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.
Perhaps in future, increases in direct relation to major changes in working and resultant cost savings, could be divorced from the cost-of-living rise - and so not applicable for the RPI + 0.5% cap.
This may be true...then again it may not be. I could be £100k worse off (bloody hope not!) or no worse off at all. My reason for the NO vote is that there are way too many assumptions being taken into account and used as concrete facts in this proposal. Vote NO.
NATS' Income =£2,000,000 per day.
NATS handles, say, 7,500 planes per day.
= £267 per plane (average).
Losing £1,500,000 per day means 5618 planes per day have gone missing.
=Cobblers.
Perhaps in future, increases in direct relation to major changes in working and resultant cost savings, could be divorced from the cost-of-living rise - and so not applicable for the RPI + 0.5% cap.
So you'd be happy with everything bar cost of living rises being non-pensionable?
That means currently all work / changes done for WP etc would be a one off payment and not an actual pay increase.
Do you think those one off payments are going to be as good as an extra 1% on your pay for the next 20-30 years? Plus that one off payment won't benefit subjefrom furtherpay rises either.
So I for one would not want to see future pay deals to include one off payments - pensionable or not.
The impact of even 0.5% of a pay rise being non-pensionable will turn a 2/3 scheme in to more like a 1/2 final pensionable salary over the course of 38 and a bit years.
If you don't believe those figures then work it out for yourself and see how much money you'll be losing.
Of course, the 'yes' supporters will say the cap is only in for 15 years but is anybody really naive enough to believe it will ever go?
If the pension proposals had been to change from a 2/3 scheme down to a 1/2 pay or less you can be sure the reaction would have been completely different.
Not often I agree with you ZOOKER but on this occasion you're right. The number of stories that have appeared on NATSnet, coincidentally as the pension briefings are taking place, smacks of propaganda nonsense...they are trying to pull the wool over our eyes. Funnier still, the story that was pulled from The Times about how much debt NATS was in...they can't have it both ways. We're either healthy or we're not...at least be consistent.
Traffic inevitably quietens down in November when the winter schedules kick in, especially at places like Gatwick where there is a high proportion of charter traffic...it does not necessarily mean NATS is about to go under.
If we chop out the dead wood in the company (like the ATCOs for example as they're a complete waste of space and arrogant to boot) I think it would lighten the future pension liabilities. If I'm correct then this is the direction we should be taking to help our wonderful management. I'll put my job up for review and if I'm not pulling my weight for the company - I go. Everyone else to do the same -especially the high and mighty ops rooom personnel that expect the company to revolve around them. Air Traffic - get a grip you're so 20th century. We have to develop the brand and move it forward with a dynamic world-leading yet organic capability while, and most importantly, retaining our environmental credentials, we can't do that with shift-working Trotskies moaning about their pension can we?
The major airports remain busy (I was at one today). The Centres remain busy - It's November, the traffic always drops off - (well has done for the last 20 years!)
Don't believe the figures, don't believe the hype.
what a good idea. Everyone has a job until, say, march. in the meantime, we are all under review. prove your worth or get out and go to asdas. I'm up for that.
That could well be the case in NSL.Little rumour flying around that it will be sold about that time,and perhaps not even in one lump.
Good rumour or true.Only time will tell.
Methinks like so many, you're living in fantasy land. Still, if that's what you truly believe then why stay with NATS? Surely you could be more gainfully employed with another ATC company, for example IAA, DFS, Skyguide, SERCo, Eurocontrol or DFS all of whom are desperately seeking employable ATCOs....? After all, nobody's forcing you to draw your not insignifcant NATS salary, and maybe you'd feel happier, find greater fulfillment and personal achievement, be better appreciated and more loved if you worked elsewhere....
If NATS is restricted about where it spends its profits because of 'the regulator' then the regulator (ie the government) can 'ing well top up our pension.
After 27 years of night shifts for this company my sleep pattern is completely shot to pieces - I'm lucky to average 5 hours sleep a night during the rest of my shift days and days off, regularly waking during the night at 3am and unable to get back to sleep. My days off are now wasted recovering from my night shifts and my kids probably think I'm a miserable .
It's a well known fact nowadays that shift patterns/lack of sleep shortens ones lifespan - just hope I live long enough to spend the pension that I've worked my off for.
Sorry for the rant but 'ed off with this company/government.
Last edited by Min Stack : 18th November 2008 at 07:00.
CAP493,
You forgot about HIAL who have a final salary pension scheme.
Certainly in this part of NATS empire the pay is about the going rate for outside.We have had guys come in from other employers,and are surprised how busy it can get.Also the pension was a big factor in recruiting them.
I think some parts of the empire are in a fantasy bubble,but certainly not this outpost.
People retire,or lose medicals.They are beginning to vote with their feet as well,and this pension issue doesn't help.Replacements? There are very few,and the part valids are keeping the system running.Then they can't get training to become fully valid Tower/Radar,which is what we require to run the place.
You are most welcome ,if you're an ATCO,to come here and validate in ''fantasy land''.
That could well be the case in NSL.Little rumour flying around that it will be sold about that time,and perhaps not even in one lump.
Good rumour or true.Only time will tell.
NSL is already conveniently split into 3 nice little groups and I'm sure that NATS would love to get rid of 2 of those groups asap if this farcical deal goes through.
So you'd be happy with everything bar cost of living rises being non-pensionable?
That means currently all work / changes done for WP etc would be a one off payment and not an actual pay increase.
Do you think those one off payments are going to be as good as an extra 1% on your pay for the next 20-30 years? Plus that one off payment won't benefit subjefrom furtherpay rises either.
So I for one would not want to see future pay deals to include one off payments - pensionable or not.
No, you've got it the wrong way round. If you divorced the two, only cost-of-living has a cap imposed at all. So any salary increase directly attributed to cost savings etc wouldn't have a cap in place. It's theoretical only, as management wouldn't allow such an easy circumvention.
I also never proposed one-off payments as being a good idea - its just the way I see things going. Put yourself in their shoes for a minute and see what makes business sense. Doesn't mean it's right... but it's the way things will go.
Apart from the Long service award celebration last Saturday has anyone else heard of anything? I haven't, those days are long gone whilst we continue to have to charge RPI -x% by the regulator.
We still have "team building" trips to Prague and Brittany going on... and... and... oh where to start!
Interesting little missive from the CAAPS NATS Section Trustess was waiting for me at work last night. Amongst other things, Richard Mountjoy ( i think that's his name anyway...it was 3am when I read it!), the head of the Trustees, said that the Scheme did not require ANY PRESENT ACTION but would be reviewed again on December 31st 2008 . Totally at odds with what the Union have been saying.
Mr Barron has now also used Pulse to air his views on the subject of pensions...I have cancelled my subscription with immediate effect...
Just to add to the figures being thrown about here, you've got to remember that the £10k the modeller says you'll be short is actually based on todays prices (thanks for FINALLY clearing that up Hold At SATAN!!!) so if, as predicted, come rough retirement time in 30 years our final salary is 4 times what it is today (i.e £250k-ish) the difference in pay is actually going to be 4 times greater (i.e £40k!!) and not just £10k!! Another excellent managment tool for trying to force through the deal...tell someone you're only going to be ten grand worse off is a lot more sellable (if that's even a word!!) than telling them they're going to be FORTY grand worse off!!
Took the time to go to my second briefing yesterday (on my well-earned day off as well...aren't I the dedicated one!!) and again asked my questions and I still don't buy it. One question I asked management was why, even though it became apparent to them 2 years ago that there was a problem with the scheme (so much so that they sought negotiations with the union to change it) did they not feel it prudent to start paying the correct underlying rate, regardless of what the trustees said they could or couldn't do in terms of paying less. I think I'm still waiting for an answer!! Even a simple "we ed up and should have" would at least have calmed me down, but not even an acknowledgement of the error was made!! So i'm sorry, until the company can clean up their own back yard (in terms of not paying enough into the pension in the first place, wasting money on needless things like overnight stays and hotel bookings for conference rooms instead of using the perfectly suitable ones at the units etc etc) they can't expect to start messing with mine!!!
'ing well top up our pension.
) and not just £10k!! Another excellent managment tool for trying to force through the deal...tell someone you're only going to be ten grand worse off is a lot more sellable (if that's even a word!!
Even a simple "we 
Linear Mode
