UK - NATS Pay negotiations - latest rumours

[Dan Dare]

If we were to accept less than (August) RPI it does not just show in next years pay slips, but also has a knock on for every year of our pensions. The RPI + .5% pension CAP would make any shortfall in this pay round difficult to recoup when negotiations have us in a position of more power in the future.

We should not even contemplate the pay cut that less than RPI would be.

[Mahaba]

Just to chip in late to put things correct.
Hootin an a roarin.

I know the area atco quite well as I have worked with him for many a year now and shared the watch he was on for a while.
Although Im sure he always felt otherwise he has always said to us that he didnt complain about the assessment that he undertook-though Im sure we were (and if he were honest about it would be himself) gobsmacked at the result.
For the rest he wasnt just an area atco-he was valid and instructing both in twr and approach on the system that manch works now (2 runways etc) whilst still holding area validations and was promised at the time he would never need to give up his twr/app validations. He was very unhappy when they were taken off him because he couldnt be rostered enough to stay current in all 3.
He has never complained about it to my knowledge but I have heard that manch management intervened when he was offered a college instructors job (after passing assessment)by telling them he no longer wanted it (without telling him!!-he only found out when he mailed the college about starting dates) as he was moving back to twr. Naughty! I believe he still has the emails for proof.
This chap isnt just jumping ship-he's an atco,ojti,assessor,verifier,lce,examiner,wto and board examiner, so I reckon the area side are holding onto him as long as they can and it should be remembered that this chap had trained a good proportion of the twr/app guys who are valid at manch now.
Sorry if it seems like a rant but I believe this chap shouldnt just be looked at as stopping someone else getting an nsl job at mnch-i certainly would not be valid without him and theres probably a lot more here would agree with that.
Respect where it's due from me!

[Hootin an a roarin]

Mahaba

No problems.

The alledged dodgy dealings went on with a Manc based female who was not as qualified as some external candidates who did not even get through the paper sift. At the time non Manc people did not realise that she was the other half of one of the successful candidates and so she was also successful. Don't know if that is the bloke you are refering to or not, or what happened in the long run but at the time it stank and left a lot of people not in the Manc clique p*ssed off.

[Mahaba]

Different chap-I was referring to the chap who is yet to move when manch closes.

[RPIplus1]

Latest news from the pay negotiations....


The NTUS met with NATS on 16th March at which management made a pay offer which they described as “modest”.

The offer was derisory and had so many strings attached that it was rejected out of hand by the NTUS.

The next meeting is scheduled for the 23rd March.

[Me Me Me Me]

August RPI was what... ~ 5%. It's now 0.1%

While the agreement beforehand would theoretically entitle us to expect at least the ~5% from August, I think management would have a decent argument to say it's reasonable in these extreme times of financial instability to accept something based on an averaged out RPI over the span of those months.
Yes, if RPI had stayed at 5% till now and you were offered 2% then that is indeed a pay cut in real terms... but that's not the case. Our cost of living hasn't increased consistently at 5% since last pay increase. We can't stamp our feet at management cherry-picking figures and dates that suit them, and then do the exact same ourselves.

Personally, my first priority is to still have a job... I like eating and wish to continue doing so with regularity. However, I wont be scared into submission by that...

If they offered me 2%, backdated to January, I'd take that. It'll be a while before RPI gets back up to that level.

I would accept a pay freeze... provided a couple of things were done first:

1. No dividends
2. PCG group waive, or at least defer all contractual bonuses. That includes Barron.

Not going to happen!

[Fletchers Left Boot]

Food up at least 5% since last year. Council tax up by 5%. My car insurance up by nearly 10% this year despite no claims....

Anything less than last August's RPI will be a pay cut in real terms... as well as the aforementioned effect on my pension on the long term.

[Dan Dare]

Me Me Me - I think you misunderstand. The £100 basket of food (fuel, mortgage, electronics etc) I could afford in August 2007 year already costs £105 last in August 2008 according to the government figures. I should think it costs £108 by now. I can't buy as much food now. With the fall in the value of the pound I don't suppose my value Dutch tomatoes will cost any less either, but nats think that its okay that I should have the spending power of 2007 and that my long awaited pension should be that much less for the rest of my life. This is not acceptable to me.

When nats want to negotiate next years pay rise and RPI has been 0.01%, then I would consider a pay freeze, not before.

Incidentally I am not alone in believing that we are heading for large inflation to pay for the excesses of the last decade and the various £bn payouts. August RPI type payouts may help protect us in such times, but any time we accept less than RPI we also screw our pensions further.

[Ceannairceach]

I'll only accept any form of pay freeze if the top management team and the PCG grades are given no whopping bonuses this time around - and give up some of their rather cushy perks.

Or, in other words, I won't be accepting a pay freeze. I expect the rise in the cost of living to be accounted for in my pay packet - at the very least.

I don't believe that's greed. Just sense.

[radar707]

PAY 2009
17th March, 2009

The NTUS met with NATS on 16th March at which management made a pay offer which they described as "modest".
The offer was derisory and had so many strings attached that it was rejected out of hand by the NTUS.
The next meeting is scheduled for the 23rd March.

Ian McNeill
NTUS Co-ordinator

[ToweringCu]

What was the offer?

[Vote NO]

I think it was 1.25%, a 4.55% pay cut (on Aug RPI +1%) :mad: with certain terms+ conditions :confused:

[Kiwitraveller]

All this talk of pay rises is very nice, but the rumour mill seems to be alive with prospects for redundancies. NATS is getting more like a real company every day!

400 jobs to go through Voluntary redundancies apparently, which if not achieved will lead to a compulsory boot for some... Obviously the higher paid are more vulnerable, it takes fewer £90k types to make a target cost saving than it would for £35k types...

Whats' the scoop on the bush telegraph? Where will the cuts bite? I am right or is it all hogwash?

Katie

[Vote NO]

I heard there was a cull at CTC on staff involved with projects

[Not Long Now]

Very difficult to make controllers redundant as UK legislation says you then can't restaff that role for a number of years, so presumably as soon as you want to make controllers redundant you have to stop recruiting.
But then again, we've apparently loads of staff and then there's the recession so volume of flights will be down for at least 20 years, so a definite cost saving could be made there...........

[STAN Man]

As well as a cull on CTC project staff it would appear to be "slash and burn time" for the lad and lassies in System Control at Swanwick. They tell me that several senior staff are going under VR whilst others will have to find jobs at CTC and elsewhere - if there any left. I am very concerned about the level of support that will be left in the Ops rooms at the completion of this exercise. Not just the numbers of engineers to support us but they used to be quite a good laugh to work with and now all seem totally p*ss*d-off with everything and anyone who dares to walk in there.

[Radarspod]

I heard there was a cull at CTC on staff involved with projects

Cull is a bit of a harsh word to use! :}

A lot of contractors have either had their contracts terminated or will not be renewed, as well as the engineering voluntary redundancies which were well oversubscribed (unsurprisingly!). This was needed to get the headcount down as lots of project work has been pushed back in time and there isn't the demand any more for the resourcing.:ugh:

Unfortunately, voluntary redundancies means the loss of some good people......the deadwood unfortunately still remain. Some might suggest that targeted compulsories aren't always a bad thing.......:E

RS

[Vote NO]

As NATS gets more brutal and a nastier company to work for, so does my language :(

But not as brutal as Katies :E

[Kiwitraveller]

So does the CTC Projects and Swanwick Systems 'rightsizing' (to use the jargon) provide 400 dead heads? Must be significant elsewhere too right?

Katie

[Jungle Jingle Jim]

400 from CTC is untenable!

Why 400, how is this calculated, is this just a numbers game...?

Rumours are some ex Spectrum, ATSA 4's, Band 5's on non op's jobs close to retirement, but certainly not 400...YET! Add the contractors not kept on.

Car Parking spaces currently at the CTC are no longer at a premium, so I guess senior managers will soon be banging via the Intranet about how green NATS has become!

[Kiwitraveller]

The 400 number will be driven by the amount of cost that needs to be taken out of the business. So take the average NATS salary, multiply by 400 and hey presto you will have a good indication of how many £££ that NATS need to cut. There are other factors like overhead to consider, but its a good 'back of the fag packet' indicator...

Katie

[Vote NO]

That's about £20 Million in annual salaries for 400 staff. The 45 VR's alone from Manch and Scottish will cost about £6 Million when they leave in Nov 2010 :bored:

[anotherthing]

...then there's the recession so volume of flights will be down for at least 20 years, so a definite cost saving could be made there...........
I assume this is tongue in cheek?

20 years... complete hogwash, even management with their scaremongering aren't stupid enough to think we believe that... are they?

[MaggiesFarmer]

That's what I was thinking, anotherthing... I work in the city just now, and even the most miserable people up here aren't predicting 20 years!

[anotherthing]

Traffic was down 10% on average in Feb this year compared to last Feb.

Given that traffic had been growing by about 5% per year before the 'credit crunch' (and as much as 15% at some units), the 20yr figure is laughable.

I think there will be a few people caught out when the summer schedules kick in, especially if they swallow the management doom and gloom predictions. There will still be overloads this year, I reckon.

Be careful people, traffic will not be as quiet as some may think - and it might catch us out, especially after a quiet winter.

[Vote NO]

There is a school of thought that aviation has now peaked and movements will remain steady for several years to come. A bit like the housing boom. On the plus side we will be working at a more comfortable pace similar to 2004 as opposed to the usual pace :eek: we are accustomed to, unless the lack of staff means we will still be as busy :uhoh:. So I guess overloads will still occur, but because of insufficient backup :sad:

[rumouroid]

I love the diplomacy of the union using the word "modest" to describe a 1.25% pay rise offer! Anything less than 3% could be described as insulting, pathetic or just plain cr@p! and any offer less than 3% should not be recommended by the union to it's members, if they want to try and get some respect back after the pension recommendation that should have had a pay rise of at least 4.8% attached to it, if they had negotiated harder. I can't believe we let NATS get the new pension for FREE! :ugh: If only the first vote had been no who knows what we could of negotiated, NEVER accept the first offer! There's always more available. Let's not make the same mistake again over pay. Also it won't be long until pensions are needing to be revisited either.
Personally I believe a "modest" offer would be between 3% and 4.5% and a suitable offer would be more than 4.5%, and if they want to attach some strings then it's at least 4.8%.
Let's see what next Monday brings

[heading 125]

Well said, totally agree 1.25% is an insult after the pension acceptance. When will our unions learn - perhaps they need to attend a course on "managing mangements pay expectations". PB has always said he wants to have a well motivated work force, with the 1.25% and the pension issue that isn't going to happen.

[rumouroid]

Yahoo

I stand corrected, indeed I believe NATS management described their offer of 1.25% (not RPI+1% as you quote) as "modest" and the union described it as "derisory" due to the low amount and the strings attached.

However the sentiment of my previous post remains the same.

[Nimmer]

Lets face it, management have us just where they want us. We should be negototiating a pay deal using the pension as a bargaining tool, but no we sold ourselves down the river, thanks prospect.

Look at the pension vote, only 70% of ATCO's bothered to vote, some weren't interested, others never received ballot papers(don't get me started on that).

So we have a disorganised and weak union with a at least, an apathetic workforce of 30%. So if came to strike action or any sort of action on pay, 30% wouldn't bother, and out of the remaining 70% how many would support the action when in these dire financial times the press will give us a totally hammering. Supported by facts given by NATS management.

After all we do get well paid(comparing the national average of 15 grand), you only need look in the Swanick car park to support this.

I reckon we will get maybe 40% willing to take action, so planes will fly with a bit of flow, no problem really considering how busy we are or not at the moment.

So you can kiss goodbye to any sort of payrise this year, thank you prospect and all those who voted YES, i hate to say I told you so, but I TOLD YOU SO.

Managment can sit back keep offering nothing and say do your worst, meanwhile people are getting made redundant, and other companies are giving pay freezes.

We are screwed, and the sooner people realise this the better.

PS no running off to the Middle East either they have stopped recruiting and maybe looking at job cuts!!!

[Minesapint]

For what it's worth I think 'they' are waiting until after the end of year profit figures are produced. If they are high then the union will hopefully get stuck in! I disagree with the post above on one point: Remember when the ATSA's went on a one day strike? Our customers were forced to cancel flights by their hundreds! I expect Mr BAW to be on the phone to Mr Von Richthoven in short order! The uninions should stop this cosy arrangement of "working together" until management make a decent offer. The unions need to take a much tougher line. :suspect:

[Loxley]

you only need look in the Swanick car park to support this.


At the risk of opening a huge can of worms, I believe the above comment is very telling. There are a load of other units, that aren't on Swanwick pay, that earn considerably less. Without using the 'B' word, I would like to think that the disproportionate pay between the units is something else that will be looked at, and I'd like to think that our colleagues at Swanwick would be in full support of this.

In reality though I think I'm living in a dream world.

On both counts.

[Standard Noise]

why not a narrowing of the gap ?

Controversial.

[manny fred]

Where does it stop though. Band 1 units probably feel they should be band 3. If band 3 units move to band 4, then band 1 units will want band 4. If band 1 then get band 4, the original band 3 will want band 5.Confused now.

Divsion 2 footballers probably want Premiership wages, they all kick the same size football around.

[Hootin an a roarin]

manny fred

We don't expect necessarily to gain another bands salary, just a narrowing of the huge gulf between 1, 2, 3 and bands 4 and 5. Is that so controversial or greedy?

Seeing however as the ATCO's in bands 4 and 5 hold the majority vote its never going to happen.

I suspect that NERL will gain more out of this supposed pay rise than NSL and hope that the Union does not give in, mainly because the majority of the BEC is made up of NERL Atco's. Most of the strings attached to the derisory offer relate to NSL after all and would lead to even more Atsa redundancies as we are forced/conned into doing more of their jobs. I would sooner have a pay freeze than gain 1-2 % to do met on a night shift etc which would lead to the removal of an ATSA on a night shift and the inevitable further loss of staff at that grade.

In relation to strike action. By the time we have given notice of a strike by law, it will be into summer schedules. OK, we may not be as busy as usual but traffic will be kicking in again soonish and will still cause chaos if we did strike. Unlike the French who laugh at us every time they visit my workplace we will never gain respect from this management unless we flex our muscle. After all management continually flex theirs and I believe look on the operational staff with contempt.

[manny fred]

I dont care who gets what, but some of the units you mention, dont work nights, dont do full afternoon shifts, or full weekends, people are able to validate in 4 or 5 months. Promotion to watch sup/manager is a lot quicker. Some of the units are northern so in terms of cost of living are probably better off than a southern controller. All these units have been evaluated in terms of movements and complexity, and I dont think it is a coincidence that guys who fail at LACC/LTCC end up validating at Manch/Scottish, or guys who fail at LL validate at SS/KK

[anotherthing]

Band 6 for TC... campaign starts here :ok:

[Hootin an a roarin]

manny fred

Typical response from an arrogant Band 5 atco with his head up his ar**. Prices where I live are comparable to London which will also be more costly than Swanwick. Aberdeen is full of oil money and again is an expensive place to live. Promotion to Watch manager? At smaller units it's dead mans shoes, people stay there for life. There isn't much movement nor promotion prospects.

And if you don't care, as you state, if these things were true then it wouldn't matter to you anyway. But as per usual you are top of the heap and if the lower mortals in Nats (your colleagues) got a bigger percentage to narrow the banding gaps, you would see it as money out of your own pocket no doubt. NSL is shafted for life as the top tier will not look after the rest but themselves.

[manny fred]

Not at all hootin. I have not got an arrogant attitude about being on the top band. I am just looking at it from an air traffic point of view. Just because we all share the same job title, does not mean we all do the same job. Someone has evaluated all the units and determined these bands. Should the Captain of a 737 working short haul, be on the same wage as a 747 pilot. Of course not, but they are both highly skilled pilots.

[Hootin an a roarin]

Just because we all share the same job title, does not mean we all do the same job. Someone has evaluated all the units and determined these bands. Should the Captain of a 737 working short haul, be on the same wage as a 747 pilot. Of course not, but they are both pilots.


Who has stated that we should all be paid the same?

The banding system is flawed and always has been. The initial study was not perfect, and the union at our pensions brief agreed that they may have made a mistake and that it contributed to the pension problem. That makes the lower bands who did not make significant gains feel really good.

If the big units continually get what they want at the detriment of smaller units then can someone tell me the point of the union? Isn't its role to look after the minnows and the collective as a whole?

[manny fred]

Fair enough. To be honest I have no idea what a band 1 2 3 or 4 unit is paid. If a band 1 unit suddenly became a band 3 unit then so be it, but my original argument is what would the rest of the band 3 units feel about this. Surely they would want to become a band 5 unit then, and what would a band 5 unit feel about that. If they kept a band 1 unit as a band 1 unit, but increased there pay, then surely every other band would want a similar pay rise. Its a vicious circle, and impossible to make everyone happy.

[BDiONU]

Fair enough. To be honest I have no idea what a band 1 2 3 or 4 unit is paid.
Its available on the intranet http://natsnet/intranet/notices/relatedDocs/EN2007-11-3.xls

BD

[manny fred]

I just assume that everyone is on the pay that NATS warrants acceptable. If it wasn't acceptable then noone would work there. The way I see it, it is human nature. It is human nature for a KK controller, to look up the road and think they have comparible jobs with LL. A LC controller believing they have more complex traffic than SS. We all want more, we all think we have the hardest jobs, control the busiest traffic, and without looking at figures, I assume all NATS units get paid more than NON NATS units.

[manny fred]

OK..Well why dont you explain why you feel you should be paid closer to a band 5 unit .Why is the banding system flawed. It is not an argument to say, I want more money, I deserve more money. We all want that, but why is the banding system flawed, could it not be your professional pride that is flawed??

[Hootin an a roarin]

we all think we have the hardest jobs, control the busiest traffic, and without looking at figures

Unless you are a fool I suspect not everyone thinks they are as busy as Swanwick or Heathrow, so don't think even Gatwick would expect to be paid the same (no disrespect intended).

It is the gulf between the bands that is the problem. Please listen to what is being said.

Also some non-Nats airfields pay comparitively the same as Nats regional airports but it has been the pension that has kept staff within Nats. That has now changed and seems only to get worse. I have no loyalty to Nats and if my terms are eroded will look elsewhere, but you also have to remember that there are other factors involved such as families to take into account so it isn't as simple as if it wasn't acceptable then noone would work there. The way I see it, it is human nature

Anyway need to start shift soon to go and sit with my thumb up my bum doing very little in accordance with my banding :}

[throw a dyce]

In the last review on Banding,it was interesting how Prospect fudged and twiddled things to avoid changing anything.The scores in there true form showed Aberdeen ahead of other units on complexity etc.It's busier than a certain Band 3 units,but surprise surprise there was no change.Even the Prospect rep there has complained to Prospect down south.
Anyway nothing will ever change.Once the ATCO 2/3 split was agreed by the majority at the bigger unit,then the smaller units fate was sealed.The Banding exercise just widened the gap,so now the difference is what a lot of people earn.
People have voted with their feet before,and will do so again.NATS/NSL is not a pleasant company to work for anymore,and they don't deserve the people that work for them.Especially at the smaller units,who just get fed all the rubbish and left overs.

[Data Dad]

manny fred (and other newer joiners)

for a full debate on banding and the history of NATS/CAA ATCO pay over the last 30 odd years look at this (http://www.pprune.org/atc-issues/343025-nats-banding.html) thread which I started last September

Rgds

DD

[mr.777]

Well, i've kept my mouth shut on this issue so far, mainly because I cannot suffer all the management arse-licking bs that has been peddled...but I'm about ready for a rant now :)

Pension YES voters (and that includes those didn't vote YES but still told everyone else it was a good idea)....congratulations on..
1) Selling our pension down the river. Funny how the MOU hasn't been written yet and management are looking to cut the cost of the pension still further.
2) F***ing us over on our t & c. You reckoned that a YES vote on the pension would have no bearing on this....that would be why PB and his chums are stamping their jackboots all over us now...BECAUSE WE HAVE NO SPINE FOR A FIGHT.
3) Paving the way for NSL to go bye bye. Again, you believed the Union, who in turn believed the management and now look where we are...Special Delegates Conference.

See you in another 3 months for another rant when no doubt we'll have had a pay freeze, spine point freeze, NSL is gone and PB has upgraded to a Lambo Murcielago..

[BDiONU]

Pension YES voters (and that includes those didn't vote YES but still told everyone else it was a good idea)....congratulations on.. Blah Blah blah
What part of 'Democratic vote' do you not understand? The Yes vote won, get over it and pick up your teddies. :}

BD

[Cuddles]

Perhaps NSL will go, but the aeroplanes worked by NSL will still exist, and need a service.

Might not be altogether a bad thing. At least there'd be the possibility of moving between units if they were all independent.

[Vote NO]

You are right mr. 777.... we did tell them. :uhoh:

See you in another 3 months for another rant when no doubt we'll have had a pay freeze, spine point freeze, NSL is gone and PB has upgraded to a Lambo Murcielago.. Probably half of CTC gone as well :eek:

Anyone noticed "SERCO" :* is appearing more often on Nats intranet. Me thinks they have a foot in the door.....:suspect:

http://i266.photobucket.com/albums/ii270/mkalert/Turkey.jpg

[eastern wiseguy]

**** it....lets sell CTC instead!!:}:}

[Vote NO]

"White elephant" springs to mind .........:oh:

[rumouroid]

I see that on page 13 of the Profile magazine lots of other Prospect branches have achieved decent pay rises. Out of the 12 groups quoted 5 got more than 4%, 4 got more than 3.5% and 2 got more than 3%. From that I would expect Prospect to achieve a minimum of 3.5% with no productivity strings attached, if management want to attach some strings then we want proper renumeration for it in addition to the cost of living rise, preferably add more spine points to the top of the scale that aren't affected by the cr@p new pension cap.
The cost of living rise of August 2008 RPI, which was 4.8%, is the baseline of what we deserve without us giving more productivity. Over the last 5 years the pay deals have been above RPI because we have given something away to management each time. There is not much left to give other than more flexible rostering, additional attendances and taking on extra jobs, inparticularly at NSL with ATCOs doing ATSA tasks.

mr.777
I totally agree with your rant, the "yes" vote has invited the fox into the coup and it is now starting its feast.

[Hooligan Bill]

It's pay back time for the majority sitting on there hands in the run up to PPP. Anyone who had worked outside NATS could have told you what was coming. Bend over, here it comes again!

[ZOOKER]

"Democratic vote" :}:}!
From what I read on here, certain anomalies are evident.
Unlike a General Election....
Many voters should have received voting papers in time to cast their votes.
- They didn't.
The return of voting papers should not have been hindered by the 'Christmas post'.
- It was.
The count should have been overseen by"independent scrutineers".
-It wasn't.
The proposers of the outcome, (Prospect), were swayed by the manifesto of the opposition party, (Management).
Prospect allegedly 'oversaw' the count. :E
Smell a rat?... NOT ARFF!!

[45 before POL]

Yes the pension which was supposed to have been done and dusted and protected for another 15years is already rearing its head as a levering tool in managements pay negotiations! their quote of a modest offer of 1.25% is certainly an insult as especially as this was offered being non-pensionable!(big string!) They have started already as this would devalue the pension further and chip away. As for the new schemers that start next month, this would have no effect as 9% contribution on salary is 9% thus down the line they have set their stall out, less members in the scheme later on would leave a yes vote by the new schemers......the unions stance of "working together".....some must be thinking now thats more like...."working for management".....time for change of view by the union:E:E:E

[Vote NO]

Any news on the latest pay talks today? :\


24 hours have elapsed, any news :confused:

[anotherthing]

their quote of a modest offer of 1.25% is certainly an insult as especially as this was offered being non-pensionable
Management have already been allowed to degrade our pension... we let them.

I remember, just a few months, ago that the 'yes' men all claimed on here that a cap on pensionable pay rises would not be much of a burden to the employees as any chance of a rise greater than RPI+ 0.5% in the next few years was minimal.

Now that we've bent over and taken it, management are trying to wriggle out of even more pension payments.

Good work chaps, I hope the union really stand firm this time, it's long overdue that they do.

[anotherthing]

Any news from the latest meeting??

Why we should hold out for a decent rise (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7959564.stm)

[Vote NO]

"No news is good news" :\ , as they say :E

However, I suspect this could be the exception :mad:

[Traffic is...]

Two days on and not a sausage? Anyone?

[eastern wiseguy]

Why would the union tell us?.........we only pay the bleedin' subs!!

[Vote NO]

More talks this Friday ........... don't hold your breath though :*. Word on the street is Max. 2.5% "pay increase " or in other words a 3.3% pay cut:mad:

[anotherthing]

Worth startng a campaign now... we should make it clear to the Union that any pay rise we receive (and we had better get one) has to be pensionable up to the limit as agreed and requested by management in the recent Pension Ballot.

No 1.25% non-pensionable malarky :=

Firstly, 1.25% is a joke.

Secondly, pensionable up to the RPI+0.5% limit, or else.

No bleating about the current economic situation when it comes to pensionable portion of any pay rise - pensions are long term investments.

Our powder is chuffing dry

edited after Vote No added the 2.5% bit.

That's a hell of a jump 1.25% non pensionable to 2.5% in the space of a fortnight and one set of talks. How much is really available if we play hardball.

Chances are the union will swallow it hook line and sinker though.

[45 before POL]

Still a long way to go, IMO. The union will never accept a non-pensionable payrise as this would start the divide straight away between the new pension and old. What happens in 10-15 years time though when likely most people will be on new pension is entirely different:eek::eek::eek:

[alfie1999]

The 'Yes' voters were warned that rolling over on the pension issue would invite relentless attacks on T&C's.

Management know that if staff weren't prepared to defend the 'sacred cow' of their pension then they definately won't fight over pay.

Does anyone on here really believe that staff would strike over a pay freeze (cut in real terms)? Not a chance, just as they wouldn't if the same deal was offered in 2010 and 2011.

The management are only doing their job and they're doing it brilliantly.

[Quincy M.E.]

More talks this Friday ...........

Nice of the union to let us know! Obviously I would'nt expect the fnkcing company to, their one piece of information on the subject being the article on Natsnet on the 18th of March.

[BDiONU]

Nice of the union to let us know! Far be it from me to defend a union I'm not a member of but reps I know have made the point that they won't negotiate in a goldfish bowl. I'm sure they'll let everyone know the outcome once negotiations are complete and agreement reached. Why the constant need to know every little step of the negotiation process? Its not going to influence the outcome IMHO.
Obviously I would'nt expect the fnkcing company to, their one piece of information on the subject being the article on Natsnet on the 18th of March.
But the company has made information available and you have the ability to comment on that, something I'm not aware the unions have made available to its members.

BD

[Quincy M.E.]

Yeah good point I take that back. I have been used to them getting in touch really quickly before though.

But the company has made information available and you have the ability to comment on that, something I'm not aware the unions have made available to its members.

The information has been minimal though and a few weeks ago when there was NO information I tried to ask HR and they just fobbed me off and ignored emails I sent.

[ProM]

The information has been minimal though and a few weeks ago when there was NO information I tried to ask HR and they just fobbed me off and ignored emails I sent.

Don't read too much into that. In any organisation, HR always fob people off and ignore e-mails from staff on any subject. HR are only there to suggest completely inappropriarte candidates for roles that they do not understand, and to oversee disciplinary procedures on people who work in a context they do not understand.

Oh and in any engineering organisation they are also there to provide the best looking/only women in the building (sexist I know, but empircally true)

[privatesandwiches]

Just got this years Council Tax bill.... pretty much up 5% for the services of most agencies...... Fire, Police, Council spending etc etc.

[mr.777]

Far be it from me to defend a union I'm not a member of

Shame you didn't bear that in mind when you were telling people to vote YES for the pension eh?

[privatesandwiches]

More posts vanishing again...... Viva Natsnet!!!

[Vote NO]

These HQ types are very easily offended :} and nasty keyboard warriors must not be so naughty :oh:

Me thinks he has gone to ground, but a well chosen no vote may well flush the blighter out :E

ps ..hope I am not being offensive, if so I will unreservedly withdraw my remark :E

[Jungle Jingle Jim]

The car park in Whiteley is likely to be somewhat emptier next month and beyond, so I guess the focus with senior management is with the redundancies rather than the pay rise and in my view rightly so. I guess once this has been completed pay negotiations will be taken a bit more seriously by NATS?

[privatesandwiches]

Yeah right. It's just scabby managements latest distraction technique. They are most likely waiting untill the first redundancies are gone at the end of this month and then use it in some way against a pay rise, ie: weve had to pay out all your payrise money to afford the redundancy payouts, boo hoo :(

[anotherthing]

Jungle Jim

don't get used to all the free parking spaces - no doubt there will be some new management posts created, so they will need spaces... meanwhile at the coalface, the ATSAs and ATCEs numbers dwindle

[rumouroid]

BDiONU
Far be it from me to defend a union I'm not a member of but reps I know have made the point that they won't negotiate in a goldfish bowl. I'm sure they'll let everyone know the outcome once negotiations are complete and agreement reached. Why the constant need to know every little step of the negotiation process? Its not going to influence the outcome IMHO.Perhaps the constant need to know is because so many members have lost so much faith in the reps negotiating skills, both during and after the pension proposal. The reps have brought it upon themselves that everyone wants to know every step during the negotiations.
I think the membership want to be sure that "expectations aren't being managed" AGAIN, and that the reps aren't "working together" with management too closely AGAIN.
"Once bitten, twice shy" springs to mind.

[Vote NO]

That should flush the blighter out :ok:

[DC10RealMan]

The term Rep is a shortened version of the word "Representative". The Chambers Twentieth Century Dictionary describes a representative thus: One who represents another or others as a deputy, delegate, etc.
If you dont like what is going on by YOUR REPRESENTATIVES either directly (Negotiations) or indirectly (Working Together) DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
Challenge your reps/union officials, Agitate, Attend the monthly BECs, Submit motions to Conference, Submit motions of no confidence if necessary, etc, etc.
Hopefully we have not reached the nadir of New Liarbour/Tories where the MPs after election toe the party line to advance their careers and feather their own financial nests and renounce their duty to the citizens who voted for them OR HAVE WE????

[Flaps ten please]

http://data5.blog.de/media/550/3209550_cda91d145f_m.jpeg

[hostman]

Just for your info, us poor old pensioners, will have an increase in our pensions of precisely nothing, nada, zilch, zero, not a sausage or to put it another way 0%.

The rpi was stated at 211.4 to February, hence the big fat zeroid. Which to be honest is nice round number. :rolleyes:

So how much do you really think you'll get?

[Vote NO]

On the basis you may be a spy for PB or even PB himself :} I think we will get what we ask for or we will ballot for strike action.
Hope that answers you question :ok:

[octavian]

Flaps Ten Please,

Great photo. Good point well made, but where is the representative from the "Enterprise Architecture Department"?

[landedoutagain]

well hostman, perhaps you are unlucky to get 0% extra on your pension this year, but, at least you probably have the pension you signed up for - the majority of us within nats just now will not.

Back on thread - i see that several sources are forecasting inflation to be up at 5%+ by autumn, RPI may not get as low as predicted. (which means, more income for nats of course....!)

[FDP_Walla]

Hostman. Whay are you on a NATS pay forum moaning about Pensions. Write to your MP. Anybody know what the lastest offer is from MGT. I think that we should be careful going for a two year deal unless it is linked to RPI.

[PeltonLevel]

I expect the ATCO is on a SRATCOH break, so isn't even allowed to watch!

[Minesapint]

Summer is coming,,,, traffic may well be down but lest at least get the gauntlet out of storage!

[White Hart]

"I think we will get what we ask for or we will ballot for strike action. "

If only that were true. Problem is, the staff/Unions have shown their hand to Mgmt by failing to stand up for themselves over the pensions issue. You ain't going to get anything you want, demand, request or insist on from this point forward. You will get what Mgmt chooses to give you - or not.

[Jungle Jingle Jim]

I work within CTC. I had a heated debate with a Barron Lackie manager saying that I was greedy for voting NO over the pension issue. She told me everything would be okay (probably as she had naively believed the Barron banter).

I want a pay rise to meet the cost of inflation, nothing more.

Reservations are now no longer required to park at the CTC. Some folk who believed Barron are now looking for work, thus the number of available parking slots available!

Anyone now claim to have voted YES?

Barron does what he wants and more fool any ATCO on a PCG contract currently as they are a diminishing breed!

If we want a pay rise, we must all FIGHT for it!

[Vote NO]

Now you are talking Jim :ok:

[Radarspod]

J J Jim,

I also work at CTC, and I voted YES and stand by it as it was the right thing to do IMHO. I am in no way ashamed, even if this forum is full of nay sayers blaming everything on the pension vote (that being the democratic vote that went through by a significant majority of those who bothered / were given a chance to vote, remember?).:ugh:

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.

RS

p.s. Vote No, fire at will if you must :ok:

[Disillusioned]

Isn't it kinda ironic that these top level managers have done such a great job in saving a few £££'s here, and a few £££'s there, and penny pinching as much as they can, that now there is literally no more money to be saved, except for their own salaries.

I agree, we have to stand and fight for a decent pay rise this time...and it HAS to be pensionable.

[White Hart]

"..The current pay situation has absolutely **** all to do with the pension vote,.."

maybe not, but the same thought process that turned Union 'dry powder' into 'damp paste' will prevail for a second time with the pay vote. In the current climate, you can forget all about the bravado, fighting talk and standing together. The reality is that, irrespective of any offer, the majority of members will be individually voting to try to retain their most important asset - their job. This will apply particularly within NSL, (which is rapidly floating off down Sh*t Creek) and more especially right across the non-ATCO NATS workforce. What they will not do is go down the road of taking industrial action to 'stand and fight' as is so often bantered both here and in the workplace. Talking about strike action is one thing - actually going on strike is quite another.

As we have seen with the pension issue, when push really came to shove, the majority didn't have the balls to go through with it. It will be the same this time around, too.

[DC10RealMan]

I have to agree with White Hart, because as he eloquently puts it "You dont have the balls" and the management know it.

[Vote NO]

Some of us do, however in a democratic society it's the majority who rule. Maybe its time to break away from the non operational ATC types in the office who understandably are concerned about their jobs, and form another union so we are not dragged down with them. That way they can keep their jobs and their pay cut, and others will get the pay rise :ok:. The united we stand, divided we fall rule is no longer working for us, at the moment we are all falling:(
The public dont give a toss as long as they can still fly. They dont care about projects and airspace planning. As long as the core workers keep them in the air they dont want to know.

[anotherthing]

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 :ugh: 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!

[Radarspod]

Maybe its time to break away from the non operational ATC types in the office who understandably are concerned about their jobs, and form another union so we are not dragged down with them.

I'm sorry, remind me what was the result of the pension vote for the ATCO branch and the size of the majority that voted YES? :}

If we start dividing up the existing NTUS union powerbase, the management have won before they even started.:ugh::ugh:

[notlgw53]

One? Won, I think

[White Hart]

"Some of us do, however in a democratic society it's the majority who rule. Maybe its time to break away from the non operational ATC types in the office who understandably are concerned about their jobs, and form another union so we are not dragged down with them. That way they can keep their jobs and their pay cut, and others will get the pay rise . The united we stand, divided we fall rule is no longer working for us, at the moment we are all falling"

Erm, I hope that you are joking about this. To start thinking about this course of action just smacks of utter selfishness. What you are suggesting is tantamount to having ATCOs doing their own thing, and fcuk everybody else. Any move to promote this would bring the 'us and them' issue (which has been discussed on here many times - and totally refuted by the ATCOs!!:rolleyes:) into the starkest relief possible. What a good ploy for engendering the team spirit!

If that's the way things (and thoughts) are going, then it really will be time for many to put the coat on and head out the door, 'cos the atmosphere at work would be as pleasant as a silent eggy fart in an overloaded stuck lift.

DC10RM - PM for you.

[Passepartoute]

White hart I could not agree with you more. I have read this and the pensions thread with growing concern. It appears that many people on here make an assumption that management are stupid and do not know what they are doing. This could not be further from the truth. A short trawl back over these post sees ATCO's against CTC against ATSA's against Engineers. NSL against NERL. Productivity against profit. This atmosphere is exactly what they are trying to create. Every topic posted on Natsnet right now is deliberately engineered to lower the morale of the workforce. You doubt me? Compare the posts from one year ago and look at the tone and wording used.
Management are deliberately attempting to create splits within the workforce so that they can use the collective bargaining of the workforce against us.
In the case of the present negotiations they state the economic situation to propose a mediocre pay rise that is dependent on changes to working practices agreements. Those changes ( for the most part) only affect NSL units thereby splitting the majority NERL vote. This they do this at the same time as making ATSA's and CTC personnel redundant. They claim hardship but will still post a profit for this year and despite there doom and gloom for the following 12 months will still pay a dividend to the shareholders.

[Bagheera]

Diary of a possible redundantee, 18 years air traffic experience ( area procedural, area radar, ground ,tower and approach now an ATSA)


DAY 1 -Received an email the other day ( from [email protected]), I quote " EFPS introduction requires that a number of ATSA posts are no longer needed". Thats a pretty smart system, here was me thinking that it just dealt with the strip processing but no apparently it deals with unit staffing requirements as well. Just as well, management havent got a clue what the hells going on!

Day 2 [email protected] informs me I need to attend an interview with respect to voluntary redundancy can I possibly attend at 11-00 Thursday or 13-00 Friday. Reply that 11-00 Thurs is a bit tight because I have just come off a night shift and need some sleep. 13-00 Fri would be better because I can come in early whilst I am in to cover the back shift of the ATSA that they never bothered to replace.

Day 3 Get reply. Interview 11-00 Thurs.

Day 4 Night shift (Dont take a break cos its snowing all night and know that aircraft need the latest conditions )

Day 5 Guess what its snowing again.

Day 6 Get 2 hours sleep and come in for my interview. They tell me I can ask questions at any time... So How many ATSA's are you looking to get rid of? will remain? Im sorry cant tell you that.
So what will the duties of an ATSA be once EFPS come in.... Im sorry cant tell you that.
So what will be the working roster of an ATSA once EFPS comes in....Im sorry cant tell you that.
To be be fair to the guy from HR he did for a second look a bit embarrassed!


This company is going down the plughole so quickly ( God I used to be so proud to work here), the experience is just being allowed to drift away and god help the rest of us that are left. If you are having any problems just email faceless.nats.uk apparently he has all the answers!!!!!

Baggy

[Vote NO]

White Hart..

Like I said , The united we stand, divided we fall rule is no longer working for us, at the moment we are all falling"

So what do you suggest ? The present set up has seen our pension screwed, no ferking pay rise and job cuts right left and centre with morale at rock bottom :sad: . Just wait till our terms and conditions are changed and we eventually end up being shafted by our new owners in a couple of years time. All because some of us :suspect: don't have the balls to put up a fight. We should at least die with our boots on.:ok:

[Radarspod]

We should at least die with our boots on.

Agreed, but better we go down together rather than get picked off in smaller groups :{

[Quincy M.E.]

I wonder what the kind of responses would be posted on NATS net if it were anonymous?!

I know one thing: there would be less bollokcs about soup!

[alfie1999]

I think it's time to consider operational and non-operational staff going their separate ways when it comes to negotiations on t&c's.

It's unfair, and frankly selfish of the atcos to expect non-op staff to support them in their claims when expectations on pay and pensions are obviously so wide apart.

Atco's should do the decent thing and breakaway to allow office staff and other non-op personnel the freedom to accept deals offered by the company that operational staff are perhaps reluctant to commit to.

[Standard Noise]

Atco's should do the decent thing and breakaway to allow office staff and other non-op personnel the freedom to accept deals offered by the company that operational staff are perhaps reluctant to commit to.

Despite the fact that any 'breakaway' would be a bad thing, would it not be encumbant on the 'office staff and other non-op personnel' to initiate the breakaway themselves. No one's holding them back, they're not sheep.

[alfie1999]

SN,

I got the impression that some non-op staff on here felt atco's were greedy and had little awareness of economic reality so i thought they'd welcome the opportunity to plow their own furrow.

Maybe i'm wrong.

[Vote NO]

Despite the fact that any 'breakaway' would be a bad thing, would it not be encumbant on the 'office staff and other non-op personnel' to initiate the breakaway themselves. No one's holding them back, they're not sheep.



http://farm1.static.flickr.com/219/501105007_128c4a3314.jpg?v=1205767563


I'm not so sure about that :}


ps I hope you guys in PD dont get too excited with the photo :E

[Standard Noise]

I look worse than that now............and I don't even work in an office!

Alfie, I'm not saying your wrong, but I suspect that the office staff and non-ops guys are quite happy to stick with the ATCOs. After all, they can watch us do all the shouting and screaming while keeping their heads down.

I'm not sure that ATCOs are 'greedy', but we all want to earn as much as poss. I'm acutely aware that any number of health problems could see my licence taken away, problems that wouldn't necessarily affect the earning power of a desk jockey. I want as much as I can get my mitts on so I can pay off the mortgage early, that doesn't make me, or any other ATCO greedy.

[anotherthing]

Alfie,

NATS are posting a record profit this year.

Our Boss got or is getting (I believe it's every 3 years it happens so not sure if it is due this year or has just gone) a huge bonus which takes his gross pay to over a £1 million).

Lets just say 'for instance' his basic was £450k, and with bonus his gross pay comes to over £1 million, thats over £550k bonus over 3 years - almost a whopping 50% per year bonus.

ATCOs are not greedy, they just want recognition for the work they do.

The office workers should be shouting about the amount of extra work they put in to achieve unrealistic deadlines...

It's not about greed, it's about rewarding a diligent, loyal workforce (whatever your job title), with a decent rise - if our boss can get a tasty bonus whilst the company posts record profits, why should we not expect a decent pay rise?

Non Ops staff outnumber ATCOs by a big margin. The fact of the matter is, there is a shortage of ATCOs worldwide, not a shortage of office workers. I'm all for everyone sticking together - after all the 'unrealistic demands' of ATCOs have resulted in good pay rises for non ops staff in the past...

As an ATCO I could look at it this way - seperate the ATCOs and Ops staff from non Ops and have seperate negotiations.

The fact is ATCOs are in worldwide demand. So once the NATS Non Ops personnel (the majority of people in NATS) have accepted their meagre pay rise, it will leave a bigger pot of money for Operational staff to divvy up, giving us an even better pay rise.

However, I believe going our seperate ways would be a bad move and as an ATCO would not advocate it.

[rumouroid]

It's about time the ATCO's who "bring home the bacon" broke away from non-operational staff as an ATCO's bargaining power will always be greater then a desk jockeys.

I'd even go as far as to say NERL ATCO's should break free as NSL appears to be having the more difficult time and their future looks bleak, inparticularly the pension costs are a real headache for NSL.

The reality is that Prospect must do the best it can for all it's members, eventually however there will come a time when it is too damaging to it's majority membership (NERL ATCO's) to protect it's minority membership (NSL ATCO's).

[Quincy M.E.]

It's about time the ATCO's who "bring home the bacon" broke away from non-operational staff as an ATCO's bargaining power will always be greater then a desk jockeys.

er, if it were'nt for the 'desk jockeys' there wouldnt be a home to bring the bacon back to.

[Radarspod]

It's about time the ATCO's who "bring home the bacon" broke away from non-operational staff

I'd imagine that is a sentiment that would upset a lot of operational engineers!:suspect:

[ProM]

I'm not sure that ATCOs are 'greedy', but we all want to earn as much as poss.

compare with criticism of the Baron for receiving a bonus and driving an Aston. Is he not just earning as much as poss?

[PPRuNe Radar]

It's about time the ATCO's who "bring home the bacon" broke away from non-operational staff as an ATCO's bargaining power will always be greater then a desk jockeys.

I'd even go as far as to say NERL ATCO's should break free as NSL appears to be having the more difficult time and their future looks bleak, inparticularly the pension costs are a real headache for NSL.

The reality is that Prospect must do the best it can for all it's members, eventually however there will come a time when it is too damaging to it's majority membership (NERL ATCO's) to protect it's minority membership (NSL ATCO's).

Why not go the whole hog and split everything up then ?

Green Watch in TC can do their own negotiations, so can B Watch at Prestwick Centre. If they manage to negotiate a higher pay award than Red Watch at LAC, then well done to them. In fact, why not just scrap unions altogether as you obviously don't understand the principles on which they operate ??

[WorkInProgress]

Team Resource Management..............That was worthwhile then!!!!;)

[privatesandwiches]

It was for management..... the same management who know sweet FA about ATC :ok:

[mr.777]

compare with criticism of the Baron for receiving a bonus and driving an Aston.

Not one ATCO I know drives an Aston. Not one ATCO I know got a bonus merely for doing their job either.

[ProM]

Does it matter whether the income is salary, or additional voluntary whatever, or bonuses?

So that famous sketch has become (it would appear in some people's minds, not all):


"I look down on him. His skills are not in as short supply and so he does not deserve to get paid as much as me

I am entitled to get paid lots, it is only reasonable to want to earn as much as possible

I look down on him too, he earns a lot more than me. So he is greedy and does not deserve it."

[mr.777]

I would say that it matters rather a lot where it comes from when he expects his workforce to take a pay freeze (and that includes all staff, not just ATCOs). Why should he get a £600k bonus or whatever it is when he expects everybody else to get nothing...in addition to the reduced pension we now have?

I really struggle to comprehend how anybody can defend this course of action...you must be f***ing brainwashed :ugh::ugh:

[anotherthing]

ProM
compare with criticism of the Baron for receiving a bonus and driving an Aston. Is he not just earning as much as poss?
I think you will find that the reason there is criticism is because whilst the top dog gets all the juicy treats, his workforce hardly get any scraps.

I'm all for management awarding themselves bonuses, so long as they don't try to tell the workforce that the company cannot afford to give us pay rises!

Say what you want about Mr B - he is very good at his job. Unfortunately his mandate comes from his labour cronies who sold NATS and put us in debt in the first place. He is doing everything they wanted him to do.

The problem most people have is nothing to do with his performance - he excels at cutting costs at lower levels and scaremongering - but everything to do with the fact that his mandate does not sit particularly well with the idea of being the best ATC provider... a slogan that no longer appears on NATS literature.

[PeltonLevel]

Atco's should do the decent thing and breakawayIt would be interesting to watch it happening
All you have to do is follow the script:
Derecognition owing to lack of support - worker application

A worker (or workers) from the bargaining unit can apply to the CAC for derecognition - but only where no such similar application has been made in the past three years. If the CAC accepts the application as valid, it will try to help the workers, union and employer reach an agreement on derecognition. If an agreement is not reached, the CAC will arrange a secret ballot to test worker support for derecognition. However, it will do this only if it believes that:
- at least 10 per cent of the workers in the bargaining unit favour derecognition, and
- a majority of the workers in the bargaining unit are likely to favour derecognition
A union will be derecognised as a result of the ballot if a majority of those voting and at least 40 per cent of those entitled to vote favour derecognition.

Of course those pushing for derecognition would have to do it in their own time - only recognised unions get facilities time. They wouldn't be able to push off home at the end of every shift. They would also have to find another union who would accept them and would then have to become the reps instead of sniping from the sidelines. Might be educational!

[ZOOKER]

anotherthing,
According to the NATS website, you still work for:-
"A World Leader in Air Traffic Management". :ok:

[White Hart]

"So what do you suggest ? The present set up has seen our pension screwed, no ferking pay rise and job cuts right left and centre with morale at rock bottom"

absolutely. all down to the fact that no single group within NATS carries the negotiating punch as strongly as the ATCOs - who decline to put their weight behind anybody other than themselves. Hence - no unity. Therefore, as a workforce with negotiating clout - bolloxed.

My suggestion, FWIW, would be that the ATCOs and Prospect realise once and for all that 'teamwork' includes everybody, both in the workplace (irrespective of grade/position) and most definitely at the negotiating table. Acceptance of this one small point, and with a single Union representing the entire workforce, could make all the difference when it comes down to getting the best deal for everyone.

[White Hart]

"Or will it be another case of the ATCOs digging deep to sort the rest of the company out again?"

WTF are you on about? I must have missed this little gem somewhere in the dim and distant past. looking at the historic (union) record, the only hole the ATCOs have ever dug is one for the rest of the workforce to fall into. The fact that the majority of ATCOs consider themselves to be a cut above the rest in all fields is the primary cause of the situation we now find ourselves in as a Company workforce!

In your eyes, the rest of us are responsible for dragging you all down. In our eyes, the perpetual intransigence of the ATCOs to honestly recognise the input and value of the support staff (and especially the Ops ATSAs) and back them up accordingly, is what the real state of affairs is.

While this situation exists, all of us have no chance of working and negotiating together effectively. Go your own way if you must - we won't be able to stop you, but we certainly won't be any worse off than we are at the moment.

[fisbangwollop]

The only time anyone in this Company showed they had balls was back in 77 when the Assistants walked out for 10 weeks......!!! We have been well and truly shafted in recent months and why????.....because most folk just touched there toe's and let management ram it where it hurts!!!....cannot see this changing in the future either!!!!:*:*:*

[mr.777]

The fact that the majority of ATCOs consider themselves to be a cut above the rest in all fields is the primary cause of the situation we now find ourselves in as a Company workforce!

I think you've got issues mate. That is total and utter bulls*it...where do you get off blaming NATS current situation on the ATCO workforce??? I don't know one single ATCO that displays the attitude you are so ready to tar us all with...certainly not towards ATSAs and Engineers, and certainly not on my watch.

[anotherthing]

Bittertwisted -

unfortunately your post quickly sank to the depths that you accuse others of...

but you wouldn't have worked that out as you are so brilliantly selfish and generally misinformed.


Well done you. Have a skinny latte and then go and throw fewer planes than last year around for 30 minutes...because the downturn is unique to Swanwick of course and not evident at every unit in NATS...
...Then have a cup of tea (variety is this spice of life after all). There's no point trying to keep a high moral ground when you start slinging mud yourself, you make yourself sound as petty and smallminded as you claim others to be :ugh:

[ImnotanERIC]

bittertwisted:

I was trying to be slightly sarcastic and attempting to be tongue in cheek with some of the remarks.

Fail

[White Hart]

"I think you've got issues mate. .."

hah!-going over old ground here. cant be ar*ed to respond - its a lost cause, anyway.

[ImnotanERIC]

white hart
cant be ar*ed to respond
Fail

[manny fred]

In your eyes, the rest of us are responsible for dragging you all down. In our eyes, the perpetual intransigence of the ATCOs to honestly recognise the input and value of the support staff (and especially the Ops ATSAs) and back them up accordingly, is what the real state of affairs is.

Only speaking on behalf of AC/TC here, but the input of ATSAs over the years have dwindled, and to be perfectly honest, the amount of time I have sat with an ATSA who has read a book throughout the whole of the session is easily 85% of the time. Some go off and wander around. I no longer feel any value of support from about 90% of them. There are some who are desperate to support you, and they have great awareness of the tactical picture, but they are the definate minority, the rest are barely noticeable and get a great wage for what they ultimately do, and if they were honest with themselves, they would agree. I bet they would not get a cushier job, with such a wage, anywhere, ever again.

[ImnotanERIC]

from the way you say they sat next to you suggests that you are talking from purely an ac point of view, is that correct?
In tc, in my experience, some of our atsa are brilliant, and can't do enough for you and it is really appreciated, they really earn their money and take pride in their profession. others are no better than dog toff and it can make working a sector more awkward than it should be. in the past i have contemplated splitting a sector earlier than necessary to accomodate for poor atsa work.
A good atsa is as good as a coordinator (sometimes better) for the help they provide to the operation.

[kats-I]

Manny Fred
Try sticking your head into TC..No time for book reading there. :=. Our ATSAs are on their feet most of the shift, running around like the proverbial B-A Flies. AC ATSAs don't have the same work load as TC..why do you think none of your ATSAs want to come in and join ours..too much like hard work?? :} :yuk: So please do not judge all the same. :E:sad:

[Disillusioned]

None of the above is really helped by the fact that there is still no news at all about Friday's meeting.

Even if someone from the negotiating team was to say that there are further meetings planned on such and such a date, at least we would know that things are still progressing. But the complete lack of any information whatsoever (especially after the union promised to keep members more informed about the current state of negotiations, after the pension debacle), isn't helping.

Anyone know anything about Friday's meeting?

[manny fred]

Yes it is a purely ac point of view, but also rumblings from TC guys. Maybe it is a little unfair as on some sectors they have more to do. But on AC sectors, esp Central/south banks. I would say 95% of there jobs is putting the strips out, and nothing more. The ATSAs who only work on the wings(FIR- are worth there weight in gold), are on a great wage, older ones over £40000, with some getting great redundancy money £80000 plus. My wife works long hours for the NHS, and is constantly busy, and gets no where near that sort of money. I then see an ATSA sat next to me, reading the newspaper, and sighing when the printer prints a strip. They are usuallly oblivious to the planner and tac working their butts off. Apart from some who do other tasks, I think they are grosely overpaid, for the service they provide.
How about last August bank holiday. A notoriously busy day in Air Traffic. I am working like crazy, and the ATSA is an overtimer. The ATSA is getting triple time, and it works out they are getting close, if not more than I am getting paid. She is doing the crossword.

[kats-I]

Unfortunately thats Technology and Progress that has taken jobs off ATSAs, not the fault of ATSAs. (sp..grossly):=

Still no news on payrise?

[anotherthing]

Anyone know anything about Friday's meeting? What meeting? I think it was cancelled, at the request of management.

MannyFred,

There are some very lazy ATSAs in TC, but fortunately they are in the minority. In fact one has just gone via VR :ok:. There is a big difference between AC and TC ATSA roles/work conditions. When AC first moved out of WD there were a few TC ATSA jobs VN'd. Some AC ATSAS came for a visit with a view to applying as they wanted to stay London way. After seeing the work entailed, not one applied.

However, that's by the by, the majority of ATSAs are good, some exceptional, there is the odd one that if they are working on your sector, you know you will get poor service.

Annoying, but no different from any other walk of life, but yes the pay is exceptional.

I'mnotanERIC
A good atsa is as good as a coordinator (sometimes better) for the help they provide to the operation.
to be fair, that's probably more of a reflection of how bad/lazy some people are at coordinating...

[Quincy M.E.]

But the complete lack of any information whatsoever (especially after the union promised to keep members more informed about the current state of negotiations, after the pension debacle), isn't helping.

Here-here, and of course nothing put on NATS net.......

[manny fred]

Unfortunately thats Technology and Progress that has taken jobs off ATSAs, not the fault of ATSAs. (sp..grossly):=

Still no news on payrise?


I totally agree. I do come across some old timers, who are terribly bored and are chomping at the bit to help in any way they can. I am just responding to white harts comments:

In your eyes, the rest of us are responsible for dragging you all down. In our eyes, the perpetual intransigence of the ATCOs to honestly recognise the input and value of the support staff (and especially the Ops ATSAs) and back them up accordingly, is what the real state of affairs is

and quite frankly in response to him, I am sorry but as far as I am concerned, the majority of the time I do not recognise the input or value of the OPS ATSA.

(sp grossly noted ty)

[rumouroid]

There was a post previously that stated that the pay meetings were programmed for the Mon 16th and Mon 23rd March and then Fri 3rd April, so is there still one this coming Friday?

[anotherthing]

rumouroid,

I believe there was supposed to be a meeting on Fri 27th, that was cancelled at the request of managment (according to a rep I know).

The other meetings are still planned not sure of the dates, though who knows whether management will cancel again or not...

[DC10RealMan]

Ladies and Gentlemen.

During the Nazi era there was a Lutherian pastor called Martin Niemuller who wrote this poem in protest at the Nazis and was imprisoned for his trouble.

"First they came for the Communists, and I did not speak out-because I was not a Communist;
Then they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out-because I was not a Socialist;
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out for I was not a Trade Unionist;
Then they came for the Jews and I did not speak out-because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me-and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Does this mean anything to any of you in your narrow minded, parochial, greedy, status driven, self-obsessed, view of your relationship with your employer?

Tony Fallows
Cheshire

[manny fred]

Ladies and Gentlemen.

During the Nazi era there was a Lutherian pastor called Martin Niemuller who wrote this poem in protest at the Nazis and was imprisoned for his trouble.

"First they came for the Communists, and I did not speak out-because I was not a Communist;
Then they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out-because I was not a Socialist;
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out for I was not a Trade Unionist;
Then they came for the Jews and I did not speak out-because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me-and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Does this mean anything to any of you in your narrow minded, parochial, greedy, status driven, self-obsessed, view of your relationship with your employer?

Tony Fallows
Cheshire


It means nothing to me

[beaver liquor]

One thing I have never understand whilst working for NATS is why are so many people so obsessed with what someone else earns? All you should be concerned about is what you get. Seriously - what someone else earns is none of your business.

It makes me laugh to see some of the guys on here who harp on about how to run a company - as if they have a clue how to run a business! They'd be the first to cry foul if someone told them to how to be an ATCO, or an ATSA or ATCE.

Going by whats on here, the management tactic of divide & conquer is all but complete. TC v AC. Swanwick v rest of NERL. ATCO v ATSA. All this ATSA-bashing, jeez you'd think there'd never been a **** ATCO, when anyone in TC in reality could name all the duff ones on each watch.

If you want a decent pay rise, tell your reps to tell the NTUS to stick together, strength in numbers is our only chance. 2-3% with no adverse strings attached should be achievable.

[Minesapint]

All true! MP's and forces :suspect:are getting 2.8% so I will not be happy with anything less.

[Phantom99]

Manny Fred:

But on AC sectors, esp Central/south banks. I would say 95% of there jobs is putting the strips out, and nothing more......Apart from some who do other tasks, I think they are grosely overpaid, for the service they provide.

You obviously didn't work the Green Watch afternoon last September then...ATSAs saved our bacon on Clacton and North Sea.

[White Hart]

"you'd think there'd never been a **** ATCO"

Haha! :D How true!!

anyway, despite suffering from mr777's 'issues', my opinion of the situation has not changed. The workforce is terminally divided, in mutual respect, co-operation and a sense of being in it together. And to top it all off, one particular element perpetually thinks that their opinion is the only one that counts for anything when it comes to the provision of ATC.

Big, hairy spherical objects! :mad:

some of you just don't get it - and that's also why TRM is/was a crock of sh*te.


DC10 - your PM turned up OK, and I totally agree with the comments you made.

[manny fred]

You obviously didn't work the Green Watch afternoon last September then...ATSAs saved our bacon on Clacton and North Sea.

like i said 95%.

[intherealworld]

Just because their task has been devalued on a day to day basis on most AC sectors and they're under utilised I think you need to look at the bigger picture. Good luck when it falls over once ifacts is in!

[Vote NO]

http://www.majescoentertainment.com/catalog/nintendo-ds/air-traffic-chaos/banner.jpg

Picture says it all :hmm:

[ImnotanERIC]

white hart, i got your pm just now and have to say i disagree with all but the last point

[White Hart]

Quiet night shift in TC, is it? Or maybe your subscription to Tug TV has expired? :hmm:

[ImnotanERIC]

?? because i don't agree with all your comments i'm apparently a ******?? really? cheers.

[Caesartheboogeyman]

less sniping, more pay talks. i have just scrolled through pages of sh**e looking for pay rise news, does anyone on here know anything?

[White Hart]

you're welcome.

and speaking as somebody who may be regarded as "no better than dog toff"

fail.

[ImnotanERIC]

oh white hart. i was merely stating that some atsas are dog toff. if YOU consider it possible to be regarded as that, just IMAGINE how you are REALLY perceived. oh dear.........i can smell the pedigree chum nuttyness from here
im sorry you are that bad at your job.
you need to work on your use of "fail"
that is all.

[mr.777]

You really are a well balanced individual White Hart aren't you...a chip on BOTH shoulders.

[Mr A Tis]

Maybe this thread should be closed now?
There is no news on NATS pay (thread title) just juvenile comments from people who claim to be professional people.

[kats-I]

Play nicely children.,
ImnotanEric.you really shouldn't slag off the support staff.
People in glass-houses etc!!! How are you perceived??

When do the lightening strikes start folks? Work to rule? When is P.B on his hols?

[mr.777]

Er, he wasn't slagging off the support staff, re read the posts :ugh::ugh:

[ImnotanERIC]

kats 1, i wasnt slagging off support staff, if you check my earlier posts, i was saying that some atsas are nothing short of brilliant. but some are rubbish. I then got into a slanging match with mr hart. and won.
to get back on track:



rpi +1%

[kats-I]

I have just ploughed though the last 20 pages of the pension thread..yes I know its all old hat now!! Short on something to read...not too impressed with the punchline or unhappy ending.
I am surprised that no-one queried or retaliated that the lack of votes was not down to "Can't be bothered"!! But may have been due to the fact that a large amount were lost in the abyss with the christmas post and may still be floating around mail rooms ....as PB expected them to.:D:D

We all know that when management want something to go through its a postal vote. If they aren't losing anything its a piece of paper in a box somewhere in the ops room. Strange old thing!

I have been with Nats(CAA) a long time and we know this is how they always work so if there is to be a vote on a paydeal lets not let it be one with deals attached or a postal one!! :=:=

Unless its an outstanding one...not much hope there eh? Ballot box it is then.??:ugh:

[kats-I]

Sorry guys "Perception" of posts..misunderstood "DOG TOFF":{:ok:

[anotherthing]

written on another ATC thread in early december...

Not too far off the mark


Quote:
So what happens now? http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/confused.gif
1. The pension changes happen.

2. Management will play hard ball on the pay talks (we've asked for Aug RPI+1%) - expect rumours of a pay freeze.

3. Expect further cuts in Ts & Cs

4. At least 5% staff cuts over next 6 to 18 months

5. NSL will undergo some changes...

6. Mr Barron will leave with a nice golden handshake within 18 months.

7. New joiners will be on a different pension scheme - which is the biggest issue by the way - and this 2 tier scheme will be used in the medium to long term future to cause more rifts in the workforce.

8. Expect NATS to come cap in hand well before the 15 year period is up, claiming they can't afford the pension...

9. Money will continue to be wasted on lavish awards ceremonies/projects/new management posts that duplicate work already being carried out


Point 1 was obvious.
Point 2 ...
Point 3 linked to point 2 in current pay talks
Point 4 Getting there
Point 5 New contract at Manchester anyone?
Point 6 Please, please, please
Point 7 About to start happening
Point 8 Already started
Point 9 Central Airspace party in April... E-mails from management at Swanwick trumpeting removal of managers from certain posts - neglects to mention in the same e-mail that some of those managers are moving sideways to new positions and that their old position is being filled by someone new...

[luv pringles]

Perhaps someone could point out the flaw in this thinking.
When the approach function for the London airports was transferred to West Drayton and then the seaside, at a stroke ATCOS at these units recieved the same pay for doing half the job, very nice if you cant get it, so why do these ATCOS recieve band 5 pay?, How come the whole banding issue is not looked at again.

[anotherthing]

Some people would argue that it would be a very sensible move for Thames radar function to move to Farnborough.

In a business sense:

No more band 5 for Thames (though LF deserve a higher banding than they are on, especially if the move happened)

In a practical sense:

Farnborough LARS covers most of Thames area anyways.

Farnborough are good at their job.

Don't know who Luton Radar could be farmed out to though...

[terrain safe]

Don't know who Luton Radar could be farmed out to though...LIDL!

But seriously totally agree with your previous point about when radar moved to WD some staff moved to ATCO2, as it was then, when those who stayed behind got left on ATCO3. Really unfair as most of those who were left behind had no choice in the matter. Banding is very divisive especially give the diffence between top of scale.
Band 1 > Band 2 = approx £1500 difference at the top
Band 2 > Band 3 = approx £1500 difference at the top
Band 3 > Band 4 = approx £12000 difference at the top
Band 4 > Band 5 = approx £15000 difference at the top
Please note that these are from memory so If I'm slightly wrong please don't shoot me. The principle is the important thing.
Those who say so what NSL is screwed, need to remember that a lot of NSL is paying more than is required for support services due to the poor way things are set up. Also NSL is the only part that is supposed to make a profit, so while NERL has had a very long golden period, it is at an end now, and they are going through the period of trying to make a lean operation that NSL went through a couple of years ago.
Those who seek to have differential pay awards need to really think it through.
But I'd still like Augusts' RPI +1%.

[ATCO Two]

aniotherthing,

I was more than happy to work at Heathrow Airport doing aerodrome control, tower supervising, and Thames Radar and SVFR. I did not particularly want to be posted to West Drayton in 2003. The majority of Thames Radar controllers are either valid, or cross training onto other approach sectors, including Heathrow, so how do you work out what banding they should be on if there is to be a differential at TC?

[anotherthing]

ATCO2

Do you honestly believe that someone doing Luton or Thames is a Band 5 controller?

Do you honestly think that someone doing Luton and Thames is worthy of more money than say someone from Scottish or Manchester ACC?

The fact is a lot of what goes on in the TC Ops room is unfair on outside units... heck there's a huge disparity in the room - do you honestly think Thames or Luton equates to the same as someone doing North or South plus another sector?

The fact is when the units moved there should have been a differentiation between tasks - How fair is it to Luton only tower guys who wanted to move to WD but couldn't??

Unfortunately we are stuck with the system, even though the likes of Aberdeen or Farnborough are shafted. There is no way you can claim that Thames/Luton is worth more than Aberdeen or Farnborough, yet the difference is tens of thousands.

There should be a banding system, but it should not have such a huge differential. The banding system should also be run so that there is a more realistic set of rules, and not run on the lines of paying everyone in the same huge Ops room the same money because they happen to be in one room.

WRT people who came kicking and screaming to WD from Heathrow, then it is fair enough in some respects that those people were kept on the higher banding, but people coming into the job today certainly should not.


The majority of Thames Radar controllers are either valid, or cross training onto other approach sectors, including Heathrow, so how do you work out what banding they should be on if there is to be a differential at TC?
The way you work it out is find out which App functions really are Band 5 level. Then you have to do one of those to get Band 5 pay.

It's happening in the TMA - the days of controllers doing both East and Capital but no core sector (to most TMA controllers way of thinking, not MUR level) are numbered (with the exception of people who are getting towards retirement), the idea now is that every new TMA controller must have a proper core sector (i.e. satisfy MUR) as well as possibly doing a secondary one (the vast majority do).

Unfortunately we are too far down the road now for the Union to agree to re-visit individual App functions within TC.

But that's all right, we have one watch in TC where the vast majority of Thames controllers are Thames only and are not as yet cross training... as long as they continue to get Band 5 pay, screw everyone else eh?

Anyone who is not honest enough to admit there is a huge disparity both within the room and also between App functions and external units is frankly delusional.

It will be interesting if the Thames function does move to Farnborough... will Farnborough be given a banding change, and will the Thames only valid people be able to validate on a different App function (2 actually to get MUR unless it is EGLL) in the TC Ops room?

One is spectacularly failing to do so at the moment... on what is universally accepted as being the easiest App sector in the room.

Edited to say:

I'm not saying that there is an easy fix for Banding, and certainly not saying that whatever you did, everyone would be happy. But at the moment there are huge flaws in the system.

[RPIplus1]

It's just been announced that there will be a second round of redundancies in Autumn this year (it wasn't stated if these would be voluntary, though I would guess that they would be).

Slightly off topic, but this may have an impact on the pay negotiations.

[ADIS5000]

I'm not in work today, anyone any more details on the newly announced redundancies? More redundancies would seem to strengthen the managements arguements for a miniscule pay offer. Bet the union negotiators are a bit stressed now!

[Quincy M.E.]

Where was this announced? There is nothing on NATSNET, I've not had a letter from the union. Is it just your department?

[RPIplus1]

It was announced at the leadership conference. Both PB and IM were there.

I've no idea at the moment if this is limited to a particular area of the business, but I doubt it.

[Minesapint]

In keeping with the management agreement with the unions it will be VR. Like many companies, NATS is taking the opportunity to shed staff to show the world that we are a leaner and definately MEANER :mad: company. If NATS reports a high profit as expected, the airlines will want a slice too. I look forward to taking a long look at the business brief when announced. Talking of support staff, many are ex/current ATCO's as well as ATSA (T&S) grades. There has been a great deal of 'slash and burn' in some areas of systems development. :ugh::ouch:

I understand that the last VR round was over subscribed so there is scope already. I also expect VR to be offered in areas not previously touched. Even some nonop ATCO's may be offered a wheel barrrow! :ok: Maybe the promotion ban (was that negiotiated with the union? why didn't the union let staff know? :oh:) will be lifted!

[mr.777]

Anotherthing:

The way you work it out is find out which App functions really are Band 5 level. Then you have to do one of those to get Band 5 pay

I agree with you 100%. However, I asked to corss-train on LL and was given Thames. ...so you have to at least give people the opportunity to try and validate on LL (which, lets face it, is probably the only Band 5 App sector in the room).

[anotherthing]

Mr 777.

I agree that LL App is probably the only true Band 5 App function in the room.

App is different from TMA, it's not my trainset so not my place to grant it, but I would be more lenient on Approach controllers than the TMA (probably because I am a TMA controller)... I don't agree with people holding Capital and East being regarded as fulfilling MUR, and that mindset is changing. I don't think that as an App controller you would need to be given at least a chance to do LL to be considered band 5 as per your post(see below).

I think that EGKK/EGSS although not band 5/core validations per se, if they were coupled with any other function, including Luton, that would be enough to satisfy MUR.

Luton and Thames together does not, in my mind, satisfy MUR the same as Cap and East doesn't.

I would group the room as follows:

True core sectors

North
South
Heathrow

No need to do another sector (there is no requirement at the moment), but most people would (most TMA controllers do)... the only reason so few EGLL people do it is because of a shortage of EGLL controllers to enable release to train and maintain another validation.

Next group

Midlands
EGKK
EGSS

Although Mids is a core sector I don't class it the same as North or South, I think most TMA people would agree. Therefore it would be expected that if you held one of the above 3 you would need another validation to hit MUR.

Any other validation would do the trick.

The extras

Capital
East
Thames
Luton

These 4 would be supplementary validations, holding 2 of the 4 would not count as MUR.

People in the room were paid accordingly, i.e. band 5 once they meet MUR as laid out above.

You could have an interim payscale for those who didn't start with a core sector... they would stay on the interim scale and then go onto true band 5 pay as and when they met MUR.

This band 5 pay and the pay spines would be backdated to the point they would normally go onto Band 5 at the moment i.e. 2 years after leaving college, or 3 years after joining NATS (whatever the criteria is nowadays). Thus they would not be penalised for being put onto a non core sector initially, or for delays in training on a second sector.

(We would bin the current ridiculous practice of backdating peoples pay if they have failed elsewhere - that is rewarding failure :ugh:. The fact they still have a job should be reward enough and is very relevant now, when we see people being given P45's when they have failed on the hardest sectors in the room, without being given the option of training elsewhere).


Those doing extra sectors over and above what is classed as MUR within the above criteria would be rewarded for it.

As I say, not my trainset so I can't make the rules. I think the above would be pretty fair though, purely from a Band 5 perspective.

I'm sure the same exercise could be carried out within AC identifying and classifying sectors.

It doesn't, of course, solve the other Banding issues for other units i.e. the huge disparity or the possible 'under-banding' of units such as EGLF & EGPE (Edited after Eastern Wiseguys post - I don't really mean Inverness).

That took longer to type than it did to think up - I'm sure there's some holes in it, but not many I would say. Unfortunately it would take balls for the union and management to do something like this.

Of course, as we are primarily concerned with safety (at least the operational amongst us), there would be scope for people to do quieter sectors if they felt the need as they approached retirment age... a sensible approach to this could be easily found.

[eastern wiseguy]

EGPE



Typo?......................

[anotherthing]

Too busy thinking about 4 and 20 virgins.

EGPD, of course :ok:

[foghorn]

"(We would bin the current ridiculous practice of backdating peoples pay if they have failed elsewhere - that is rewarding failure . The fact they still have a job should be reward enough and is very relevant now, when we see people being given P45's when they have failed on the hardest sectors in the room, without being given the option of training elsewhere)."

Anotherthing - the last crop of trainees on the payscale that gave backdated pay joined the company in mid-2004 - so I doubt if there are many left that are not valid or chopped by now. So it's not really current.

[anotherthing]

Foghorn,

Are you saying that if someone fails at Heathrow tower (as a for instance) and then gets a move to another tower and validates some 4 or 5 years after joining NATS, they no longer get their pay backdated to the common graduation date, (or whatever its equivalent is called) nowadays?

Is that correct?

If so, good... but not sure it is, there is still a common date that people have to wait until to get on the true ATCO scale if valid before it... conversly, I was of the understanding that if valid after that date, pay was backdated to it...

It's happened just recently at MACC

[General_Kirby]

Yes thats correct. Been the case for a good many years now. I've heard about someone at Manc, think they must surely be the last one floating around on the old contract. These days its crap pay whilst training at college, crap pay whilst training at unit, if valid before the 3rd anniversary of joining then you go on to slightly less crap pay, until the 3rd anni, at which time you join the main pay scale. If valid after then you go straight onto main scale, no back pay. Which is how it should have always been. Your no use till your valid.

[Avoiding_Action]

Why not allow someone to go straight onto the main pay scale if they validate in less than 3 years?

[General_Kirby]

Apparently thats not fair, because NSL sky gods are valid so much quicker than the blip people. The 3 year mark seems to ensure most people will be, are are very close to validation at all units. You do then of course get two people doing the same job in a tower with a potential 30K ish difference which is nice...

[Jungle Jingle Jim]

A bit of back ground info. London LARS is operated by NSL from Farnborough under a contract to NERL for 3 years. As I understand it, they plan is to bring London LARS 'in-house' after the contract expires, but this could be undertaken from the CTC?

NERL is considering the provision of ATSOCAS above FL100 from the CTC covering England and Wales, so the addition of London LARS would would seem a tidy fit. The ATCOs involved with this would also land the London TMA traffic if Swanwick was nuked/suffers act of terrorism/roof collapses (I am not joking)!

And yes the CTC can be configured to provide the services mentioned above.

With the introduction of P-RNAV for both Luton and Stansted in 2010, or is it now 2012? Both units banding can be scaled back to minimum as the function will be mostly monitoring and not vectoring. Only joking about the banding of course and the dumbing down of the job! P-RNAV then comes 2-3 years later for Gatwick, Heathrow and Thames. By then the whole unit will be Band 1 as P-RNAV is NATS saviour! Personally, I am not convinced!

[kats-I]

9% for PB!! can this be true??:{:{:{

[The Many Tentacles]

If so, then that's a f**king outrage

[landedoutagain]

9% for PB!! can this be true??

Yes, its true. the other 91% are against PB...

[Ballstroker]

Anotherthing - people who joined before mid 2004 as foghorn mentions get the backdating, people who joined after that don't.

Since mid 2004, all trainees who validate prior to 3 years after joining the company go onto the special cut-price V scale until their third anniversary of joining when they go onto the main scale.

[Quincy M.E.]

9% for PB!! can this be true??

What, what, what?! I infer that you mean a payrise or some such? :mad:

[anotherthing]

Foghorn, General Kirby and Ballstroker -

thanks for the info... glad common sense prevailed (speaking as someone who spent a year on the V scale, as it was, before getting real ATCO pay only to watch others getting rewarded for failure).

As for PB - is the 9% true? If so I'm really pleased for him what with that and his bonus. It's just a shame the company can't afford to give anyone else a payrise (obviously they can meet bonus payments). Never mind, as long as PB is sorted, that's fine.

:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

Jungle Jingle Jim

Surely your post on the 2nd April was a day late?

Just a few questions to anyone in the know -

Who will provide the LARS from the CTC?

How will they be legally able to ... land the London TMA traffic if Swanwick was nuked/suffers act of terrorism/roof collapses (I am not joking)!considering the licensing issues - There are a whole load of legal ramifications regarding carrying out the function of a sector you are not qualified on, the use of frequencies etc.

As you say JJJ - I think the PRNAV idea for the whole of the LTMA by 2015 is pie in the sky. Of course, NATS management might be thinking that by then they will have devised a system that means that they can control the weather...


9%... ****

[RPIplus1]

Where did this figure of 9% come from?

[121decimal375]

If the 9% is true the unions need to be withdrawing from current talks and submit a new pay claim.

I dont think we should be getting anything less than 9%!!!

Come on union show us you really have got the balls for a fight!

[kats-I]

I expect 9% was some wind up for me ..easy done...but then nothing would come as a surprise..or is that 0%??
The first reply back was probably right ..91% against.

Sorry folks to have got you in lather.

[Me Me Me Me]

percentage isnt the way to look at it if you want the real answer. look at the trend on actual cash value. Check in the accounts. It goes up by the same amount each time. Same again for 09.

[kats-I]

so Me Me Me..what is the outcome? :rolleyes:

[dallas2]

God, are we in trouble! If Barron is reading this he's laughing all the way to the boardroom. Divide and conquer is complete. Its not just about NSL and NERL pay and banding, wait until they decide we have to work on days 7 and 8 of a 10 day cycle after leave, or have to go to individual rosters. We need to unite and stand against the company NOW not fragment and get into stupid slagging matches about who earns too much. Barron has to be got rid of before he wrecks this company for everybody except the shareholders ( none of whom paid any money for their shares anyway!). Everybody needs to support everybody else because if it aint happening to you now Barrons planning it for your future!

[PPRuNe Radar]

Its not just about NSL and NERL pay and banding, wait until they decide we have to work on days 7 and 8 of a 10 day cycle after leave, or have to go to individual rosters.

There are many bad things taking place thanks to NATS managers, but the breaking of the legal requirements of SRATCOH will not be allowed unless they get permission from the regulator.

If you are an ATCO, you should be aware of the ins and outs of SRATCOH since you are a licence holder and could be brought to book as an individual if you break the law, regardless of the fact your employer told you to.

[dallas2]

PPrune
Its my understanding that if you have 3 or 4 days off followed by days 1to 6 of a cycle as leave then it complies with both shratcoh and wp to make you work on 7 and 8 then start the following cycle as usual. However this was not the point I was trying to make, that being that we need to take a stand against the Barron instead of picking holes in each other all the time.

[DTY/LKS]

We should know if PB's rumoured 9% pay rise is true soon enough as someone has asked him outright on NATSNET if it is true, and for once it wasn't Private Sandwiches.

[DC10RealMan]

If he replies that 9% is not correct, would you believe him?

[anotherthing]

Don't think he (PB) cares whether it's 9% or not after picking up a bonus of over £500k (which he gets paid once every 3 years).

That equates yearly to over 50% of salary in bonus.

Add to that the pay rise he received last year before the cap on pensionable pay rises was brought in.

I don't mind people being paid bonuses (though it is an obscene amount), but not when the same people claim NATS is having to tighten it's belt,

[Data Dad]

dallas2

I would question whether your suggestion is WP compliant.

I can't speak for other units but under WPP you work either an 40hr/Week Gross hours roster or a 35hr/Wk Net (no meal breaks) roster. At my unit, the (net hours) roster comes out as an average of 34.7 (IIRC). Taking 6 cycles per year and working days 7 & 8 adds 12x8 hrs (96hrs) to the annual total and pushes the weekly average to over 36. Therefore, here it would not be WPP compliant. Even working only one of Day 7 or 8 after every leave cycle would push our average over 35.

DD

[Me Me Me Me]

07/08 accounts: CEO salary £400k
06/07 accounts: £350k
05/06: £313k
04/05: £252k

You can find these figures in the published accounts. Freely available to all. The accounts due in the summer for year just finished will report on the salaries paid in the past year.

I wouldn't expect to see any blips in the graph...

[anotherthing]

Expect to see a salary of £450k ish (nice annual rise btw) plus bonus.

04/05: £252k
05/06: £313k - 24% annual increase
06/07 accounts: £350k - 11.9% anual increase
07/08 accounts: CEO salary £400k - 14.3% annual increase

Remember the above figures are salary, bonus will be extra.

And I really shouldn't be so lazy but I can't be bothered to trawl through all the posts in this thread - but some wise wags have repeatedlly berated those amongst us who want a pay rise commensurate with Aug 08 RPI, saying that the RPI is history and inflation etc has dropped, thus we should accept much less.

Fuel has just risen, again

Council taxes are up

and

Spiralling prices of staple foods (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7982056.stm)

[privatesandwiches]

DTY/LKS.... ive done my management bullet dodging for the moment. Thankfully, someone else has taken the torch. Getting pulled in the office and listen to a 'company' type telling me how great it is to work for NATS, how great that plonker PB is and how we should tow the line is not my idea of fun.
Do your job, go home and let management lackeys sniff eachothers' arses like a pack of confused, stray dogs as that is all they are good for.

If they dont want to engage ops staff, take every break you can and enjoy the sunny weather on the balcony....... sod 'em :ok:

[kats-I]

Not just fuel rising..blood pressure going up too!!!:eek::eek:

So 9% is looking pretty good for PB then?
Whatever happened to "Lead by example"? It really is a case of "I hear what you say. However..."

Talk of compuslory redundancies..Will this start at the top and work down? ???

[Me Me Me Me]

NATS/TU have a written agreement saying that there will be no compulsory redundancy at any time... However, they also have a written agreement that says NATS promises not to use cost as a deciding factor in selecting volunteers to go... We all know they don't stick to that.

It will be very interesting to see how PB and the Comms team deal with the direct question about the 9% rumour. Difficult one to escape from with any credibility!

[BDiONU]

Fuel has just risen, again
Council taxes are up
and
Spiralling prices of staple foods (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7982056.stm)
You neglected to add that if you earn more than £43k NICS have gone up by circa £350 p.a.

BD

[anotherthing]

BD

Didn't know that.

I'm a bit of a realist, don't expect we'll get 4.8% though of course it would be nice - but if the rumour of 9% for PB is anywhere near the truth (looking at the figures provided by Me Me Me it won't be far off the mark), it would be nice to see people treated fairly.

I appreciate that bonuses are part of the contract for certain grades, but when the company is trying to save money and is saying it can't afford to give the great unwashed much of a pay rise, it would be nice to see people accept little or no bonus and just be thankful of a payrise...

[General_Kirby]

This is beyond a joke now. How much longer is it going to drag on? And from a communication point of view I've heard barely anything, a short post on NATSnet and a brief union statement doesn't really cut the mustard. And what of the special conference to discuss issues about NSL? Any rumours there?

[RPIplus1]

MeMeMeMe - "...However, they also have a written agreement that says NATS promises not to use cost as a deciding factor in selecting volunteers to go..."

'fraid not - the agreement only states that cost will not be used in deciding compulsory redundancies.

[rumouroid]

If PB is getting a pay rise of 9% he is only being rewarded for his success in improving the future financial health of the company. He has done this by reducing the pension liability, cutting staff levels to the bone and soon he will give us a meagre pay rise. Anything less than the 4.8% that will have been budgeted for, and we are entitled to, he can claim is a saving and will be rewarded for.
You only have yourselves to blame for his pay rise, well when I say you I mean the "yes" voters, thanks again for shafting us all.:{

[BDiONU]

You only have yourselves to blame for his pay rise, well when I say you I mean the "yes" voters, thanks again for shafting us all.:{
In what way to blame? Or do you mean that the democratic voting method is fundamentally flawed and everyone should only have been able to vote how you wanted?

BD

[manny fred]

It is getting ridiculous now. It is April, and we are still non the wiser about our pay increase. Say they give us this figure of 4.8%, but dont backdate it, what is the actual increase. If it goes into may/june, will we get our increment rises, backdated. Come on give us something to chew over. If they have nothing in the coffers to offer, say so, but then ensure you dont pay dividends or bonuses or rumored 9%. If we are getting little or no payrise for the good of the company, I will accept that, if we are getting little or no payrise, but bonuses,dividends and management are getting payrises, then this is unacceptable.

[Vote NO]

Originally Posted by rumouroid http://static.pprune.org/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.pprune.org/atc-issues/358345-uk-nats-pay-negotiations-latest-rumours-37.html#post4842569)
You only have yourselves to blame for his pay rise, well when I say you I mean the "yes" voters, thanks again for shafting us all.http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/boohoo.gif

BDiONU

In what way to blame? Or do you mean that the democratic voting method is fundamentally flawed and everyone should only have been able to vote how you wanted?

BD

The democratic process is not flawed, however some might suggest that those who voted yes for the pension may have flawed decision making processes, and fundamentally fail to comprehend that giving in once sends out signals of weakness :E

Hence, we are no further forward with the "pay rise" :)

[Cuddles]

When are the NATS 2008 / 9 accounts due to be published?

[Vote NO]

June ..:ok:

Previous for NERL http://www.nats.co.uk/uploads/user/NERL%20Regulatory%20Accounts.pdf

The regulatory accounts were approved by the Board on 26 June 2008 and
signed on its behalf by
Finance Director ______________________ Nigel Fotherby

[anotherthing]

Mannyfred

Good point re back-dating pay and spine points - will be a bit of a headache to work that one out!

However, our pay is due from Jan 08 therefore we should accept nothing else but backdating. Bacdated correctly, pre and post April figures...

4.8% from 1st June not backdated (if that was offered) would equate to circa 2.4% (not quite as simple a calculation as that, but as near as dammit).

We have not had a pay rise settled by the 1st Jan for years - notwithstanding the fact they were waiting to sor out the pension this year, the union really needs to get a grip and start negotiating earlier in the preceding year. Late once or twice over the past years is almost OK, but every time???

[BDiONU]

The democratic process is not flawed, however some might suggest that those who voted yes for the pension may have flawed decision making processes, and fundamentally fail to comprehend that giving in once sends out signals of weakness :E
And the majority who vated yes might disagree with your suggestion that they had flawed decision making processes and that 'giving in' is entirely different to voting to accept something which appeared to be fundamental to sustaining their pensions in the future.
Hence, we are no further forward with the "pay rise"
You're conflating 2 different issues. The only way you could link them is in that the negotiators on both sides were too involved with the pension issue to look at the pay issue in time for the pay discussions to deliver a pay deal in time for 1st Jan. But that late agreement has not been unusual in my time in the company, other than the past couple of years which were part of a 3 year deal, and has always been backdated.

BD

[250 kts]

However, our pay is due from Jan 08 therefore we should accept nothing else but backdating. Bacdated correctly, pre and post April figures...

shouldn't that be Jan 09?:confused:

[Vote NO]

BDiONU


Lets agree to dissagree on this one :). However I think there is a valid point here insofar as agreeing to have the pension reduced which was a major decision, only sends out the message that a pay rise is insignificant in the bigger scheme of things.

[Roffa]

I think the bigger issue(s), yes even bigger than this year's pay round, will come up at the forthcoming special delegate conference.

If the rumours I hear are true then I hope the outcome of the conference is an immediate ballot on industrial action.

The sand needs a line drawn in it.

[Vote NO]

Exactly :ok:

[rumouroid]

BDiONU

We are assuming that the returned ballot papers were correctly counted and independently verified, which there is some talk on here that they were not independently verified. Then there is all the other conspiracy theories about how many actually received a ballot paper, did it make it back with the Xmas post etc. Many staff mistakenly wholeheartedly believed the unions and voted accordingly, I've even heard rumours that the reps now realise they were too gullable when listening to management and regret hard selling the proposal to us.
Also I have spoken with several original "yes" voters who now regret their decision and with hindsight would now vote "no" knowing what they do now. Sadly not enough of us saw this coming and realised that we were not only voting on the pension proposal, but actually voting on all future negotiations and our bargaining position at them, which is now the weakest it has ever been, "hence we are no further forward with the pay rise". Unfortunately the original "no" voters were only just in the minority at 40% (ATCOs) and unable to save us from this poor position we now find ourselves in and will always find ourselves in forever.

[atce]

Having retired from NATS at the end of last year I recently had a letter from the Pensions section telling me that April's pension increase will be 0%. Nice.

[DC10RealMan]

ATCE.

I also received the same letter concerning our non-pension rise, however I can live with it knowing that I now have a "safe" pension and dont have to get up at O dark o,clock to go and work for nats at swanwick.

[BDiONU]

We are assuming that the returned ballot papers were correctly counted and independently verified, which there is some talk on here that they were not independently verified. Then there is all the other conspiracy theories about how many actually received a ballot paper, did it make it back with the Xmas post etc. Many staff mistakenly wholeheartedly believed the unions and voted accordingly, I've even heard rumours that the reps now realise they were too gullable when listening to management and regret hard selling the proposal to us.
Yeah we've all read, on here, about how the NTUS reps are selling us down the river blah blah blah. All I can say is look at all of the hot air written on here about the MoU for pensions and then look at the reality of the change to our terms & conditions:
• NATS will not require or incentivise existing employees to leave the NATS Section of the CAA Pension Scheme in favour of the NATS Defined Contribution Pension Scheme;

• NATS will not differentiate between employees on the basis of different pension scheme membership.

The above elements have been incorporated into a legally binding Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signed by NATS and NATS Trade Union Side (NTUS), which will cover a 15 year period from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2023. However, the last two points identified above will form a change to your terms and conditions of employment by their insertion into your contract of employment. For this reason, the protection will remain for as long as you are employed by NATS.
From my dealings with the unions I reckon the reps do their damnedest to drive through the best deal they can, despite all of the mud thrown at them in this forum.

BD

[Radarspod]

Careful, BD - too much sense for this thread :ok:


Roffa - what rumours?? :confused:

[eastern wiseguy]

do their damnedest to drive through the best deal they can


Not enough for you to join the union though!

[ZOOKER]

BDiONU,
"From my dealings with the unions I reckon the reps do their damnedest to drive through the best deal they can, despite all of the mud thrown at them in this forum"
BD.
REALLY?
Is that why NATS ATCOs are (allegedly) not fully reimbursed for the cost of their annual medicals, yet BUPA membership is provided for 'managers' wives?

[BDiONU]

Not enough for you to join the union though!
I didn't know that Closed shops existed any more. We all have the choice to make whether we wish to join or not.

BD

[mr.777]

....and you're not in it, so why do you persist in trying to influence people into thinking that PB is God and NATS is the greatest company on the face of the planet?????!!!!

[Roffa]

Rumours - well from what I've heard it all stems from the Manchester contract negotiations and amounts to pretty much a tear up of current T&Cs, not to the workforces benefit.

E&0E

[BDiONU]

....and you're not in it, so why do you persist in trying to influence people into thinking that PB is God and NATS is the greatest company on the face of the planet?????!!!!
Hhhmmm, can you substantiate your claims and point out any post(s) where I've made any such claims, or are you just having a pop? Why do I persist in trying to influence people? Two reasons, 1) I try to counter some of the guff from the nay sayers. 2) as I'm not in the union and the union is the only recognised method by which the management will negotiate with the workforce the only way I can have a 'say' is through others.

BD

[eastern wiseguy]

You ARE happy to let the rest of us (via the union ) improve your terms and conditions though.

[BDiONU]

You ARE happy to let the rest of us (via the union ) improve your terms and conditions though.
Happy? No I would rather not have a.n. other negotiate on my behalf for my pay and conditions, but there is no other option. Unless I've missed something its either join a union or be disenfranchised.

BD

[Radarspod]

Put your handbags away ladies and let's return this thread back to topic!:ok:

[Vote NO]

http://www.pprune.org/atc-issues/358345-uk-nats-pay-negotiations-latest-rumours.html#post4641602tomtom2003 (http://www.pprune.org/members/250432-tomtom2003)

Join Date: May 2008
Location: SCOTLAND
Posts: 3

11th Jan 2009

Latest Pay Round
ANYBODY GOT ANY INFO ON THE CURRENT PAY NEGOTIATIONS,

IT'S ALL GONE A BIT QUIET

WHO ARE GOING TO BE THE MAIN BENEFICIARIES?
http://static.pprune.org/images/statusicon/user_offline.gif (http://www.pprune.org/atc-issues/358345-uk-nats-pay-negotiations-latest-rumours.html#post4641602)http://static.pprune.org/images/buttons/report.gif (http://www.pprune.org/report.php?p=4641602)Three months on since the initial post, and still SFA :sad: . Although I think we can answer the third question :mad:

[mr.777]

I notice that Barron hasn't replied on NATSNET to the 9% payrise rumour (unless it happened today).
I'm starting to think that people are becoming more p***ed off over this now than they ever were over the pension. Its a bridge too far and the woeful lack of communication and action from either the management or the Union is starting to get people's backs up.
Of course there are always one or two conscientious objectors who like to fire pot shots on behalf of the Union/Management from a safe distance....so I'll be careful not tar everyone with the same brush. I'm sure these people can't wait to bend over and be shafted yet again :rolleyes:

[privatesandwiches]

It appears some seem to like being bent over and shafted whilst shouting 'yes mister Barron, I vote yes' and also 'no mister Barron, dont use the KY.... I likes it rough'

I heard this morning that the union and management are going to be shedding info over the next couple of weeks that we will not like and most likey tucked up in bed together sharing a post coital fag whilst we are left to fend for ourselves.... which is nothing new and is only a rumour. Come to think of it, I struggle to remember when the union gave us something that we did like in recent times.

Has there been a meeting lately? Any news, or are we just going to sit and watch more meetings be scheduled only for those NATS wankers to cancel yet again?

I'd like to see the union play hardball and end this game, will that ever happen? about as likely as me retaining a decent pension!!!!

[mr.777]

Pay freeze? Even worse, spine point freeze? In fact, they can't do that can they since April 1st has come and gone...can they??

[privatesandwiches]

No they cant. But they need to find some balls and get on with getting our payrise and get the bloody thing backdated.....

[eastern wiseguy]

Great simple question to have asked PB.

Only two answers Yes or No.

How hard is it to "remember" how much your pay has increased....or not?

[kats-I]

"The King is in his counting house counting out his money" or is that our money??:confused:
:ugh::ugh:

[privatesandwiches]

I would like to see him worm out of this one, if its true of course.
A simple answer would be welcomed, especially for us knuckle dragging ops types. No doubt a long winded, buzz word containing, management truck of PB ****e that he hasnt even written (he has cronies for that, I know because I have met them and seen them in action) will be expelled from his CTC Mansion. published next to a photo with his 'concerened/angry' pout from his last photo shoot on nats net.

Standing by!!!

[anotherthing]

The chances are the question has put the cat amongst the pigeons.
He was probably so busy counting his bonus that he had not worked out what his pay rise equated to as a percentage.

Now that someone has questioned him on the intranet, it has brought his attention to the fact that he may 'only' have received 9%. (Bet it was on time as well unlike ours).

Obviously he will be asking his minions if this is correct because if it is he'll want to know why, after rises of 24%, 11.9% and 14.3% in the previous 3 years, he is being penalised with such a paltry sum.

How is anyone supposed to live off that, I ask you?

[eyeinthesky]

QUOTE
Is that why NATS ATCOs are (allegedly) not fully reimbursed for the cost of their annual medicals, yet BUPA membership is provided for 'managers' wives?
UNQUOTE

As I understand it, OHS provide the facility for all ATCOs to have free medicals either at LAC or at the regular mobile clinics which they offer throughout the country. These are apparently offered at regular enough intervals to allow everyone to have medical renewals done in time and for free.

If someone decides for whatever reason not to take advantage of this comprehensive service (which has a cost to NATS) and go 'private', then they will reimburse costs up to £150. Doesn't seem to me to be an unfair offer. Given the requirements of medical confidentiality, I can't see why anyone would feel the need to go to another doctor for their annual renewal... unless there is a scam going on somewhere.

As for the main point of this thread: Still disappointed at the apparent lack of progress on pay talks. Not really sure why everyone is so hung up on what PB is getting: concentrate on skilled negotiation for the wider workforce and stop being distracted by one figurehead.