Welcome to Nats. NOT !!!

[radarman]

A word of warning to anyone whose ATC service is in the frame for a NATS takeover.
NATS took over this rocky little relic of the Empire in January, on a three year contract. Pay and conditions weren't too bad under SERCO, but the assistants were near the breadline. Right from the start we were made to jump through flaming hoops changing over to the NATS management system. We are only a small unit, with no admin staff at all, so everyone has been loaded with extra secondary duties, taking work home to comply with impossibly tight deadlines. As well as being controllers and assistants, we're all now document owners, impact assessors, QA verifiers, and God knows what other titles. Having worked our fingers to the bone to comply with the demands of our new masters, what reward do we get? Zilch! Just a few crumbs to lift the lowest assistant above the cleaner's pay? Nope! What about the NATS Staff Handbook, which lays down very detailed pay scales for ALL staff? Nah mate, not entitled! And where does the union stand in all this? In the background, cuddling up to management, wringing its hands and saying there is not enough profit in the contract to give any extra. :ugh: NATS costed their bid using SERCO's old pay scales, not their own as laid down and agreed with the unions, so under TUPE we're stuffed! Thanks Mr Barron, your new stripes suck, the new logo sucks, so does your pay policy. :mad:

[zed3]

Seems to be the modern management syndrome . Extra tasks , many promisses but no results . Management laughing , targets reached - aren't they good . To cap it all we were given a booklet " Dignity of the staff at work " , just leads to frustration and anger , not good in an Ops Room . Do the "managers" understand ? Nope .

[055166k]

radarman
Ah! You've noticed. NATS is actually a giant management company, ATC is just a minor part of the business. Up here at Swanwick one of the senior managers doubles as a Supervisor on watch, doubles as a radar controller, doubles as a planner controller, doubles as advanced systems developer, is a human factors specialist...in fact he quadrohexotriplicates a variety of tasks simultaneously. He would be proud of you!
The rest of the workers are as human as you.......and sympathise.
Your post seems to indicate that your union is batting for the other side.....that is very unusual.....never heard of that before.......why is my nose growing longer???

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<one of the senior managers ........ doubles as a radar controller,>>

Now that is something I really would like to see........ Do you sell tickets for these events?

[63000 Triple Zilch]

Well, if the airfield keeps closing down due to ATC sickness then I guess that NATS contract will be pretty shortlived. I hear that the Gib. government were pretty displeased!!!

[man friday]

i was amazed when the decision to close the airport was taken, according to management we are not short staffed at this unit!!!! so someone must have been available to cover the sick controllers if this were true
if no one is available to cover talkdowns it has been sugested by management that we should just switch off frequencies, so as not to be distracted!!!god knows what the implication would be if we missed a distress call because our published approach frequency was switched off during opening hours
as for the atcas, they could easily make £4k a year more with better hours working for one of the many internet bookies in gib, its only their dedication, and empty promises from management that keep them in the job. some are even having to be economical with the truth in order to obtain mortgages as their wages are so poor!
it is not uncommon for them to be expected to come into the office on their days off to give new Nats inspired briefs to airfield drivers. no day in lieu or overtime is given.
the unit has been operating mainly on goodwill from its staff for months now, and sadly there is only a finite ammount of this, and its rapidly running out.
after the fanfare arrival of nats, with their chest of shiny beads and mirrors and string of empty assurances, i find myself nostalgically remembering Serco as an employer. Christ things must be bad

[radarman]

63000.
'Pretty displeased' is a slight understatement. Apoplectic would be a better word. And the local press! 'Shock closure of airfield', 'Disgraceful action by MOD.' etc etc. For heavens sake, it's the first time in at least 29 years the airport has closed for staff shortage, and only two flights got diverted.
But to get back to my original thread. At least the sickness was genuine this time, but it might not be next time. The general feeling is that we've all worked our fingers to the bone to fit our operations and administration into the NATS mould. Now we've done it the company has turned its back and told us that although we are part of the NATS empire,we don't qualify for the NATS pay structure. Morale is now pretty low, especially amongst the assistants. There is talk about taking turns to 'throw a sickie', thus allowing other staff to come in on their days off and get overtime. Never in 12 years of SERCO was this ever mentioned. As I said in my original post, be very careful and suspicious if your unit is threatened with a NATS takeover. It seems set to become a two-tier company, and I would advise present NATS members to look carefully at any future pay negotiations.

[feinwerkbau]

Last weekend I had a road sweeper laugh when he found out what the ATCA pay was. Think I'll be asking if there is a spare broom around....might get paid more.....

[EGXX]

Have NATS lowered the ATCA's pay from my days there then? 97-03..
You all still doing flexi's?? :mad:

[TATC]

isnt this the reason NATS brought in the Band 0 pay scale, so they could pay peanuts for the contracts they take over in the future. Out of interest are the ATCAS there on the Variable term contracts or permanent contracts, and are they stilled called ATCAS considering that grade doesnt exist on NATS pay scales

[radarman]

TATC.
Funny you should mention the Band 0 pay scale. Our union rep was told by Prospect that we shouldn't press too hard for improvements as there is an unpublished Band 0, and he wouldn't advise going down that road. What exactly is Band 0, and where can we find details?
As to the ATCA contracts, everybody is still effectively on the old SERCO permanent contracts as TUPE applies. NATS have had the business now for six months, but there has been no information as to when we will ever have a NATS contract. In fact there has been b*gg*r all information about anything. Any queries about our terms and conditions are answered by one word - TUPE. All we do know is that we are working as a NATS unit, with all the associated extra duties I described in earlier posts, but getting SERCO pay. I just hope, for his sake, that Paul Barron isn't contemplating a bar-stool session here. He might find himself dumped in the middle of the bullring in La Linea. (What's it worth? :E )

[feinwerkbau]

TATC: Yes we're still called ATCAs @LXGB (must be so they can pay us less than ATSAs). EGXX: Pay hasn't been lowered but it hasn't been brought in line with NATS pay and it is unlikely to. Like radarman said the magic word from the powers that be seems to be TUPE.:mad:

And no we are not doing flexis at the moment.......:D

[PPRuNe Radar]

Great thread guys .... let's get this stuff out in the open :ok:

If you are NATS, then you deserve support from NATS staff and unions :)

[SilentHandover]

Barron is planning a trip to Gib, according to the latest update of his online diary on the NATS intranet at least.

[radarman]

Any lawyers, accountants or business-heads out there? If a company (NATS) completes a lengthy review of its pay structure, agrees the results with the unions, and publishes the detailed figures in its staff handbook, isn't it then duty-bound to pay staff (present and future) the agreed and published figures? If so, how was NATS allowed to bid for LXGB using SERCO's salaries rather than its own (higher) costs published and agreed with Prospect? And having got the contract claim that there is not enough profit margin to pay the salaries agreed with the unions?
If NATS is using dirty tricks like this, I would warn all other staff to keep a very sharp lookout, and not take everything they see in the staff handbook as gospel. As 055166k said, NATS is now a giant management company. Don't think of it as being interested in Air Traffic or its controllers.

[BDiONU]

Any lawyers, accountants or business-heads out there? If a company (NATS) completes a lengthy review of its pay structure, agrees the results with the unions, and publishes the detailed figures in its staff handbook, isn't it then duty-bound to pay staff (present and future) the agreed and published figures? If so, how was NATS allowed to bid for LXGB using SERCO's salaries rather than its own (higher) costs published and agreed with Prospect?
Just a quick two penny worth.

Do the Gibraltar staff fall within NATS pay grades etc? I assume that they're not operating with full UK ATCO licenses (yellow one) but under some hybrid MoD licence (blue one). Therefore they are restricted in where they can work. Similarly the ATCA's are not (again this is my assumption) NATS ATSA grades and are not mobile but restricted to one place.
Would seem to me perfectly fair and reaonable that there should be different pay for those working under different terms and conditions.


I shall stand by for the attacks and flames now. Ho hum.

BD

[Chilli Monster]

I assume that they're not operating with full UK ATCO licenses (yellow one) but under some hybrid MoD licence (blue one).
You assume incorrectly - they are full blown "yellow peril" holders inspected by SRG.

[anotherthing]

in reply to Radarman

Just to throw this into the debate - The pay scales as per the NATS intraweb have the specific units that are on each pay band written down on the appropriate Excel spreadsheet page.

As they were negotiated with the names already down on individual paybands, would any new units i.e. Gibraltar, be exempt from access onto these pay scales because they are not down in black and white??

Not saying it is fair by any means - just wondering how the company is managing to weasel out of paying Gib a recognised NATS payscale (even if it's band 1)..

Maybe the fact that units are mentioned by name next to pay bands gives them a get out clause for any new units.

What are the unions doing about it?? Surely they should be fighting for equal rights (they maybe are - it's just not very public if it's the case).

At least they have not cut wages... yet.

I would not trust this current management one iota - they are not interested in their number one asset - people, They are too busy waving their willies about and trying to outdo each other with the next new wave management babble.

Beware of the pensions.........:uhoh:

[radarman]

Thanks everyone for your thoughts so far.
BDiONU and Chilli Monster. The current Gib licence situation is far from clear. Up till eighteen months ago we had the old UK style yellow licences (not the really old ones with yellow tie-laces, although I've still got mine). Then there was a bit of a diplomatic hiatus concerning the ANO (Overseas Territories) Act, and the governor (God bless him!) exempted us from the requirement to hold a licence at all. ???????? :ugh: Now we have the latest style UK licence, but it only has the ratings, which have not been validated. We also have ASSI licences, which will be our operating licence when ASSI take over regulation. But they're not due to do that until the end of June, so at the time of writing we are still operating on the governor's exemption. I think. A well known ex-CAA inspector is coming later this month as an ASSI consultant to do a full inspection and check the LCE/TRUCE paperwork, but since we still won't have a legal regulator by then, I don't quite know what the basis for his inspection will be. Oh, I forgot to mention our operations are based on JSP552, not MATS Pt 1. :confused: Confused? So am I. (Mods- sorry about thread drift)

[BDiONU]

The current Gib licence situation is far from clear. <snip>Oh, I forgot to mention our operations are based on JSP552, not MATS Pt 1.
Thanks for sort of clearing that up. So the situation as to licensing and operation requires some sort of formal footing and regulation as you're currently effectively in limbo. I would humbly suggest that until that is sorted out NATS (and the unions) can't work out where you are on the pay scales.
Thats my personal viewpoint and (for those who know me) nothing 'official'.

BD

[anotherthing]

BDiONU -

What you say is surely just a way for management to get out of paying a fair wage. Licensing issues aside, the pay scales are (supposedly) based on complexity and how busy a unit is.

Whether the ATCO concerned holds a 'Yellow Peril' or not does not change how hard or not they have to work.

NATS took the contract on knowing the anomalies in the licensing - or at least if they did not, the management needs another boot up the :mad: .

Working out where someonone should be on the pay scale is merely an issue of applying the much heralded banding formula - no more and no less. Other issues are just an excuse

As for operating on blue MOD licences and being restricted as to where they could work (whether or not that is the case)... what about an ATCO that is only capable of working at a band one tower only unit - surely by their ability they are limited in their ability to work elsewhere and therefore, by your reasoning, should maybe not be on a pay scale!!

A question for Gib controllers and ATSAs - do your new terms of employment state that you are a mobile grade?? If so, that is even more strength to your elbow. Good luck :ok:

[BDiONU]

BDiONU - What you say is surely just a way for management to get out of paying a fair wage.:
I beg to differ. Are they getting paid less now than previously? I assume that they were given a Contract of Employment to sign (its a legal requirement in the UK but maybe not abroad) which detailed the pay and the terms conditions of employment?

NATS took the contract on knowing the anomalies in the licensing -
I believe thats correct and its being sorted from what Radarman tells us. I fail to see how NATS could have addressed it before they were awarded the contract. No company is going to go through a process of fixing something when they're one of a number of bidders.

As for operating on blue MOD licences and being restricted as to where they could work (whether or not that is the case)... what about an ATCO that is only capable of working at a band one tower only unit - surely by their ability they are limited in their ability to work elsewhere and therefore, by your reasoning, should maybe not be on a pay scale!!
No, they can be moved to any other terminal unit in the UK, AFAIK there is no 'grading' of controllers as to capability such as busy, medium or low. They get posted where NATS needs them and they can apply to go elsewhere. The same cannot be said for those who are not operating on a full UK licence.

BD

[CAP493]

<<one of the senior managers ........ doubles as a radar controller,>>
Now that is something I really would like to see........ Do you sell tickets for these events?
You're just a little out-of-date LHR Director := Certainly, as far as NATS Airports (NSL) is concerned, there are plenty of 'senior managers' who - if ATCOs - also provide operational cover, albeit for sickness cover and/or leave relief.

Such locations include:-

Aberdeen
Belfast
Birmingham
Bristol
Cardiff
Gatwick
London/City
Luton
Southampton
Stansted.

I'm not talking here about watch managers/supervisors but individuals who are part of the unit management.

The days that you (and I) can recall 25 years ago at LHR when not even the watch managers/supervisors were 'valid' have long gone. Even 15 years ago at places like Gatwick, such staff were required to hold a Unit Licence Endorsement ('validation').

NSL (the NATS Airports business) is not the inefficient, overblown civil service 'Ministry' animal that it was (which in part, explains the remarks from the staff at LXGB, about which I make no comment...).

:suspect: :E

[anotherthing]

BDiNOU

I think we are talking at cross purposes here - NATS does not grade ATCOs as such (unless you are destined to be a hallowed Heathrow God). However there are ATCOs out there who for whatever reason are unable to validate at one unit and end up working at a quieter and easier unit. I am talking about ability here, not vagaries in the training system, which is far from perfect.

These ATCOs are not, by their inability to work at more complex/busy units, fully mobile. Just the same as NATS ATCOs with blue licences are not fully mobile.

I mentioned it merely to make a point - not all NATS ATCOS can do all the ATCO jobs in their discipline.

I would not expect NATS to address any anomolies in the licensing issue before being awarded a contract - it does not make sense as a business. However, banding and pay scales within NATS are based solely on complexity and levels of traffic - they have nothing to do with licensing issues.

It's a bit of a moot issue anyways, as Gib controllers have yellow perils. However it's to do with principle and ethics, something senior NATS management seemed to have lost along the way.

NATS management have a transparent policy of trying to divide and then conquer it's workforce - for example the £250 bung given to people who did not qualify for HTD if they voted to bin it for those who did qualify, not to mention the upcoming pensions issue.

There is enough division within the company caused by the airports/centres issue and who makes what profit etc etc. We do not need there to be further issues with foreign contracts.

The only possible way around it would be to make a sub division of NATS to deal with foreign contracts and run it as a separate business and to make sure that everyone was aware of this... otherwise as a fully mobile grade, ATCOs are within their rights to request a transfer from say Luton to Gibraltar (tho getting it would be another thing) and all ATCOs/ATSAs/ATCEs would rightfully expect to be on the same set of company pay scales (with the banding).

[BDiONU]

The only possible way around it would be to make a sub division of NATS to deal with foreign contracts and run it as a separate business and to make sure that everyone was aware of this... otherwise as a fully mobile grade, ATCOs are within their rights to request a transfer from say Luton to Gibraltar (tho getting it would be another thing) and all ATCOs/ATSAs/ATCEs would rightfully expect to be on the same set of company pay scales (with the banding).
I totally agree, but I am still making the point that Gib ATCO's are 'different', at least I would assume so as I would assume that as they're not being treated the same then they're not signed up to the NATS terms and conditions. This is something that Gib staff can tell us.

BD

[chevvron]

CAP 493 - you forgot Farnborough (as does everyone else) a Band 1 unit where the GM has to fill in when people are sick.

[CAP493]

CAP 493 - you forgot Farnborough...
Sorry Chevron: unintentional. Just didn't know for sure whether your GM also has to provide operational cover a/r. The fact that she does, merely underlines the point about the modern NATS Airports business.

Thanks for the correction.

:ok:

[ForestFlyer]

You're just a little out-of-date LHR Director := Certainly, as far as NATS Airports (NSL) is concerned, there are plenty of 'senior managers' who - if ATCOs - also provide operational cover, albeit for sickness cover and/or leave relief.
Such locations include:-
Southampton

I can't be 100% certain about this as it's second hand info, but I believe the Southampton Unit Manager is now actually a Tels guy, and not a qualified controller at all, unlike the man he replaced recently.

[Loki]

ForestFlyer:

Before we know it they`ll be putting HR people in those positions, or anyone else prepared to sing the company song (however ridiculous the words are).

[Number2]

You don't need to be an ATCO to be a manager - certainly that'll be the way NATS see it. 'Managers' are probably much cheaper than ATCOs!

[anotherthing]

Number 2 -

I think that is where NATS has gone wrong in the past - it has tried to make managers out of ATCOs. Some of the ATCOs were totally inept due to personality (but their face fits), others would probably do a good job if they were given real management training - something NATS could learn from others including the miliatry.


Bring in managers from outside - as long as they are given a proper induction programme that allows them to totally understand what is involved in our business. That includes the duties of all personnel.

Unfortunately, although the Red Barron may be a good hard nosed businessman he is perceived as not giving a t:mad: ss about the workforce and therefore has failed at one of the most important parts of being a manager.

[Hootin an a roarin]

"Before we know it they`ll be putting HR people in those positions, or anyone else prepared to sing the company song (however ridiculous the words are). "

Whilst not strictly HR, the recent appointment of the Luton GM has proved that! Slippery Slope!!

[radarman]

BDiONU,
You asked whether we are signed up to NATS terms and conditions. Why are the answers to everything to do with Gib so complicated? The short, and technically correct answer, is 'No'. The reason being that NATS took us over under TUPE, so we are still bound by the Serco T & C's. However, we have undergone six months of intense NATSification (Nazification ?) and indoctrination into the NATS Management System, and as far as the unit is concerned we are NATS. But although the staff are employed by NATS, the pay and conditions are still as they were with Serco. Apart from allowances, it would seem, where for some reason we are allowed the NATS scale of accomodation and meal allowances on official trips. Management seem to be cherry-picking bits and pieces from the various terms and conditions so we don't know where we are, who we are, or what we are entitled to. This is what is pi**ing us off.

[TATC]

ForestFlyer:
Before we know it they`ll be putting HR people in those positions, or anyone else prepared to sing the company song (however ridiculous the words are).

Isnt that the reason why the position of "Manager ATC" has been created at airports - so the GM can manage the day to day running of the unit, and the manager ATC deals with the operational side of things

[CAP493]

...it has tried to make managers out of ATCOs. Some of the ATCOs were totally inept due to personality (but their face fits)...

Whilst not strictly HR, the recent appointment of the Luton GM has proved that! Slippery Slope!!

Personally, I would rather work for/with a manager who is a good manager, but not an ATCO, than with someone who is/was an ATCO (even if a good one) but who is a lousy manager.

NATS is not the only company where this ATCO-to-Manager process has sometimes proved unsatisfactory; SERCo (and its predecessor IAL) is just the same, so was was Airwork (RIP), and so too are many non-NATS (i.e. independant) ATC units in the UK.

...something NATS could learn from others including the Military.


Perhaps so - but the skills required to be an effective manager in a civilian commercialised and unionised workplace are not entirely the same as are required for an Officer or SNCO in a necessarily prescriptive military working environment which is underpinned by QRs. This is why many ex-military types also make lousy (civilian) managers.

The debate can be summed up in one sentence: 'horses for courses' - and that doesn't necessarily mean having ATCOs as managers!

:cool: