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.
Quite right. Allegedly the CAA don't think it's right that NATS are passing the pension costs onto the customer (isn't that how these things work in every other industry though?), yet the sole aviation regulator for the UK can continue to fund its own pension by passing its own costs on to the very people it is regulating and telling to trim costs!
The problem, anotherthing, IIRC, is that ERG has allowed airlines to criticise NATS pensions costs one or more times in the past, and by 'allowed' I mean they have not corrected the notion.
I think you might have to wade through old minutes of ERG meetings, and written submissions by airlines to get a good feeling for it, but basically I'd say the die was cast years not months ago.
It requires a complete reversal of sentiment by NATS executive and ERG for the pension to survive 'as is' and for them to condone passing on the costs to the airlines...
But I am still not actually convinced by the bleak projections by 'the actuaries'. Can a £3,000,000,000 fund be so vulnerable? Part of me cannot help but think the warnings about upping contributions may be an elaborate smoke screen / red herring affair.
At any rate, I sincerely hope you don't get done up like kippers
Jolly good. If it comes down to it do give me a wave whilst you cross the picket line as I and my Prospect colleagues defend our own T&Cs as well as yours.
Just have the good grace not to denigrate those that are acting on all our, yes even your, behalf.
I think that "Working together" has been compromised in the minds of the workforce. We can still have meetings with the management to discuss "stuff" that affects us, however it should be in a more formal enviroment with minutes taken of what was said etc.
I freely admit to being old fashioned and wonder if the union representatives themselves feel comfortable with informal "get togethers" with management in overnight stays in hotels with management personnel, including confidential briefings that they are not allowed to tell the union membership.
Rightly or wrongly the union membership feel that under "Working Together" their representatives are being compromised by their position hence some of the complaints/observations being voiced on this website.
I agree entirely DC10RealMan, "Working together" can only be beneficial to management. Overnight hotel stays plying reps with booze is not healthy (excuse the pun) for the workforce, and sends out the wrong signals. A more formal gathering would send the message we mean business and give a psychological advantage
Missed this thread for a few days now and have just caught up.......
Firstly I completely agree that public opinion matters not one jot, I cant really see why it would TBH. If its so important to some then I reckon we should all buy sub-£1k motors and use them for work which would, at a stroke, negate any arguement about us driving flash cars.
HOWEVER, how I wish to spend my money is MY business. If I want to but an Aston or Lambo then I will, I wont be pressurised NOT to in case some non-NATS employee takes the hump.
Secondly, knowing how the media like to sh1t-stir I have no doubt they would portray us in the worst light (unless, of course the editor has ATC connections). I strongly believe that the union should invest in a PROPER PR company to oversee things should things start to go down the strike road.
Thirdly, I sreally believe that the withdrawal of goodwill i.e no AAVA's, second sector work etc will produce the goods if carried out for a sustained period of time. This alone will have the desired effect going by what folks have said regarding staffing issues in their area of the business.
I really believe that the withdrawal of goodwill i.e no AAVA's, second sector work etc
You're 100% right in what you say, Spamcan defender, but please don't refer to AAVAs as "goodwill" - being paid £350 to £500 a shot (depending on your unit) to come in for an additional duty has bug**r all to do with "goodwill"; it's simply down to economics i.e. it's cheaper for NATS to pay the AAVA rates than to pick up the bill for the likely delays, and it puts a not inconsiderable amount of additional cash (even after tax at 40%...) in the ATCO's pocket - which is a perfectly reasonable financial arrangement.
As for comparisons with the US ATCO strike and the current situation, one of the biggest differences is that back then, there were plenty of young recruits available to "join up" and eventually replace the guys who'd been fired. Nowadays (and it's the same throughout Europe) we're in the middle of a massive retirement bulge that's not due to peak until around 2013 by which time it's estimated that there could be roughly a 25% shortfall of controllers across Europe. Against that background, even the most right-wing administration and management would baulk at a "mass sacking" option.
As an ex US controller told me out here in the desert the other day, the US strike was illegal as FAA employees weren't/aren't allowed to strike ISTBC.
As no such legislation exists in the UK, and providing due industrial dispute process is followed, then a similar outcome would be highly unlikely!
Best wishes, on behalf of the ex NATS boys in Dubai.
You're going to have to convince the non-members to rejoin.Why did they leave?Well ''working together'',and being constantly shfted might have something to do with it.
Would the larger units come out on strike,if any pension changing plans involved NSL lower band units only.Errr No.Maybe that's what going to happen,because that's the trend from the past.
Our pensions are already much lower,because of the huge pay difference.In fact a Band 5 Atco can now retire on more than a Band 2 can earn.
I talk as one who has taken industrial action,and there will always be ways of getting round it.
Would the larger units come out on strike,if any pension changing plans involved NSL lower band units only.Errr No.Maybe that's what going to happen
This CAN'T happen
Any changes to the pension happen to the pension as a whole - not individual members.
Banding is not the issue here. It is an issue - just not this one.
If we don't stand together on this then what banding did to pay will be insignificant.
Once Barron (and any future boss of NATS) sees that we aren't prepared to fight for our pension, our biggest T&C imho, then you can kiss pay rises goodbye. It'll be RPI + 0% - "because we have to save money".
It doesn't matter what band/grade/job you are. If you have money invested in NATS pension scheme - your money - then you have to stand together.
Please leave banding out of the pension discussion.
which I believe is only in the interest of Management and Union types seeking promotion 
but I don't agree with this "working together" stuff. I don't think its in the interest of your average punter like me.
fted might have something to do with it.
Linear Mode
