Talloway,
it's people like you who stir up ill feeling between units amongst those who are easily led.
There is precedent with Swanwick and TC regarding appropriate remuneration
Proof? TC received nothing for moving, mind you it seems TC is the only area unit that accepts it is a mobile grade...
although I concede that the OCT for TC was probably very limited since they were going with like for like kit, I am sure they didn't do it for nothing either.
A few things about your assumption.
1. The kit isn't 'like for like' - in fact we still have lots of issues with the VCCS more than a yeardown the line, we had training on days off for the new kit before we moved. Unpaid, covered by clawback.
2. TC got nothing, nada, zip for the move over and above the normal relocation package.
We just got on with it... the usual attitude that TC has about most things.
It's totally incorrect 'statements' like yours that divide the company and cause ill feeling between units, when there is in actual fact, no basis for it.
Fenella
You need to be a bit more consistent - you are the one that waded in with the emotional blackmail, stating that airport workers would be laid off if NSL was sold. The inference you gave was of many redundancies as well.
I for one don't want to see them made redundant.
if the vote is no, the ultimate result will be that NSL employees lose their jobs. How will you all feel about that?
Because at the union conference Mr Barron apparently said that he would be worried about massive redundancy payouts if NATS lost the contract at EGCC... Doesn't sound like he wants to keep them, does it? If NATS start walking away from NSL contracts, what do you think they will do with the staff?
I think you've misunderstood me.
I think I understood your earlier posts exactly.
I know you'll prove me wrong somehow
You're the one that's changing your statements...
What if they don't want to stay and train? What if they ask to be relocated to another NATS unit and are told they'll have to move to the opposite side of the country? (Sorry to any Manch area readers about that one). Nice options....
So, now you are saying that they will lose their jobs because they
choose not to stay and train.
You are saying that staying within NATS and retaining NATS benefits(which is what you say you want for them), is not worth relocating for?
Fenella,
If you look back at my posts, you will see consistency.
I have said all along that I do not want NATS to sell of any part of NSL. I have also stated that
I believe that making the pension costs cheaper (accepting the proposal), is a great incentive to any future buyer of NSL.
I will not be blackmailed by someone who states one day that people will lose their jobs if a 'no' vote goes through, then amends it to 'people might not want to stay with any new contract owner'.
I have said all along in this, people should vote for what they believe is right. I have not tried to emotionally blackmail anyone. Even when I have said that NSL is a better propostion for sale if the pension proposals happen, I have clearly made it understood that that is my belief, not a definite like the first few of your posts infer.
However I will tell you what is definite... That's Mr Barrons previous history of taking large companies, breaking departments into seperate subsiduary companies, closing the pension schemes, then selling off the loss making parts.
Am I the only one who does not see similarities or a possible trend??