This isn't about how ATCO's are paid or job security relative to other professions. This is about whether you as an individual can justify screwing colleagues at the bottom of the ladder to fund your own payrise.

From your post it would appear that you already feel salaries/job security/time off etc are at least satisfactory compared with other professions. So if you are already doing so well, do you really need that extra few percent so badly? The crucial point being which group of your colleagues will you be screwing in 3 years time to get a few percent more than if the pay deal was to be applied fairly across the board & underpinned by a minimum amount for those for whom an extra 3% is nowhere near the kind of sum those higher up the scale receive.

This is not about "screwing colleagues". The people that this will affect are not yet employed by NATS and hence they will make a judgement whether they wish to apply for a career with this as a starting salary.They are certainly not colleagues,just prospective candidates to join the organisation.
I understand that NATS was/is spending around £50m on training with a failure rate around 30%. it is clear that this can't be allowed to continue either financially or with that failure rate. What this deal does is attempt to redistribute some of that money into the payscales for those that ACTUALLY VALIDATE and become a useful and productive ATCO. Those people then progress quicker up a scale to a higher maximum where they will spend the majority of their career. I for one can't see the problem with that as either an objective or indeed as a result.
This really is a no-lose situation because if the supply of applicants dries up NATS will have no choice than to increase the starting salary again and the savings produced now will already be in the pay scales.
I think it's called short term pain for a long term gain. 4 years in the job will mean nearly £50k/year on this deal at a Band 5. Not bad for what could well be less than 2 years as a trainee.

[Bandbox4Training]

Not strictly linked to the pay deal but if NATS are so concerned with cutting salary costs for new recruits I find it absurd that an ATCO (T&D) can fail at one unit, be chopped and shifted to a "quieter" one whereupon sucessful validation is, as I understand it, still rewarded backdated ATCO pay from 2 years after leaving the college, however long training takes and however much money it is (recently well over 10k I've been led to believe!). If that isn't a waste of money then I don't know what is!?!
just an opinion.

[MancBoy]

Bandbox, we've recently heard about one of our trainees who didn't make it on DTY on safety grounds, who went to manchester and recently validated, clearing 17K with the backdated pay!

How can that be right?

People are being rewarded for failure. The sooner this ends the better!

[foghorn]

People are being rewarded for failure. The sooner this ends the better!

It has: backdating went in the last lot of TATC pay cuts that came into force in October 2004. Folks who are still getting backdated pay upon validation are those that joined prior to then who are still in the system.

[Nick Falzone]

2 answers to this off shoot of the thread
a) some people were not necessarily given the best chance/ opportunity to validate at some units, be that mentors, too few hours etc, some admittedly may have just been pants. Some were "held" for years during the NERC opening, did the wrong AVC for the sector, the list goes on.
with the hours and experience mounting up, it is a lot more likely they will validate at their next unit. And the back pay was a hidden bonus, nobody would want to go thru the hell of training reviews, will i get reposted, or am i off to stack shelves in tesco. And if asked they would have glady settled for a validation, a jb, and no backpay, nobody asks though!
b) If NATS are going to pay it, then the ATCOs aren't exactly gonna say , you know what, I don't want it, put it towards your cost saving.

It's always good for the Band 4/ Band 5 banter too!
And PS, beware the chinese whispers of back pay, I heard a trainee at Manchester got so much back pay he just ordered a bugatti.

[incise]

I agree that 10k is a somewhat meagre salary for the newly initiated, but there are still plenty of applicants because the rewards are clear and gauranteed if you can make the cut. In terms of this scheme not attracting the right applicant my opinion is that this is slightly off the mark as it would bring people in that are instilled with the dedecation and determination needed to make a contribution. Also if it does only appeal to the youngsters then it is fact that they are more pliable and can be moulded easier into a successful ACTO than someone older and set in their ways.

Im sure your management cant justify flinging thousands at someone just to end up with no return, you have to recognise that as good business scense.

How many of yous have had a whip-round for the newbies? not many me thinks.

[Lookatthesky]

I agree that 10k is a somewhat meagre salary for the newly initiated, but there are still plenty of applicants because the rewards are clear and gauranteed if you can make the cut. In terms of this scheme not attracting the right applicant my opinion is that this is slightly off the mark as it would bring people in that are instilled with the dedecation and determination needed to make a contribution. Also if it does only appeal to the youngsters then it is fact that they are more pliable and can be moulded easier into a successful ACTO than someone older and set in their ways.

Im sure your management cant justify flinging thousands at someone just to end up with no return, you have to recognise that as good business scense.

How many of yous have had a whip-round for the newbies? not many me thinks.

A little short-sighted methinks!!

May I suggest that it would actively discourage 'older' people from applying. By older, I mean those who already have a career and are looking to change. They may, of course, still be 'instilled with the dedication and determination....' but may have wife/husband/kids/mortgage and 10k a year will not be financially viable.

Regarding a 'whip round', well that's not really necessary is it? Those who feel that strongly about it will surely have voted no :}