Working Practices at LACC - have Prospect got it right ?

[zygote]

Having just read the Prospect brief about the proposed changes to the Working Practices I was struck with the view that the arguements seemed balanced, credible and acceptable. It appears the Prospect guys have at last done a good deal. I voted 'yes' to show support for the new team. Does anyone else think we have turned the corner with a pragmatic union representation?

[Numpo-Nigit]

That's cancelled out my vote then !!! :hmm:

[DtyCln]

I don't know which one of the Reps/Managers you are Zygote but that is a poor contribution!

The reason we pushed for new Reps in a 'fresher' Section was because the last lot tried to sell us 0630 starts for some of the Morning Watch when NERC opened and we told them to Get Lost! So now we get the WHOLE watch coming in a 0630, which is 0515 rise for most of us!! REAL Progress.

We didn't like ONE of the Afternoon Watch staying on until 2300 to cover Late Traffic/ Night Sickness and Lo and Behold, now we get TWO people staying on until 2300 on the LAST DAY of their cycle! REAL Progress!

We already sold our Promotion prospects down the river when we arrived at NERC by reducing ATCO1 numbers by 50% and now WE are offering to reduce ATCO1 numbers even more by offering to Band-Box LAS Positions, Day and Night.

We generally get about 14-16 hours off between shifts at the moment, now WE are offering to finish at 2000 then start at 0800 the following morning, the absolute SCRATCOH minimum I understand. Nice drive in for the Guys/Gals from EGHH/EGHR ends of the M27 at that time of the morning, 1 hour minimum!

Rumours from the ORO, who now have the ShiftLogic patch for this change in place, also indicate that we haven't been told the full picture regarding what shifts we can work. It is far more complicated than our Reps are letting on!

Ask more questions before you sell yourself down the river.

[Loki]

Well, let me put it this way; my membership of Prospect is hanging in the balance. I always thought the job of a union was to protect the interests of its membership....I don`t see that happening here.

[BEXIL160]

One of the things that "The management" (for that is what they choose to call themselves) continually hit Prospect with during negotiations is that the company will "go to the wall" without agreement to change.

This "scare tactic" is, of course, complete b***ocks. Nevertheless some in Prospect still appear to beleive it.

NATS is NOT under threat. It is 49% owned by the UK government. THEY are the largest shareholder, not TAG. It is also one of New Labours Flagship PPPs. Politically it cannot be seen to fail, our Tony would never allow it, particulary after all the trouble he had getting the PPP through in the first place.

What may well be under threat is certain managers jobs. You've guessed it, the same ones who are using the "scare tactic" about NATS going bust. The reality is that THEY are the ones whose jobs are decidely dodgy. They are the ones who are sh*t scared.

The result of the ballot is by no means a foregone conclusion. USE YOUR VOTE.

Rgds BEX

[A I]

Well said Bex.

I have and it was a NO.

I have no problem with staffing to service the traffic but I do have with a blanket 0630 start. Next year it will be 0600 and so on. If the whole shift arrives then most will go straight to the canteen (I refuse to call it a restaurant). Can they cope?

AI

[Arkady]

Leaving aside the content of the proposals for a moment, I believe that the section should be congratulated on the manner in which this exersise has been conducted. All the central points under discussion were highlighted to the membership months ago and comments invited. The section says that its objectives were based on consultation with the members and in this instance they have every right to believe so. It has made an admirable effort to pass on the reasons for its final recommendations whether or not you agree with them.

DtyCln

Management can bring in as many early spinners and write a sub roster for as many Morning Early shifts as they wish. The demand exists at 0630 and the National Working Practices Agreement allows it. Simply saying that we don't want to work 30 minutes earlier won't stop it.

The two 2300 stays are south bank only and they are needed. The chances of working one of these on the last day of the cycle is off set by the reduction in slip days leaving you with only three days off instead of four.

You make a valid point about the reduction in ATCO1 posts meaning a reduction in promotion prospects but the suggestion to bandbox LAS positions came from the membership not Management or the Union. This proposal was put to all the membership some time ago and I can only assume that no serious objections were raised or the negotiating team would never have put it on the table.

The 0800 start D2 with the minimum off time of 12 hours is a straight trade off for less slip days, therefore more four days off and more roster predictability.

Part of the agreement is for AVAAs to be able to be rostered for any eight hour period from 0600 to 2300 so it makes complete sense that the ORO has a tool that will roster them. (I'd be amazed if it worked though)

Bex

I don't think our local managers are so far up there own a***s to use the "going to the wall" argument in a local agreement and expect to be taken seriously but what you say is quite true and will be very relevent next year when the National WPP is to be negotiated.

Loki

If you don't think your Union is representing you join the section as a rep. If, after a year you are still unhappy, by all means resign but who will represent your views then, badly or otherwise?

I am not a manager or a Union Rep and I will have to work D7s if they come in. To go all the way back to Zygotes original post, whatever you may think of the final proposals, the manner in which the section arrived at and communicated them to the membership can only be commended.

[Findo]

All those early morning departures from 0600 onwards. They are presumably crewed by people who don't live 20 minutes away and are rostered to turn up from 0500 onwards not from 2200 the night before.

Who employs those crews ?

The up side was SERCO did not buy us. The down side is the airlines don't recognise an argument that says we don't like starting before 0700.

All those who live in the EGHH area ? Even our managers refused to include that area in the "reasonable commuting distance" so it is pretty difficult to say they must take it into account when setting shift starting times.

[BEXIL160]

Arkady....

You have a somewhat higher regard for LACC local managers than I do.

Rgds BEX

[Arkady]

Yes, and I accept I may be wrong.:)

[250 kts]

Arkady is absolutely right and I'm not a Prospect rep either. The presentations were a real eye-opener to what the negotiations entail and just how complicated they really are.

The LACC section is now full of young and enthusiastic people who I believe came up with the best deal they could in view of the pressures NATS is under. Remember this is a SUMMER deal only and if we, the membership choose to go back to a 0700 start-assuming the 0630 start is ratified-then so be it. It is true that many positions will not be open at 0630 exactly but if a small number of sectors are causing delays at that time of the morning then how do you suggest that those staff most affected by the inevitable earlier starts are rewarded? I suspect that if restrictions are not applied early as now then we will be surprised by just how many sectors are open before 0700. But remember this is not an exact science.

I suggest we should give this a try and if we find the delays are still above the target then there is no doubt that heads will have to roll but at least the LACC ATCOs will be able then to say"we told you so" and not have the blame pushed in their direction which would inevitably happen and allow those managers to hold on to their jobs for another year.

Cut the local section some slack and see how things pan out for just 5 months. Then if things don't work out maybe it will be time for some of the old dinosaurs to take up the reins again-remember the "POWDER IS STILL DRY"????????????????????????

WE REAP WHAT WE SOW!!!!

[BEXIL160]

It seems there is little alternative to what has been proposed by PROSPECT. Indeed it DOES seem to be the best achieveable under the current WPP set up. I agree with 250, above, that we should give this a go. When it all falls down around LACC managements ears (delays will certainly get MUCH worse), at least there will be no blaming the operational staff.

My main point remains the same, and has much relevance to pay negotiations and WPP next year when the whole collective argreement is "up for grabs". Hopefully the "new look" PROSPECT will not be swayed one iota by senior managements bleating about "the company going to the wall." The reality being that the managers themselves are most likely to be first against the wall.

Rgds BEX

[eyeinthesky]

Another point to note is that we are apparently gaining "a lot of goodwill" which will stand us in good stead for the 2004 pay round. Fine, but it's a fair bet that when the 2004 pay round starts the first gambit will still be: "Thanks very much for your flexibility with the early starts in the summer, but we much regret there is still no money in the pot, so better luck next time!"

I must add my vote in favour of the open way in which the local reps have briefed us this time, as opposed to some previous votes where the piece of paper was put in front of you with no idea at how it was reached.

Whether we like it or not, there is a demand to have more sectors open at 0630 than we can manage under the present system, and management CAN AND WILL roster us to meet that demand. Better that we vote in a system which gives us the best options for us than have one imposed upon us.

[5milesbaby]

I don't see much of a problem with the new proposed roster changes, so what it means starting 30 mins earlier, but then you finish 30 mins earlier too. This is a step that needs to be implimented as ATC changes rapidly, and so the need for the providers to do so does too. To begin with I really hated the ideas being proposed but now see that the choices are valid individually and one has to be done. Having suffered first hand by the lack of appreciation for attending the early starts previous, getting everyone in by 6:30 HAS to be a step forward, and yes, I do believe the company will benifit from it and feel its about time we as ATCO's/ATSA's should give at least a little something back.

On a side note, how are the northbank validation alterations coming along, all seems to have gone quiet on that front.......unsuprisingly.

[mainecoon]

findo have to agree for a change !

to all posts from lacc

manchester have worked these shifts for some time now (in most forms early start
late finish etc)

sorted by prospect who didn't give us the chance to vote on it

if you want more money than the rest of us face it they will exploit you too (after all you do get paid more )

:ok:

[250 kts]

mainecoon,

You are missing the point that the proposal is that the WHOLE watch starts at 0630. Like you we already have spins that start as early as 0600 but this is a major change from that situation.

It is a fact that local WP deals are never linked to pay but true that if there is anything in the re-structure then this is the type of flexibility which may affect how a unit gets paid.

You're right that we do get paid more and if it was up to me the differentials would be greatly increased for LACC/LHR and LTCC in order to attract and retain more people to these units. After all we never hear about retention and recruiting issues at the likes of MACC do we??

[mainecoon]

250

point taken mate
understand what you say but part of my point was that prospect seem to do these things without asking the troops what they really think

from our point of view it 'seemed' you always got what you wanted by weight of numbers

for myself i don't like early starts but like night shifts
strange to most i would imagine

but the whole point is that prospect should as much as poss echo your views so don't get stitched

thanx for the reply with no flames by the way

regrds maine

[250 kts]

I think it's been said earlier but this time there were excellent briefings given which covered all the watches. In true ATCO fashion they weren't always well attended but those that did seemed to be pleased that they learnt a bit more about what is involved-certainly it was an eye opener for me.

Not sure about us always getting what we want. The AAVA scheme probably has a higher take up rate at MACC than at LACC and many people are not given the opportunity to do the O/T due to the night commitments on them leaving them SRATCOH'd.

The ballot result is due Tuesday-so watch this space.

If you prefer nights ever thought of a posting to LACC where you can work all the night on both nights!!

[250 kts]

The grapevine tells me we will all be getting up for a 0630 morning duty for the rest of the summer. Not sure of the exact figures but the change was apparently carried fairly comfortably.

[atco-matic]

Those of you that voted yes to this... do you realise that, regarding the number of staff on Southbank that will still have to do the old morning spins (ie day off, R1, R2) the following will be required (according to ORO:

2x West T/P
1x South OR Central T/P
1x LAS


which means that the west enders will end up doing them at least twice as often as the rest of us by my reckoning... don't remember that being in the union brief!!!

Also, after having taken 12 out for nights (13 on summer weekends) and 4 for the above that makes anybody left have virtually no chance of getting what they want.

[250 kts]

atco-matic,

Not sure it's quite as clear cut as that. There will ALWAYS be the requirement for the D1s as they have to open sectors. It is also preferable that some of these are west enders to relieve those that have been on all night-after all thay would be the first to complain if they were never getting a relief or extra staff to split. The number of D1s is no different to what we have now as far as I can see.

What it does do is account for most of the staff who will not be working a 6 on 4 off cycle and so the vast majority of the rest of the staff will be doing just that.

[zygote]

And with most of the Watch doing 6-on and 4-off, most of the Watch will not be able to do any AAVAs

[eyeinthesky]

zygote:

Not quite sure how you figure that. Surely if more people have 4 days off there is more scope for more attendance during those 4 days.

Don't forget the new 'rolling 8 hour' AAVA where you can volunteer for any period of 8 hours during the day to suit you or the ORO.

By the way, I hope that NONE of the people who voted NO to the early start are volunteering for AAVAs. If you don't want to get up 30mins earlier, why should you want to come in for any more days than you have to??? Of course... £500+... :rolleyes:

[250 kts]

Not sure it'll work quite like that. I think "we" still volunteer the days we can do extra and THEY choose the 8 hour shift to fit in with their needs.