ATC IssuesA place where pilots may enter the 'lions den' that is Air Traffic Control in complete safety and find out the answers to all those obscure topics which you always wanted to know the answer to but were afraid to ask.
Rumouroid........what a total fckunig arse you really are with comments like that......would be glad to meet you anytime to have your comments explained, please come on up here to Scotland and repeat your comments to the ATSA's that today have been told they may no longer have a job in NPC..!! what can you really see of the real world with your head up your arse???
What exactly has happened to the scottish ATSAs? Have the LACC ATSAs got anything to worry about other than iFACTS (£130 million spend to date) slashing some of their jobs. I think ATSAs have done well to keep their terms and conditions since West Drayton closed, I believe most of them have been grossly overpaid since its AC closure 8 years ago. There is a lot of top of the scale ATSA 2 and 3 in the LACC ops room earning between £35000 and £40000 inc shift pay for doing nothing more than putting strips out. NATS would be wise to use these current economic turbulence to start paying them commensurately for their task, perhaps between £20000 and £25000 per year, inc shift pay. By reducing their salary, and therefore their final pensionable salary, it would also help to reduce the pension burden.
Controversial I know, but I think prudent all things considered.
And I thought I was being controversial, but reasonable as usual of course
Sorry, as my previous post states I didn't know what has happened to Scottish ATSAs today. I do feel terribly guilty now, however, unlike a lot of NATS ATCOs I've worked outside NATS in the "real world" for several large organisations, therefore I feel slightly qualified to make a judgement based on my observations of peoples jobs.
Why is my post any more controversial than those that bash CTC staff? I'm not saying ATSAs are unnecessary workforce like a lot of people say that CTC staff are, I'm merely suggesting that they are somewhat overpaid and I'm only speaking about LACC ATSAs as I have no knowledge of other ops rooms.
For example Police Sergeants and Inspectors pay is similiar to ATSAs as is Nurse Team Manager and Modern Matron and Warrant Officers in the forces, do you think they all should be paid the same?
Until recently NATS employees have never really lived in the "real world".
As a no voter I'm obviously bitter and disappointed with the result today, perhaps that's why I posted such a controversial post? Sorry if any offence has been taken, however I still stand by what I said.
Last edited by rumouroid : 19th December 2008 at 23:29.
I dont know what i'm more disappointed about. The fact that it is a Yes vote, or the fact that such a large amount of atco's either couldn't be arsed or didn't think it was sufficiently important enough to vote on!! That both saddens and sickens me. This was THE issue. The one issue that everyone has always said would get them out of the door, their pension was sacred and yet such a large percentage didn't vote!!!.
I'm afraid that the way i feel at the moment is so disillusioned with the whole thing. i think i will now join the disinterested ranks.It doesnt seem to make a difference. I dont feel the union any longer represents me and the issues that are important to me. I feel they have been quite aggressive in their targeting of this deal and they have gotten the result they wanted. My only interest in union membership from this point on will be the legal backup provided.
For those that voted yes, congratulations
For my fellow no voters, commiserations , we tried our best.
And for those who couldn't be arsed to vote at all shame on you
Has anyone thought that perhaps some of those who did not vote had decided they didn't know how to vote? 'Undecideds' as the pollsters describe them; that abstaining reflected their positions better than 'yes' or 'no'?
Those would be the same ones who say turn left, correction turn right, correction climb, correction descend
If a bunch of ATCO s cant make their mind up on a two choice decision.....heaven help us all
Has anyone thought that perhaps some of those who did not vote had decided they didn't know how to vote? 'Undecideds' as the pollsters describe them; that abstaining reflected their positions better than 'yes' or 'no'?
So return the papers as "spoiled" then. That is the correct way to show abstention as opposed to just can't be a*sed.
I would hazard a guess that a large proportion of those that did not vote were in their mid 50s and, rightly or wrongly, decided that the proposals would have little or no effect on their retirement. You could argue that they were right to abstain from a proposal that will not effect them.
The Union has been less than honest with us during the briefings. At the briefing I attended they gave a list assurances that would be included in the MoU, giving the impression it was just a matter crossing the ts and signing; yet in their correspondence today it all seems a lot less certain and appears to need a significant amount of consultation. However, I still think a yes vote was the right one.
If you are a union member, you should have been sent the official results, which showed that one engineer (or other specialist) spoiled their ballot paper.
Ok, let me re-phrase.....would someone who had decided to abstain from voting, for whatever reason, really return a spoiled paper, or would s/he merely not bother to return it?
I don't think I would bother to open the envelope, if I were in that position.
Anyway, my point was that, just as one should not condemn all those who undertake overtime/VAPs/AAVAs as being greedy, one should not condemn those who did not return a vote as 'couldn't be arsed' or 'didn't think it was sufficiently important enough' or 'lazy'.
Its not fair to say that all those that did not vote should be ashamed of themselves. I, and I am sure there are others out there, know of half a dozen ATCO's who fall under one of the following -
a - Were not able to attend a brief at their unit due to manning and therefore were not properly informed and able to make an educated decision
b - Some people did not receive ballot papers at all, one colleague received theirs the day the ballot closed
c - Felt that the whole consultation was so quick and mis managed that they had no idea what the hell was going on (I know some will say that it their own short sightedness but it happened).
It harks back to my previous post about the Union and their role in all of this. I don't feel they have represented us at all and to paraphrase a quote on the internal net (and to agree with ToweringCu), have shamefully ignored the 'democratic' mandate' we give to them.
So it is all over. Some interesting and Witty comments on this thread over the last few weeks. The next big challange will be the pay award.
Anything less than RPI and I feel that we realy are on the start of a long slippery slope.
It would be interesting to see a new thread on why people are union members (given the vote and number of abstainers). I feel that too many see it as an insurance policy to cover up their own weaknesses in the profession.
Good ATSA's with some Systems engineering knowledge can play a big part in our Future centres programs so I hope that some will retrain as those that I have worked with have been well worth their money.
ATSA reductions wont only be limited to PC but Scottish airfields with the roll out of EFPS. Still a long way to go (IMHO) for PC and the systems that replace them will need to have good fallback systems and procedures which will prove (again IMHO) much more expensive than the projects would want in order to make those staff reductions. The latter was never more obvious than during the recent NAS-NERC system resynch problems where the OPS and theefore business effect was limited by the continuing production of good old paper strips distributed by the good old ATSAs.
as much as I believe we should never settle for any less than RPI, I honestly don't think we will get anything above 3% - if that.
The union has asked for Aug RPI+1% (5.8% I believe), but asking for something and fighting for it are 2 totally different things, as we saw with "OneNATSOnePension".
Regardless of why people chose not to vote, a 35.3% non turn out over the board is very poor considering the ramifications of the pensions issue, and will only serve to make Management believe that in fact they can do almost anything to us, because we can't be arsed to vote about it (whether can't be arsed is the correct reason or not, it will be taken that way). I say that despite acknowledging the extremely valid and correct point Gonzo makes about some people maybe being unsure which way to vote.
A lowly 64.7% turnout is another victory for Mr. Barron in the 'divide and conquer' tactics.
As for Rumouroid saying what he/she did about ATSAs...
In TC the ATSAs work exactly the way they did at West Drayton. I have a lot of respect for the good ATSAs, though we do have some useless ones (it's a fact of life in any job).
However, they are paid extremely well for what they do - any sane ATSA will admit this. Anyone looking from the outside in would be amazed and incredulous at the salary for what they do.
However, the very good ATSAs that we have are worth their weight in gold and can make or break a sector... are they overpaid, or are they just very well paid??
I can't comment on the AC ones as their job has evolved.
However, Rumouroid has a very valid point - those operational staff that bleat on about CTC staff are a bit two faced when they then try to shoot him/her down.
The CTC staff generally get paid less, but do a lot of good work and long hours that goes unnoticed by operational staff, just because we don't undertsand it or there is not visible day to day evidence unlike looking in an Ops room.
I don't doubt for a minute that there is excess fat that could be trimmed at CTC, but that is true in the Operational side as well, if to a lesser degree.
We are talking about the financial health of the company, which is allegedley what the pensions issue was about. In talking about the financial health, statements such as Rumouroids are perfectly valid, whether they are found to be correct or not is another matter, but they do need asking.
Thank you for your support, as far as I can see you are a well resepected and longstanding member of this forum and have many posts. It is difficult to be a probationer and post such an emotive issue and not get some support when what you know you are saying makes sense, however delicate the subject may be.
I knew I wasn't alone as I have heard many a conversation with ATCOs and ATSAs on this subject and many have come to the same conclusion.
As I previously said most NATS employees, certainly the operational ones are just waking up to the "real world". I'm surprised that we have managed almost 8 years since PPP before these questions have begun to arise. In most other companies they would have been asked a long time ago.
I think you're certainly right when you say that its amazing that we have lasted this long. NATS, or what we used to know as National Air Traffic Services, is dead. Barron is nailing the coffin shut on its corpse and its only a matter of time before it becomes completely unrecognisable from the company that it once was.
Linear Mode
