NATS Pay Ballot (The only vote that counts) [Archive]

NATS_Not_Funny

21st May 2002, 23:53

160to4DME, it is everyones right to make public or keep secret the way they vote in this or any other ballot. Many of those who have posted in the other topics related to this have made it clear which way they will be voting.

As for understanding the arguments...

Almost every sector in the airline industry has been suffering financially since well before September 11th 2001.

Most UK airlines have shed jobs in the last 12 months.

NATS has twice in the last eight months gone cap-in-hand for more cash to the banks/city/govt.

Although NATS PPP left much of the company management intact, the purse strings are now firmly in the hands of TAG.

NATS/TAG management are trying to REDUCE costs, hence the redundancies in admin, ATSAs, management and engineering.

ATCO wages are the biggest single outgoing the company has. They WILL try to alter terms and conditions over the next few years to attempt to cut this cost.

In short, this is the worst time in many years to try to take the management on in a battle for more cash. Arguments about who should be paid what are meaningless. EVERYONE's future is at stake.

It's the wrong fight at the wrong time with the wrong people.

Feel free to respond to these arguments, it's more rewarding than simply insulting people.

sony backhander

22nd May 2002, 11:13

Mr NotFunny, how much LESS does the average house cost up there?
(I'm a no, so there goes one of your friend's yes votes too)

BEXIL160

22nd May 2002, 11:37

NATSNOT FUNNY...

The management line regurgitated once again....

A few points. NATS is NOT in financial crisis. Mr. Everitt says so, CAA ERG says so. Read the report. Using NATS' own worst case figures it is ONLY £27m down on low traffic growth projections INCLUDING Sept 11th. In fact it appears that there may be upwards of £50m available, depending on how you juggle the figures.

ATCO wages may well be the biggest outgoing the company has. The ATCOs are also by far the biggest Money Earners the company has. No ATCOs, no revenue. This is apparently now a commercial company. ATCOs are not being paid what they are worth. Time to pay up.

It also bears saying again. We've already made OUR contribution to cost saving measures in the form of a pensions holiday for NATS management. Don't forget that.

You have exercised your democratic right. Others will do the same, but the majority will disagree with you. Respect their rights.

rgds BEX

HounslowHarry

22nd May 2002, 12:42

NATS_Not_Funny

And of course the engineers have rolled over and had their bellies tickled again. That's why you keep getting shafted.

I understand from sources that you lot would have settled for a lot less than 2.2% - get a spine.

You have a roll to play in NATS, but you will only do it by standing up for yourseves.

Expeditedescent

22nd May 2002, 13:08

OK Notfunny,

I will take up your challenge:

1: "Almost every sector in the airline industry has been suffering financially since well before September 11th 2001."

A: And this has what to do with our pay? How about the low cost airlines? Traffic in that sector is booming, which means more traffic for us to work.
The truth is many airlines (Sabena, Swissair, BA etc etc) were in pretty poor shape well before Spet 11th, and hard fact is many airlines found 911 to be a Godsend because it enabled them to make cuts they desperately needed with an easy get out.
Poor management is not our fault......why should we pay for it?
By the way we are not in the airline industry.....we are in the Air Traffic Control industry.

2: "Most UK airlines have shed jobs in the last 12 months."

A: And again this has what to do with ATCO pay?
To follow your rationale then, as NATS have laid off staff no airline pilots should be in line for a pay rise this year then?

3: "NATS has twice in the last eight months gone cap-in-hand for more cash to the banks/city/govt."

A: That is due to the folly and stupidity of the Govt pushing through the PPP. Why should ATCOs pay for that too?
NATS mismanagement is not our fault, neither was 911.

4: "Although NATS PPP left much of the company management intact, the purse strings are now firmly in the hands of TAG. "

A: Errrrr, so what? I am sure they recognise the company's most valuable asset.........it's entire workforce.

5: "NATS/TAG management are trying to REDUCE costs, hence the redundancies in admin, ATSAs, management and engineering."

A: A few lost jobs in the multitude of layers of management wouldn't go amiss either. NATS has always been too top heavy.
Nobody wants to see job losses, but it was inevitable with PPP, again this is not the fault of the staff who remain.........I repeat why should we pay for the folly of PPP?

6: "ATCO wages are the biggest single outgoing the company has. They WILL try to alter terms and conditions over the next few years to attempt to cut this cost."

A: Funny that isn't it....probably due to the fact that NATS business is about Air Traffic Control.........it's a bit like saying that NatWest's biggest outgoing is salaries of banking staff ! Come on !
If they attempt to alter T&C then they have to go through appropriate channels.......not sure what this has to do with pay either.......

7: "In short, this is the worst time in many years to try to take the management on in a battle for more cash. Arguments about who should be paid what are meaningless. EVERYONE's future is at stake. "

A: Disagree entirely......this is the best time to make a stand now. You are right the future is at stake, the long term future of me and my collegues, and getting paid appropriately for the job that we do. This battle should have been fought years ago, but it has taken until now to finally make a stand and say to management, this is it, enough. You have undervalued and underpaid ATCOs and we are not going to take it any more.

I never ceased to be amazed by people who swallow everything management say hook line and sinker. Do you not believe it is in management's best interests to offer as little as possible......I mean why pay ATCOs what they are really worth if they will accept less?
Instead of believing everything management (or anyone for that matter) says, challenge them..........they say there is no money available..........the CAA doesn't think so, NATS own figures can be read to say that is not the case.
I am pretty sure that faced with an ATCO strike (and almost certainly the bankruptcy of the company, and probably a few of the TAG airlines) they will magically find the money.

I don't want to go on strike, I don't want this uncertainty, I want the company to be doing well, and I don't know anyone who is looking forward to walking out........but at the same time I don't want to be sitting here in 10 years going over these same arguments, saying the same things and going round in ever decreasing circles.......a stand has to be made at some time, or we will always be underpaid.

I repeat ATCO staff have never benefitted from the success of the company during the boom.....why should we now suffer during bad times......talk about management having its cake and eating it.
Pay has not risen in line with traffic levels........this has been a battle that has been looming for ages, as management have not recognised the efforts and workload of ATCOs.
Time for them to pay up.

Undercover

22nd May 2002, 13:37

Why are such open and up front people so put out by someone openly stating they voted yes?? You all openly stated you'd be voting no didn't you? Do you just not like it when people don't do as you tell them???

And BEX, how can you have a go about someone regurgitating the management line and them disagree with them by saying "Mr Everitt says so" ?!?!?

Anyway... everyone has their view and is entitled to vote as they see fit. Might be interesting to see what happens now management's chief negotiator on this pay deal has decided to jump ship! (Mr Montague, for those that missed it)

eyeinthesky

22nd May 2002, 14:10

Galling though it may be, Not funny does have a right to his opinion. The pity is that as an engineer he feels his job is at threat (so Prospect tell us) so therefore he has to accept whatever crumbs come his way or he might get made redundant. It might be true or it might not. I don't know enough about the engineering side to know whether an Air Traffic engineer is easily replaced by someone from an outside contractor at a lower cost. If he is, then that is market forces and maybe Prospect should be negotiating separately for them and all the hundreds of admin staff who get offered the same as us for relatively little effort...

The point is that market forces make Area Control ATCOs a limited commodity and therefore valuable at present and therefore we should be rewarded accordingly. There are any number of pilots out there just waiting to jump into an airline seat so perhaps the present pilots also feel threatened (not forgetting the cost and time taken to train new ones...). We are not in that position either, and we are being regularly shafted by our local and central management due to a weak approach tken by IPMS/Prospect and the staff themselves in the 8 years that I have been in NATS. The time has come to change things, and the likes of NotFunny will just have to take their chance. I hope that his principles and agreement with the NATS logic will mean that, should we manage to achieve a better deal, he will be accepting only the first offer... I BET HE/SHE WON'T.

The other point is that we can rant and rave (preferably without getting personal), but we will have to abide by the result of any ballot, however uncomfortable that may be...:eek: :(

Minesapint

22nd May 2002, 14:18

Just seen on Sky News that the "Air Traffic Bailout" is going to cost £230m. I expect that is why there will be no big payrises this year and NATS bean counters are unwilling to spend a £50m surplus on ATCO wages.

Personally I think a great deal of this is down to crap management, especially in ATC and especially at a certain large facility on the south coast. The management 'style' creates increasing bad feeling amongst staff, makes us feel unwanted and held in low regard - "a problem to be solved".

RICHARD - LISTEN UP. Start treating your front line staff better - stop the childish, penny pinching, autocratic managers from continually pi$$ing off your workforce and do it quick!:mad:

I have worked for NATS for 20+ years and have never seen a militant ATCO before (quite a surprise really) its not all about pay. The status of ATC staff has dropped and that is a management issue.

Low morale is created and maintained by poor management. Maybe now some of them at least will be shown the door and improving morale and motivation amongst front line NATS staff will become the MAJOR issue before its too late.

Undercover

22nd May 2002, 14:34

eyeinthesky... What I believe is more galling than an individual having an informed opinion different from yours is the arrogant and insulting attitude SOME ATCOs have to fellow employees filling other roles within the company.
Yes the ATCOs perform the recognised task of controlling airspace and landing planes... but without the rest of the company around you, who exactly would you do it for??? and who would pay you??
If you think you can run the whole company single handed then I'd be happy to see you try, but I think you may quickly discover just how little you know about what other people in the company do.

And before I have to read the outraged ATCO response... I know perfectly well I wouldn't have a job in this company if it wasn't for the ATCOs... but it works both ways.

BEXIL160

22nd May 2002, 14:39

Undercover....

The point I was making is that even our esteemed CE admits that things ain't so black, whilst requiring the staff to roll over and accept whatever pay deal the management deem neccessary. It's his position that is contrary... we've got the cash, but you lot can't have any of it.

It is very true that inept management lies at the root of this whole situation. Now they get to pay the price of arrogance, indifference and sheer incompetence.

Rgds
BEX

eyeinthesky

22nd May 2002, 17:30

Undercover: I assume your riposte is aimed at my comments about admin staff.

Firstly a small correction: I think you will find that whilst we do indeed control the airspace it is the pilots (human or electronic) who land the planes..:p

I was not suggesting that I could run the company single handed, but like many people I do wonder why you need (if you believe South Today) 800+ people who support the operation (and I know that includes engineers). I remember reading that when TAG took over NATS they commented that they could not believe how administratively top-heavy the company was.

Two examples of what I was driving at:

1) OCT expenses: Claim form submitted to ORO Swanwick to check that you are eligible and attended on the relevant day. Form forwarded to Financial Services at LATCC (now closed) for checking. (If incorrect a memo sent to claimant advising of 5p or whatever amendment). Form then forwarded to T&RE Edinburgh for further checking and payment. Efficient and value for money? I think not.

2) I have been in discussion with HR Swanwick since May last year regarding an issue over my relocation. They have agreed to take certain action, but their last letter to me was in February 2002 and despite a reminder over a month ago I am still awaiting any form of response or action. Deserving of a pay rise and sympathetic handling of staff (remembering that moving house comes next in the stress list to bereavement)? I think not.

Yet these people get the same pay rise as us as Prospect negotiate on their behalf. Have any of them (apart from maybe you?) actually spoken up in defence of or against the ATCOs at this fairly crucial time? No. They just sit there and follow the flock.

Meldrewv: If you follow this thread through, you will see that what you are saying does not hold water. For years now we have seen traffic grow by 6%+, but we have been restricted to pay rises of under 3%. Now that the business has taken a downturn we are expected to accept that as a reason for a derisory pay offer. Don't forget that NATS is not supposed to make 'huge profits' anyway. Why should we start following traffic levels now just because it suits them?

NATS_Not_Funny

22nd May 2002, 22:32

Expeditedescent
A: Funny that isn't it....probably due to the fact that NATS business is about Air Traffic Control.........it's a bit like saying that NatWest's biggest outgoing is salaries of banking staff ! Come on !

A good analogy. Look at how many jobs have been lost in the banking sector in the lastfive or ten years.

Pay has not risen in line with traffic levels........this has been a battle that has been looming for ages, as management have not recognised the efforts and workload of ATCOs.

Whatever gave anyone the idea that it should? Do you really want to link your pay to the number of aircraft you handle? Do you work more hours than 5 years ago? Would you accept upping the number of aircraft a sector takes to get a performance bonus?

Bex
It is very true that inept management lies at the root of this whole situation. Now they get to pay the price of arrogance, indifference and sheer incompetence.

Like many others you seem to hold the current management personaly responsible for all that you think is wrong in the company. Do you really think that new management would come in and start flashing the cash?
Be careful what you wish for - you might get it!

By the way, what are your union reps actually asking for as a percentage pay rise? Does giving other grades less as eyeinthesky seems to advocate form part of your claim?

eyeinthesky
We are not in that position either, and we are being regularly shafted by our local and central management due to a weak approach tken by IPMS/Prospect and the staff themselves in the 8 years that I have been in NATS. The time has come to change things, and the likes of NotFunny will just have to take their chance. I hope that his principles and agreement with the NATS logic will mean that, should we manage to achieve a better deal, he will be accepting only the first offer... I BET HE/SHE WON'T.

How exactly are you being shafted? In the 8 years since you joined pay has risen as much as or more that inflation, the hours you work have not changed and the pension is still there.

I'm not on a personal contract so I'll take what my union negotiates for me. Sorry if that leaves a little less for you...

I'll take my chance as you put it. I don't fancy your chances much though if you are fighting everyone in NATS instead of just the managment.

BEXIL160

22nd May 2002, 22:55

Too right. I DO hold the current management ENTIRELY responsible for the current situation. I take responsiblity for the job I do, I don't see why they shouldn't take any responsibilty for the jobs they have FAILED to do properly.

I never wanted PPP BUT.....I expected TAG to put NATS at least on a proper commercial footing. To ditch all those managers (and others) that failed to perform, and turn the company into one where "everyone can contribute". They have failed on every count. Whereas I, and my colleagues at ALL NATS units, both ACCs and aerodromes, still continue to perform to highest standards.

Yep, I KNOW what I'm wishing for.

Rgds BEX

Captain Mayday

22nd May 2002, 23:59

NATSNOTF_INFUNNY

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Funny that isn't it....probably due to the fact that NATS business is about Air Traffic Control.........it's a bit like saying that NatWest's biggest outgoing is salaries of banking staff ! Come on !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A good analogy. Look at how many jobs have been lost in the banking sector in the lastfive or ten years.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes, and how many of NATS jobs could be replaced by on-line controlling? I can just see it now, two spotty kids with gameboys, plugged in Row34 on the Virgin A340, doing their own vectoring.

Alternatively how many of the banking redundancies were the profit makers at the sharp end of money making, and how many were the support staff at the counters ? Oh and how many of the money makers took a pay cut ?

eyeinthesky

23rd May 2002, 06:53

Not funny:

Have you been to Swanwick lately? Have you sat through a duty and seen just how we lurch from one near crisis to another in terms of staffing? What goes on on a daily basis is a shuffle from sector to sector on a just-in-time basis to prevent someone going out of hours. Flexible we are, but what is happpening is akin to asking a pilot who is rated on an F50 and a 737 to operate alternate legs on the two different types of aircraft. One day he will use the wrong bit of knowledge on the wrong type of aircraft and something nasty will happen. This is just one example of what is happening, and it is solvable by proper rostering and flow management. However, the desire to minimise delays, admirable though it is, means that local and central management will not take the necessary action to ensure that the various sectors are given no more traffic than they can handle with the staff allocated to them for a particular duty. This firefighting then occurs.

You might not think that this is directly connected to pay. Pay is the reward you earn for all the work you do and the environment in which you do it. The working environment at present is not a pleasant one (except for being able to watch the ducks on the pond instead of burnt out cars around LATCC!), and therefore there should be increased reward to recognise the efforts we are all putting in. This is just a small part of it, and all the extra reasons that others before me have expressed on these pages are another part of it.

I understand that you have made up your mind and you think the pay offer is the best we deserve. My point remains therefore that if this is so, why should you accept a higher one if that comes along? That should be against your principles.

By the way, I am not fighting all of NATS. I am simply saying that if you and others who are not operational are happy with the offer then perhaps the time has come for operational ATCOs, the majority of whom we believe are NOT happy, to have a separate pay deal to recognise all the problems we have highlighted.

P.S. I see the issue of character legibility has made it onto the news again today. BBC Breakfast had an interview with a guy from Computer Weekly and a reporter standing in a bush at the back of Swanwick discussing NATS non-action on the HSE reprt on character sizes. 'A prototype is under development...' they said.

Undercover

23rd May 2002, 07:33

BEX... Now that I agree with completely! :D

All Systems Go

23rd May 2002, 08:01

Again I'm very worried. All this talk about splitting unions and the like. How long ago did the attitude of "them and us" come along? Don't we all have the same purpose in this little company of ours? To shift big lumps of tin about in the sky without denting each other. I think all us "workers", both Ops, non-ops and others need to come together at a time like this as if we are split then it makes it easier to slowly chip away at our rewards for the job in hand. Please people, please get rid of this "them and us" attitude. We are all, at the end of the day, about to be shafted together, but if we are together and as one then we stand a much better chance of getting something done about the situation.

I agree that engineers do roll over and play dead when it comes to such matters - I don't know why and wouldn't like to comment, but we need to stand up together and be counted. I'm still not sure which way I'll vote on this pay deal. What does a vote of No mean? Do we all walk out? Do we work to rule? I know what a vote of Yes means....

1261

23rd May 2002, 09:11

I really had to think about it when the ballot paper arrived this morning. If they had been offering us a one year deal at 2.2%, then start again in January (when hopefully the oceanic situation will have improved) I would have given management the benefit of the doubt and agreed. But two years - no way; I voted no.

I have to say, however, that I am unsure as to what we hope to achieve here as I can't see how we can take any practical form of industrial action. Have Prospect thought about this? I certainly hope so.

A discussion on our night shift yesterday ended when we got to the idea of a training ban. For that to be effective, it would surely have to include LCE duties. Am I prepared to (potentially) sacrifice my validations over pay? Nope. And beyond that - what, exactly? An all-out national strike? I don't think so. Rolling stoppages? Perhaps. We'd have to have at least three people in at our unit for emergency cover; do they get paid? Are they scabs? Who chooses them?

There has been a great deal of talk on this forum over the last eighteen months-or-so about keeping powder dry. I'm starting to worry about playing with fire now, for fear of blowing myself up. Melodramatic, maybe. I haven't worked for NATS for that long, so I'm prepared to go along with what is obviously a majority opinion among my more experienced colleagues. But I sure as hell hope you know what you're doing.

fatcontroller

23rd May 2002, 10:39

I don't consider the big ussue here to be the 2.2 % this year but the fact that for too many years now we as ATCO's have paid with good will to bail the company out of one crisis or another.
We have operated beyond our requirements in areas such as secondary validations secondary duties - projects research etc etc. for NO extra pay often working in our own time for 'time in lieu' which we can't use because of a lack of staff.
All this in a attempt to help the company provide the service WE want to be proud of.
For years we have 'kept the powder dry' and 'waited for the big claim next year' and seen nothing to bring us back in line with the industry slipping slowly down the slope of recognition in terms of pay.
I'm sorry now Richard but my bank of good will is overdrawn - TAG stopped investing in my future pension to the tune of about 6% last year - we did not object (as it was within your rights) but now you offer me the 6% back as a pay rise - over 2 years! and expect me to be greatful. I am insulted
The bottom line is the pay burden for NATS will the the same in 2 years time as it was a year ago and WE are paying again with Good Will.
All this when NATS have just paid in excess of 60 Million in compensation and millions in legal fees for an out of court settlement with Lockhead and EDS.
We need to be brought back in line with our industry. It's bad luck that TAG have just taken over but let us also remember that it was the Governemnt that screwed us for years and they are still majority share holders - 2.2% is OK for TAG's half - where is the governments half !:confused: :confused:

Expeditedescent

23rd May 2002, 10:46

Oh dear Notfunny,

You completely miss the point...........

I was not saying we should get pay related to amount of aircraft worked, but the fact is:

Traffic levels (and hence workload) have risen far ahead of reward (pay).
Why should that be acceptable, I mean if your workload had risen by around 8% a year and your pay had not......would you be happy ?

Name me any other sector of industry where the workforce would accept a year on year increase in workload of 8% with a pay rise of 3%?

Looking back at your first post in this thread, I am wondering what your motives were for posting........I mean tell the whole World you voted yes.........who cares, you won't be the only one.
Why did you feel the need to have a pop at ATCOs though?
In all threads here you will see how supportive and appreciative ATCOs are of the engineers, it is just a shame that people like you choose to pick on division rather than unity.
You obviously do not understand the arguments ATCOs have, so I'm not sure why you feel qualified to stick you oar in. You are not an ATCO, you do not have to handle the reality of operational traffic, so who on Earth do you think we are to tell us what we should settle for in the pay claim?
Have you seen ATCOs telling the engineers how to vote?
You made your choice, you capitulated.......thats up to you, but leave others alone who have higher aspirations than you do.

Oh and undercover, everyone is entitled to their opinion, however how many ATCOs have started threads here saying I am voting no, and then having a pop at the engineers?

All systems go, I agree unity is a far better option than division, however that has been taken out of our hands by the fact that the engineers branch and pcs have supported acceptance......

1261........There is no way management could afford to hold out over an ATCO strike. If fincances are as strained as management would have us believe, a one day strike would be almost enough to obliterate the company......if we went out for a sustained period it would blow the company and a fair few UK airlines out of business.........a situation that will never be allowed to happen.........when push comes to shove management will find the extra money.
A no vote is a vote to send a message to management that they cannot continue to treat us like s**t and are going to have to realise that ATCO pay must rise ahead of what it has been in the past.

Standard Speeds

23rd May 2002, 11:00

Having received ballot form am now considering my options. For those that believe Management will back down in the face of threats of industrial action - beware - they might not. When the Cabin Crew from BA took strike action over pay the management took them on and won. Any action ahs to be unilateral and I'm not too sure that it would be on this issue.

I wholeheartedly support a drive for better pay increases and conditions. I just don't want the union to be defeated over this and impotent for the rest of the decade.

Enjoy placing your Cross!

BEXIL160

23rd May 2002, 11:38

.... and when the BA PILOTS threatened to do the same thing, the management backed down the day before the threatened one day action...

Rgds BEX

Expeditedescent

23rd May 2002, 14:33

Standard Speeds,

I fully appreciate your concern, nobody at all wants to go on strike.....I mean it's just not a pleasant thing to have to do.
I am certainly not militant and hate the idea of going out, but I just feel now that things have gone too far, and we need to make a stand NOW for our future.

Yes we are gambling, however look how the cards are stacked in our favour:

1. The most obvious thing is that we cannot be replaced easily, so if TAG sacked us, where the hell would that leave them?
Ask yourself is that really a likely outcome.........what seriously will happen, delegate airspace to the MIL? Is it likely? How long before almost every UK airline goes out of business with the skies closed day after day?

2. Think of the financial implications for TAG if we went out........think of the amount of lost revenue, how long could they sustain those kind of gigantic losses?

3. Think of the airlines..........BA is losing money hand over fist.......how long could they sustain the grounding of the entire fleet?

4. The Govt, with its obligations under ICAO to provide services, especially over the Atlantic, how long could they politically allow us to be out, especially given the chaotic state of transport already?

I cannot seriously imagine that TAG will let us go out, if they do it will not take more than a day or two for the company to go belly up, and it will likely take a few UK airlines with it too.........

The risk to them is far greater than the risk to us..........the alternative is we accept this...make the Union look totally stupid and frankly we can kiss goodbye to ever getting a decent pay rise in the future. And to be honest we can forget about attracting capable people into the job in the future, because the pay 10 years from now will suck........where will we be then?

BEX as usual talking sense.........no disrespect at all to Cabin Crew, but what is easier to replace pilots, or cabin crew? BA knew that taking on the cabin crew would not cripple the airline (more than one union represent cabin crew if I remember correctly), but the pilots were a different proposition.

Think carefully how you are going to vote.......and remember the BEC have advised rejecting this offer.....that is not something they would have done lightly........what happens if we vote yes on this deal, the union's position becomes pretty much untenable, what then?
As far as I am concerned the worst future is represented by voting yes. By voting no, the short term may be worse, but the long term will certainly be much better.

Minesapint

23rd May 2002, 16:35

Just to help clarify a couple of points.

Reference delegating traffic to the mil. In the 1977 strike BMI/BA and a few others sneaked up the North Sea working Eastern / Northern / Border. After a few days of this we were told not to work them. Something to do with insurance / licencing.

I am a support person. If traffic levels rise by 5% it does not affect me, engineering or management - it affects frontline ATC staff that are already naffed off. I have been there so I do understand.

I still think we should stick together, take this deal, allow the aviation world to recover then take them to the cleaners. Let them know that its coming too!

As far as splitting unions goes - a single union is the way forward - no "ATCO's branch" and "Engineering branch" or PC(bl00dy)S. Just one big powerful ATC union for everyone.

As we are we are devided as a workforce before we start.........:(

Route BIG-KOK

23rd May 2002, 17:26

We must stick together and fight for more pay, the management would like nothing more than to divide the workforce.
Come on unite!!
:D:D:D

stopp the climb

23rd May 2002, 18:18

I would be interested in your views on my suggestion in the NATS
Forum. ATCO Pay

Route BIG-KOK

23rd May 2002, 18:20

Mr NotFunny,
I have to totally agree with expeditedescent on this one, you are indeed a gullable fool that management love. I feel that your team is very small and ours very big, I'm sure that you will thank us one day, when you have a nice pension because we achieved decent pay rises at last.
:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Night Shift

23rd May 2002, 20:30

Full on you guys expeditedescent and Route Big KOK. NATS Not Funny is a loser.

NATS_Not_Funny

23rd May 2002, 22:17

Expeditedescent

Oh dear Notfunny,

You completely miss the point...........

I was not saying we should get pay related to amount of aircraft worked, but the fact is...

You obviously do not understand the arguments ATCOs have, so I'm not sure why you feel qualified to stick you oar in. You are not an ATCO, you do not have to handle the reality of operational traffic, so who on Earth do you think we are to tell us what we should settle for in the pay claim?
Why the link between traffic levels and pay then?

I do understand that the arguments, I also understand the current economic situation. I understand that NATS gets it's income from airlines, many of whom have a financial investment in NATS. I have always said that the important issue is not what we settle for in this years pay round, it's what will happen to ALL of us over the next few years as the TAG management turns the financial screws.

If you'd like to tell us all the qualifications required to have an opinion on this issue feel free.

Route BIG-KOK and Night Shift, thank you for your well thought out constructive comments on my personality :)

I live in the real world, why not come over and visit.

terrain safe

23rd May 2002, 22:25

Fatcontroller

Nats stops paying in 12% not 6% into your pension so this payrise for the next 2 years is being paid for in just 6 months. This gives them a massive amount of money being saved.

As a side issue does anyone know is the pension fund was calculated on the new FRS17 rules or on the old rules. Only asking as since everyone else is using the new rules they semm to be getting out of final salary pensions faster than a manager out of the ops room.

Diggo

23rd May 2002, 23:09

stopp the climb..................

For your information:
I would be interested in your views on my suggestion in the NATS
Rubbish :D
Does it pass the common sense test
No :)

Off to put some ointment on me "farmers".............
All that sitting around "GS'ing" caused them to play up a bit :p

professor yaffle

24th May 2002, 00:43

Not So Funny

As I recall I didn't get a ballot paper to vote whether or not to go on strike

Expeditedescent

24th May 2002, 09:54

Oh for crying out load notfunny...............

The link between traffic levels and pay is your spin.

Our WORKLOAD has risen by around 8% year on year, and that obviously relates to increasing traffic.

WORKLOAD, how hard one is working do you get the idea yet???

The amount of exra work we are doing on shift has risen far ahead of how we are rewarded. It's really simple to work out......

How about answering some of my other questions, or do you simply wish to skip around anything you don't want to deal with?

With respect you have no idea about the ATCO arguments........you are not an ATCO, all you know is the engineers side, and seemingly you have swallowed the management line pretty meekly. But do not insult ATCOs by claiming you know where we are coming from on this.
You can have an opinion on anything, however ill-informed it may be.......I would love to know why you feel so qualified to spout at length on issues affecting ATCOs only?

You are the one who brought ATCOs into it with your so intelligently worded first post.
ATCOs don't tell you how to vote, so why do you feel qualified to tell us how to vote.

It may interest you to know that the ATCOs BEC have advised rejection of this offer.............do you have anything to say to that?

fatcontroller

24th May 2002, 10:43

Terrain Safe

Thanks for the update on the 12% issue - now I'm more dissapointed.

Mr Not Funny

Sorry I just don't understand your view.

1) You must appreciate that where you are a 3 bed Terrace does not cost £250,000 and a 4 bed £420,000 +

2) The sectors where you are may be a bit slower especially with the lack of oceanic traffic but believe me we are working our socks off down here in TC

3) you can't believe the stats produced by Management ( or by anyone for that matter) they WILL say whatever they want them to stats always do

4) Many airlines that suffered post 9/11 are back to full strength and if not already they are at least recruiting again.

5) There never is any more money on the table thats what negotiotiation is all about - it's just we have not been very good at it before

6) if we keep going as we are it will become very viable to take a career change into a job with little responcibility and suffer only minor losses in return. Boring I know but why train for X years and hold a license when you dont have to.

7) Going 'cap in hand' to the government ? They own more that half of our compnay they must pay up.

8) Pricing policy is not my concern - any other company would be able to increase charges in relation to costs but we are limited by GOVERNMENT legislation (ERG ) - they must sort it out - we should not have to - they managed to find 60 million to pay off EDS and Lockhead and millions in legal fees ! (out of court)

9) We have never been in a stronger possition - the airlines are still weak and TAG would never let us go out on strike - in a few years with rapid growth as predicted they may well be stronger and able to withstand our efforts more effectively

I am sorry that you have been taken in so convincingly by all you have heard from our leaders - you almost sound like one - hope you recover soon :rolleyes:

All Systems Go

24th May 2002, 14:17

Does anyone know what we can realistically hold out for by voting no? Not in the actions that might have to be taken, but what are the realistic aims of voting no? Are you ATC types looking for a pay rise in line with traffic growth, or 5%, or what? Its all fine and well saying your going to reject the current offer, but what is good enough? I'm quickly going over to the No camp in this vote (my 1/3 of the union seems to like the quiet life - they didn't ask me when they said they recommend a Yes vote. Suppose that what's these ballots are all about) as I agree totally with most of the comments in this thread - we deserve more. I'm not saying I deserve as much as an ATCO in the form of a pay rise, but I think my efforts over the past year, including moving down south and enduring almost constant courses so I can fix the wonderful systems we find at Swanwick are worth a little more than 2.2% this year and 3.7% next.

As a side i love the way people in favour of this pay deal always say 6% over 2 years. Give me such a warm fuzzy feeling inside...

Back to the point. I'm not sure what my efforts over the past year have deserved. I know my cost of living has remained the same after moving from West London to Portsmouth, yet I've lost my London weighting. What are your good selves ideas of a good % that we might be able to vote Yes on?

NATS_Not_Funny

24th May 2002, 16:29

Expeditedescent
Traffic levels (and hence workload) have risen far ahead of reward (pay).
Why should that be acceptable, I mean if your workload had risen by around 8% a year and your pay had not......would you be happy ?
and later...
The link between traffic levels and pay is your spin.
Our WORKLOAD has risen by around 8% year on year, and that obviously relates to increasing traffic.

WORKLOAD, how hard one is working do you get the idea yet???

No, I don't get it. How can you say that your workload is related to traffic levels, and then say that it isn't? How do you quantify it as 8%?

This is a side issue anyway. I am not saying that the settlement reflects the workload of ANY of us.

fatcontroller
1/ That's why I turned down the chance of promotion several years ago. A move down south is a step backwards in my standard of living. Everyone you work with - admin, engineers, etc suffers from this.

2/ I don't doubt it for a moment.

3/ Problem is others here want to use stats to prove that they deserve more...

4/ As we all seem to agree, there were major problems before Sept 11th

5/ I leave that to the union - that's what I pay my subs for.

6/ I'd like to hear some examples of a job like that with comparable pay.

7/ Wages are paid from earnings not loans from the government. The money NATS has got from them isn't connected to the pay deal, but does show how badly the future had been planned for.

8/ Pricing policy may not be our concern but when the major shareholders are also the major customers you can be d@mn sure you know where their priorities lie. :(

9/ As I said in my original post, if ATCOs wouldn't take industrial action to stop PPP I don't believe they will do so for a few extra percent of a pay rise.

NATS_Not_Funny

In short, this is the worst time in many years to try to take the management on in a battle for more cash. Arguments about who should be paid what are meaningless. EVERYONE's future is at stake.

It's the wrong fight at the wrong time with the wrong people.

I have always said that the important issue is not what we settle for in this years pay round, it's what will happen to ALL of us over the next few years as the TAG management turns the financial screws.

I am not anti ATCO, I am not pro management. I am simply an ATCE with lots of concerns about the future, for me and for ALL my colleagues.

fatcontroller

24th May 2002, 17:56

Not Funny

OK it would appear we agree on somethings;

I don't remember being balloted re: industrial action over PPP - in fact I was told we couldn't do it due legislation surrounding industrial action and the reasons for it - I must confess I don't understand. However given the option I am sure many ATCO's would have taken action over PPP - may be even more than now as many will not act over pay.

I feel your discussion with Expeditedecent re: work related pay is a little strange on both sides. I agree we should have been rewarded in line with growth over the past X years to reflect our increased workload. I do not agree with pay related to production. It is a fine divide - we are not responsible for the number of A/C we move - we just do our best and work harder and harder as the industry grows, we're back to good will again and extending validations . Training and other duties. This is not productivity based pay as I feel it would be moraly wrong to be paid per number of A/C moved as this leads to corner cutting - something we must not be encouraged to do.
I think we should have been rewarded in line with growth to reflect our added commitment and effort - I can see where you are both coming from though.

It may be then - if you are happy in Scotland with a considerably higher standard of living that we in the south both at LATCC and NERC should receive a pay increase to equal your stanadard of living in a form not too different to the London weighting - may be then we would all be happy.

See Ya:p

Expeditedescent

24th May 2002, 20:06

Notfunny,

Let me quantify.

You earlier inferred that I was arguing for "performance related pay" type scenario, in line with something like pay according to movements handled.

That is not my point............however what I am saying is ATCO workload has risen dramatically and pay has not kept pace.
Do you think we should work harder and harder for less pay?

Oh and you say:

"9/ As I said in my original post, if ATCOs wouldn't take industrial action to stop PPP"

I don't seem to remember you engineers doing so either....perhaps that is why so many of you are now fearing for or have already lost your jobs.

Sorry to be blunt but if you act like doormats, then don't be surprised if management walk all over you.

You say you have over 20+ years experience.......well I have almost 30 years left to go, and its the FUTURE that I am worried about not the present. Living in the short term can only get you so far, at some point you have to bite the bullet and stand up for yourselves for the collective future.

BEXIL160

24th May 2002, 20:56

OK folks I think we've done this particular argument to death now.

NATS_NOT_FUNNY doesn't agree with the majority of ATCOs and has voted accordingly. He has his reasons. Agree or disagree as you wish, but he has a right to express his views. Personally I disagree with him,and as I have mentioned, do MOST ATCOS.

Next up...

I believe we need to take a stand now. Let this issue fail, and NATS "management" will walk all over us in the future. NOW is the time to say, enough is enough.

Divisions amongst NATS Staff? It certainly seems that way. With PCS and the Engineers recommending the offer and the ATCOs rejecting it.. forcefully. Why have PCS and the Engineers reps recommended the offer? Do you ATSAs and Engineers want to PAY for the ATCOs pay rises? United we stand, divided YOU fall. What's going to happen if NATS offer the ATCOs a decent pay offer and you're stuck with the current offer? What are you going to do then?

One more point. Consider short term industrial action. There will be those that actually go on strike and those that go in. Eventually we've all got to work together again. Except that there will be serious bad feeling and non-cooperation between the two factions. NATS is leaderless and badly managed now. Just HOW are they going to cope with a workforce not only peed off now, but openly at war with itself following industrial action? They aren't, are they?

Solution? Two words already promised by NATS management. OPEN and HONEST.

Stop the spin. Offer a decent pay rise that the Operational staff DESERVE. Start taking to task those managers that FAIL or have FAILED.

Things NEED to change. I was one, among many, who was open to change when TAG took over. Sadly NOTHING altered and now TAG are reaping the reward for NOT doing a "night of the long knives" when they took over.

Discuss....

Rgds BEX