NATS ATCO Severance Proposal

[rab-k]

Having just read the BEC letter on this subject, I'd like to voice my opinion regarding the now x-proposal.

:mad::mad::mad: :mad: :mad: :mad::mad::mad: :mad::mad::mad::mad: :mad::mad::mad: !

Thank you; I feel much better now.

[niknak]

Please enlighten the great unwashed.:confused:

[terrain safe]

Rab. Very erudite and correct. :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad: :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:.

Thank you.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Seems they want to get rid of several dozen ATCOs. How this is possible, given that a few stations I know of said to be undermanned? Perhaps someone could please prove me wrong?

[Lon More]

you didn't expect the cuts to be made in management's ranks?

[Pheasant Plucker]

Yup!...:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

[Ceannairceach]

You thought the ATSAs would be the only ones getting cut back then I presume?

Take a look at ORDIP......

[Pheasant Plucker]

If VR is to be offered, at least let it comply with the agreement in the employee handbook.

You presume incorrectly btw (look in the NATS forum if able).

[aldegar]

Seems they want to get rid of several dozen ATCOs. How this is possible, given that a few stations I know of said to be undermanned?

NATS, in alliance with Ferrovial, is trying to take over some (if not all) of the spanish towers that are being privatized this year (13, the rest of them on 2012). I thought they would be in a desperate need of recruiting more ATCOs, not firing them! :bored:

[REVOLUTION]

According to the Prospect email it says Nats wanted to offer one years salary in return for the individual to commit to leaving the company. Apparently NERL have identified 41 individuals across PC, AC and TC who would be offered this deal.

My thoughts are there would probably be several individuals who would take up the offer. When you consider four Heathrow approach controllers have gone to Dubai in the last six months.

I personally am keen to continue working for NERL but I am sure others may be interested in a sweetner to jump ship.

Is it right that the BEC reject these sorts of proposals without first questioning their membership?

[ZOOKER]

This raises interesting questions.
Who, in NERL, has identified these individuals?
What criteria were used to identify them?
Have the 41 individuals so identified been informed of their identification?
Why is there no mention of this on the Prospect (ATCO's branch), website, ATCOs.co.uk?

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<According to the Prospect email it says Nats wanted to offer one years salary in return for the individual to commit to leaving the company. >>

Don't tell me, the union is holding out for 6 months salary!! :-)))

One year's salary is a derisory offer. I seem to recall that when they were getting rid of ATSAs, considerably more than that was offered.

[eglnyt]

During the recent "cost cutting" amongst the ATCE and STAR grades a number of those who applied for VR were rejected because letting them go was not cost effective. They were then made individual lower offers outside of the VR scheme. They were mostly those with not long to go to retirement and several of them accepted the lower offer.

[samotnik]

Hey, but I guess NATS is constantly recruiting new people. Why they force ATCOs to leave instead just move them to another unit?

[ZOOKER]

samotnik,
good point. ATCOs are allegedly 'mobile-grades', after all.

[On the beach]

At least in retirement you will get an inflation-linked "pay" rise.

Anyone for 5% February RPI?

On the beach :hmm:

[chevvron]

Well January is 4.8%. If you factor in the rise in VAT and increased fuel costs alone, February should go up at least to 4.9% if not higher.

[DC10RealMan]

Hurrah for us pensioners!!!

[Brian 48nav]

Chev according to the ST today, the official figures for January's RPI/CPI will be released on Tuesday 15th.
I guess therefore that the ALL IMPORTANT Feb figure will be announced on March 15th or 16th.

Do you remember the disappointment of the 2009 figures? 0% increase!

BW

[Roffa]

When you consider four Heathrow approach controllers have gone to Dubai in the last six months.

They should be offering some retention bonuses then rather than putting money aside for VR.

[PeltonLevel]

My recollection of the standard deal is:
for each year after the age of 41, 1.2 months pay;
for each year before the age of 41, 0.8 months pay;
taking a maximum of 20 years in total into account.
Anything less, you're being diddled (speaking as someone who was diddled, but I got a bung to do what I was planning to do anyway).

[goldfrog]

Hurrah for us pensioners!!!

Oh! Yes! .

[Pheasant Plucker]

Pelton - you were close!

From what I can remember from reading the employee handbook the other day, the terms are as follows:

Up until December 2010 the deal was:

for each year before the age of 41, 1.2 months pay;
for each year after the age of 41, 1.8 months pay;
taking a maximum of 20 years in total into account.

But since January 2011 the deal now is:

for each year before the age of 41, 1.0 months pay;
for each year after the age of 41, 1.5 months pay;
still taking a maximum of 20 years in total into account.

So, as far as I can see, if you have done fewer than 12 years or have only got a year to go then the deal might be ok, but everyone else is getting diddled!

[Mantovani]

No one can be forced to take VR.

The year's salary for committing to leave NATS sounds like it is on top of the current scheme.

The Unions should be telling NATS management they will not even listen to any proposals until the pay negotiations are concluded.

It is now February and NATS have yet to make a realistic pay offer.

The only Union Management discussions should now be about pay. All other discussions should be cancelled until the pay is sorted out.

NATS is making fantastic profits :D:D:D we deserve our rightful share :ok:

[Me Me Me Me]

Is it right that the BEC reject these sorts of proposals without first questioning their membership?

Completely right. The BEC is not there to look after the personal interests of the individuals in each post, but to look after the posts themselves and make sure the current custodians of them are treated fairly.

If a company employee wants to leave, just because they pay a union sub doesnt mean the union should support them and give up that post for future employees/members.

No one can be forced to take VR.

Well no... 'cause then it's called CR.