NATS Pensions (Split from Pay 2009 thread)

[Fenella]

"City of London"? Convenient argument. I find that post risible... unless I haven't been told about the huge amount of nurses and cleaners living and working in the Square Mile. And damn those annoying women that lessen your case for argument, eh? How dare they have the audacity to work in the city for a lesser wage Get them cleaning somewhere else I say

[Vote NO]

Getting back to my original question

So folks, how do we reckon the vote will go?

[alfie1999]

The vocal sides of each camp are relatively small in number.

It's the silent (very large) majority who will decide and I have a feeling that those who say nothing are more likely to be 'yes' voters than 'no'.

Don't ask me why I think that, I just do.

(How's that for scientific?)

[Vote NO]

Ask BD ......

[Dee Mac]

Zooker, it's a NO vote, around 70%.
I see someone has been on the sauce again......

[Vote NO]

Zooker is hiding

[ZOOKER]

Dee Mac,
"Thanks For The Information"
Worcestershire, Heinz or HP?
PS. Don't forget Hammond's 'Chop Sauce', - MONSTER!!

[250 kts]

f you count the actual attendance hours, divide into an average month it works out a about 8 hours a day for a 5 day week... but as we don't do a 5 day week, we do the same hours in less days per month.

So yes simplistically looking at it we get more days off, but we work the same hours

Also simplistcally we have a 5 watch system that has to cover a 24 hour period divided by 3 shifts, therefore on average we must work 8 hours per shift x 181 attendances per year-or am I really missing something?

[PeltonLevel]

am I really missing something?

Well you might allow half an hour per shift for overlaps?
Why 181? I make it 219 less leave.

[PeltonLevel]

Fenella

the huge amount of nurses and cleaners living and working in the Square Mile

Someone must clean the office blocks (those responsible probably don't live in the city), Bart's Hospital is within the square mile, as is Sir John Cass's Foundation Primary School.

[anotherthing]

...damn those annoying women that lessen your case for argument...

I can't believe we still include wimmin in the statistics... this is the 21st century you know, not the dark ages

Next someone will tell me that female NATS staff are included in this Pensions Ballot

It'll never catch on, I tell you.

[anotherthing]

Dan Dare

That mean wage you talked about - is it a poll of people who actually work in the square mile, or live there?

If it is merely those who live there, then that puts a whole different perspective on the figure.

[eglnyt]

That figure is for place of work for full time employees. The equivalent figure for Fareham is £31245.

[ZOOKER]

FRANK COOPER!

[BDiONU]

NATS don't work out how many 'days' you work but how many hours in a year. For ATCO/ATSA its around 1400, for office type staff (including CTC filth) its around 1500.

BD

[Del Prado]

36.5 cycles a year at 6 days per cycle = 219. plus 3 days clawback = 222

less 28 days leave, less 8 public holidays = 186 days

186 x 8 hours per day = 1488 hours per year.

so you are correct BD, ATCOs work around 1400 hours per year.

[anotherthing]

So not much difference then, as I stated. Shiftworkers get lots of days off, but work almost the same amount of hours.

Thank you BD for confirming (even if you didn't meant to!) statement.

[ProM]

if you count hours worked we work in the mid 30's per week... much tha same as anyone else!

You obviously haven't worked in a professional job in private industry for a long time. The last time I did that few i was on holiday

Office workers work 1500 hours per year

Maybe NATS office workers do. I think anyone who worked as little in most offices would have been sacked long before the current round of redundancies

Good luck with the vote, but please do not suggest that your hours are comparable with most professional jobs on the basis of these numbers- and surely you would rather be compared with professional jobs than shelf stackers?

[BDiONU]

Originally Posted by anotherthing

Thank you BD for confirming (even if you didn't meant to!) statement.

I have no axe to grind, I was simply stating how it works. I personally think that the 100 hours differerence is in order to account for 'sleep' days as you'd do around 10 hours work over that 2 'day' period (irrespective that you've actually probably done at least 6 hours work (midnight to 0600) on a 'sleep' day).

Hope that makes sense.

BD

[Ben Doonigan]

Shiftworkers get lots of days off

Scuse me .... I get pi$$ed off with people saying that our shift pattern is 6 on and 4 off. it is not, it is 7 and 3.

I work 30 cycles per year, and out of that I do about 50 nightshifts/10 day shifts. I start a nightshift at 2200 and I rarely get out the door before 0600 the next morning. I then go home to sleep for 6-8hrs til about 1400.

How would all the blunties like it if they were in work for 6 hrs in a day and told on this forum that was viewed as a day off ? Aye right.

So I make it that I am working 181 shifts, plus 3 clawback days, plus 50 'sleep' days where i have spent 6hrs at work at NATS behest.

That makes 234 calendar attendances by my reckoning.

Not forgetting having my bodyclock ####ed around, working weekends and Christmas etc ... AND having to book my leave 11 months (Yes, 11 months in advance).

Now. back to an original question - why does NATS not take REAL life expectancies into account ? That shouldn't be too hard to work out.

The quoted expectancy is 86, and that applies for all staff. But NO ACCOUNT is made for the 1500 shift ATCOs, 1100 shift ATSAs and 400 shift engineers whose life expectancy is 5 years shorter because of the long term health implications of shiftwork.

In the last 5 years I know of 6 ATCOs and one engineer that have sadly died before retirement. 4 in mid 50s and two in their early 30s.

The way I see it, effectively you are subsidising non-shift workers, by statistically dying earlier.