Is every one still wanting to strike?

[JMcKenna73]

Things have gone a bit quiet about this over the last few days.

Has the final offer - accompanied by the unions notes and explanations - made anyone rethink their (perhaps hotheaded) initial reactions?
Are the unions reasons for not striking reasonable?
If we were to strike, what would bring YOU back to work? (concrete, realistic suggestions and figures).

The ballot will be out in the next couple of days and I'm still pretty confused as to what to do.

------------------
...is it VFR or IFR, is it day or is it night??
P.S. I'm not the real J. McKenna, though my entire knowledge of aviation law is down to this man!

[This message has been edited by JMcKenna73 (edited 18 October 2000).]

[This message has been edited by JMcKenna73 (edited 18 October 2000).]

[get'em to heaven & back]

possibly controversial but i would go back if the new bonus schemes, which quite frankly are dangerous, were scrapped to be replaced with a 5 or 6% rise in basic plus an additional WHOLE spine point for ALL OJTIs (which is less than the "up to" 11.5% currently on offer). However, in order to minimise the chances of a strike that may not be really wanted, urge anyone who is thinking of doing so, NOT to protest vote- if you're not prepared to strike with all that that entails then take what's on offer.

[WonkyVectors]

I agree get-em

I haven't seen the union explanations, but from what i have heard the bonuses are unnessessarily complicated.

As said above 6% rise in basic and a garuanteed payment for ojti (no conditions/targets etc) would probably get my vote. However I honestly doubt that there will be any change in the offer.

If we do vote no, and as the offer stands I believe we should, then one of the reasons should be because the bonuses are potentiallly unsafe.

Why?
Just imagine what you "could" do to reduce delays, as a ground, tower, approach, area etc controller, and how "these" actions would endanger safety: [approach at a single runway unit packs the inbounds 3nm apart to achieve his target coz the shuttle is complaining about his number in sequence-tower wants 5nm gaps to launch outbounds-apc says thats not MY target/problem], thats besides the other potentially divisive, dangerous and untenable problems that will arise.

I don't believe that any of us are daft, phsychotic or UNPROFFESIONAL enough to let things get that far, but are these bonuses a sign of things to come(post ppp)?

So even with Xmas coming, and it would be great to spend the back payment on the kids,
I believe we must send a message to nats saying that we want a fair offer, not one that is unrealistic, UNSAFE, and from which we don't see the money for ANOTHER eight months.

And yes i am prepared for what may come after the vote, is anyone else?????

[Spotter]

Wanting to strike? no definitely not WANTING to, but certainly prepared to if that's what it takes to get a better deal.

I agree that stupid bonuses are asking for trouble.

The VFR flyers will be shafted even more so as not to add an extra few seconds delay to the IFR's.

The temptation will be there to apply artitstic interpretation to airborne times (at units that are not auto DM'ed) in order to appear to knock a minute of the actual delay.

Our professional pride is what makes us provide the best service possible often with the handicap of reduced staffing or faulty equipment.

The basis of the bonuses on offer is really "OK so you want more money, well it's gonna be a lot busier, there won't be any extra staff, & we don't want to spend any money on equipment either. Oh & by the way you'll have to shift 'em quicker too."

5% on pay & related allowances consolidated & pensionable is not an unreasonable claim. More than enough money has already been tabled to pay this. If we don't stick out for that come the next pay round we'll be fighting doubly hard even just to stand still. & remember that's only just over a year away now.

I'm not an OJTI so I can't comment on that part of the deal.

[Shazbat]

I think it's all summed up by saying.......

"NATS management is UNPROFESSIONAL"

The problem is, and always has been, the fact that the vast majority of NATS managers are less qualified, and less intelligent, than the staff they are supposesd to "manage".

:mad: :mad: :mad:

As for the pay deal, who knows.....but I, for one, will be voting AGAINST, and happy to support that decision. However, if industrial action IS taken, be prepared for the brown tongued brigade - who don't appreciate what a MAJORITY decision is.

[monkey boy]

Following a recent visit from the Union, it appears that we are being left to make up our own mind, and although the pay offer stinks, OJTI and all, if we reject even a part of the offer, we're rejecting the lot. If we do then choose to walk out, the Sun / Mirror (Insert tabloid sensationalist newspaper here) will show what the pay deal means to an ATCO 1 at LATCC, with an aeon of service, and this will be rather a lot of money. We all know that this kind of money is only available to a select few, but the General public do not and will fall in line with the Government / Dictatorship. For this reason any industrial action we take over this insubstantial and really rather half arsed bonus deal is very likely to go against public opinion.

Industrial action taken against PPP however, is likely to be a completely different matter. If not even a full strike, imagine the knock on effects of a work to rule in LATCC, Heathrow, and Gatwick.

Think about what is really the more important long term issue

[cossack]

I received the ballot paper this morning along with the explanatory notes. I've seen the samples that the union put out showing what some (very few) will get if we accept this offer.

The fact that almost half of the rise is made up of non-consolidated bonuses, and therefore doesn't go toward either our next pay rise or our pensions is a disgrace. The money is obviously there but NATS don't want to/can't give it to us, even thought they have recognised (to a fashion) that we have a valid claim.

As for the OJTI part of the offer, who is going to keep track of who trains who, when and for how long? Are we all going to be falling over ourselves to sit with a 6-weeker? What about those units where there isn't a great deal of training? If you don't spend 50% of your time training you don't get the cash.

Then there's the question of the "introductory lump sum" (BRIBE). 2% of salary (non-pensionable) for accepting the offer now. What is going on? If the Treasury will let NATS bribe and cajole us into accepting this, why not just do it properly? If the offer including bribes and bonuses is worth on average 9% over 21 months, I am sure we would all accept say 8% over the same time-scale as long as it was consolidated and pensionable. Wouldn't you agree?

The fact that NATS say that these bonuses are easily achievable is neither here nor there. Why should 0.5% of this rise be for the on-time commencement of NERC OCT? About 75% (a guesstimate) of NATS staff have absolutely nothing to do with NERC and wouldn't want to if there lives depended on it. So why is it a string attached to the offer to NATS staff as a whole?

So, where do we go from here? The ballot ends on 3 Nov. Do we reject the offer and then have a ballot on any industrial action? Or do we accept the offer now and concentrate on the spectre of PPP? It seems fairly clear to me that the greater of the two evils is PPP and we should do everything we can to stop it. After all, what is the use of a 10%+ pay rise now if in 12 months time we're being scr*wed by whoever wins the raffle for NATS and 10% of us are out of a job and the pension scheme is drained?

Think long and think hard people. My ballot won't be going in the box just yet. This is the most important decision you'll have to make for a long time. Make sure you're confident its the right one.

[Not Long Now]

As I understand it, and I admit I'm no expert, we can't strike because we're being privatised. We can only strike against changes in conditions/offered changes etc., not for the fact that we don't want our company sold. Anyone feeling expert care to disagree?
(and I'm still voting no, and if it goes through anyway(again), at least I can say I don't want the extra money and stop training)

[get'em to heaven & back]

Regarding the headlines in The Sun & Mirror and ATCO 1 pay.
What if we refuse the 11.5% on the grounds that the bonuse are a dangerous road to go down, letting profits and pay become the master of all things right & proper (read SAFE)? We apppear happy to accept less than the current totals if they are divied-up in a fairer, more agreeable fashion. The Sun & Mirror can't criticise us for greed if we accept less than is on the table and if we highlight the fact that we are refusing the offer on the grounds of potential safety & intrusive commercialism then it highlights the adverse effects of PPP far more than IPMS could ever hope to have achieved through the extensive & vastly under-rated, under-appreciated lobbying which they have been carrying out tirelessly on your behalf. Comments, anyone (preferably not leading the thread down a union-bashing road-there are other times & places for that if you must)?

[JMcKenna73]

Things are a bit clearer for me now after attending a Union briefing.

According to the Union, the consolidated, pensionable pay rise that we will receive will keep us ahead of the cost of living by approx. half a per cent, so we are in effect getting a real terms rise in the value of our services (no matter how small)!
The 'bonuses' are not performance related. They have been guaranteed to pay out without us having to do anything other than what we are doing at the moment. They are just a method for us to obtain more money above the Treasury imposed limit of 3 per cent on basic pay. As this can't be seen to be given to us in the form of a 'bung', a performance related element has been introduced to keep us in line with other public sector organisations. As I said, they have been constructed to pay out without us being placed under pressure to shift additional traffic in order to meet the targets.
The Union also mentioned that if something unforeseen (though maybe not entirely unexpected) happens, i.e. another NAS breakdown occurs, and the average delay per flight goes above the target set, because this is outwith our control, the Union said that management will be amenable to re-negotiate the target delay.
Management, apparently, are keen for us to have these bonuses as any failure on their part to deliver these, after raising peoples expectations, will make things far more difficult for them (PPP or not), next time around.
As far as the OJTI payment goes, the Union said that yes, it is overly complicated, it might not work too well initially, but it is at least a foot in the door and a stepping stone to future improvements.

Bearing in mind the real terms rise that we are getting (again, no matter how small) do you consider that we as ATCOs are under valued for what we do compared to other job types within this country and tax regime? (And are rising traffic levels relevent considering that - especially at centres, both north and south of Hadrians Wall - the overwhelming majority of ATCOs do not work their rostered hours, through EGs, split night shifts etc. plus alot of the time working half hour/hour on, half hour off).

With regard to OJTI payments, why exactly are we asking for more money for something that we are contracted to do already, and for which we all agreed to under take by signing up to do this job in the first place?

Just so that you know where I'm coming from, I am not management and have no desire to be, and I have nothing (other than being a member) to do with the Union.
I am just an ordinary ATCO at a centre, valid on one of the top ten (in terms of movements) busiest sectors in the country and I am also an OJTI. I have worked both at LATCC and ScATCC.
As far as my attitude goes to the deal on offer, well, what ever they offer it will never be enough (naturally)!
Will I vote in favour of it? Yes I will.
It isn't ideal, but then I can't think of specific reasons (especially ones that would entail strike action) that can justify turning it down.
I think that what we are paid at the moment is a fair reflection of our value (though a lot of people that I know of, who know what my work entails - and who also think that I get paid a good deal less than I do at the moment - would tend to disagree).

As has been said, we need to keep public sympathy for more important things such as fighting for our terms and conditions post PPP.

Thats just my take on things, feel free to enlighten me!

------------------
...is it VFR or IFR, is it day or is it night??
P.S. I'm not the real J. McKenna, though my entire knowledge of aviation law is down to this man!

[This message has been edited by JMcKenna73 (edited 18 October 2000).]

[vertigo]

I'm fed up not getting leave unless I give six months notice, I'm fed up working twice as hard as I did two years ago, most of all I'm fed up taking more and more responsiblity knowing at the end of the day, if something goes wrong, I will be standing alone, watching management retreat as quickly as they can.
I'm fed up trying to train people to a standard I couldn't achieve if I was a trainee now in traffic levels unimaginable a few years ago. Knowing one slip from them could lose my license.
I'm fed up being told Nerc is the priority, and if we are short of staff, we will have flow control. Yet as soon as a traffic manager imposes flow control he/she is taken to task over their decision.
If management want me to take on the extra responsibilities involved with todays traffic levels, I want a lot more than 0.5% over inflation.

[This message has been edited by vertigo (edited 07 October 2000).]

[Spotter]

half a percent!!!! big wow. that's a whole 50p for every hundred quid you earn.

OK some of us will see more, but for me that's just £8 extra. I'll try not to spend it all at once.

I couldn't give a £uck what the press will make of the ATCO 1 figures, and agree whole heartedly with the comments of get 'em to heaven & back.

I'd be prepared to accept significantly less than 8-9% if it was properly consolidated.

[Shazbat]

Vertigo

I think your comments have just about summed up the majority's feelings !!

Now....if only we can get someone to LISTEN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :mad:

[2 six 4]

Wonky. Don't suggest we reduce the separation but one way of reducing overall delays might be to stop imposing delays on sectors which are still bandoxed at night and should be open ..... at a major unit near EGLL now.

[North of the Border]

Still quiet. Is everyone voting yes

NOTB

[JMcKenna73]

If I had recieved my ballot form I would have!
There is obviously a conspiracy :)

P.S. I'm not the real J. McKenna, though my entire knowledge of aviation law is down to this man!



[This message has been edited by JMcKenna73 (edited 18 October 2000).]

[ATC Watcher]

2 six 4 : I have not seen many delays in the middle of the night . Be more precise. which sector(s) are you talking about ?
Just mention the 3 letters or the number/letter code of the sectors, we'll know which centre it is and we keep this off the papers.

[cxi]

Yes the pay offer is deri no stup no not enough!!!
but at the moment there are probably enough people going to vote yes that it is going to be accepted despite what the rest of the atcos not on the top of the atco two scale say.

someone said that people are not working full shifts and doing 30 mins on and hour off , that person doesn't go into tc very often does he?
the fact is, in tc they are moving 1.1 million a/c a year with the same plus or minus 2 or 3 people that they had when it opened at the beginning of the decade. Is that poor productivity or what? How many other companies can say they have coped with an almost 100% increase of traffic without growth of staff?

[bill]

come on 2six4, give us a clue!
what watch? what sectors?

I work at the only major unit near egll and haven't heard of what you're suggesting, enlighten us please...

[Yellow Snow]

Guys and girls out there please use your vote carefully!!!
I know the pay offer is $hite but don't vote to reject if it is only a protest vote.
If we have a majority vote to reject, we've called our own bluff and will probably end up taking industrial action. None of us trully want this because we know it's a no win situation, both publically and politically.
If your not willing to strike then vote to accept!!
Remember there are bigger fish to fry - PPP

[2 six 4]

10/11/33 would do for a start.

[JMcKenna73]

CXI - What your point shows is that there was a lot of slack to take up in the first place.

P.S. I'm not the real J. McKenna, though my entire knowledge of aviation law is down to this man!



[This message has been edited by JMcKenna73 (edited 18 October 2000).]

[cxi]

True, but there isn't now! However the management still remember the good old days when the night shifts were spent at the local or at home or all the other things that were done in the seventies :)
that is why you still get people saying that we are not productive enough and get away with bandboxing etc when we shouldn't , because they remember the "good old days"

[not a scooby]

For Mckenna73
I joined to control aircraft, if you joined to train then perhaps you should consider teaching as a carear.
there are some ojti`s that i would not wish to train my dog to ****,but everyone nowadays becomes a trainer regardless of ability.
As for the union scare tactics of a long drawen out strike. Lets flex our not inconsiderable muscle,it may only be for a few days or even just the threat,if we see no significant pressure building from our" customers" to resolve our issues then we must accept that the writting is on the wall for us with our new employers.
Public sympathy!, yes important, but commercial pressure is a much more effective weapon.
Vote no or forever regret your declining pension

[form49]

Voting NO on the pay issue will lead to a ballot on industrial action. What we must remember is te fact that any industrial action is going to be restricted to a few hours or perhaps the odd day here and there, and as such will only affect the few of us who are likely to be working on those days at those times. YES industrial action is probably the only way to get the pay offer improved into something more realistic instead of bonuses here there and everywhere, everybody I've spoken to at my unit is unhappy with the offer and is likely to vote NO on the pay issue and YES for industrial action.
At the end of the day, when push comes to shove, if the ballot for industrial action goes 60 - 40 for and we do end up taking action, just how many do you think will still cross the picket lines and turn up for work, or how many will be glad of the fact that it will be a rest day and don't have to worry about losing any money.
Vote YES for industrial action only if you are truly prepared to go all the way and show mnagement exactly what we think of them

[squawk 6789]

perhaps members at latcc would like to clarify something- at a regional place of toil the manager reckons that all you guys can see is ££££££££££££££££££ before Christmas.
anyone care to confirm the TRUE feelings of the membership @ latcc- after all, you are (almost) a majority of the membership and your opinions do sway some lesser lights. so in the interests of the rest of us not being misled or confused......?

[Oldjet Jockey]

As long ago as 7th Oct. JMcKenna73 gave an explanation he got from the union of why the management had only given a low basic increase and had supplimented it with various bonuses which, on paper at least were performance related. I have not seen anyone taking up these points.
I am retired so have nothing to gain or lose.
Despite all the criticisms of management they have a dual role to play. Firstly to ensure an efficient service and secondly to toe the government line (at least while NATS is a government service). If the explanation given by the Union is correct you should be thankful that your Union and your Management have contrived to offer you something which keeps within the enforced Government guidelines and at the same time provide so called efficiency bonuses to keep the industry and travelling public happy.
While I understand your frustration at not having the total package consolidated for pensions, remember there are many other public servants whose legitimate claims are restricted by government insistance on keeping pay rises in line with inflation.
I have seen some sensible posts here but also the usual rabble rousing nonsence from those who show absolutely no understanding of the role of management or the difficulties they also face. These people will never rise to management level unless they stop thinking they are the only ones with problems and try to take a more balanced view of life.
If JMcKenna's information is correct, take the offer and thank your management and union for finding a way past government restrictions to reward you for your efforts.
How about some of you answering the points made in JMcKenna's post?

[Shazbat]

Dear Oldjet.....

Sadly, you are very out of touch. I would not put it as "rise to management level"....more like "plumb the depths".

The mis-management of NATS (and it's forerunners) over the past years has been so UN-professional as to border on irresponsible, so how you can call it "rising to management levels" is quite beyond me.

[Henrietta Horsebox]

In the en-route bit of LATCC nearly everyone says that they have or will vote No.

The bonuses on offer may appease Joe Public and our customers but are of an order of magnitude removed from anyhting which would motivate staff.

I'm surprised that anyone thinks that NATS management are the log-jam. Government policy is the reason for the seemingly less than good pay offer.

HH

[JMcKenna73]

Not a scooby - I too joined to control aircraft, which I try to do to the best of my limited abilities!
I definitely do not want to teach for a living (far too stressful, though getting to mess with 30 tiny young minds simultaneously instead of just one at a time does have a certain appeal) :)

The point that I made earlier was that we all voluntarily agreed to do OJTI by signing up to do this job, under the terms and conditions specified i.e. 1 spine point rise. So to then want to go out on strike because we now don't like what we got ourselves into is a bit rich.

I went into this with my eyes open.

This doesn't mean to say that I agree that becoming an OJTI is an automatic right and that everyone should do it (myself included).
If however the deal on offer means that it will become a more specialised task, with not everyone getting included in one of the 'teams' then that could be a good thing (provided the selection is made on merit).
In addition, if this means that because there needs to be an excess of OJTIs within a team to cover leave, sickness etc. then controllers that don't want to train continuously may skip a 3 month period, then that must be a good thing also (saves OJTIs getting stale, also good for those that can't be arsed).
There are issues concerning people at the top of the scale, the thing is again however, how much would everyone be satisfied with?
3% does sound low. Don't get me wrong, I can be as mercinary as the next person - whatever we get is never enough.
What can we realisticly expect?
What kinds of supplements do OJTIs get in other countries? (% not cash)
With the foot in the door that we are being offered, is it really worth going on strike to improve it?
I don't honestly think so.

To take up your other point on pensions - it isn't this years pay round that will be the determining factor in whether or not your pension declines. As we are all aware, it will be whether or not we get an amendment to the privatisation bill that will offer us a guarantee on the structure of the fund post PPP.
Public sympathy WILL be important WHEN we strike over this (and I will have NO hesitation in doing so).
Next year is an election year remember.

Anyhow, hope some of that has made some sense, can't be sure - as I'm knackered (I'm sure I'll be put right) ;)

------------------
...is it VFR or IFR, is it day or is it night??

P.S. I'm not the real J. McKenna, though my entire knowledge of aviation law is down to this man!

[This message has been edited by JMcKenna73 (edited 18 October 2000).]

[This message has been edited by JMcKenna73 (edited 18 October 2000).]

[Oldjet Jockey]

Shazbat

I'm sure it is really well beyond you to understand anything about management, good or bad! Every one of your posts show how little you understand of life.
At least JMcKenna and Henrietta Horsebox have realised that as far as this particular pay claim is concerned, the management, for what they are worth and I also think they are less than perfect, have a restriction placed on them by the government. Incidentally did you help to vote them in?
Even governments have very difficult tasks in balancing all the aspirations of all the people.
Your attitude seems to be that you want something which is just not available in the form in which you want it and you are prepared to blackmail the government, the aviation industry and the travelling public to get what you think you deserve.. I believe we live in a democracy and we have to accept the restrictions placed on us by the government of the day whether or not we voted them in. Heavens above I dont like paying the taxes on my pension but I have to accept the situation.
Why dont you volunteer for some management training then perhaps you might just understand some of the problems your managers face, and perhaps you might even get a chance to join them and try to do a better job.
You are obviously an angry young man who believes he is worth more than he really is.
Hijacking, terrorism, kidnapping and piracy have never been right. Hurting innocent people with a strike is just like one of these other crimes.
Your offer may not be what you want but added together you are not likely to get more by striking and will only damage the reputation of a fine group of professionals.
Get of your high horse, be sensible and try to forget your bitterness. ATCOs are not the only public servants who want and deserve more money. There is a limit to what is in the public purse. When you are privatised you will have to justify your worth commercially and who knows maybe then you can prove you are worth more and then air fares will have to go up to help to pay you that extra.
Enough of my ramblings, I'm not so out of touch as you suggest, may be rather more mature with a wiser head on older shoulders.
Forget striking, take what's on offer (far more than the government restrictions allow) and prove your worth in the big bad commercial world. Good luck

[Shazbat]

Dear Oldjet

One should NEVER assume.....

.......at least, that's what I was taught wehn I joined this outfit, which, by the way, was a loooonnngggg time ago....long enough to be involved, and become UNinvolved with such a deficient management system.

For someone who purports to have a "wise old head" on his shoulders, I am left to wonder as to why my voting in a General Election has anything to do with the matter in hand ?

Times have changed, and I do think that you are, perhaps, a little behind - perhaps more so than you think !

[squawk 6789]

oldjet- you make some sound points and put them well. but anyone with a titter of wit knows that that labour plonker stood up @ their conference and shouted defiantly "our skies are not for sale". so unfortunately "accusing" someone of voting this government in then whingeing about is pretty stupid and insulting to the rest of us who are possibly going to be left holding the ppp baby!
and i echo previous comments about there being bigger issues at stake than just a couple of %- i.e. bonuses are for managers who achieve productivity. they have no place in an atco pay deal where we risk our own lives (bit dramatic, maybe, but do you want to be the one to put two tins together?) every day to provide a SERVICE to our customers- ultimately the poor punter down the back who hasn't a clue how many other tins he has had to avoid on his flight from a to b.
as for the difficult job that management have to do- are you really trying to wind us up her? yes it is a difficult job, not too many people dispute that but do they have to try and p*ss all over there staff at the same time, do they really have to put personal interpretations on the employee handbook at every turn? if management played fair by its staff there'd be no need for a ******* union, would there?
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[Numpo-Nigit]

To Sqwawk 6789 (and anybody else with the same question)

The mood at LATCC (at least in en-route) is pretty well as p***ed-off as other contributors have implied. However, when it comes to the actual ballot, I think the result will be closer than some of them would care to admit. The anger is being fuelled by all sorts of things that have been caused by, or allowed to happen by, NATS management at all levels. Taking LATCC as a whole, my (admittedly-limited) soundings suggest that quite a few will be voting "yes" for many of the reasons mentioned above. It is noticeable that those in TC, who are not so directly affected by the NERC debacle, are more generally in favour.

Those of you at other units should use your vote as you see fit, because it may well be that the deal looks a lot better from your angle.

To Shazbat and others who may tell me I'm out-of-step with LATCC opinion or a management stooge - I don't think I am the first, and I'm CERTAINLY not the second. I'm still debating the finer points of my own personal decision - it is not a black and white issue.

[Shazbat]

Dear Numpo

I would never try to influence your decision....nor would I scoff at the amount of time taken to make that decision.

It IS a big issue, and one which needs very careful consideration. The gut reaction to vote "no" just to spite management is a strong one, but all the circumstances both now, and in the immediate future, need to be considered very carefully.

For what it's worth, and I don't mind admitting it, I have voted for the deal. The reasons I would vote for industrial action are those which affect my terms and conditions of employment, and, MOST important of all, my pension. THAT is, as far as I am concerned, sacrisanct.

See what I mean Oldjet....NEVER assume :) :)

[Oldjet Jockey]

To Sqwawk 6789

Touched a tender spot I see. If you read again my post you will see that I havent accused anyone of voting for any party. I merely asked a question which was probably quite rightly ignored. I went on to comment that whether or not we personally voted a government into power, in a democracy we all have to accept what ever comes.

It is now becoming clearer that there are two distinct issues here although as usual there is some overlap.

One is that you are not happy with your pay offer because the majority of it is not consolidated for pensions. The second is that you have no faith in your management.

Let me try to be helpful with some suggestions which you are of course free to accept or reject!

For the pension problem: Normally you have a deduction from your gross salary to help build up a pension fund (somewhere between 7.5% to 8.5% I guess). If the bonuses are not consolidated there should be no such deduction leaving you with money which instead of spending you could invest in a private pension fund. Be careful though there are a lot of sharks out there just waiting to catch you. Why not get your Union to sort something out for you, probably get reduced rates that way if lots of you join in.
OK I know that there is an employers contribution which will be missing but with the right scheme you may well be able to make most of this up.

Next the management problem:
If they really are as bad as you say, why not wait until the dust settles on the pay claim then get your union to pass a vote of no confidence in the whole management with all the press publicity you can muster. Get the union to ask for some resignations, but make sure you are ready with chapter and verse and concrete examples of ineficiency or outright bad management practices.

Now a surprise for Shazbat

Way back in the early eighties when I was a crew chief at LATCC, I saw a number of ATCOs put on the fast track to management (Probably the very ones you complain about)
While I am aware that the criteria for promotion (or as you see it - demotion) to management levels has nothing to do with ones abilities in the present job but rather on potential management abilities I was very surprised by some (not all) of the selections for fast track. I knew them as very average controllers and saw absolutely no signs of management potential. Perhaps they really had potential which didnt deveop, perhaps they had brown toungs or funny handshakes. I really dont know.

The result for me was that I did not want to work under such people and I looked for the way out. I found it and moved out of CAA into pasteurs new with new challenges and different responsibilities. Way before my normal retirement age. I have stayed in aviation since then and since my retirement from full time work have continued to offer my experience internationally to those who think I am worth it. I am still very much in touch with ATC and other aviation (got a new offer of a consultancy project only yesterday)

I used my feet to vote against managers I didnt trust and have never regretted getting out from CAA when I did. Lets call it quits on the business of assumptions - what do you think.
I will make this my last post on this issue, I hope you can accept my suggestions as well intended and that they give you something to think about

Bye

[identnospeed]

OJ,

You make some lucid points. However, I take issue with your assertion that the employers contribution to the pension may be
mostly made up by being in the right scheme.

As an ex-employee of a large insurance and pensions company during the late '80s and early 90's, I say that you are wrong.

INS

[Shazbat]

Enough said Oldjet......at least you can recognise bad management when you see it :)

As for the vote of no confidence in management, I think that's a great idea.....any "Unioners" out there want to comment !

[squawk 6789]

your reps should be sounding everyone out re motions to conference round about now..........

[Shazbat]

Thanks 6789......I think we should ALL ask our reps to push for a "Vote of No Confidence in NATS Management"

[North of the Border]

Totally agree. Lets have lots of motions to
conference. They got a shock over the OJTI ballot. Lets keep up the pressure.

NOTB

[Boeing_jockey]

Can someone tell me more about this sectors not open problem ? Are we being delayed for good reason ?

[Shazbat]

It's a basic shortage of staff Boeing old chap.....watch this space in the next few months !!

[reracker]

After watching the program about New York last night I can honestly say they couldn't pay me enough to put up with that kind of pressure. In that environment, you can never get a "slack day". You guys deserve more than the pilots, flying 10 - 12 jets at a time. They get cutting edge technology, you get steam driven. Hats off to you all. Keep fighting for every penny. Hopefully we Kwik Fit fitters will be only a few quid behind you in a race to catch the glory boys in the pay stakes !!!!!!