Oh, I see. So you only want to be a member when there are ballot forms to fill in and the potential for you to be warming your hands round a brazier? I'm not really sure you're in a position to criticise what you view as apathy...
Yes, I am and always have been a union member. In the current climate I would like to think that the reasons for that are obvious and I don't count apathy as a reason.
Pensions are clearly a complicated subject - something on which the membership required coherent guidance when it was put to the vote. Sidestepping the issue of whether you think members of our profession are more intelligent than those of any other (?!), what were they supposed to think when the union advised a 'yes' vote when, at the time in the financial cycle, it was wholly inappropriate? As I stated before, it's hardly surprising that 30-40% of people opt not to vote under these circumstances. And don't even get me started on whether it's appropriate that a senior member of watch management, who also happens to hold a senior position in the union, browbeats his watch into voting one way or the other. Conflicts of interest of this magnitude should not be allowed to occur.
The AAVA agreement is actually up for renewal towards the end of the year - the union gave management three months' notice that they were pulling out of the agreement (
early) because management had contravened its terms at several sites. So, I understand exactly where we are with respect to AAVAs - question is, do you? As @Disillusioned has said, we will see how fiercely the union is willing to bare it teeth at the end of the month.
Management shoud be told that until the core pay deal is settled, other Ts and Cs (which means AAVAs etc) will not be discussed. Selling ourselves out for an extra half a percent (or whatever) for a permanent AAVA deal at the current rate is not the way to go.
At last, something on which we are agreed. But as I said before, the
rumour is that the union are worried about NATS management taking legal action because a refusal to discuss AAVAs just because the core pay deal hasn't been settled could be viewed as deliberate obstruction. Emphasis on rumour because the union have chosen not to inform the membership of discussions in this area. And you think communication has improved and that the union are more likely to take on management?!
LTP