Monday Pay Talks Deadline.......

[expediter]

So now the deadline has passed, what is the final offer?

[Expeditedescent]

Good question........

Wouldn't it be nice if just for once we could find out direct from the Union rather than on here.

Whe ATCO's branch website has not been updated since 24th May and the main Prospect site has no mention of the pay negotiations since we voted to reject the offer.

So just how does the Union plan to communicate with its members?

I suspect we will only know when someone from work posts the contents of a circular in a day or two.

Why is communication so difficult for them?

[No 1]

I HEARD TODAY THAT IT WAS 8% OVER TWO YEARS!

[SensibleATCO]

Expiditedecent...............

Wind your neck in...........

The meeting finished at 18:00.....so you can't expect too much information just at the moment.
It's quite clear from your previous posts that you have no experience of industrial procedures, the work place in general and you clearly have a very over inflated opinion of yourself. My guess is that you have no more than a few years radar under your belt and have virtually zero experience of the real world.
Try this...........instead of talking B******s on this site, why don't you get involved on the shop floor and start pushing for some of the changes you would like to see?

Regards
SATCO

[Ichabod]

SATCO: Try and chill out a bit. People are only letting of a bit of steam because they are tired of feeling underpaid and undervalued. There is even a validity in some the points concerning communication. The vast majority of the ATCO's I work with are very unhappy with the information (or lack there-of) from Prospect, and I would tend to agree with them, though you may not. Resorting to personal attacks help no-one...we are all on the same team so lets not pull this down into some sort of 'cat fight'. (Oh, and I was a Rep. for a number of years and understand well 'The Industrial Relations Act, and Employment Relations Code of Practice') :(

[professor yaffle]

more to the point as far as i was aware, the deadline for improved offer was the 11 july, therefore was expecting a ballot on whether to accept new pay offer or strike

when is an ultimatum not an ultimatum??

prof

[Scott Voigt]

If you don't have one, you should try to get Prospect to put together a members web site where all the info can be put out to everyone. That's one way that we do it over here. There is both verbal and written info on it. We normally get word out to the membership well before the govt. gets info out to the managers.

regards

[Expeditedescent]

SATCO.......

Bloody hell.......what was the point of that.......hit a few raw nerves eh????

Jeez, you make many assumptions, none of which are true, and have launched a pretty pathetic personal attack.

So you think that Union have no issues on communication then?

Prospect always get out information to its members in a timely and efficient manner?

For your information, provided your feeble mind can cope, I am a valid TC ATCO who has done plenty in the "Real World".......BTW what do you define as that?
Do you not live in the Real World?..............from your post looks like you spend more time up your own backside than interacting with "Real" people..............

Idiots like you frankly have no place in a team job.....and, as you got personal, I suspect you are:

An old git who believes nobody has a right to an opinion if it does not match your own........that healthy debate is a bad thing......that the union is above criticsism......anyone younger than you is of no use to anyone......and that everyone around you has to do things the way you want it done.

Get real, grow up and get the hint this is a place for EVERYONE to discuss their views and opinions..............resorting to an unprovoked personal attack in the way you did shows that while I may be younger than you, it is you who are acting like a child.

Oh, one final piece of info for you......as of this year I will be involved in the Union, and yes I will be pushing for change from the inside..........Happy now!

And why is there still no official word from the Union on yesterday's offer?

PS: Scott we do have such a site......it has not been updated since 24th May.......

[Nogbad the Bad]

WELL SAID Expedite Descent !!!!!!!!

[SensibleATCO]

Yaawwwnnnn.....................:D

[2 six 4]

I hear the meeting has had to continue through until today. The last pennies are being extracted. Vote to be arranged shortly.

Even if the offer turns out to be c**p nobody will be able to say the negotiators didn't give it their best shot. I'm intreagued to see what has changed so much since that nice Mr Eveready sent us all a letter.

[ContactLondon]

I am just wondering if SensibleATCO is tired, he appears to be yawning on this topic and on the Wednesday pay talks topic as well.

[OrsonCart]

Word on the street indictes that another meeting has been scheduled for this afternoon (tuesday), to finally put the last pieces of the jig saw together.

How about 10% over 2 years as an opening gambit?

I would like to pass on my thanks to all the negotiators, whatever the outcome is.

I would imagain communications will come from 'Prospect House' once management and union agree on the final wording of the final offer.

[Vercingetorix]

Sensible ATCO
is that Ken Livingstone aka Dick Mason ? Get a Life

[foo fighting]

exp. descent

congrats on your reply to SHATCO, obviously a complete ****, perhaps a friend of that other ppruning cretin alpha control.

As has been said, not the job for ignorant bigots.

foo

[sector8dear]

Not directly involved in this, but as an observer:

Seems that both SATCO and Expeditedescent have hit a "raw nerve"!

If SATCO is 'in the job', he is already in the team, thus it is the place for him.. and as for the "I suspect you are an old git".....nice one, alienating all those older than the obviously immature (and young) Expeditedescent.

Well I for one would hate to be in your (Expeditedescent's) "team" with such a bigoted and agressive individual. It strikes me that according to him, only people who agree with him have a right to a point of view! ..and it should be done the way Expeditedescent wants it done instead!!!??!! And as for the "Involved in the Union" bit - God help all those older and stupider than Expeditedescent.....

[Undercover]

God this same old "It's not fair why wont they tell us anything" malarky gets very old and tired people...

They CAN'T tell you anything until AFTER the meeting is formally closed !! :rolleyes:

After which, they have to get together and agree on the wording of what communication goes out to members and then arrange for it to be written and published. I'm sure you lot would be the first to jump on them and criticise if they were slap dash about it and put out incomplete communications.

Whether you know at 9am today or 12pm tomorrow you still will have a good few weeks to vote, so cool the jets !

My own personal wager will be on no improvement to the basic increase but extra incremental progressions for ATCOs and probably a little bonus thrown in for those already at the top.

If I'm right I look forward to you all knocking back this extra cash in order to keep to your word and professional integrity whilst holding out for 10%..... ;)

[Expeditedescent]

So Sector8,

Someone launches a personal attack on me, and I have no right to defend myself?

How come I am bigoted and agrressive, when I only fire back at SATCO, what he fired at me.......does that make him exactly the same?

As you will not be in our Union, as you are not an ATCO, then you won't have to worry about me will you?

As for immature.........well look at the post that started this..........who is really immature?

Young does not mean immature........old does not mean wise.........

As to alienating the older ATCOs......what cack you talk. I was simply returning a volley sent from SATCO......not making generalisations about anyone......if you can't see that then Heaven help you.

Perhaps you would also like to explain to the ATCO population why you feel we are not overworked and underpaid?

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=490442#post490442

Anyway enough of this drivel........I made my point, and I will let all SATCOs luvvies come in and protect him........life is too short for this simple minded poop.

[Expeditedescent]

Undercover,

The issue with me is not that they have not told us the offer......but they have told us nothing at all.

The deadline we were given was the 11th........It is surely not unreasonable for the members to expect something by that day.

As it became apparent here that there would be a revised offer from mangement this Monday, again it is surely not unreasonable to expect the members to show a high interest in what that outcome was.

Now all they would have to do is a small statement on their website, or press release or anything, just to say that negotiations were ongoing, the meeting had to be extended and progress was being made.........That would quell a lot of people's diquiet.

When you are left hanging with no information at all, people get restless..........after all the only reason most of us go to work is to get paid...............Would you do it for free?

All the members want is a little communications just to feel like we are still in the loop.

[Undercover]

Agreed... it's nice to be in the loop... and of course we all have a great interest in how these talks pan out.

Personally though I get a little bored of seeing so many communications come out saying "We had a meeting. It was good. We can't say any more. We'll have another one soon."

"Aye, very good"I say... "get back to me when you've actually got some news!!"

[nodelay]

Expeditedescent:

Well said.

[Undercover]

Just got the lowdown on the improved offer. Pretty good going by the Prospect negotiators I have to say.

I reckon it could spell the end for the joint pay bargaining though... as all those in PCS and Prospect engineers who voted "yes" last time are not going to be happy that ATCOs will get a bigger increase on basic pay - as this doesn't really come under the remit of "addressing the ATCO sectional claim only"

More fun and games to come I think!! :rolleyes:

[Air Show Bob]

Go on Undercover spill the beans....Can I go ahead with the Ferrari and the villa on the Costa?

[Dances with Boffins]

When you ladies have quite finished.... :p .[sorry for the insult to any real ladies];) . The latest offer is posted on teh NATS site. For all you non-NATS prunes, don't worry, you still earn more than us.....

[Abraham Zapruder]

Dances -

Just looked at www.nats.co.uk

Nothing there!

Did you mean the 'Intranet'? If so how do/can you access it from a remote location?

:confused:

[Undercover]

In addition to agreed rise...

ATCO pay spine points to be adjusted by: -

2% from 1 October 2002
1.8% from 1 December 2003


"adjusted"... like it!! Not "improved" or "increased" Wouldn't want the rest of the company thinking they were missing out!!

Some other bits and pieces that, to be honest, don't interest me a great deal.

[Yellow Monster]

Abraham,

He/she meant the NATS forum on pprune. Which no-one seems to look at or discuss NATS topics in anyway:)

[Grasscutter]

Adjusted UP I hope.:D

[xerxius]

Given what was initially put on the table Prospect have done a good job and sorted out a decent pay rise.

Rumour has it though that our colleagues at Swanwick still don't think it's enough. A touch greedy perhaps...?

[Abraham Zapruder]

Yellow Monster -

First day at school 'New Boy' I'm afraid!

How / where do I find the NATS forum anybody?

:)

[xerxius]

Look under the "Airline Specific Private Forums" section and you will find NATS. You will need to send an email to the moderator to gain access though...

[1261]

Surely nobody at Swanwick can seriously be suggesting that the thick end of 10% over two years ain't enough? Especialy when you take into account the other aspects of the deal. £500 per day for additional attendance? Where do I sign!

What exactly DO they want? I for one will accept this deal as it stands.

[AREA52]

I don't want to start a bun fight over this but I think a few points are being missed!

Yes 10% over two years is quite a good deal, however this is 9.7% over two years, of which you receive the equivalent of about an addional 2.65% within the two year period, due to the deferred payments. Yes you do receive 9.7% on basic in the end.

Also, this comes with strings attached, which was not part of the original aim. We all want rewarded for the job we already do.

Morale is so low at Swanwick (and not just in ATC), that most people wouldn't do O/T whatever the amount. Also, TOIL and accrued leave should be valued in accordance with the previous precedent set £820 per day plus inflation, and before anyone starts all units should be looking for this in the future when they get as bad as Swanwick is at present, believe me it is not too far away. Also, can we really do overtime whilst we are complaining about the screens and workload?

Use of non op days for op duties? this is why they were non op duties in the first place, because nobody wanted additional operational attendances. The next thing you know it will be compulsory OT then factored into basic pay at a lesser rate!

As regards the second 1.8% increase, call me a cynic, but in JAN2004, will this work in our favour for the next pay round. The management will say we have just had another 1.8% increase a month ago!

1261, if you are so keen, then why don't you come down to the sunny south coast and try your hand at Swanwick, where the houses are twice the price. You might then be able to afford one with all that overtime you would be doing, but you wouldn't have much of a life:confused:

Think twice before accepting!!!!!:eek:

[5milesbaby]

I agree with Area52. This offer is just as crap as the initial offer. Don't management understand the words 'ONE year pay deal, NO STRINGS ATTACHED'. Even if its a 2 year deal, how about 5% each year, end of message. None of this, 'we'll give you this then, a little sweetner for the ATCO's then, bit more then....'. And yes, 1.8% just before the next battle commences, we're not that stupid. Overtime, I actually would LOVE to do overtime, and the price is very tempting, HOWEVER, get screwed. I really could do with the money, but I aint selling myself out now for it to become compulsary in 3 years time as it'll be a 'standard practice'. Where I could fit any in is another matter, all my free time is normally spent feeling totally crap trying to get fit for the next duty. I'm expecting that this will come back to a vote and that the union aren't stupid enough to accept it on our behalf, so as I, like many others down here can just say NO.

[xerxius]

You guys got paid £820 for TOIL? You have got to taking the p*$$. No wonder this company is "struggling financially". This explains why our previous pay rises have been rather small. Lets face it, in a "proper" privatised company you would be lucky to still have a job if you didn't put in the extra hours. We already get paid a decent salary, get loads of time off and get to have fun at work. No other job is like ours. Count yourselves lucky that we're on such a cushy number.

As for house prices being high in Southampton, you obviously haven't been to the capital of Scotland where prices are the highest outside of London.

[5milesbaby]

'As for house prices being high in Southampton, you obviously haven't been to the capital of Scotland where prices are the highest outside of London. '

I might stop laughing sometime tonight, but I doubt it.

[xerxius]

5mb, so much to learn you have, young Jedi.


You don't have much to say about my other comments though do you? Proabably because the nail has been hit firmly on the head.

[Scott Voigt]

Area 52;

Shoot that sounds like what we do over here all the time. There is no such thing as a non duty day if you are an operational controller. Unless you have put two of them to close together or on medication, you are going to get the honor of plugging in everyday that you are at work. You also get the honor of getting called for overtime quite often. Of course, that is why most of us all have answering machines at home and always left on <G>...

regards

[AREA52]

Thank you 5mb


As for X,

As a fellow scot, I can understand why you might enjoy a cushy number, good salary, fun at work and lots of time off. No double nights up and working to SCRATCOH limits in extremely busy traffic for you then I guess.

Nice work if you can get it and I would probably feel the same as you in your position.

However, as dear old NATS gave me no other options, I ended up at LATCC and subsequently Swanwick, where the picture is not quite as rosy as you appear to imagine. Ask anyone at SCATCC who has managed the old LATCC/SCATCC shuffle?

As for not knowing house prices in Edinburgh, I am well aware of these, however, you do not have to live in the capital when you work at SCATCC, and can commute to EGPH if you work there from not to far away.

Unfortunately, house prices in London are not the only problem in England, anything South of Oxford in a half decent area is not that much less than London, and a lot more expensive than the rest of the UK, with the odd exception.

For those who work at SCATCC, I believe your reps were also aiming for a similar figure of £820 for sector 31/33 trials and any subsequent TOIL, but it would appear that some are happy with £500 or even £250, perhaps you would like to inform management, I don't think so!

Round 1 to me I think:p

[AREA52]

Thanks SVOIGT,

Proof from the other side, and from a reliable witness.

Hope all is well over there outside work!

regards

AREA52:)

[Lieutenant Dan]

Area 52, you seem like a very clever chap. You're clearly wasted in NATS.

Forgetting about the 1.8% next December, only the 2.2 for this year is back-dated. So the only real change is an extra 2% in October.

Last week we were talking about strike action. Now, for 2% more, it's all sweetness and light again.

And no hated 2 year deal, either!:rolleyes:

Well done, Prospect.
You showed them, didn't you!

[DangerousD]

Just returned from another busy afternoon shift at a centre somewhere between swanwick and prestwick during which I received the details of the fantastic new pay deal......

Just flicking thru the mail shot from Prospect dated 11th July (original deadline day) where they had refused managements final offer of approx 8% over two years (good work fellas) as ' it was not sufficient recognition for pressures we are currently facing...'

There was also a hand written note from a union rep from monday evening apologising for the delay in a new offer but they were making significant progress on a new deal.

I find out today that this 'significant' progress is 1.8% 16 months away in return for which I will have to now give management an extra operational duty at their request once a year!!!! what a marvellous achievement by our negotiators plus the fact they have agreed for big brother to monitor how much work they have got out of you every day

Well at least i can sell my soul to the devil for £500 a day.....but can I?? am I being a little cynical in thinking that the only unit where this will be readily available is LACC and that management at every other unit will try there hardest to aviod overtime to protect budgets.
Sorry to rant but this is not just about a decent pay rise its also about recognition for the hard work we all do and the fact that its only going to get harder and more complex...

Come on everybody stick together, think of the bigger picture , vote this one down

[AREA52]

Thanks for the backing LD!

[AREA52]

Here Here DD!

Nice to see some backing from the other units, you obviously appreciate this could be you in a couple of years!

[Direct HALIFAX]

It all sounds quite attractive doesn't it. But should we be agreeing to overtime, albeit voluntary and worth £500 before tax. Why should we sell back days-in-lieu which are a right, not a perk. It's not our fault there's 2,500+ to cater for. Why accept a 2 year deal, some of which we don't get until the end of the 2nd year.

And what about the other non-pay related issues we wanted addressed, such as poor morale, lack of recognition etc. Or is the new GM going to wave a magic wand and sort that out too.

[Lieutenant Dan]

Sadly, we've been screwed again.

Congrats to management who do their job very well. Well, they
got what THEY wanted didn't they? Credit where it's due.

But nothing's ever going to change. For once it looked like we were gonna use the power we have, but we wimped out.

And to all our NATS colleagues who have such a dislike of us arrogant, over-paid, under-worked, aggressive, abusive controllers - thanks for your support!

Don't be surprised if I let that door swing shut in your face next time.

[Ichabod]

I don't work at a centre where TOIL, and AL will be bought back as a matter of course, so I would like to pass this warning onto all the airport units: BEFORE any ballot takes place, have a meeting with management and make sure they agree on the local conditions for buying back your time-off. BEFORE you vote yes to this deal, make sure you really know exactly what you are getting, and the implications of OPM on night shifts!! YES, at the end of 2 years your BASIC salary will have risen by 10%, but at what cost?:( :( :(

[EarlyGo]

Lieutenant Dan.. wise up. Most ATSAs know & appreciate how hard your job is, after all we work alongside you. You do an amazing job, day in, day out. I'm happy for you to earn as much as you possibly can, more than you do now, I just don't see why you should get a bigger PERCENTAGE rise than me, 10% of your salary is more than 10% of mine, fair enough, but why 10% for you and 6% for ATSAs?

Don't play the "nobody supports us, nobody loves us, boo hoo" card either, the ATCO sectional claim is all about valuing ATCOs more than other staff, thats hardly going to endear you to many people is it? Its not as though you'd support PCS to get the same percentage rise as you either? Thought not.

And if you think your offer is crap, its still more than the rest of NATS has been offered, or had you noticed? (or cared?)

I'll watch out for that swing door, cheers

[professor yaffle]

early go,
unfortunately the majority of pcs voted yes on that deal,and the atcos have been offered more because they did not

prof

[120.4]

Lieutenant!

Peace my friend, peace. It is okay to feel how you feel but sounding off at others won't help, you or anybody else. You might need to have a look at what is really important in life. Seems to me that money is coming ahead of people?

Point 4:)

[All Systems Go]

LD:

Thats not a very friendly attitude from you. I'm someone you, whether you believe it/like it or not you couldn't do your job without. You need the support, help and love of me and my kind, and putting stupid childish comments like that on here isn't going to help. 90% of non-ATCOs in the company know the job you do and how hard it is. But the same 90% of non-ATCOs get very upset when all you do is whinge and whine about how the rest of the company doesn't know about your plight and doesn't care. Maybe they don't care cos of the attitude you have towards them? This pay deal, on the face of it seems pretty crap to me. But then its not my opinion that counts now. What really bugs little old me and an awful lot of the other enginners I've talked over the past few days is our union. Now fair enough you lot voted no and the rest of us voted yes, but isn't this union supposed to be fighting for all of us? What the hell am I paying my subs for? I'm not paying my subs so you chaps and chapesses can get a pay rise and I don't. Again, yes I know about the voting thing. So a question on how this now works. An e-mail came around yesterday saying along the lines that this new pay bung as well as the old offer will be put back to the vote. I got the impression that everyone in no-Prospect would be re-balloted on the original pay deal, and the ATCOs on the bung. Is this true? If this is true, what happens if the rest of us vote no to the original deal? Does that mean you lot then get naff all until we're then sorted out for our sectional claim? I'm asking cos I don't know, so please enlighten me.

[nippa]

Gosh our management are sharper than I thought!
This deal is brilliant , well done Mark , Kenny etc.

But what the heck do our Union Guys think they're doing.

[nodelay]

I trust you will be looking forward to the day when individual units negotiate their own pay. Then you can settle for the type of deal that is being offered and let people in the south, where the cost of living and levels of traffic are much higher, try and get something a little better for themselves. Then you will be happy and so will I.

[160to4DME]

I was under the impression that our unit for one had given Prospect a clear mandate to fight any talk of overtime, be it voluntary or enforced.

I don't want to start a fight between units, but this offer seems unequivocally geared towards appeasing the troops at LACC.

Chaps, we are fighting for a better basic wage FOR ALL.

I value my free time. I am permanently too knackered and mentally exhausted at the moment to even contemplate volunteering for overtime.

Call me a cynic, but having seen various other management regimes at large, something which is introduced voluntarily often becomes compulsory; productivity through stealth. NO, I don't want it.

We're creating a very stiff rod for our own back when in one breath we might be voting to accept the idea of overtime whilst in the other bleating to the Daily Mirror and Chirp that we are overpressed, overworked, and insufficiently rested.
Put your future before next month's pay slip.

I'll also bet the equivalent money NATS has saved on my pension contributions that hell will freeze over before management at MACC find the resources to buy back TOIL. :mad:

Stop looking at the figures in the form they are being banded around. Look VERY hard at the strings which management have cleverly attached to their oh so generous offer.

ATCOs have criticised our worthy ATSA colleagues on here for not supporting our stand and have cast doubts on their commitment to 'the team.' I hope that when you consider the offer, irrespective of your unit, you consider the fact that your colleagues at smaller, less influencial units might be thinking they are getting royally shafted by this appalling 'deal'.

Keep the big picture, vote NO to this shabby offer.

160

[Nogbad the Bad]

WELL SAID 160to4DME !!!!!!

Overtime ???? :mad: :mad: :mad:

Extra duties ???? :mad: :mad: :mad:

What the HELL do Prospect think they are doing ??????????????

VOTE NO

[vertigo]

I don't want a two year deal. I don't want overtime. I'm voting no.

[A Nonny Mouse]

I hope that some of the Union Negotiators read this!

In case they don't I will be voicing my concerns to my local Union rep asap.


1) I don't want 10% over 2 years. I want less - yes less.

All I would like is 4% backedated to January 2002 and for one year only.

No strings, clauses, subclauses, bonus schemes, performance related. Just 4% for one year starting at the beginning of the pay year!


2) It would also be appreciated if our (the one we pay for and fund) union would investigate the state of our pension scheme on our behalf asap. With the stock markets worldwide nosediving, surely the calculations used to give our employer a pensions holiday is now questionable. Could our union please address this, and if need be, get NATS to start up their contributions again.

We should really be mobilising against this one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


As for the pay ballot. Remember the Cast of Grange Hills famous drug song

Just say no!

[Expeditedescent]

Gotta agree with everyone else here.........

This offer falls shabolically below what I was hoping for, so you can all count on another X in the no box.

This time I really had hopes.........silly me :)

[Numpo-Nigit]

Like those who have commented above, I am extremely disappointed by the eventual offer - the leaks had given the impression that something more appetising would appear. I am also saddened that, on this forum at least, we appear to have a north-south divide on its acceptability. As others have pointed out, whatever the current situation elsewhere, those of us at NERC and West Drayton are not in a unique position - we are just a few years ahead of what will become the norm. There will be no cosy postings in NATS before very long!

To address a few points not yet mentioned -

What is intended by the agreement to reduce the minimum shift length for part-time staff? Is this just an enabling-agreement for a few individuals with child-care or similar problems? Or is it the start of a stealthy move towards individual rostering by picking on a minority group to start with?

As the greatest pressure on management in their quest for service delivery improvements will come between now and the end of September, why does the start date of the "inducement" not coincide with the probable introduction of the revised rostering?

As regards the one-off buy-back of TOIL and annual leave - I do hope our negotiators were not influenced by the potential for personal pecunary advantage, to the detriment of their colleagues. There are rumours that some of the team have around 80/100 days-in-lieu owing - do the maths.

Overall, despite some canny negotiation by the management side, I cannot see this as the key to a much-improved service delivery. A few people MAY opt for overtime payments, but their opportunites and hence their impact, will be extremely limited, and the additional one operational duty per year will have even less effect! It seems that the net result is a no-score draw - both sides as aggrieved as before, and both looking forward to the replay in January 2004 with increased expectation.

[ATC Engineer]

Numpo-Nigit

The result was an own goal by both sides.

The management have succeeded in annoying the ATSAs and engineers who are now going to reject the re-balloted pay deal unless they get parity with ATCOs.

Prospect engineering branch seems about to collapse in on itsself after the same union gave two different recommendations to the same pay offer. Most people I know are on the verge of quitting.

[Bigears]

Abraham Z,
Basic pay differences are because there is a difference between the types of job. In answer to your question, increases should be across the board.
ATCO's should, IMHO, get paid more.
As you stated, management think that there is a surplus of ATSA's- says a lot that! Better utilisation of ATSA's (and ATCO's) would even up the numbers a bit.
Not written as well as I'd have liked, but short of time.

[roger]

Will the ATSAs and engineers be re-balloted? I thought they had already spoken, I'm sure you're not about to be asked again to clarify the situation..
roger

[2 six 4]

I like the deal and think the negotiators have done a good job. I will vote for it.

[PooDon-FromAbove]

2Six4

Would you please like to explain just WHAT is so good about the offer??? Its` total S***!!! Your not from LACC by any chance are you?

One really pissed off controller who will also be voting NO!!!

(By the way , I see from todays` papers that our MPs` have given themselves a 25% pension increase whilst ours`is probably going down the pan!!!)

[ATC Engineer]

Roger

That only holds true on the basis that we believed management when they said there was no more money in the pot, as this is obviously a lie then the original ballot was flawed.

BTW I voted no the first time anyhow just on general principle

[1261]

To NATS staff: I've posted a poll in the NATS forum in the hope of seeing how much support there is for this latest offer......

[Lieutenant Dan]

To all those I offended, sorry. Just get a bit carried away at times.

But as ATCO's we're always being reminded how we get up everyone else's noses coz of our attitudes. Some of us ARE tw4ts, admittedly. But there's a lot of us and no one seems to notice the majority of quiet, humbler controllers.

Not a dig at ATSA's either BTW, I love you lot!

As has been said, money's not the be all and end all.

So once again, sorry. Maybe I'll hold that door a little longer!

[roger]

PooDon-from above
if 2 six 4 is from LACC he is in the minority from what I hear.

1261
well done, that's where this thread should be any-way.

roger

[2 six 4]

Poodon - My opinion is personal same as yours. Considering the original offer and some very serious strings that management tried to attach to any increase, I think the end result is accepatble.

There will shortly be a working practices negotiation and management are going to have to put a value on the things they consider they need for productivity gains. They tried to get some of these things attached to the pay offer and failed.

Yes I am at LACC and no I won't be signing up for extra shifts.

[PooDon-FromAbove]

2Six4
Yes, we are all entitled to an opinion and I am trying to understand yours. So go on, explain why it is so good. Forgive me if I am missing something but should not our negotiators simply have told Management to stick it when they tried to attach strings in the first place.
I personally will accept nothing less than 10% across the board on everything(including LVs` for that matter) for this year alone.

Next year we will be paying more NI and inflation is not going to go down. Do you really think, in all honesty, that this deal is acceptable? Even the council workers are more ambitious than you! Come on, We`re worth more than this wherever we work!!

[controller friendly]

Lets not run before we can walk here! We said no to the initial offer, they came back with more because thay were obviously very afraid of what might happen......lets not forget that. There is alot to be said of good faith in this matter, we have won a battle but certainly not the war. We know we are under paid as ATCO's but this is a starting block!
I am by no means completely happy with the result but at least we are getting across what we are worth. It is a long and winding road ahead, give the BEC some credit for the work they have put in. Stay together and stay strong!:p
Sister cf!!!:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Bev Bevan]

Roger,

Before the last ballot, PCS said they reserved the right to re-ballot their membership if the ATCO's got an improved pay offer.

I suspect that will now happen if a meeting between PCS and management doesnt bear any fruit.

Did most of the ATSA's vote no? I have heard that they did, and that the admin staff voting yes carried the day.


BB

[eyeinthesky]

Easy as it may be to say whilst sitting on the ATCO side of the metaphorical fence, I'm afraid ATSAs have been royally stitched up by PCS this year. The attitude of ' We'll take this but if anything better comes along we'll have that as well' was doomed to failure, and that is now coming home to roost.

It looks like you will get your 2.2% then 3.7% that your union voted for you and that's that. Why should anything be different if you reballot now than it was the first time? Are any of the overlying issues like job security changed? No. Are you prepared to go on strike to force the issue? I doubt it. Sorry, guys, but the trade union games that PCS has been playing this year (cf. the roster change debacle) has left you high and dry this time.

With regard to the ATCOs deal, my vote is for NO as well. The AAVAs start 1/9/02 but the money doesn't come until 1/10/02, and I really wonder what the long term effects will be.

The last 1.8% at the end of 03 is a red herring. The pay deal is 8.2% over 2 years and and extra 1.8% for one month. You can bet your life that when the pay round starts in 04 the first line will be: 'You've just had 1.8%, why are you asking for more already?

Sadly, I think the deal will go through as there are too many short-term thinkers who will take the money and volunteer for 20 AAVAs without thinking of the end result.

[Karoshi]

I have to agree. I think that many ATSAs feel let down by PCS now. I attended one of the PCS pay briefings before the ballot and we were told that we should vote yes because management had assurred the union that there was absolutely no more money available and that this was the best deal that we were going to get!

Can't help but think that management have been very clever. They have managed to divide the workforce and save money in the process. Almost every operational ATSA I have spoken to voted NO and I don't believe that the "YES" vote is representative of the feeling on the shop floor.

I certainly believe that my ATCO colleagues should be paid substantially more, but equally, I'm not sure that it is fair to offer different pay increases to different grades within the remit of the annual pay talks. This is a road we haven't been down before and I just wonder where it will lead in the future.

[Air Show Bob]

You are bang on eyeinthesky with

"The last 1.8% at the end of 03 is a red herring. The pay deal is 8.2% over 2 years and and extra 1.8% for one month. You can bet your life that when the pay round starts in 04 the first line will be: 'You've just had 1.8%, why are you asking for more already?"

After my extra 1% NI contributions and inflation its hardly worth having - Its a definite no from me as well.

All this overtime at 500 quid a throw is a load of guff as well, obviously geared towards people at Nerc with nothing better to do with their lives.

I reckon the vote will be pretty close though and if the No vote prevails with a slim majority will there be a sufficient mandate for a strike?

Discuss below ........
:D :D

[2 six 4]

Why would a rise of 1.8% be a red herring or nothing at all ? That 1.8% is permanently on your salary until you retire and increases every spine point value for those who are still climbing the salary ladder.

We have had many staged deals before and some have had a payment immediately before a new negotiation takes place. Nothing in NATS pay negotiations history says this will be a factor in setting the next pay rise.

Why do I think it is a good deal ? Because in exchange for changing a couple of non operational days to possibly operational I get a permanent 10% pay rise at the end of the 2 year period.

All the rest is entirely at your discretion. If you want to work extra days go ahead. If you think you should get paid £830 per day then don't work until they pay you that amount. As I said the negotiators did a good job in remaining firmly against any committment for any of us to work extra days voluntarily. I'll take my salary and the time off thanks.

Don't you think that management have just shot themselves in the foot ?

As has been said they have seriously upset the rest of the staff who believed Mr Everready when he said there was no more money available.

They have to come back to the ATCOs and ATSAs for a WPP negotiation. The ATSAs will rightly want to make up ground after being duped.

One of the management aims of WPP negotiations will be extra attendances. They have now set a value of every extra voluntary day worked at somewhere between £540 and £830. That is going to be the calculation of money saved for every day of extra productivity. Nobody is going to get me to vote for any cumpulsory extra attendance which is not valued at .at least that starting figure.

Add that to more flexible shift start and finish times and it is going to be a very expensive negotiation to get us to move.

So, having separated the basic pay from any productivity negotiations, I am happy to vote yes to this and no to a WPP deal which does not come up to expectation. :) :)

[Exel]

One Union - ATCO/ATSA/Engineering - operational and training staff only - makes for stronger voting power - has it ever been tried?

[PooDon-FromAbove]

Is it any wonder that we are supposedly the "second worst paid" controllers in Europe. We are in a position where we have got them by the b***s and people are prepared to settle for this crap!!!

Is it any wonder that the pay & conditions of the Spanish & French collegues are far superior to ours. And, before anyones says the obvious, yes , I would like to work in Spain but would they let me in???:( (They should do because I am prepared to take industrial action to achieve what i think i am worth!!!:mad: )

Do I hear the sound of "lets keep our powder dry for the WPP negotiations":D :D :D :D

[Richard Everest]

Sister, do your BEC deserve credit for getting a 10% pay deal? No, one shouldn't attempt to run before one can walk- but have they actually tried crawling (pardon the poor joke) before walking? What would your definition of walking be in this case? They give the impression of being a bit toothless quite frankly and easily fobbed off!

I must add my congratulations to the Management team in that they have a "headline" pay offer on the table (including the bit that won't kick in until the sought after 2 year deal has nearly finished), dragged all sorts of extras into a "pay deal" that really have no connection with, or any business being associated with, pay. The boys and girls at LATCC are thrown a "sweetener" which, again, is a "headliner" to try and sway (or at least divide) the vote there whilst the rest of the country will just vote yes anyway (probably) because 10% is the mythical figure every ATCO apparently aspires to- usually over one year but the “grab it while you can” brigade will win in the end (ignoring that the reality of the deal is 4.25% this year, 5.5% next- God, you lot are gullible!). Whereas your union brethren in the civil service jump up and down and actually DO strike, over a greater offer, the predictable ATCOs, well, don’t. Remember your mandate to strike over PPP? Remember what happened? Anyone try to take a tube yesterday?

To those who suggest that the BEC may be self-serving over the buy-back of TOIL, you may say that but I couldn’t possibly comment! :D

I’ll try not to leave it so long before my next message, oh little ones.
:D :D :D

[controller friendly]

Hey!!!
I'm only offering my opinion, no need to get so personal. In case anyone thinks otherwise, I am not on the BEC. There is noone on the BEC who lives in sunny NI.
Back to the point, we asked for more, we got it. Not as straightforward as we might have hoped but as I said it is a start.
Someone who is quite close to me who is a rep for another union, nothing to do with atc, told me all along that management would offer more, they had to. Now it is up to us, this is what negotiation is all about. If we walk out now, just how greedy will we look, do you not think management will lay it on thick about the state of the industry post 911. We know most of it is cr@p but that will not stop them.
As I have said personal opinion, I thought we were still able to express those in the UK.:rolleyes:
Regards
cf

[Findo]

Poondon maybe you could enlighten us. France and Spain could you tell us the starting salary, scale length, working hours per week, number of working days per year, minimum years to retirement and percentage of salary on retirement ? I would love to make a comparison with our overall package.

In the meantime I'm another one happy to prime my powder for the WPP negotiation.

[160to4DME]

Pay attention chaps, French, Spanish and Portugese conditions and salaries were discussed at length on this forum before the initial ballot.

Having sat and pondered, my thoughts are:

*Management have proved to be devious liers having 'found' resources to make a slightly improved offer after saying categorically there wasn't a cent left in the barrel.

*the magic 10% figure some seem to salivate over is only nearly attainable if you compound all the bits of the offer onto your current salary. If you add each year's bits onto that year's starting salary, the figures look much more modest...and for modest read disappointing.

*The above thought is especially pertinent to the 1.8% which will only be implimented in the last month of this (Management defined) pay deal timescale, and is nothing more than a bargaining chip for management when it comes to the next pay round.
Plus, how anyone can include this in the calculation of the overall increase is beyond me as you aint going to see it for another 15 months.
It's the usual story......jam tomorrow.

*There's an extra 1% NI to be deducted.

*The offer of overtime is a three-pronged tool for management:
1. They hope it will be a softener to make the offer look more attractive
2. It's a desperate attempt by them to cover up for the woeful shortstaffing and mismanagement of recruiting/training in the past.
3. The moment we accept overtime in principle, then Management can close the book on any WPP issues concerning hours and fatigue.

*Have all unit managers agreed to buy back TOIL at the quoted rate or will they be duty bound to do so ? I think we should all be clear on our respective unit's position.

I think Prospect have acted as they should; they represented us and are now coming back to us with the new offer. Whether I believe they are right to recommend it is another issue altogether.

Management, despite their front men, are seriously cacking their corporate M&S Y-fronts because, for once, we've had the mettle to stand up to them.

We still have the upper hand, the motivation and now the inertia to reject this offer and press for a real substantial increase to all our basic salaries.

My view remains that this offer is devious, paltry and inadequate; as such, my opinion remains that to say NO is the only way I will be able to vote.

160

[atco-matic]

Well I'll be voting NO NO NO... if I can only get prospect to realise that I have moved... how do you do it online??

[Lieutenant Dan]

Dontdoit, can't speak for anyone else, but I'm knackered after every shift these days.

As much as I'd love to do all the o/t being offered and clear a few credit cards, the six day cylce alone is leaving me too tired for much else.
And I'm only mid-twenties.

[atco-matic]

I could have written that post L Dan!!! I dont want to be paid more for working more, as I am fed up and tired all the time with what I have to do as it is!!

[Standard Speeds]

Some thoughts Ladies & Gentlemen,

I have spent a considerable degree of time reading through all of the information available to us from Prospect and Management regarding the whole of this pay round from last October to date.

I have also spent time reading about the aviation industry in this country and in Europe/USA.

There have been some who have posted here who are anti the deal and who are either advocating that others should also vote no because they will, or are just telling us that they will be voting no. That is their right and they have exercised it.

The deal is not brilliant. But these are some facts:

1. It does add up to an increase of 10% (damn as near with compound interest) on basic salary by Dec 31st 2003.
Yes there is the extra NI to pay, but NATS have to pay that as well - so they wont be too receptive to that argument!
And as for inflation - well the headline rate for June was 1.5 %. True, things can change - which is why a 2 yr deal isn't always a good plan, but if things stay as they are then inflation is easily covered by the offer.

2. The overtime and all that it entails may well be put into practice if the offer goes through at the rates stated and subject to agreements with local reps, managements and individual ATCOs. BUT IT IS VOLUNTARY, and does not extend beyond 2003 at present.

Would it not make sense that money to pay the overtime will come out of existing budgets which are set for each unit based on a pre-determined number of staff? If so, those units that do not have said staff should have the said money left over to pay overtime. This may well help individual ATCOs finances, let alone those colleagues who otherwise might be overloaded day in, day out without the help of overtime workers.

3. If the offer is voted in (subject also to PCS wrangles...) and no-one does the overtime then the rate offered will no doubt increase. If they need it badly, they will pay for it - and much more if no-one volunteers. I strongly suspect that at the present rate they will be killed in the rush. There is always someone who will do it - especially for £300+ net/day. Don't believe those who tell you otherwise.


4. The only catch to the deal is the introduction of OPM. This can help us. Yes it can be used as a tool to reduce PSS - but only if we let it. Bandbox sectors/positions and it may show where savings can be made. OPM was on its way regardless of the deal.

5. NATS finances are not rosy - and yes IT IS OUR PROBLEM!! This is a commercial company - even if "Not for profit." If we push too far and the unthinkable happens and TAG are removed do you think President Blair, Prescott et al will simply re-nationalise us. NEVER. (Well, except perhaps during a prolonged war, god forbid).

I firmly believe that if the negotiators who, despite what you may think, are skilled and knowledgeable on this subject, think that this is the best option - I can find no possible reason to disagree with them. I have tried to find one. Believe me.


Just because I am leaning in favour of this deal does not make me spineless. (I have time to change my mind!) The WPP and PSS clause in the deal is of far greater significance in the very near future and one where big money might be made for little hurt. It is also one where big action may be required and dry powder may be useful.


If this vote goes 51% against then what do you think will really happen? There will be no more offers made. We will be taken on. With 49% in favour, management would fancy their chances. This may well apply to any vote that isn't say as strong as 70% against. They could split the ATCOs if we are not careful. Let alone the merciless treatment we would receive from the press. And yes, that does matter - especially when say 49% don't (in this example) want to fight.


Think carefully and discuss carefully.


To win is not about winning battles, but winning the war. It is a clever workforce that knows when to quit and when to fight. What are we? Quitting now isn't to quit for good. Oh no! Quit whilst you are ahead. Come back later. Dry powder can only be used once. The threat is more potent than the reality.


Disclaimer.

I am not a rep. I am therefore not BEC. I am definitely not management.

Sorry to have gone on!

The touch paper having been lit, he/she sat back to watch the fireworks...

Be safe.

SS.

[jocko0102]

WHAT BOLLOCKS!!!!!

Quit while you are ahead and come back and fight at some other time is what the union have said for years.
You are still not paid enough and you certainly do not get the recognition for the job you do.
Fight all the way and start to kick ass.
The government/management need you more than you need them dont forget that!

[PooDon-FromAbove]

Standard Speeds.
What makes you think that the government would not re-nationalize us? What DO you think would happen if TAG went bust?(even if we had nothing to do with it!!).

I am now well into my third decade with NATS and I have heard it all before:mad: As I said in my first ever posting on Prune in the other thread and i WILL SHOUT IT :-

[PooDon-FromAbove]

Sorry I hit the wrong key!!!!
THE ONLY DECENT PAY RISE I HAVE EVER HAD CAME AFTER THE LAST TIME WE TOOK INDUSTRIAL ACTION

I`m sorry but I have been around long enough to know that if we do not take action now people will not do it just for WPP or anything else you stated. Look what people said about PPP and our pension scheme!!

[PooDon-FromAbove]

RogerOut
I`m with you all the way. The silence is deafening!!!

[sector8dear]

RogerOut, you do have to give and take a little (OPM etc) however in reality I think you will find that NATS are saving a good deal more than 6% with the pensions holiday - if my memory serves me well the "employer" contribution to the NATS (ex CAA) pension scheme was in the region of 12%!!!!!!!!! - all of which makes your point even more strongly!

It's also true however that NATS will also have to pay increased employer NI contributions, so as pointed out this is hardly a point that will gain much sympathy from NATS. Also whether we "care" that NATS is part private or not does not alter the fact that it is - and the government will certainly not re-nationalise (except for war).

[Vercingetorix]

Which of Alistairs Darlings (sic) on the union team managed to get overtime working approved ? Watch for serious upward mobility in the near future

[terrain safe]

The only trouble with keeping your powder dry is that it starts to cake and then does not go off as expected!

I for one will be voting no to the pay offer as I think it should be a recognition of past good work and future worth to the company. I believe that management do not recognise anything other than "you're a number, shut up and do what you are told".

Also has anyone else spotted that they are relying on 6, yes 6, Atcos per day at LACC to work on overtime, and 3 at LTCC. How can you do this on a 6 on 4 off system and still keep within SCRATCOH? Please answer as I can't work it out.

But please everyone vote no as the previous offer was with no strings, now, they offer more but they are aiming for their pound of flesh as well..................

[eyeinthesky]

Not strictly on topic, but I note that another chance to inject some fresh ideas into the management of LACC has been missed. The early retirement of the present GM was an ideal chance for TAG to put a new person in who might offer some ideas on how to improve things (new broom and all that). But no, under the insistence of C&Ham the GM LTCC has been moved up and everybody shuffles along. More of the usual sh!t to follow, I suppose.

[EarlyGo]

You might be pleasantly surprised by your new GM, if you give him a chance :eek:

He was fairly popular at LTCC.

[Undercover]

Looks to me like management screwed up big time...

They must've thought that this capitulation would at least get them clear of the threat of industrial action - even if they admit they have no idea how they propose to pay for it!!! :rolleyes:

And yet now, not only are not all ATCOs exactly biting their hand off... they now find themselves in a major dispute with PCS and the Prospect engineers

Perhaps the famous "Mission Statement and Guiding Principles" could be better shortened to "D'oh!"

Just on the constant reference to the pension scheme... I'm afraid none of us are in a position to complain about the pensions holiday. As it is a final salary scheme, the company can do what they like as long as the money is there to cover their commitments. As there's a significant surplus, that mone is there's to do what they like with. And the savings (of around 12%) aren't going into a high interest account.. they're being used to keep the company trading! Sad isn't it...

[eyeinthesky]

EG: I do hope that you are correct, in which case I will eat my words.

Undercover: I think you are missing the point. The days of final salary schemes in this country are numbered. What is to stop the company deciding to wind up the final salary scheme, converting each person's pension entitlement or fund at that point into a money purchase scheme? Correct me if I'm wrong, but the small print does not include the phrase: 'We will continue with a final salary scheme for exisiting members forever'.

More importantly, actuarial advice earlier this year was NOT to take a pensions holiday due uncertainty over the future state of the market and NATS' future pensions commitment. NATS/CAA decided to proceed anyway. You cannot miss the fact that stockmarkets are now down around the level they were 5 years ago. What do you think NATS/CAA does with its money to produce the growth needed to meet its pension commitments? I'll bet a large percentage is invested in the stock market. I wonder what state their portfolio is in now compared to how it was when they decided to take the pensions holiday...:eek:

During this time, the money saved by the holiday may well have gone into running the company, but where is the surplus money in the company which might soon be needed to prop up the pension fund??

I'm willing to bet that pensions will be a big issue in the coming years.

[Findo]

PooDon - Maybe the reason there is silence is because we have seen the arguments and await clarification of the deal at members meetings.

As for you point thatTHE ONLY DECENT PAY RISE I HAVE EVER HAD CAME AFTER THE LAST TIME WE TOOK INDUSTRIAL ACTION

I have been in ATC since 1971 so the following comes without reference to R/T, radar recordings or Staff Notices -

The first staffing crisis in UK ATC came in the 1960s. Difficulty in retaining ATCOs or recruiting additional non service people lead to the Radley ( ? ) report. This took the unprecedented step of breaking the ATCOs away from their Civil Service grade salaries and turning a literally bicycle owning workforce into car owners overnight.

The 1970s saw the IPCS Union negotiate the introduction of the 5 Watch at most major units in the UK. ( Aberdeen caught up at the turn of the century !!). This radically altered the working conditions of ATC staff and went from the old 4 Watch A(M/N)SO to the almost universal MMAANNSOOO. This gave ATC staff 18 more days off per year.


There were huge pay rises in the 1970s but only because of inflation. I think the peak was around 1976 / 77 when we received a 26% pay rise. The big problem was inflation was around 23% . Our pay was determined by the Pay Revue Unit (PRU) which simply averaged the private sector pay rises over the previous year and awarded it to the Civil Service. Occasionally a bit was added to anticipate the effect of rampaging inflation.

1981. The Civil Service strikes were as a result of the Government scrapping the PRU at the same time as they were telling Health and Teaching staff to go to some form of revue body. It didn't seem to matter to Thatcher or the public that the Government were applying double standards. As members of the Civil Service Trade Unions we went on strike. The result was and increased pay offer of about 2.5% but no return to the PRU. We were then "free" to collectively bargain with the Government who just slapped us with pay policy after pay policy. Pay rises usually just reached inflation and sometimes not even matched it.

This political strike motivated a lot of otherwise conservative ATCOs into long term work for the trade Union movement. Barry Gibbs, Doug Bush, Dave Vaughan, Paul Louden, Tony Cowell, Alan Taylor, Billy Rodger, Graham Clarkson and Robin Morris all served as reps and BEC members in the next decade. Hopefully this rising of Trade Union interest amongst ATCOs will produce leaders of similar ability for the next decade.

The ATCO restructuring of the early 1980s saw the demise of the old grading structure. ATCO IVs disappeared and ATCO II artificial barrier to pay progression ( called PPR) was dropped. If you were near the bottom of the ATCO grades or scales you got a massive rise.

The ATCOs Branch of IPCS supported the formative committee of UKATS financially and more importantly it gave them Union protection against a hostile CAA management. Only when the personal threat to the members disappeared did Union membership cease to be a condition of UKATTS. This has left UK ATC with one of the best travel schemes in the world.

1987 Working Practices agreement saw a productivity agreement which paid for significant rises. Each ATCO had spine point rises and some in the middle benefited from the shortening of the pay scales.

Following that the ATCO early retierment scheme was negotiated. This allows ATCOs access to retirement conditions which no other staff enjoy. CAA management accepted the scheme and ploughed in millions of pounds to top up the fund for this extra bonus. ATCOs paid no extra.

At the same time a sceptical CAA management were persuaded by IPCS to back the Committee on the Regulation of ATCO Hours ( CRATCOH ) and back the legal limitation of ATCO hours championed by Tony Cowell and the ATCOs Branch through many years of debate. We are one of the few countries in the world to have the protection of this type of legislation.

The 1990s saw some ATCO's Branch members spend years defeating Thatcher and then Major Government proposals to fully privatise NATS and flog it off to the financial markets. We were eventually double crossed by this Government but still managed to retain many guarantees in legislation which never existed under any other privatisation. Not least of this is your final salary pension scheme which under joint TU and management governance has become one of the best pension schemes in the UK.

Reacting to ATCO pressure around the UK NATS again restructured the ATCO grades around 1990. The introduction of ATCO 3 and spine points for all ATCO 2s was a direct result of negotiation. The ATCO 3s may not have liked it but the alternatives were far worse. For no changes in working practices the ATCO 2s gained.

The 1997 Working Practices Agreement again gave spine point rises and bonuses to all ATCOs in return for productivity. This negotiation reduced the number of ATCOs by about 115 but we were at least that number short. A very limited number of early starts were agreed but management made major concessions in returning annual leave to debiting by days and not hours to the benefit of all ATCOs. Minimum shift length times mean that management cannot bring you in for extra days to cover short peaks of traffic.

This year's negotiations have probably produced the biggest above inflation pay rise ever negotiated in the annual pay round. That includes other multi year deals we have settled. Almost no concessions were made on productivity. A daily rate in excess of normal overtime rate is established as the baseline for any additional attendance.

Management still have to come back for productivity negotiations under any new WPP negotiation. You will have your say on the policies to be adopted in those negotiations and a ballot to vote for or against the final proposal.

In summary, never in the last 40 years have ATCOs gained more from industrial action than they have through negotiation.

[vertigo]

If TAG did go bust who would take responsibility for a shortfall in the pension fund ?

On the subject of overtime ;
In order to satisfy SRATCOH, I believe anyone doing additional attendances must be rostered on spins rather than nights for day 8 or 9 attendances. Therefore, can all those not volunteering expect permanent nights.

EVEN IF YOU DO NOT VOLUNTEER FOR OVERTIME THIS WILL HAVE A MASSIVE IMPACT ON YOUR ROSTER

[g m c]

findo

nice speach mate
is that going to form the basis of your triumph when addressing the bec on the next pile of ***** they advise us to accept.
your rise up the ladder of power is almost assured nats management need the easily appeased like yourself

prospect rejected the idea of a two year deal earlier why turn tail now:confused:

we should all vote no to this devicive insult if not it will all end in tears not far down the line:mad:

ps totally agree with joko1020 top point

[OrsonCart]

Findo, well said.

Not everyone will share your views, but the history behind former wage rises is fascinating.

I think the work the negotiators put in to bring to a ballot a 10% rise must be commended, especially against a back drop of a huge re-agjustment within the airline industry.

In a former private sector life I had part responsibility for negotiating, or rather protecting existing terms and conditions. It was always a massive task even attempting to negotiate a near inflation matching award (Profits are for shareholders, not staff!).

With inflation so low and the current business in turmoil, I personally think they have done a good deal with very few attached 'strings'.

The big negotiations however will start in ernest once management and Prospect start talking WPP. The terms and conditions enjoyed by NATS employees are generally the envy of most non NATS units. They must be protected at all cost. As Findo said, there are ways of reducing costs on paper which reap financial rewards for staff without them having to give much away in return.

Personally I am far more concerned that via WPP negotiations, my T's & C's are not compramised, and very worried about the future of such a fine final salary pension scheme which is the flagship of all ATC pensions within the UK!

The question I now have to ask myself is, am I prepared to go on strike with this offer on the table?

[Galaxy Defender]

Can anyone from the NO vote camp please give me a proper reason why I should follow them. So far I have heard opinions, we're worth more, I want more, I'm not doing that and I'm not accepting that pile of !
Opinions are fine, but without subtance can damage our cause. I want to see facts and information that back up your opinions, and that will let me make up my own mind.

However, compare the NO's to the Yes's, the YES camp are able to put forward an intelligent and well thought out argument for accepting the offer.

Our job may not be rocket science but we're all intelligent people and deserve intelligent arguments from both sides.

Just an unofficial observation from my tower!

[Spotter]

Apologies to Ian Dury & the Blockheads for stealing their line.

I will be voting no & here are my reasons.

1... the deal is NOT 10%. the extra money is on spine points only & does not include other allowances.

2... 1.8% of the money will not be seen until December 2003. I believe this is just a ploy to undermine the next round of pay negotiations.

3...I don't know about the centres, but management at airports will do anything rather than pay £500 for an overtime shift. The extra financial disincentive will mean watch managers being put under even more pressure than they are now to operate understaffed & bandbox or close positions. (Of course it's perfectly safe & obviously it would be all my fault if I had an incident as a result.)

4...This is not just a one-off increase I am seeking. I want to see my salary increase in the long term above inflation. I do not think that 5% on pay AND related allowances year on year for the next few years is too much to ask. I had hoped for more than that, but that is the absolute minimum I had decided I was prepared to accept. This deal is significantly short of that AND with strings attached re overtime & extra shifts.

5...Extra operational duties. I don't know the details of this so please forgive me. But as I see it a shift that "may" be converted to an operational duty = a shift that WILL be.

I do thank the union negotiators who have made some progress over the initial offer. However as in diplomacy sometimes talking can only get you so far & you have to weild the big stick. I feel it is important that we do not back down now until we have a deal that a large majority of the staff feel they can back. This is important for the present, and also signals our determination as a workforce to be taken seriously in the future.

Thanks for listening.

[g m c]

oh findo findo fido
understand the post

that was your speach to get you to your mighty status.
so by spouting very uninspiring stats you get to the management level.

you obviously have no thought for your troops at all, good nats man!

i've only had twelvev-thirteen years in this shambles but the craick is always the same (wait we've got them the next time)

i'm affriad this time i've had enough and feel udersold by management union and the likes of yourself alike.

be assured pcs and the engineers will never be in a union team with ourselves again.
prospect hav let all of us down and nats management are rubbing there hands once more
:confused:

[120.4]

There are undesireables to this offer, sure, but it is not unreasonable, all things considered. Yes I do believe we are seriously undervalued by our managment and there does need to be an equally serious adjustment to the pay. However I think it might be unreasonable to expect to get that all in one go. Provided that this imbalance is corrected progressively over a short period of time then I can accept it. (I most strongly assert that the 1.8% in December next year must in no way be allowed to hold back the award for January 2004)

In the mean time let each of us ensure that we are not taking on more than we should be.

Point 4
:)

[cotsRus]

Many unhappy bunnies out in Union Land. NATS say no more money, NO vote wins, increased pay offer to ATCOs only!
You ATCO types do damn fine job. But unity needed with all branches and unions.
Often asked how does increase of pay reduce workload / stress? and according to press: average 181 shifts of 7 hours p.a. by some simple sums that equates to 25ish hrs per week.
Don't shoot messenger!

[Pheasant Plucker]

Members of the BEC:

Why do you positively support a 3 year pay deal (for that is what it is), when the membership said they wanted a 1 year deal?

Why are you supporting the re-hire of retired staff? (and how much would they be paid)? Most controllers in their mid to late 50s claim that they shouldn't be working on radar at their age. Shouldn't we be working towards lowering the retirement age??

Why are you supporting overtime when it could ultimately lead to an increase in controller hours across the board and a rethink of CRATCOH? (if controllers are seen to be volunteering for more work despite claiming to be overworked and stressed enough as it is - should we not be trying to reduce the number of hours worked??).

Why is it that the only information that we have had about the deal has come via unit management and not directly from the union? (and why are the watch and unit reps as in the dark as everyone else is about what is going on)?

Why draw a line in the sand and then let management **** all over it?

We are also wanting to know what the union's thoughts are concerning the relocation of the North Sea sector and Sector 7, north of the border.
Are ScATCC controllers expected to work these sectors for 10% less than what our counterparts at NERC are getting for the same job?? (when they are open)!

My watch at ScATCC are totally against this deal.

Any answers?

P.S. - g m c - your spelling is s^!+e :D

[OrsonCart]

3 year deal, even me, with my bad maths cannot calculate it into a 36 month period.

Right, so what do the no votes actually want strike action to achieve? Come on, I am very curious, If I vote NO, what do I anticipate getting at the end of industrial action? 15-20% over 2 years, please tell me, for if I vote YES, I know what my salary will be post Xmas 2003 and prior to pay and related issues being negotiated from Jan 2004?.

So if I go on strike, will I be better off forsaking the offer on the table?

I have no intention of asking for extra shifts, so I ignore the short term over time kind offer to NERC.

If I go on strike will NATS finally pull their interest in the excellent pension scheme? (You bet they will consider all options).

I am however, prepared to stand up and defend my T's & C's and my pension.

Still yet to decide which way to vote though!

[Standard Speeds]

Pheasant Plucker

I agree with Orson here. This is a 24 month deal. It is up to the union to ensure that the 1.8% in December next year doesn't effect the deal in January.

And as for your comment re. North Sea and Scottish I should get back in your box if I were you. TC has taken on more and more of LACC's airspace for the past 6 or so years for no extra money and with very few extra staff. You are the last in a long line of ATCOs deserving more money for taking on more airspace (MACC and S29 would be in front of you in the queue, for example) and no-one will get it for the forseeable future.

You want more money for working harder - come down to the south east or south coast and earn it.

Sorry.

SS.:D

[viaEGLL]

Standard Speeds,

What would your views be on separate unit pay deals or should every ATCO get the exact same pay rise no matter how much traffic is moved???????

:confused: :confused: :confused:

[Crappy Headset]

Standard Speed:

"TC has taken on more and more of LACC's airspace for the past 6 or so years for no extra money and with very few extra staff."

Why?

If you're too busy down there why not volunteer for a posting north of the border - it's nice and wet this time of year.

Unfortunately I didn't have a choice.

[Mr_Grubby]

Crappy Headset

You have my sympathy. I too was sent north against my wishes.

Many years ago after Northern Radar closed. I had to endure 4 years, 6 months, 5 days and 10 hours (apx). Hated every min.

Hope you escape soon.

Mr G.

[250 kts]

First of all let me say that management are running a VERY cute campaign at LACC by letting it be known that the rest of the country is in favour of this c**p offer. However reading this leads me to think tht this is not the case!

I too thank the negotiators for what must have been a very difficult task, BUT, The offer on the table gives up just too many conditions for it to be acceptable. In fact I understand that the BEC recommended this without a full BEC meeting to thrash the arguments out. WHY?????

For this to be a true 2 year deal(something I am strongly against) shouldn't all the pay rises be back-dated to Jan2001?. NATS are already holding on to the money but if it were to be back-dated then that would at least make it more palatable.

On the issue of TOIL. A rate was set at LACC last year for the buy back of TOIL and now the BEC are prepared to recommend a rate that is around 30% of what was offered last year-WHY??
The rate to be paid for Annual Leave is double that of TOIL. Does this mean that time spent on a day off at a meeting/on OCT.etc is less valuable than a days' AL??
Management are fully aware of the size of this problem and we should not be doing anything to help them out of the mess-certainly nothing under last years' agreed rate anyway. What is the point of working hard to set a precedent one year and throwing it all away 6 months later??

Not sure of the impact of reducing the shift length for part-timers-but I suspect it could lead to additional attendances if it is not carefully written.

The conversion of a TRUCE day into an operational duty is nothing short of a DISGRACE!!!!!!

The rehire of retired ATCOs. Well how is this for reducing the ability to be promoted. i can't wait to see the first ones brought back to sit in the LAS/GS positions drawing salary and pensions. This really is the start of the slipppery slope to getting rid of ATCO jobs. We already have a number of LASs who are no longer planner valid and this opens the door to exacerbate this problem.

So we will now have a policy which has the Flexible Retirement Scheme. This took YEARS to negotiate and bring to fruition for all ATCOs in NATS. The BEC also now want an incentive scheme to deter people from retiring early. What are those incentives and how do the two policies marry together???

We were led to believe that the sectional claim would be addressing things like OJTI payments not giving away many of the hard won policies.

I urge you all to ask whether this offer,with all the strings attached,is really an improvement over the original one which was so overwhelmingly turned down-I THINK NOT.

The unit reps must talk to one another to gague the feeling at the individual units-the BEC do not appear to be prepared to
want to do this.

[Yellow Monster]

RogerOut,

From my understanding of the deal offered, those at the top of scale will be getting 9.7% over the two years.

Those who are still moving up the scale may appear to be getting more, but spine point increases should not be included in salary increase calculations so effectively all ATCOs are being offered 9.7%.


Yello

[fish food]

Be careful with your figures. The beauty of 2 year deals, especially with staggered increments, is that the bean-counters can sell them a hundred different ways to a hundred different people. i.e. a 1.8% increase in month 24 may be good, but it doesn't equate to a 1.8% increase in overall salary. But, this does mean 2004 increases start at a 1.8% higher launch position than they would do otherwise! (Confused? Exactly the reason why 2 year deals should be avoided!!!)

My own calculations: (for what they're worth).

Year 1 = 2.7% increase in gross annual salary (compared with year 1 gross annual salary without any deal)

Year 2 = 5.4% increase in gross annual salary (compared to year 1 gross annual salary with deal)

HOWEVER! Those NOT at the top of the scale will get a greater overall increase in year 2's gross annual salary compared to year 1's (with deal) as they get the approx 4% increase in April due the extra scale point, giving a year 2 on year 1 increase in gross annual salary of approximately 9.6%.

(Do the sums just by taking gross monthly salary Jan '02 and apply the deal to it. See if you like the colour of YOUR money by end '03. But be careful...one man's 9.6% is another's 5.4%!)

What ticks me off most is the fact that we're having to do this kind of mathematical jiggery-pokery in the first place just to try to find out exactly whats on offer.

All I wanted was a ONE YEAR deal with a 5% increase in basic pay and allowances and WITHOUT STRINGS! The percentage aside, those, like me, who attended the TU meetings at ScOACC made it perfectly clear to the reps that we were not going to accept a two year deal. The reasons being as outlined above, uncertainty over traffic projections and the fact that if we did it once, this would then become how things would be done in future...every deal a 2 year deal!

Now what do I have? Another two year deal, like the one I rejected last time, but now with some clever accounting tricks to add a % here and there and a heap of strings to do with over-time/time-off-in-leui/annual leave/claw-back days/buy-back days/opm etc.etc.etc.

What a complete and utter ****ing can of worms!!!

SO PROSPECT, WHAT WAS SO DIFFICULT ABOUT NEGOTIATING A 1 YEAR DEAL WITH A 5% INCREASE EFFECTIVE 01 JAN, WITHOUT STRINGS?

Now, will I hold my breath, or not...:confused:

[Yellow Monster]

Some more calculations:-

Year 1 start salary=X (which we're all agreed is not enough)

Jan02 increase salary=X+2.2%X

Oct02 increase salary=X+2.2%X+2%(X+2.2%X)

Jan03 increase
salary=X+2.2%X+2%(X+2.2%X)+3.7%(X+2.2%X+2%(X+2.2%X))

Still with me?

Dec03 increase
salary=X+2.2%X+2%(X+2.2%X)+3.7%(X+2.2%X+2%(X+2.2%X))+1.8%(X+ 2.2%X+2%(X+2.2%X)+3.7%(X+2.2%X+2%(X+2.2%X)))

So there you have it!

I agree with fishfood that the 1.8% is not really a salary increase, however at the end of the 24 month period the above shows how much your salary will have gone up by. And no doubt it will stay at that level for a few months while the next pay round drags on.
Those of you who are still travelling up the ladder will have to change your Xs to Ys in year one after April and the Ys to Zeds in year 2!

:) :) :) :)

[Findo]

CostsRus - If we had a 25 hour week that would be some improvement !!! Unfortunately the minimum shift length is 7 hours. Maximum shift length is 10.

We also have a net hours deal so every rostered hour is a working hour. All in all the average around the country is near the maximum - about 39 hours.

[Vercingetorix]

Findo
fascinatimg to read the historical detail but did atcos not receive their biggest pay deal due to the revolving strike action i.e Heathrow on morning strike, West Drayton on afternoon strike, Satccc on night strike. etc ? or are you taking a clasic marxist revisonist stance ?

[hatsoff]

The strike in the 80s was a general Civil Service strike caused by the Thatcher Government abandoning the Pay Research Unit ; the PRU being an independant and fair way of keeping Civil Service pay in line with outside bodies.

The Union are rewriting history by making us believe it was an ATC strike - it was not. We did not receive any benefit as a result of that industrial action.

Also watch those calculations.
As mentioned elsewhere , UHP is not included in the sectional offer.

[Findo]

Vercingetorix - Nope. The revolving strikes were the only ones we have ever taken nationally. That was 1981 and the action as partly successful as I said previously. The main objective was the restoration of the PRU but the compromise settlement was a slightly larger pay offer and a complete loss on the Revue Body.

PooDon was shouting your line but hasn't yet come up with figures. My little potted history was done from memory so the actual fugure may be slightly different. However the clear history shows that when we have a strong negotiating hand we gain greater than all other times. :) We have never had a stronger hand than now. All we need is the negotiation as this pay round has shown. Major objectives are not won in one short battle. Lets be clear what the long term objectives are and give the negotiators the mandate to return with a fair offer in exchange for what we are prepared to give.

Despite the personal comments about myself and others who see merit in accepting this offer, I am happy to go with the democratic majority. Speaking as one of the few who has been involved in both official and unnoficial strike action in ATC I have never found it productive to slag off colleagues who are honest enough to express their opinions or spend time working on my behalf without reward. The picket line can be a lonely place. :eek: :eek:

[Check your speed with....]

I must confess that I have not read all 120 or so posts on this topic so I apologise if any of these points have been made or answered before:

1. I really can't see a problem with 2 year deals. We're over half way through the year already and if we accept the offer it will probably be the end of september before we get the money. That's nine months after the start of the negotiations. Do we really want to go through all this palaver again three months after that.

2. With regard to the pay rise, I know it's being paid in stages but at the end of it all the fact remains that in Jan 2004 your pay will be 10% higher than it was in Jan 2002. That's not particually confusing or complicated and after all, we are supposed to be reasonably intelligent people. These are salary scale increases not bonuses or lump sums so we will continue to see the benfits of that year on year. I've got plenty of friends outside air traffic who would be ecstatic at such a rise, so lets take a bit of a reality check here.

3. Overtime.
I have seen a lot written here about how tired people feel at the end of a shift or cycle. Well here's a revelation for you: So does nearly everyone else who works for a living! Are you seriously trying to suggest you deserve special recognition for that. If you feel too tired to do overtime:- DON'T DO IT! But there are others out there who feel they should have the opportunity to do some if they want to. Let's look at this for a minute. If you sign up to do 13 days, that amounts to less than one a month, so you'll be working on average about 19 days a month. That's still at least one less per month than the vast majority of the working population. Plus we also get more holiday than most as well.
There's been lots said about overtime just masking the real staffing crisis; it's getting management out of a hole; there should have been better planning yeras ago; etc, etc ad nauseum. All of this is correct, but I don't see the complainers offering any solutions. The management cannot just magic validations out of thin air and ultimately we're the ones who have been chopping all the trainees. I think we all know at least one ab initio who we feel was harshly treated and could have been given more of a chance. You can't just whinge about poor staffing and then reject the only possible answer that there is at the moment.

This is a pretty good deal that has been achieved with no great pain to ourselves, and I honestly believe that voting no on this would be a mistake. It would almost certainly lead to industrial action and while we might/probably would gain a bit more, those gains would not be in proportion to the struggle required to achieve them.

CYSW...

[OrsonCart]

250 kts, some wise words you have spoken.

Taking the LTCC crisis out of the equation, where should my focus lie? I say this not wanting to anger Swanwick folk.

If you are correct and the entire BEC did not vote, what enables a 'partial' vote? I have never been one for decorum and formalities, but Prospect ATCO's branch has its own rules. So have these been broken in this case?

Again we go back to information flow, a joint statement is published, we as members expect the hierarchy of our union to have rubber stamped it. 250 kts is of the opinion that correct union protocol has been by passed maybe?

I cannot condone irregularities like this unless the huge benefits on offer to Prospect ATCO's branch are too good to be wasted?

[tug3]

Check... -

"That's still at least one less per month than the vast majority of the working population. Plus we also get more holiday than most as well".

You forgot to mention the fact that:

a) if we **** up, we kill hundreds

b) we take years to train to a standard that not all who start down that road can achieve

c) we work in a highly stressed environment (which over time we get used to and hence tend to forget until the next time we end up 'finger-nailing' it)

d) thanks to a combination of aforementioned stress coupled with shift work it is a medical FACT that we won't enjoy as much of our retirment years as the "vast majority of the working population"!

Get real!!!!

If you want to compare like with like then spell it out instead of meaningless comparisons. Next thing you'll be saying that the job is so satisfying we should be doing it for free!!!

If your job is that p*** easy you can do my next shift and I'll happilly pay you the ****ing overtime myself!!!!

Oh, and by the way, the "vast majority of the working population" couldn't give a **** what I do or what I get paid so long as they're not hanging around airports for hours and they get to where they want in one piece. I, in return, don't give a *** what they get paid for what they do! As the person best placed to know, I recon I know my own worth!

[Spotter]

WAKE UP!!!! This offer is NOT 10%. It is not even 9.7%. I have just calculated exactly how these staggered increases, only 2 of which apply to UHP & other allowances will alter my gross pay over the 2 year period.

(Ignoring incremental progression, which has nothing whatsoever to do with these negotiations)

Dec 2001
Base Salary = 31021 UHP = 4272 Total = 35293

Jan 2002
Base Salary +2.2% = 31703 UHP +2.2% = 4365 Total = 36068

Oct 2002
Base Salary +2% = 32337 UHP + ZERO = 4365 Total = 36702

Jan 2003
Base Salary +3.7% = 33533 UHP +34.7% = 4526 Total = 38059

Dec 2003
Base Salary +1.8% = 34136 UHP + ZERO = 4526 Total = 38662

38662 - 35293 = 3369

(3369/35293) * 100 = 9.5%

Yes that's right 9.5 % higher than Dec 2001.

Sorry for coming on all Carol Vorderman, but I'm fed up of people trying to sell this as a 10% deal. If your pay is made up of more allowances (London Weighting, OJTI etc) your actual percentage rise will be even smaller.

There's a lot of psycology at work here. 10% is psycologically a very significant figure. Management must be delighted at the union & everyone else who are trying to sell this as 10%, but before you vote just spend a few minutes working it out like I have just done. Don't let yourself be conned.

[Don't Tell Him Pike]

I had the benefit of a Prospect briefing recently, and their case for acceptance was fairly good.

However, it would appear that the reason we're in the position of the BEC recommending an offer that several (myself included) do not think a good one, seems to be a certain amount of apathy by the membership ourselves. How many of us pressed for local unit meetings beforehand, so the BEC knew what we wanted. I didn't! Nor did many of you!

People mention strings attached. The only compulsory string I see is using one non-ops day for operational reasons. All other strings are voluntary. Those at LACC and LTCC that are going to be asked to sell leave and TOIL, and do overtime, my advice is to refuse. If you don't want to make voluntary attendances, then don't. I personally have nothing against you selling leave and TOIL if that's what you as individuals want. I will be disappointed if you sign up for additional attendances.

If we do accept, the bottom line is that basic pay will be 10% higher then it is now. UHP and London weighting will not be.
We will be able to negotiate WPP etc, which could be beneficial if we make the effort to tell Prospect what we want, with respet to issues of UHP and weighting for those living in more expensive areas.

If we reject it, we don't know what we'll get.

The short term part of me says Strike, the long term part says can we do even better when we start negotiating for Jan 2004?
After all, management can't bring the Dec 2003 1.8% in to 2004 calculations if we don't let them. Also, by then traffic will have picked up sufficiently for them to be unable to justify a healthy rise. My concern with the long term view is how many of us union members are going to othered enough to arrange and attend meetings to thrash out what we want before our negotiating team is sent in to the lions den?

In short, I'm still undecided!

[Spotter]

IT'S NOT F*****G 10%.

[sector8dear]

TUG3

Quote:

"a) if we **** up, we kill hundreds

b) we take years to train to a standard that not all who start down that road can achieve

c) we work in a highly stressed environment (which over time we get used to and hence tend to forget until the next time we end up 'finger-nailing' it)

d) thanks to a combination of aforementioned stress coupled with shift work it is a medical FACT that we won't enjoy as much of our retirment years as the "vast majority of the working population"! "

Just a thought, while I basically agree with your sentiments, there are also others, e.g. doctors whose responsibilities are arguably just as great and work at least twice the hours of an ATCO, and more hours without rest at a time too. I know someone else's pay and conditions don't justify undervaluing others but ATCO pay and hours aint that bad!

As I said, just a thought - don't over estimate your importance - sure it's important BUT not unique.

[bwatchbabe]

sector8dear couldn't agree more. Too many people within our profession overestimate their own importance. It is a very responsible job but so is driving a coach full of schoolchildren.
A question for more senior area controllers. Do you feel that the job has actually got easier over the last ten years as the airspace has been re-sectorised. As someone who validated on north bank some time ago I certainly feel this is the case.

[tug3]

Sector 8 Dear -

You are not an ATCO and your views re. what we do and how much we get paid are well documented in this thread and others. I repeat, "as the person best placed to know, I recon I know my own worth!", as, presumably, you do yours.

Bwatchbabe -

As someone others would accuse of talking the job up, I recon you'd fall into the category of those seeking to dumb it down:

"It is a very responsible job but so is driving a coach full of schoolchildren". No **** Sherlock! Stressful - undoubtedly, responsible - of course, but before I go on to compare HGV/PSV vs Rating/Validations, etc. etc. etc., do me one favour and I'll spare you the lecture...

If possible, before your next shift, take a trip to your nearest major airport and spend a couple of hours in the check-in area having a good, long look at the faces of the 100s if not 1000s of people, including children, passing through on their way to the departure lounges. Then consider if you will the fact that ALL their lives will depend upon the well chosen words which will be falling from your lips just a few hours later.

Now, having reminded yourself of your raison d'etre as an ATCO, tell me what you think you're worth AND how important your job is!

[bwatchbabe]

Tug3 touched a nerve there did I? With such flowery prose and dramatic content perhaps you would be more suited to life as an author or even a ballet dancer. As for my raison d'etre, like many people I am proud of the job I do but not to the extent that I believe I am some kind of superbeing, my raison d'etre is my own children and my life outside of the job.
Without being too patronising I suspect you are fairly junior. As you gain experience you may learn to be a little more humble.
As for pay, I feel that although,obviously I would like a larger pay rise, the union negotiators have done the best deal possible without risking the possibility of a workforce- splitting strike. I personally would have gone on strike if the majority had voted that way but be assured we would not have had enough backing from colleagues to carry the fight.

[Undercover]

Tug... come on... Everyone agrees that the job of an ATCO is a difficult and stressful one and deserves to be well paid. And it is.
When those in the chair like yourself come out and try to tell us you all wear your pants outside your tights and save us all from certain death on a daily basis - that's when you lose the credibility you have.
As already mentioned your average GP probably does double the number of hours working each week, while having to make life or death decisions as a matter of course. They also have to look each and every one of these people in the eye when they make the decisions. They spend longer training than an ATCO in a more highly stressed environment... and they end up owing a fortune in student loans because... gasp... most students don't get paid circa £18K plus expenses to study!!!

As you say "as the person best placed to know, I recon I know my own worth!" Yes... but you're also the best placed person to have your head stuck up your own a*se!!

You do a very responsible and skilled job.. and get paid well over the national average to do so.
Perhaps a knighthood for every completed shift would be a fair reflection of your greatness...?

Oh... and there's a "k" in "reckon" ;)

[tug3]

Teddy's out the pram, I give up, but not for lack of stamina, just to spare others from the tedium of reading black being called white and vice versa.

Off to rant on another thread, another time...

NEXT!!!

[Undercover]

Stay clear of the kryptonite... :cool:

[g m c]

bwatchbabe

hit the nail on the head

re-sectorisation

moved to tc scottish and manchester
flow control at its finest with more to come

so lie back and bask in the silence

[Pheasant Plucker]

Standard Speed - wind your neck in.

I've worked on busy sectors down south, so I know what you do and don't do down there.
You, on the other hand, seem to be fairly ignorant of what we do north of the border.
I suggest you take a liaison visit sometime.

Yours isn't the only busy unit in the country.

TC are already a couple of spine points higher than ScATCC, (and deservedly so).
Manchesters sectional claim is long overdue.

That still doesn't make it right, that work should be shipped north, so that ScATCC can do it for less money than it was being down for down south.

[Standard Speeds]

Pheasant Plucker

Go pluck a pheasant, or even better go pluck yourself!

My neck is not in need of retracting, thanks ever so!

I am not ignorant of what you do north of the border - in fact many of my friends work up there.

When were you last down south - valid, I mean?

I wonder if/when the "traffic complexity tool" comes in to rehash WPP and station grading? This, by using a tool that represents not only traffic levels, but also sector complexity, may well redress balances felt awry by all units.

I wonder whether the 2 points (or so) difference at the top of the scale down south compared to up north, is truly representative of the difference in complexity?

MACC will get regraded as soon as they get moved to LACC. Unless they go north to join forces in the NSC?!

Enjoy plucking.
Waitrose sells them ready plucked down here, don't you know!:D


Smile ;)

Regards
SS.

[jocko0102]

For those of you who already know you will vote No, good.

For those still undecided just think about what it is you do every time you plug in busy or not and think about how much you are valued by the management and government.

For those who will accept then you must have your reasons but dont sell yourself short you are worth a lot more.

Question:

Regardless of where you work the job responsibility is the same,however it is wrong that for example Manchester controllers are paid less (£5000) than those down south.
The fact is that they work more planes per controller and the south east sector is the busiest in Europe.
Also every year for the last 10 they have taken more and more airspce for the grand sum of £0.
Now that does not mean they are better than anyone else but the differential is unfair and needs to be addressed.

If anyone is going to question the above then justify your reasons and remember Scottish , Man and London all have to work together to keep the system going

[1261]

Great! Now I can go to the boss and say that our colleagues in Manchester think we should all earn the same, wherever we work.

I take it we can count on your support, then, when we petition to get rid of ATCO 3 airfields and put us all on the same scale....??

Nope, thought not.

[Pheasant Plucker]

Apologies for turning this thread into a north/middle/south/airfields divide.

Probably not the best time to be doing this, so I shall shut up on the subject :)

[Greebson]

Just out of interest, what does an average GP earn?