Latest rumour on 2002 pay....??!!

nodelay · 27th Apr 2002, 19:50

OK, so we've all read the NATS PAY pages and the feeling seems to be an overwhelming Rejection with a capital R. I heard a RUMOUR a day or two ago that management were considering an offer of 3.7% for year 2002. I haven't heard anything else on this and do not know if it would be linked to a two year pay deal. I'm sure there must be somebody else out there that can add to this.

If not, well I did say it was only a rumour

Cotton wool for clouds and a bottle top for the sun!

Roland Butter · 27th Apr 2002, 20:01

Read ya internal E-mail , the second of a 2 year deal could add up to this amount if you are lucky.

I guess you are sadly not a NATS ATCO and wanting an insight into our pay negotiations?

nodelay · 27th Apr 2002, 21:20

Roland (I can't believe its not) butter

This is completey different from the initial two year deal offering the 3.7% as a second year deal. As I said initially this is a rumour that has been banded around as a pay offer for 2002 and not as the second year of a 2 year pay deal. If you'd read the post correctly in the first instance then there would have been no need for you to have wasted your time posting such a time wasting reply

Stick to book keeping(profile) and chill out!!

Who said I'm not NATS?

Cotton wool for clouds and a bottle top for the sun!

Applycarbheat · 27th Apr 2002, 21:49

OK, so we've all read the NATS PAY pages and the feeling seems to be an overwhelming Rejection with a capital R.

Wrong.

All you have read are comments from the usual whingers.

Don't forget that NATS consists of lots of people performing various jobs and functions, the majority of which will vote to accept the pay deal.

Regards
APC

hatsoff · 27th Apr 2002, 22:55

Applycarbheat - where have you been?

I know that these forum comments truly represent the feelings of Atcos at my Unit. They are not the words of Whingers.

160to4DME · 27th Apr 2002, 23:39

Applycarbheat

The 143 people out of the 166 who voted in the straw poll on here to reject the offer (85.63%) will be delighted to see you refer to them as whingers.

NATS pay proposal poll

2 six 4 · 28th Apr 2002, 00:02

Nodelay ... absolutely right. I heard the same. A guy on the bus told one of the security staff who told one of the cleaners who told one of the canteen staff who confirmed it to me as absolutely true.

nodelay · 28th Apr 2002, 08:21

2 six 4

Like it!!

Applycarbheat · 28th Apr 2002, 11:33

Hatsoff...............

Sorry for not having been around for a while. Found much better sport on other web sites.

However I suspect that the pay issue should offer me some excellent opportunities.

Regards
ACH

alloneword · 28th Apr 2002, 17:21

160to4:

who knows how many "people" have voted on this anonymous forum?

spekesoftly · 28th Apr 2002, 18:03

You're not suggesting ...... oh surely not!

160to4DME · 28th Apr 2002, 18:42

Ah good point; I'll keep an eye out for anyone at work with 140+ different email addresses

NATS_Not_Funny · 28th Apr 2002, 19:35

As a non-ATCO I agree. It's a secure well paid job with lots of time off and 30 minutes break every 2 hours - no matter how quiet you've been.

This will probably change when individual rostering comes in and CRATCOH is modernised.

BEXIL160 · 28th Apr 2002, 19:48

But then, without us "whingeing" operational ATCOs, who actually do a damn fine job (customer comments, not mine), with all the responsibilty that it entails, YOU wouldn't HAVE any job would you?

Rgds BEX

P.S. CRATCOH hasn't existed for a while now. SRATCOH is what you think you mean. Pity...

Undercover · 28th Apr 2002, 20:35

Oooh.. handbags everyone....!!

without each part of the company the other parts couldn't function. Fancy running the whole shebang yourself??... no, didn't think so.

P.S. the rumour about a 3.7% offer this year? No chance. Think maybe someone got their wires crossed when reading the communication about the 2 year deal.

As I heard it the reason the unions are happy to do a 2 year deal is they reckon that a certain Mr Bush may decide to destabilise certain oil producing countries even further in the coming months, leading to increasing oil prices and a downturn in air traffic due to military action... and so if we can tie up a guaranteed deal now we'll be better off. In the words of King Kenny Dalglish "mibbes aye... mibbes naw"

160to4DME · 28th Apr 2002, 20:57

Oh dear, it's raining chips.

Interesting to see whose shoulders they fall on

160 (ATCO and team player)

NATS_Not_Funny · 28th Apr 2002, 21:58

BEX I stand corrected, SRATCOH it is. Whatever it's called it will be overhauled soon - that's unavoidable. ATCO wages are by far the biggest expense the company has, so getting them working more efficiently is an obvious target for the bean counters.

Undercover is right. The working ATCO relies on a whole lot of people to be able to do the job well. Many don't seem to realise this in NATS and instead see themselves as the star of the show – an attitude which can annoy the rest of us.

NATS has a published plan to lose 1000 engineers over the next ten years or less. That’s 2 out of every three currently employed. Against this background I’m sure you can see why the fuss being kicked up about the current pay round is being described as “whinging”

Route Papa 45 · 29th Apr 2002, 00:48

As NNF said, half hour off every 2, surely enough time to get a small part time job in Burger king. The cash will soon be rolling in.

BEXIL160 · 29th Apr 2002, 09:26

As I've said MANY times before, I have the upmost admiration for our engineers. I have also said here that I believe the way our engineering staff have been treated is nothing short of a tragedy.

I question the need for the "other" office staff. People like the ORO for instance. Cost a fortune, contribute zero...except upsetting all and sundry for no appreciable reason.

As for individual rosters, I'm suprised that this hasn't come up sooner. Rostering depts in most of the members of TAG have pretty sophisticated tools for crewing their aeroplanes, taking into account the relevant CAP, Crew qualifications, the Route and crew preferences (bids). I'm amazed that our rosters haven't been "contracted out" to one of these depts.

BEX

PPRuNe Radar · 29th Apr 2002, 10:52

Nats_Not_Funny

SRATCOH is a legal requirement placed on ATS providers by the Regulator, i.e. the CAA. It is not something NATS dreamt up for it's ATCO staff as part of their conditions. It is not something that NATS has any control over.

So what makes you think that it will be amended ?? Whatever NATS management want their ATC staff to do, it will have to be within the laws of the land.

This ad will disappear if you login