MACC move worries

[Mahaba]

After listening to colleague worries over the last few weeks, and knowing that managers read these forums, I thought I’d air some of them and see if there’s any reaction; and please-no criticisms from those who are unaffected.

With the current and unforeseen recession, some colleagues are extremely concerned about the negative equity they will find themselves in with the move to NPC. Houses, flats etc bought before the economic downturn, and subsequent landslide in values, will put staff into large amounts of negative equity as GSP figures reflect current market saleable value instead of either mortgage value or value pre-recession. Figures can be overhead and openly discussed of amounts ranging from £20,000 to £90,000. Some of these mortgages were taken out by people either new to the unit or by people hoping to better their chances of finding comparable properties in the move or even by staff with expanding families. Some staff have said the move will now effectively bankrupt them; with the only apparent NATS remedy being an interest free loan over 3-5 years. For some that represents an unaffordable amount to repay in that period.

Offers made and accepted on property within the NPC catchment area are now found to be in excess of the current saleable value due to the economic downturn; meaning that up to a year before the move some staff are already into a negative equity situation before they move and in some cases before their new property is even finished, even though NATS encourage early moving.

In this atmosphere people are beginning to question the legality of whether NATS can force employees to relocate in the knowledge that it will effectively (no exaggeration) bankrupt them or at least force them into such a massively adverse financial situation which would not have occurred if a recession had not appeared. Any current negative equity staff may find themselves in would, of course, have no meaning if they were not in a position of having to sell because of an employer’s decision to close the unit. This situation will of course be made worse by the impending change to redundancy terms which will take effect at the time of the move. Good timing that one!

Staff thoughts;

Redundancy. The legal definition;
‘The statutory definition provides that the dismissal must be attributable wholly or mainly to the fact that:
• The employer has ceased, or intends to cease, completely or in an employment place, to carry on the business for the purposes for which the employee was employed; or
• The requirements of the business for the employee to carry out work of a particular kind, completely or in a particular place, has ceased or diminished, or is expected to. ‘
It seems to most staff that the legal definition does indeed apply in this case, the ‘mobility clause’ being subject to legal challenge.

Constructive Dismissal. Definition;

‘ If you're forced to quit your job because of the way you're treated, it's called constructive dismissal. Although there's no actual dismissal by the employer, the end result is the same as if you'd been sacked. It's often very hard to prove that your employer's behaviour was so bad as to make you leave, so you should get legal advice before leaving your job.
The reason for leaving your job must be serious - there must be a fundamental breach of your contract. Examples include:

a serious breach of your contract (eg not paying you or suddenly demoting you for no reason)

forcing you to accept unreasonable changes to your conditions of employment without your agreement (eg telling you to work in another town, or making you work night shifts when your contract is only for day work)

bullying, harassment or violence against you by work colleagues

making you work in dangerous conditions

The employer's breach of contract may be one serious incident or the last in a series of less important incidents that are serious when taken together.’

Again, in the second instance, the term seems to apply to the MACC case where an adverse financial effect due to recession would definitely result because of a relocation.



Whilst the whole banding dispute (which of course is not helping in this instance) has not gone away and will shortly be tested legally, these other concerns (redundancy and constructive dismissal) cannot effectively be legally tested until notices of posting have been issued. MACC staff believe that these will commence in the beginning of the new year; at which point these other issues will then be open to legal challenge.
Could the recession give NATS the chance or ‘excuse’ to delay the move for ‘business reasons’, thus allowing property prices to somewhat recover and make the move less painful for staff?

Wouldn’t dream of suggesting it.

[Me Me Me Me]

I have sympathy for anyone who is forced to tear up roots in one place and move to somewhere they wouldn't really choose to be in order to keep their job...

However!

When you sign a contract in which you agree that you, "...are liable for transfer to any part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in the course of [your] employment." Then it's pretty clear that your employer is operating well within the terms of your contract to give you fair notice of a posting to another part of the UK.

On that basis, suggesting that you may have grounds for constructive dismissal based on an employer's breach of contract - when it is the employer who is applying the terms of the contract and you (theoretically) the employee who seeks to circumvent them... well can you really see a court supporting that?

That aside - there are some issues relating to the financial administration of a relocation in such difficult times. My first thought was that surely more people will seek to rent, rather than buy for the moment and wait on the market recovering.
I do know that there have been a few furrowed brows looking at the hit the company has taken on sales at reduced prices (under GSP)

I really think the guys at Manchester need to stop expending energy fighting the right of the company to move them - you ain't going to win - and concentrate on the detail of how the company works with you to ensure you are no worse off because they chose to move you at a time of recession.

[Radarspod]

Mahaba,

A very interesting summary of a situation I'd never heard of and didn't exist for the Spectrum House move we were involved in - not a good situation.

RS

[eglnyt]

There's at least one case back in the 80's when the mobility clause was tested at an industrial tribunal after a member of NATS/CAA staff resigned when posted from a regional part of the country to West Drayton. Some of the legislation will have changed a bit since then but at that time the tribunal considered only whether or not the application of the mobility clause was fair and reasonable. Its main consideration when doing that was whether there were good and legitimate business reasons for the move. Unfortunately in that case the tribunal ruled against the individual even though to some of us the business reasons seemed rather weak and obviously contrived. A rationalisation of centres is a far stronger business reason than those considered reasonable back then.

It is also worth bearing in mind that if your place of work is closed down the company actually has an obligation to consider re-location to avoid redundancy.

During the Field Engineering move to Spectrum House in the mid 90s there were some staff with a similar negative equity problem. It didn't affect me so I didn't pay much attention but I think the interest free loan was the eventual concession there.

[BAND4ALL]

Please don't bring the banding into this as it does not matter if you were band 4 or 5 you would still prob be in the s:mad:it due to the current financial situation ok:=

[sr562]

As with the above posts, I sympathise with the guys n girls who may lose out with the move North.

However, having looked at constructive dismissal (and various other ways to get some justice from my last employer) you really have to have a watertight case and have followed a strict set of procedures before any lawyer will even consider your case. Unfortunatley for you Manch guys, the fact that you are on a mobile contract and, as stated earlier, your employer is obligated to offer relocation when closing/moving premises, which they have, means you dont have a case at all.

[northernmonkey1261]

I think a lot of people will just not move house, see if they can ride the storm out, and rent a bedsit up there, meaning they will do a whole lot of commuting. This in turn will mean that NATS will not be able to rely on the usual people to do AVAs, as they will be back on the M6 to see their families; more people will be sick/ tired/ late for work; and in the in the 1 to 1s in the near future nobody will have a clue what they are doing, so will be unable or unwilling to commit to NPC. Why should they? They haven't had the decency to tell the ATSAs how many of them will have a job yet.
The rumours of a bung are rife, will it be 5 grand will it be 80, nobody knows, it may well be nada, or may be announced so late that everybody already left. I am quite sure the Airline group have not been told about the potentially catastrophic delays they will face if MACC goes up with 70 controllers, although the credit crunch may help paint over that if airlines keep pulling routes and going bust.
Some employees at MACC, as above, are finding that the GSP will simply wipe out any equity they had, if not even producing negative equity (IE deposit), and as such they simply cannot afford to move. Nobody in their right minds would think of selling in the next 9-12 months unless they were on bread and water. The TC move happened just in time for the controllers, and NATS are now sat on some negative lumps of property in the aftermath, they will not be risking that again, hence the horrendous GSPs that are being dolled out at the moment.
The move was already going to be difficult enough, will be an interesting few months ahead, can we pencil in a pension strike for O date? Oh, wait a minute, it's not a date is it, it's O month. A year to go, and the vagueness continues!

[Togo Dawn]

There are a few issues in here for me.

1. Why is this not being classed as a 'betterment' move, a quick google shows that house prices in the North West are falling at 10 - 15% but in Bonny Scotland only 5% - why should we have to fill in the gap?

2. Whats happened to our local Prospect Reps (as good blokes as they are). There was a central meeting on relocation issues last week that our managers attended and our local reps weren't invited to. Of course Prospect will say "well we had central reps there", fat lot of use they are to us at MACC as we are well aware of how they have 'looked after our interests'. If ever a meeting should have been attended by our reps this should have been it.

3. We should all be saying we're not doing anything PC related after the 1st Jan until they sort out these relocation issues. That means no MOPS workshops and other stuff in Scotland unless they can get us there and back in a 7 hour window that we would ordinarily be working.!:=

I get the whole move to Scotland thing. I'm not happy about it, but I have to move as I can't afford to pack my job in and I actually do enjoy shifting traffic. But I fail to see why I should be £100k out of pocket, which I will be as house prices in Scotlan aren't going down in proportion to the rest of the UK.:{

[Vote NO]

Maybe "O" date will slip long enough to see things settle on the financial front?
I beleive its called "O" month now, perhaps it will go to "O" year which would also give our wonderful managers an excuse to delay things which would benefit you guys at Manch and help them out of a mess :}
Good luck anyway and dont settle for second best, you have them over a barrel and without you guys they can't open PC :ok:

[Togo Dawn]

And the other thing I hear is that Cartus who get to buy our propoerties are on the brink of financial metdown, which is driving their decsion in paying us peranuts for our houses.

Given the credit crunch and the banks inability to lend money out, its hardly surprising that Cartus are struggling to attrcat investment that specialises in buying houses and selling them on at a profit. hardly a great business model in the current economic climate. Ergo, Cartus pay us the lowest amount of money they can possibly pay us. They sell lower than they pay us and NATS picks up the difference, thus NATS wants the lowest possible price as well.

Whilst I appreciate fully, I shouldn't be turning my move to Scotland into a money making venture for me - I think I am entitled to a fair price for my house and to pay a fair price at the other end. It seems by the time Cartus and NATS have fininshed de-risking their business, we are left with the S***y end of the stick.

:=

[Stupendous Man]

without you guys they can't open PC

I'm afraid they can!

The ocean can be moved in quite easily as all their kit is new and working (now!) and everyone is checked out on it. So unlike MACC - who have to move up - and the airways ops room - who need OCT for the new (to us anyway) kit - the Oceanic guys can move across the car park and start working whenever our glorious leaders decide.

And there will be much rejoycing and singing at CTC / NATSnet about how PC has opened on time - despite most of the staff and sectors not being in it.

But maybe I'm just being cynical.....

[Mr A Tis]

PC "O" date, isn't necessarily the same as MACC "close" date.
They are pushing their luck to close MACC in Jan 2010, given the amount of training required & resources available.
No structure is in place for how the MACC corner will be managed, no plans have been revealed for any ATSAs / grades / method of OPS etc.
Any wiff of trouble over Pensions or re-location hassle could see the whole thing go tits up yet.

[Radarspod]

Just out of interest (sorry for the thread creep), does MACC remain a unit in its own right when co-located at Prestwick Centre with ScACC, (like LTC and LAC at Swanwick), or will the MACC sectors become part of ScACC?

RS

[BDiONU]

Just out of interest (sorry for the thread creep), does MACC remain a unit in its own right when co-located at Prestwick Centre with ScACC, (like LTC and LAC at Swanwick), or will the MACC sectors become part of ScACC?
MACC & ScACC combine to become Prestwick Centre, a single unit. Eventually LTC and LAC will combine but there is no money to do that at the moment.

BD

[fisbangwollop]

On the bright side just think of the advantages of moving up north!! the quality of life here in the sunny north will by far compensate for the money you may lose ( though to be honest with the talk of bungs I guess you will not be out of pocket as us up here may be out of jobs!!!)

[Mr A Tis]

Integrated centre???????? :):):) single unit in name only.

MACC sectors will be in their own zone tucked away in one corner.
May as well put a wall around it.

All the fancy integrated plans went tits up when they realised they dont have enough ATCOs.

[coolhandluke]

Let me throw this into the ring. When it comes to OCT training MACC should refuse, citing the companies inability to address its employees financial concerns. If people have to move with negative equity against their will, cause NATS has them over a barrel, then the potential for sickness could dramitically increase. From a HF point of view the stress and strain of this situation on peoples home life would make it easy to get signed off long term sick. spouses/partners having to quit their jobs, children moving away from their friends and moving to a country you don't want to live in, throw in the fact that as a result of the move you are in a worse financial situation and have to change your standard of living. I'm surprised there aren't people off now. This whole situation is extremely unhealthy, and has the potential to be very dangerous with controllers distracted, tired and worried while plugged in.

On the plus its nearly christmas:\

[BDiONU]

with the talk of bungs
Will this be like the bungs TC got for moving to Swanwick from WD?

BD

[privatesandwiches]

BD.

what bungs would those be then?
other than bog standard relocation.

[BDiONU]

what bungs would those be then?
other than bog standard relocation.
Thank you, you have exactly made my point :ok:

BD

[Vote NO]

I heard a rumour today that if there are not enough Manch ATCOS/ATSAS to staff PC then some of the task/airspace will be given to LACC. Also a substantial new AAVA deal will be given to PC staff to train and subsequently validate on the remaining Manch sectors.
I beleive the guys at Scottish dont insist on a two man P and E team all the time like Manch and this is seen as another bonus for management :}
The above is "vital to ensure PC is fully operational" :eek:

[privatesandwiches]

BD.

I am of course happy to make your point as that you dont actualy have one. The MACC guys are given the same relocation as we were, there are no 'bungs' involved.. choose your wording carefully as you make out we got something that others have not.. when that is not the case.
The unfortunate fact for them is that we were lucky when we moved and got good GSP's, but for the guys now looking at moving north the property market is not what it was 18 months ago when we did it:{.
If it helps the blow though, many colleagues who moved down to swanwick got mortgaged up to the nuts and are now possibly in negative equity since the house they bought then is now worth a hell of a lot less than it is now. Any imaginary bung would have been welcomed.
Its all swings and roundabouts my friend.

[coolhandluke]

:ok:They can offer all the money they want to PC staff to validate on MACC sectors, but whoses going to train them. As it stands now OJTI's at MACC are getting fatigued.
With regards to the differences in ops, MACC is strongly opposed to adopting the single man method currently in use at Scottish. As it stands now MACC will go up north with its method of ops unaltered. Once there we and scottish can then work to adopt a common method. The arguements for singlemanning are more than outweighed by the cons.

[Arkady]

BD

You of all people should know by now that you need to use small words, type slowly and label sarcasm very clearly on here if you do not want to be misunderstood :ugh:

[anotherthing]

Private

What BDiONU is trying to get across is that TC did not get any bungs for the move, whereas in one of the earliest posts in this thread, there have been references made to the possibility of bungs being made to MACC staff.

Vote NO - if your rumours about moving of some sectors to Swanwick are true, just how the hell do management expect to be able to man them??

Moreover, If ...Also a substantial new AAVA deal will be given to PC staff to train and subsequently validate on the remaining Manch sectors...is true (this is a rumours network after all), then I think that it would be very short sighted for management to believe that Swanwick staff would be prepared to learn new airspace to help them (management) out, if they were not subject to any new super AAVA deal as well... bearing in mind that AC are already about 40-50 controllers short. Mind you, over the past few years TC have been lumbered with more and more airspace without any incentives...:hmm:

[ZOOKER]

So have Manchester!!
Shedloads of it.
AND, they do it better than the people who did it before them.
NO INCENTIVES.

[anotherthing]

Zooker you just don't get the point of my post do you??

However, you are correct about the 'no incentives' however we are talking about the possibility of a bung in the future as alluded to by someone early on in this thread.

As for
Shedloads of it.
AND, they do it better than the people who did it before themThat's obviously open to interpretation... however the fact remains that TC does it with half the controllers - Both AC and MACC have their hands tied with the T&P requirement although some sectors, especially in AC when you are talking huge ranges are suited and need T&P, there are sectors at AC and MACC that could be run single controller. This lack of flexibility (in part because the Union insists on T&P) does not help out the manpower levels.

There are some tasks where a dedicated planner is needed - this was bourne out in the recent Central sim where one of the new TC Capital sectors prove unworkable without a dedicated co-ordinator, however there are other sectors around where insisting on T&P is a waste of resource.

[ZOOKER]

Anotherthing,
I believe the team who do the 118.77 sector were nominated for some award this year for reducing delays. Was this not the old Pole Hill sector that LATCC/Swanwick used to do?
Also, I seem to recall being told that Manchester have been commended for their safety performance overall.
My safety is what Air Traffic Control is all about is it not?
As for single-manning of ATC sectors, I seem to remember that missing 'human resources' played a part in the tragic events of both Ubelingen and Zagreb.

[anotherthing]

Zooker

Uberlingen had nothing to do with single manning or T&P manning. It had lots to do with the fact that equipment was not available and the level of manning was not acceptable for the task (the controller was using two displays, not properly co-located). That does not mean that they needed a T&P FFS. That's like saying if TC had 50% of the controllers it has at the moment, it needs T&Ps. The fact is any unit needs to be properly manned staff number wise - whether that task needs single controller ops or T&P ops. :ugh::ugh:

As for
I believe the team who do the 118.77 sector were nominated for some award this year for reducing delays. Was this not the old Pole Hill sector that LATCC/Swanwick used to do?All very comendable - but NATS as a whole are reducing delays, not just MACC (whose traffic levels continue to fall at a higher rate than any other units as they have done for the past 10 months - maybe this helps make the delay reduction even better). More to the point - the fact that MACC can support the sectors more readily with regards to manpower availability means that there are less restrictions put on, which means less delays.

Less delays does not necessarily have anything to do with controller ability and usually has absolutley nothing to do with it, unless of course you are saying every MACC controller who does this sector is better than every LACC controller who used to do it? A totally stupid and untrue comment!!

As for safety, again, this will usually always improve with reducing traffic numbers, but again NATS as a whole have improved across all units.

Lets not get into a willy waving contest as is the usual crap on here. As an ANSP, NATS is reducing delays and being more safe - so well done to everyone involved.

The issue is the fact that MACC staff stand to lose out because of negative equity. This issue is true, even though the move is a legitimate move (arguments of banding, people having to move school etc do not wash I'm afraid - relocation is legitimate).

There is no other argument, mentioning other supposed 'issues' when other units have had to uproot in the recent past is not going to wash.

[Ppdude]

Uberlingen had nothing to do with single manning or T&P manning



so if the poor controller had someone sat next to him watching, they still would of hit?

[Krait]

The Point seems to be being missed a little, This thread started with a very sensible and important point and has slowly fallen into the pit of 'have a whine at each other'.

The controllers at Manchester are upset and quite rightly so. The move is not a 70 mile trip within the same country. It will be a huge upheavel for a vast majority of the people who actually go. I am not Scotland bashing here, just pointing out the facts as I see them and hear of them.

Apart from the distance and the family and friends that are left behind there are many other issues. It is obviously a really bad time to move house. Now this isnt NATS doing (I dont think). But the equity which has vanished or the negative equity WILL prevent moving house. Finding a mortgage at 90% is lucky. That deposit for many people doesnt exist.

There are many other-halfs who are worried about moving their careers. Legal/Teaching/Medical qualifications/training arent 100% transferable.

To make these things a little earlier you would think that NATS could have actually handed out some posting notices. A move date - no chance. A move month - maybe Jan. A move year - surley some point in 2010. How are families/couples/singles supposed to plan for the future and all the difficulties when we have no idea when we are going. NATS 'o-date' history is at best poor.

Those of you who moved to Swanwick must know this better than most. But your move (although I am sure had many difficulties) was a better option than those Mancunians who are being asked to move to a totally different environment that is not commutable and not keeping friends/family within sensible (M3) range.

So it is no wonder that so many people are looking for the exit. They arent leaving in their droves right now but why should they. Who knows when we are leaving and why leave the job/salary they enjoy before they really have to. However, there will be considerable numbers not going North. This will make life for those going potentially more hard work. Short numbered, short of morale and trying to settle families into entirely new surroundings.

I am still hoping things will get better but....

[rodan]

I read these MACC move threads with interest and sympathy. I would ask though, what is it that you want to happen? What could NATS do to make it better that they aren't doing?

[Manchester ATC]

To old to move. :D Sod working Christmas and newyear, will retire gracefully:eek:. Best of luck to all those moving, hope you get what you need from Nats?
Remember, the lads and lassies up north drink proper drinks. not those cocktails you drink here.:=

:O

[ZOOKER]

anotherthing,
The reason the displays were not "properly co-located" is because they were designed to be monitored by 2 controllers, - one of whom wasn't there!
(Ubelingen Final Report, Systemic causes 2 and 3).
That about wraps it up for single-manning of ATC sectors designed for 2 people.
Krait, Splendid 1st post.

[BDiONU]

A move date - no chance. A move month - maybe Jan. A move year - surley some point in 2010. How are families/couples/singles supposed to plan for the future and all the difficulties when we have no idea when we are going. NATS 'o-date' history is at best poor.
January 2010 was the date which the NATS board communicated over a year ago and are sticking to it precisely because of the soft issues you touch on.

BD

[BDiONU]

so if the poor controller had someone sat next to him watching, they still would of hit?
There was a whole chain of events, this was one of the links. Are you suggesting that every sector at every centre should be manned T&P at all times, even at night?

BD

[anotherthing]

PpDude and Zooker

This is digressing, so this will be my last comment on this particular topic (Uberlingen)


so if the poor controller had someone sat next to him watching, they still would of hit?


Ifs and buts - who knows? If he had someone sat next to him, he may have been more engrossed in having a conversation with that person (and therefore still had the incident), as it was very quiet... all conjecture. TC and some of Scottish manage just fine single manned, and believe it or not, TC is quite complex and can be busy at times...


The reason the displays were not "properly co-located" is because they were designed to be monitored by 2 controllers, - one of whom wasn't there!
Which is different from T&P :ugh:, unless of course you are saying there should have been 4 controllers on duty?? Zooker, you were talking about T&P operation which is 2 controllers per task, using seperate radar screens, but set up in a simialr way for one task in hand. The controller at Uberlingen was using 2 displays because he was executing effectively 2 different tasks/sectors.
It's like asking someone to bandbox 2 sectors at night, but making them use the normal workstations for each position, not putting them onto one workstation. The issue was not about T&P but was about not having the correct amount of manpower for the task in hand, which in my first post I stated was the problem.
If you're going to put forward an argument, make it relevant, otherwise people will switch off when you do talk about relevant things, such as the situation that MACC staff may find themselves in due to the economic situation.

[055166k]

Interesting point! The original recommendation to the CAA was contained in AIB report 1/89 para 4.13 [page 53 or thereabouts] and followed the horrific airmiss between the Tristar and the Tu154. It said there should be two controllers listening to the R/T [among other things]; however there seemed to be an inference in the wording that might preclude quiet sectors with little or no traffic.

[Me Me Me Me]

Those of you who moved to Swanwick must know this better than most. But your move (although I am sure had many difficulties) was a better option than those Mancunians who are being asked to move to a totally different environment.

What is totally different about the environment? Did I fall through some dimensional wormhole to a place where Manchester had traded places with Athens, Sydney or Las Vegas??

Last I saw, both Manchester and Ayr/Glasgow were areas in the west of the UK where it rains a lot, people grumble about the same government, use the same currency and the public transport is never on time.

I do sympathise with the families of those who are moving, who will have to find new jobs and new schools etc... but it can't really have come as a surprise that it would be required.

[anotherthing]

Here's a quick question, in no way meant to be offensive...

How many people at MACC are at that unit because they failed to validate at 'busier' or 'more complex' units?

How many of those people who were given a second chance to salvage a career with good pay through the goodwill of NATS are complaining about having to uproot to Scotland?

(And whilst I'm at it, how many of those same people complain about only being band 4)??

Genuine questions, because I know how short or how selective peoples memories can be, especially ATCOs'!!

I fully sympathise with the situation regarding negative equity that those who have bought in the last 3 or 4 years will find themselves in; however all other issues regarding this relocation, which has been known about for years, are no more valid than any other relocation programme this company has undertaken.

You're talking a distance of 250 miles, not the end of the earth. Correct it's not commutable, but then realistically, if talking about quality of life, neither really is the WD to Swanwick commute. Partners of people who moved to Swanwick have all had to up roots and find jobs as well, it's not a unique situation you are finding yourselves in.

If this relocation couple with the pension, on top of all your other gripes, such as being Band 4 etc are so bad, then why not look abroad for work? Or is NATS in reality not as bad a company as some people like to whinge about (typically people who have never worked for another company)??

[ProM]

I think some people are underestimating the scale of move:

Comparing it to WD to Swanwick move:
I know loads of people who commute from southampton area to london area. the opposite direction is even easier. For those with working partners you could have moved into the middle and each continued in your jobs

Glasgow is further from manchester than Manchester is from London. It is north of Moscow and closer to the latitude of St Petersburg than London. Hell, the SNP want to ally more closely with Iceland and Norway than London

me, me, me, me said
people grumble about the same government
Increasingly that is not true with devolution. So far Westminster may have been less popular but that will change I am sure. Who knows how far devolution will go?

You can make yourself unpopular (or worse) by cheering for England up there.

That is a whole different ball game to the WD-Swanwick move

[Stupendous Man]

Glasgow is further from manchester than Manchester is from London. It is north of Moscow and closer to the latitude of St Petersburg than London. Hell, the SNP want to ally more closely with Iceland and Norway than London

What has that got to do with the move?

I have a lot of sympathy for the guys moving up here who are having to uproot their families.

However...This has been on the cards for a while and so anyone who arrived at Manch in the last 5 or so years really has no grounds for complaint.

We are a mobile grade and the staff at Manch are being relocated.
The original point of this thread was regarding negative equity. I think it is a real kick in the balls down to timing. Unfortunate, but one of those things - not that anyone is taking it lightly.

To say its a diffrent country is sh1te. I'm not scottish, neither is my wife. We both love it here and ScOACC is a great unit to work at (even if the ops room equipment is currently the Life On Mars version of UK ATC!). All the guys are friendly - and sympathetic to MACCs plight re: moving family/changing schools/jobs for partners etc.

It is different from the WD/LAC move because, in my mind, you could still have your house/partner/kids in London and make the 2 hour commute down the M3. Not the case here. Its about 3 and a bit hours depending on traffic to see the missuses family in Manch.

So dare I say Quit whining about the actual move and put that effort into moving. Address your legitimate concerns over negative equity etc with the company. Scotland bashing won't do you any good.

(Ducking for cover from the expected incoming!)

[ProM]

I'm not moving, I just thought some people were underestimating the significance of the move which was a bit unfair on OP and his colleagues- maybe i went a bit overboard though :}

[Mr A Tis]

BDi


Sure PC "O" date Jan 2010 has been made known for a while now.

At no point have Management said when MACC closure date will be.

The two are not the same, so plan around that one, unless you want to make the announcement on here ?

[BDiONU]

BDi
Sure PC "O" date Jan 2010 has been made known for a while now.
At no point have Management said when MACC closure date will be.
The two are not the same, so plan around that one, unless you want to make the announcement on here ?
Huh? Your question makes no sense.

BD

[Me Me Me Me]

It's just a very 'Olde England' view of the provinces. We live in a multi-cultural, multi-racial, global village. Many of those moving work in a highly-skilled, high-tech, well-remunerated industry... and yet they appear to believe that civilisation stops at the borders of Blighty.

Anyway... English people don't get a hard time for supporting England up here... That's to be encouraged.. It's any Scots supporting them who get pelters!! :p

[ZOOKER]

Anotherthing,
How many are at MACC because the Swanwick/LATCC/LACC/TC training system failed? :E

[anotherthing]

Zooker,

I won't argue with the fact that in some cases, the training regime let trainees down - as it does at any unit - but hardly ever in recent years from TC, and AC who used to have a bad rep for training are having much more sucess nowadays in getting validations.

However the majority of people who failed at the units you mentioned did so because they were simply not good enough in the time allowed.

One of the reasons people who get moved to another unit to continue training do so well or succeed, is because they have had the benefit of 3 or 4 hundred hours at their previous unit... giving them a total training time of 7 or 8 hundred hours.

So the question is still valid, there are many people at MACC who may well havebeen out on their ear if they had not been given a second chance... whatever the reason for failing!

Stupendous Man

It is different from the WD/LAC move because, in my mind, you could still have your house/partner/kids in London and make the 2 hour commute down the M3.

Having moved before 'O' date and done the commute in reverse (not literally), I can assure you that even a one hour commute either way is not really acceptable. And the M3 is one of the worst motorways in Britain...

There is no doubt at all that the negative equity thing is not good, however playing Devils' Advocate...

As you quite rightly state ...anyone who arrived at Manch in the last 5 or so years really has no grounds for complaint...
It is these people who will be in negative equity, as someone who bought more than 5 years ago should still be in surplus (unless thay bought badly). Bearing in mind investments may go down as well as up, to quote the adverts...

If I was a hard nosed company man I might say to someone who complained -

"Houses are not guaranteed as a cash cow, there have been price drops in the past - you knew when you were posted to MACC that you would have to move to NPC which would involve selling up... You took the decision to invest in property, that investment has, (like any investment can), just gone belly up... not our problem"

The company, although not exactly winning any friends, would be entirely in their right to take that stance.

I don't agree with it, but it is a fact.

Serious question -

To those who have brought up the very valid point about negative equity, what do you want the company to do about it?
Who will decide what, if any, level of compensation you will get?
How will it be decided?
Will it be a flat rate for everyone?
Will it be your purchase price with a percentage added on for each year since your purchase up to the beginning of the move window?
If so, what about the fact that different types of house and different areas sustain different growth?

Just curious, because like anything, it's all very well saying you have a problem, but if you can have a solution or at least a starting point for negotiations in your mind, you will fare much better when taking NATS to task.

[Stupendous Man]

Does the AHPL (Assisted House Purchase Loan I think) still exist?

Interest free (although there are tax implications depending on size of loan) loan from company when relocating?

This may be an option for some people to help with deposits. I know it doesn't address the issue of neg equity, but every little helps.

Perhaps NATS could extend the rental window - normally a year iirc - so that when the market hopefully rises again people won't be hit as hard. Obviously the downside is that the Scottish Market will have risen too.


Anotherthing
I wasn't suggesting that any commute away from family is easy - just that some are more manageable than others.

[anotherthing]

SM

I didn't think you were - just pointing out that for quality of life, any commute can be deemed to be too much, depending on the individual. We used to have an assistant at TC who commuted from deepest Norfolk!!!

It's all down to the individual at the end of the day as to what is an acceptable commute, bit for those at MACC who try to say that the WD move is completely different from the MACC move are not being realistic.

Even with an interest free loan (if it's still available); it's still leaving people out of pocket...

[Lurking123]

Regardless of relocation packages, Prestwick is still a comparative sh1thole. :{

[Krait]

:ugh:

Anotherthing - quote

"How many people at MACC are at that unit because they failed to validate at 'busier' or 'more complex' units?"

As seems usual this is totally off topic but seriously what are ridiculous point. AC - busier and more complex?

Anyway this is not the point. Stupendous Man - thanks for your post, nice to hear the positive sides of ScOACC from someone who actually knows

[BwatchGRUNT]

ZOOKER - who is this fool renowned for chucking in his two pence worth and stiring things up, you are not even an ATCO and just a wannabe, go jump in front of a train!!:eek:

[ZOOKER]

GRUNT,
I see you have made assumptions regarding my gender on both this, and the 'patio' forum.
Never assume anything in air traffic control.
Have a nice day. :E

[anotherthing]

Krait

The 'point' is there are a lot of people at Manchester who have fauiled elsewhere, for whatever reason.

Some people might say they were lucky to be given another chance and therefore should not be whingeing about having to move to NPC (being still employed and a mobile grade etc)

As for the busier and more complex, that's why they were in iverted commas in my post. However, AC is busier and continues to grow, unlike MACC, however, that's besides the point and only because you questioned it!

[JonG]

^^^^I'm sure there are lot of people at MACC who were posted there as their first posting.

[notared]

Anotherthing

If you are going to make derogatory comments about people at Manchester at least have the common courtesy to make sure your spelling is correct, assuming of course you weren't "passed" when you made the post.:E

[northernmonkey1261]

You can hardly blame controllers if the traffic figures are dropping off, or is that also down to their lack of band 5 ability? "25 aircraft an hour" it said in the Guardian! Band 4 would never be able to manage that.
The point of this thread which started out as very sensible, is that the negative equity issue of the moment, means that some people cannot (not will not) afford to move there, without taking a 50k hit and buying a bedsit up there. The company has a duty to make sure its workforce are not doing a 4/5 hour commute to work.
It is also not an issue how many people are retreads from down South, they company had a chance to get something from there investment by retraining them at MACC or SCACC or an airfield, nothing in that, takes away a controller's god given right to moan and whinge.
What good is an interest free loan? None.
But despite sensible debate, there will always be poeple who are not involved, getting paid more, who feel that they know best about soemthing that does not affect them.
I have a great deal of sympathy for the people who were posted straight to MACC, who would have loved to go to Swanwick, but will now never get the chance, and will never earn Band 5 cash, through no fault of their own. Personally I couldn't care less, I earn plenty, and am not arsed what other people earn, but some people have to stick their oar in, and it is usually the people who earn the most

[Me Me Me Me]

So the sensible question still remains unanswered... If you feel that moving from Manchester to Prestwick is going to put you in a negative equity situation, what would you have NATS do about it? Keeping in mind their actions would need to be realistic, costed and sustainable over all movers now and in future.

[Vote NO]

If it's any help :)
Big fall in Scottish house prices :ok:

Scottish house prices have suffered their biggest quarterly fall for at least 16 years :eek:

Maybe its not so gloomy after all :) a profit of £92,537 can be made on the average house price, could be a good time to move and invest?

BBC NEWS | Scotland | Big fall in Scottish house prices (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7727238.stm#table)


Manchester house prices

Trafford
Average Cost: £247,415


BBC NEWS | In Depth | UK House Prices | Manchester (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/in_depth/uk_house_prices/html/bn.stm)

South Ayrshire house prices

South Ayrshire
Average Cost: £154,878


BBC NEWS | In Depth | UK House Prices | South Ayrshire (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/in_depth/uk_house_prices/html/re.stm)

[northernmonkey1261]

I would like a Gulfstream 5 or 4, parked at EGCC to fly me and the people on my watch that I actually like, to and from our shifts at EGPK
That alone would cost less than what NATS lost on some houses in the TC move? no? unreasonable?

[Vote NO]

Why not club together and buy one between you all, a few AAVA would cover it :)

[anotherthing]

notared/northernmonkey1261

If you read the whole of this thread, you will see that it was people from MACC who first mentioned 'illegal banding' and 'the injustice of relocation'.

To counter that, I asked the question about the number of people who were at MACC on a second chance, and if they were amongst those who were now whingeing - yes whingeing - about having to move.

I am not talking about the negative equity issue - you have my full sympathy regarding that. However we continually get told about how unfair it is for people to have to move from MACC to NPC and it gets tiring.

As for the negative equity thing, I say again that NATS could be bloody minded about it and say the following
"Houses are not guaranteed as a cash cow, there have been price drops in the past - you knew when you were posted to MACC that you would have to move to NPC which would involve selling up... You took the decision to invest in property, that investment has, (like any investment can), just gone belly up... not our problem"I think it would be unfair and very poor of them to do so, but you guys need to start thinking abut what you want done about it now... MACC are moving, you are not getting away from that fact,so that in mind what would you guys like NATS to do about the negative equity issue?

I repeat
To those who have brought up the very valid point about negative equity, what do you want the company to do about it?
Who will decide what, if any, level of compensation you will get?
How will it be decided?
Will it be a flat rate for everyone?
Will it be your purchase price with a percentage added on for each year since your purchase up to the beginning of the move window?
If so, what about the fact that different types of house and different areas sustain different growth?
Because there is a lot of sympathy on this thread from people who are not at MACC, but no one from MACC has actually said what they would like done about it (apart from saying the move is unfair - yawn).

You guys have a serious issue that needs resolving, however if you go at it half cocked and don't have a clue about how you want it to get resolved, NATS will bend you over and shaft you again.

You need to think of sensible ways of getting the shortfall back - see above - and also think about what ther company might counter argue with - see my point about different areas/house types having duifferent levels of equity growth etc.

The move is still some way off, but you need to start sorting this out now - otherwise you will end up doing what NATS is good at doing and that is firefighting at the last minute... if it gets to that stage, you will be buggered.

[northernmonkey1261]

they can't do much, people will just not move

[BAND4ALL]

Quote

I would like a Gulfstream 5 or 4, parked at EGCC to fly me and the people on my watch that I actually like, to and from our shifts at EGPK

Oh no not banding again:ok:

[anotherthing]

A Gulfstream (band) 4 must be less complex though, therefore easier to fly... :}

[Vote NO]

I was thinking more like a Cessna 150 :}

[landedoutagain]

Gulfstream (band) 5 has more fancy tools and automation though?
Gulfstream (band) 4 is better value for money?!
Same licence required to fly both!!! :}

[ZOOKER]

You definitely get more tools with a '5.
Just check out some of their posts on here! :}

[anotherthing]

A TC Gulfstream (band 5) unforunately does not come with all the snazzy tools and automation...

Band 6 for LTC anyone? :E

[Lurking123]

The problem with the biz-jet option is that you would suffer significant ATC delays on the return leg due to the third rate, failed controllers. :E

[anotherthing]

But we could buy so much more as we are waiting with our band 5 money!

[Vote NO]

Getting back to the original post......:bored:

Is anyone from MACC actually going up to SCACC when PC opens in 13 months time ? :eek:
Management must be scratching their heads as to how the hell they are going to man it, unless the rumour from my previous post which is the "backup plan" is true :confused:
http://www.pprune.org/4521663-post22.html

[northernmonkey1261]

no way on earth is there enough time to delegate any airspace or sectors from MACC to LACC, why would they be arsed to learn it, why would MACC lads and lasses be arsed to train people on it.
never happen.

[Vote NO]

The same way possibly as Scottish were lumbered with N SEA from LACC and still get shafted when LACC take "sickies" at weekends dumping their traffic on the lads and lasses at Scottish, or so my source up north tells me:)

[cheeseon]

still get shafted when LACC take "sickies" at weekends dumping their traffic on the lads and lasses at Scottish, or so my source up north tells me
Your source is talking b:mad:cks

[The Many Tentacles]

The same way possibly as Scottish were lumbered with N SEA from LACC and still get shafted when LACC take "sickies" at weekends dumping their traffic on the lads and lasses at Scottish, or so my source up north tells me

Yes, your source is talking sh:mad:te.

I can't remember the last time someone on my LAG was sick at a weekend. Comments like that help no one at all and quite frankly are pure crap. Your source is obviously bitter they got sent to Scotland.

For the record, I'm not laying into Scotland, just having a dig at their source before the s**tstorm starts

[Vote NO]

Yes he is rather bitter, probably wrong too :uhoh:

[Vote NO]

So it did happen in the past ?

[Dee Mac]

What - LACC North Sea had sickness problems, sector closures and traffic being shifted north into Scottish North Sea sectors? Yes, but as I say, not for a while, perhaps even a year in my own experience. While it wasn't what I'd call a common occurrence, it wasn't what you'd call "uncommon". I'm not sure if the problem was just "sickness", understaffing or a combination of the two, suffice to say it did happen.

I beleive ScACC may be undergoing the same problem at the moment, and still management want to remove more from the night shift!

[Vote NO]

Unbeleiveable :eek: , and they want to reduce night shift manning, knowing full well every Bank holiday and most weekends that Scottish will be hit with "Due to staff shortages at LACC.... .......etc :}.So there was some truth in what my "source" said :oh:

[Dee Mac]

Sorry - not what I said. It used to happen, it hasn't for ages. ScACC may have closed sectors last week due to sickness/staffing so I'm not going to stand in the greenhouse throwing stones!

[goldfrog]

Good to see some ATCO on ATCO violence and no mention of coffee drinking layabouts at CTC :ok:

[Radarspod]

yes, I feel like I am missing out :} ......you chaps carry on, I'm off for a grande latte.