Radarspod
The current pay situation has absolutely **** all to do with the pension vote, hence in this instance I will be there alongside you FIGHTING FOR MY PAY RISE along with everyone else.
Totally correct, however I think what some people may argue is that a lot of people voted 'yes' because they believed the management line.
Some of the things that were thrown around when the pension debate was current were
"vote the pension changes in and management will look favourably on the pay award" (mentioned by Union reps).
"Vote yes to save jobs" (mentioned by a lot of yes voters) - sorry, but if the job is surplus to requirements, then bin it - may sound harsh but thats business. As it turns out, in the way that NATS management always work, our knee-jerk redundancies have acutally included people who NATS still needs
but of course doing a proper study would be too difficult.
The pension vote does have one very big implication on the pay issue - that of Union strength, or lack off. 30% of people couldn't even be bothered to vote in the pension ballot - whatever they wanted to vote, or even if they just spoiled their paper if they were unsure, this lack of turnout has shown management they can ride rough shod over us.
They have already started by trying to make the last pay offer non-pensionable - totally against what the 'Yes' vote agreed to.
So although looking at it very simplistically, you are correct in your statement above, the fact is the way the pension ballot and negotiation was handled has sent a very clear message to management - as
White Hart states, our dry powder is useless - we should sell it off to the French to raise some cash!