NATS Pay/WP
Watchdog Delta Hotel
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: here but there in 6 years
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
250
be clear as to what you say
macc may have to start the 5.30 start but we get nothing for that as we are not a unit that it is thought to be one involved
you all get the money if you do or don't have to
plus check out the 'expert view' at scottish
i hear it shows prospect can't count
be clear as to what you say
macc may have to start the 5.30 start but we get nothing for that as we are not a unit that it is thought to be one involved
you all get the money if you do or don't have to
plus check out the 'expert view' at scottish
i hear it shows prospect can't count
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Costa del Swanwick
Posts: 834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand that there is NO NEED for 0530 starts at any unit other than LACC and very unlikely at TC as well.
Why would there be a requirement at MACC-apparently the nights are already cut to the bone and you have the SRATCOH dispensation and there is no need now so why in the future? And no you don't get the money whether you have to or not-imagine ,say, PD( no offence) knowing they were never going to start ay 0530 but getting the cash anyway-where is the ability for the unit that would have to do the duties to vote it down?
This deal changes the way business is done and targets directly those units that make the savings and work the unsocial shifts. Not perfectly yet I admit but a start that has to be built on.
Anyway what is the alternative-we all get a 8.5% rise and the big units then vote it down and NATS has no further cash to improve the deal-WE ALL LOSE OUT!!
Why would there be a requirement at MACC-apparently the nights are already cut to the bone and you have the SRATCOH dispensation and there is no need now so why in the future? And no you don't get the money whether you have to or not-imagine ,say, PD( no offence) knowing they were never going to start ay 0530 but getting the cash anyway-where is the ability for the unit that would have to do the duties to vote it down?
This deal changes the way business is done and targets directly those units that make the savings and work the unsocial shifts. Not perfectly yet I admit but a start that has to be built on.
Anyway what is the alternative-we all get a 8.5% rise and the big units then vote it down and NATS has no further cash to improve the deal-WE ALL LOSE OUT!!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: England
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TC IS likely to get the 5:30 starts to cover the night shift which will NOT be getting anymore staff even with new East coming in! (8 TMA)
The D5's will stay to midnight (possibly 2am?) to give breaks etc..
If they keep squeezing - something will POP ! - especially when the Atlantic traffic starts arriving in the morning.
The D5's will stay to midnight (possibly 2am?) to give breaks etc..
If they keep squeezing - something will POP ! - especially when the Atlantic traffic starts arriving in the morning.
Watchdog Delta Hotel
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: here but there in 6 years
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
8.5% don't fool yourself
prospect were stupid enough to start this early start thing
i never voted or had the chance to vote for the 06.30 start that we have had for a number of years now
if you wish to grab money then go ahead
no surprise to the rest of us
but i thought union mebership meant equality for all
as we say here no prospect for macc
prospect were stupid enough to start this early start thing
i never voted or had the chance to vote for the 06.30 start that we have had for a number of years now
if you wish to grab money then go ahead
no surprise to the rest of us
but i thought union mebership meant equality for all
as we say here no prospect for macc
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greystation
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 5:30 starts are likely only to be used at LTCC and LACC due to the probable reduction in night time staffing per sector. The only sector known not to be affected is LACC West End that keep their usual 4, 5 at weekends (Fri/Sat nights). The 5:30 start is needed to open the sectors from nighttime bandboxing before 6:30 (when the morning shift arrive), which is needed more often than not.
At the moment at LACC, NO spin shift finishes later than 11pm, and these are only applicable to certain sectors during the summer. To extend beyond this I believe is treading on the nightshift WPP, so is UNLIKELY at this time, and certainly NEVER to 2am. I believe the new deal allows a shift to work to 11:59pm (according to the bulletin I received through the post) but ONLY if its a part-AAVA.
At the moment at LACC, NO spin shift finishes later than 11pm, and these are only applicable to certain sectors during the summer. To extend beyond this I believe is treading on the nightshift WPP, so is UNLIKELY at this time, and certainly NEVER to 2am. I believe the new deal allows a shift to work to 11:59pm (according to the bulletin I received through the post) but ONLY if its a part-AAVA.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Costa del Swanwick
Posts: 834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mainecoon,
Why should you get a vote on a LOCAL decision to have a 0630 spin duty?-that is down to the local committee. This is just how the misinformation gets around. LATCC and I guess most other units had a 0600 & 0630 spin duty for years and didn't have a vote on it. But the subtle difference is that NATS NEEDED a 0630 CORE morning duty in order to reduce delays and hence save the possible £10m fine. The ONLY unit this was required at was LACC-not TC not MACC not PD etc. but LACC. The staff recognised this and voted to do so but only after detailed presentations from the local reps.
If you think that Prospect went down this road easily then you're wrong but if it doesn't keep up with the traffic requirements then NATS goes BUST-good for us all ??????
Yes I think for once the south is reasonably OK with this deal but by no means comfortable. And no it doesn't always mean equality for all-what it does mean is getting the best possible deal for the ATCO grade that ALL can aspire to and all can achieve in time-what's wrong with that?
I now think the BEC should forget the structure side. We all get 7.5% over 2 years and you STILL GET CLOSED-achieved alot?????
Why should you get a vote on a LOCAL decision to have a 0630 spin duty?-that is down to the local committee. This is just how the misinformation gets around. LATCC and I guess most other units had a 0600 & 0630 spin duty for years and didn't have a vote on it. But the subtle difference is that NATS NEEDED a 0630 CORE morning duty in order to reduce delays and hence save the possible £10m fine. The ONLY unit this was required at was LACC-not TC not MACC not PD etc. but LACC. The staff recognised this and voted to do so but only after detailed presentations from the local reps.
If you think that Prospect went down this road easily then you're wrong but if it doesn't keep up with the traffic requirements then NATS goes BUST-good for us all ??????
Yes I think for once the south is reasonably OK with this deal but by no means comfortable. And no it doesn't always mean equality for all-what it does mean is getting the best possible deal for the ATCO grade that ALL can aspire to and all can achieve in time-what's wrong with that?
I now think the BEC should forget the structure side. We all get 7.5% over 2 years and you STILL GET CLOSED-achieved alot?????
Last edited by 250 kts; 11th Feb 2004 at 04:36.
I'm Just A Lawnmower
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Over the hills and faraway
Age: 62
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well it seems as though the formula for deducing station grading might just be flawed in some way. The person who informed yesterday's ScOACC meeting that the calculations were, in effect, bollocks, might just have had a point.
We live in interesting times...
We live in interesting times...
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 1,122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
250,
At PD (no offense taken) we have 2 that start at 6.00am finishing at 2pm and are getting sod all for it out of this compared with band 3 and above.Also as far as PD goes there a unit with gmc,tower,approach radar at PD,enroute to all the north sea,approach at PB ,East Shetland basin and Anglia in the London FIR,which is bouncing along the bottom of the heap.Complexity formula my a
Can we fight it, I doubt it although we have 60+ ATCO's we are always railroaded by the centres and down south.Perhaps people will start voting with their feet as in the past
At PD (no offense taken) we have 2 that start at 6.00am finishing at 2pm and are getting sod all for it out of this compared with band 3 and above.Also as far as PD goes there a unit with gmc,tower,approach radar at PD,enroute to all the north sea,approach at PB ,East Shetland basin and Anglia in the London FIR,which is bouncing along the bottom of the heap.Complexity formula my a
Can we fight it, I doubt it although we have 60+ ATCO's we are always railroaded by the centres and down south.Perhaps people will start voting with their feet as in the past
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: cheshire
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
250kts
Why cant a member of the BEC be given a hard time by his unit if they think they have been sold down the river without a paddle
If you put your head above the parapet be prepared to be shot down dont moan when you do
I will agree ,forget the restructuring ,vote on the pay deal only
Why cant a member of the BEC be given a hard time by his unit if they think they have been sold down the river without a paddle
If you put your head above the parapet be prepared to be shot down dont moan when you do
I will agree ,forget the restructuring ,vote on the pay deal only
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Costa del Swanwick
Posts: 834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not wanting to go one better but we shouldn't be mixing local WP and the need for day shifts with the CORE duty. LACC has at least 5 people /day at 0600 on top of the 0630 core duty. It also has a variety of spins as do all units and I think 5miles is incorrect when he says it has to be an AAVA upto 2359-it could be a late spinner.
I think it's fair game to give all the reps a hard time but remember the Branch Chair has to take a moderate middle of the road stance on all matters. But if it got to the stage reported than that is totally unaccepatable if nothing else on safety grounds assuming he was carrying out a licensed duty. And all this coming from the unit which a while ago had the highest % of non union members.
As I said before-is this a good deal for ME-no looking over the shoulder-would I take this now and improve the structure in the future?
I think it's fair game to give all the reps a hard time but remember the Branch Chair has to take a moderate middle of the road stance on all matters. But if it got to the stage reported than that is totally unaccepatable if nothing else on safety grounds assuming he was carrying out a licensed duty. And all this coming from the unit which a while ago had the highest % of non union members.
As I said before-is this a good deal for ME-no looking over the shoulder-would I take this now and improve the structure in the future?
Manchesters Most Wanted PPRuNer
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 818
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Playing Devil's advocate here but surely the branch chair should take whatever stance the majority of the membership dictates he or she should take?
I have to say too that this is the first I've heard about the individual concerned being sent home.
I have to say too that this is the first I've heard about the individual concerned being sent home.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Jockland
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To follow on from my post the other day, it has now been confirmed by the BEC (even by one of the members that helped construct the model), that the model for grading the units is fundamentally flawed (mainecoon - did you get your proof)??
The overwhelming factor that affects each unit's score is the amount of traffic that it shifts per year.
That's as it should be I hear you cry! Those that shift more should get more!
Well... er...up to a point.
The factors that are used to level the playing field have, at best, a marginal affect.
It is difficult to explain, without having a copy of the model and the figures to illustrate, but our watch mathematician (who does actually have a degree in the subject, well, so he says), assures me that if you were to compare two units;
unit A shifting 1,000,000 aircraft per year
and unit B moving 100,000 per year
and given that the ratio of staff to movements is the same, i.e.
unit A with 1,000,000 movements has 100 controllers,
unit B with 100,000 movements having 10 controllers,
(therefore each indvidual controller working 10,000 flights per year),
then given that the mix of traffic and complexity are the same for both units
the total score for each unit shows the same ratio as the original movement figures i.e. 10:1!
Or, to put it another way - unit A's score would be 10 times greater than unit B's, and this despite the controllers at unit B working the same number of aircraft per controller as unit A, with exactly the same complexity and mix of traffic
So, what have we proved?
Unit A shifts 10 times the number of aircraft than unit B.
Thats all.
The overwhelming factor that affects each unit's score is the amount of traffic that it shifts per year.
That's as it should be I hear you cry! Those that shift more should get more!
Well... er...up to a point.
The factors that are used to level the playing field have, at best, a marginal affect.
It is difficult to explain, without having a copy of the model and the figures to illustrate, but our watch mathematician (who does actually have a degree in the subject, well, so he says), assures me that if you were to compare two units;
unit A shifting 1,000,000 aircraft per year
and unit B moving 100,000 per year
and given that the ratio of staff to movements is the same, i.e.
unit A with 1,000,000 movements has 100 controllers,
unit B with 100,000 movements having 10 controllers,
(therefore each indvidual controller working 10,000 flights per year),
then given that the mix of traffic and complexity are the same for both units
the total score for each unit shows the same ratio as the original movement figures i.e. 10:1!
Or, to put it another way - unit A's score would be 10 times greater than unit B's, and this despite the controllers at unit B working the same number of aircraft per controller as unit A, with exactly the same complexity and mix of traffic
So, what have we proved?
Unit A shifts 10 times the number of aircraft than unit B.
Thats all.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: somewhere out there
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
250kts Just as a point of fact - as I was there. The Chairman of the BEC wasn't sent home from work. He did attract a fair amount of criticsm vis a vis the pay offer whilst sat on console and wasn't very happy about it. Everyone was told that we are not to discuss it with him in the ops room anymore. Fair enough as it was a bit over the top, although he hasn't been seen anywhere "in bounds" to "discuss" it with him for some time now.
Manchesters meetings are early next week and if some of the wall posters that have appeared over the last few days are indicative of what lays in store, Prospect might find very few members left at Manchester. NATS might find also find that they have no OJTi's or only 5 or 6 people out of over 100 (the latest unofficial MORI poll figures suggest) willing to do AVA's.
The OJTi issue becomes a factor as we are short of staff and getting shorter by the month (Canada). Delays should reach monumental proportions with no staff coupled with no AVA's. Heaven only knows how they'll cope with the Madrid sims! Perhaps they'll bus some of you chaps up from down South for a nice quite break, no 0530 starts here ! (yet)
Anyway, I've applied for a band 5 unit (CATC) so I'll be out of this madhouse soon......Yeah like they're really going to let me go ...
MACC No Prospect
Manchesters meetings are early next week and if some of the wall posters that have appeared over the last few days are indicative of what lays in store, Prospect might find very few members left at Manchester. NATS might find also find that they have no OJTi's or only 5 or 6 people out of over 100 (the latest unofficial MORI poll figures suggest) willing to do AVA's.
The OJTi issue becomes a factor as we are short of staff and getting shorter by the month (Canada). Delays should reach monumental proportions with no staff coupled with no AVA's. Heaven only knows how they'll cope with the Madrid sims! Perhaps they'll bus some of you chaps up from down South for a nice quite break, no 0530 starts here ! (yet)
Anyway, I've applied for a band 5 unit (CATC) so I'll be out of this madhouse soon......Yeah like they're really going to let me go ...
MACC No Prospect
Watchdog Delta Hotel
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: here but there in 6 years
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
250
for a start i am one of the few who is happy to be leaving when macc shuts so don't assume that i post this fealing hard done by for that
re the chair
i would like to think of him as a friend but when you are seen to screw the people around you (and yourself) then the blame lies with you
he has a duty as a rep for macc as well as the rest of you and if we think he is not up to that it's our call not yours
last we have had for a long time four 0630 starts that we had no vote over and approach have earlier ones than my side
for a start i am one of the few who is happy to be leaving when macc shuts so don't assume that i post this fealing hard done by for that
re the chair
i would like to think of him as a friend but when you are seen to screw the people around you (and yourself) then the blame lies with you
he has a duty as a rep for macc as well as the rest of you and if we think he is not up to that it's our call not yours
last we have had for a long time four 0630 starts that we had no vote over and approach have earlier ones than my side
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Costa del Swanwick
Posts: 834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Morning all,
Not sure as branch Chair he does have a responsibility as a rep for MACC. The BEC is balanced across the country but I don't think that includes the chair-please correct me if I'm wrong.
But let's remember this is an agreement within which local WP can now be negotiated. In the future if other units need a 0630 core start and savings are identified than those savings would be directed at that unit. No recompense was given at LACC until now for the fact that the delays reduced significantly due to the 0630 start. This is to some extent recognition for the avoidance of the delay penalty fine last year. If there were to be no recognition then we would probably ask for a vote and go back to 0700. delays would increase again and the amount to fund the payrise and structure would probably reduce significantly-then everyone else would be blaming LACC again for ruining their pay rise. It's a catch 22 for all.
Not sure as branch Chair he does have a responsibility as a rep for MACC. The BEC is balanced across the country but I don't think that includes the chair-please correct me if I'm wrong.
But let's remember this is an agreement within which local WP can now be negotiated. In the future if other units need a 0630 core start and savings are identified than those savings would be directed at that unit. No recompense was given at LACC until now for the fact that the delays reduced significantly due to the 0630 start. This is to some extent recognition for the avoidance of the delay penalty fine last year. If there were to be no recognition then we would probably ask for a vote and go back to 0700. delays would increase again and the amount to fund the payrise and structure would probably reduce significantly-then everyone else would be blaming LACC again for ruining their pay rise. It's a catch 22 for all.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pheasant Plucker,
A flaw in that argument.......
For example, Heathrow has, say 460 000 movements a year divided by 55 ATCOs.
But what about if we still had the Approach Radar here rather than TC? In that case it would be 460 000 divided by, what, 80? So by your formula we would quieter, when in fact each ATCO would be equally as busy.
A flaw in that argument.......
For example, Heathrow has, say 460 000 movements a year divided by 55 ATCOs.
But what about if we still had the Approach Radar here rather than TC? In that case it would be 460 000 divided by, what, 80? So by your formula we would quieter, when in fact each ATCO would be equally as busy.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Cloud Nine
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please Explain .... Please Explain ...Please Explain....
Gonzo - "But what about if we still had the Approach Radar here rather than TC? In that case it would be 460 000 divided by, what, 80? So by your formula we would quieter, when in fact each ATCO would be equally as busy."
----------------------------------------
Correct me if I'm wrong folks, but that also illustrates exactly why PheasantPlucker is basically right - the formula is flawed. IMHO (I am willing to have the error of my limited understanding explained to me) the formula makes it even worse.
If Heathrow still had Approach, there would be the extra radar movements (and staff), but (inexplicably) they are treated with a weighting of only 0.5 (as opposed to 1.0 for Tower movements).
So, obviously, according to the formula, if you're a tower only, you're more productive/working harder than a tower/radar valid
...or .....if you .....weigh the same ......as ....... a duck ........
Perhaps they used the formula years ago to make the decision on CCF ...... hmmm ... still doesn't explain the Luton Radar cost benefit though ......
----------------------------------------
Correct me if I'm wrong folks, but that also illustrates exactly why PheasantPlucker is basically right - the formula is flawed. IMHO (I am willing to have the error of my limited understanding explained to me) the formula makes it even worse.
If Heathrow still had Approach, there would be the extra radar movements (and staff), but (inexplicably) they are treated with a weighting of only 0.5 (as opposed to 1.0 for Tower movements).
So, obviously, according to the formula, if you're a tower only, you're more productive/working harder than a tower/radar valid
...or .....if you .....weigh the same ......as ....... a duck ........Perhaps they used the formula years ago to make the decision on CCF ...... hmmm ... still doesn't explain the Luton Radar cost benefit though ......
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Jockland
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you PH-UKU, that's just what I was going to point out.
Anyway, this isn't my formula but the formula approved by the BEC/management team.
Don't blame me if it doesn't make any sense, I just ran the figures through their model.
If there are significant flaws with it, it will affect everyone (with MACC being a big loser especially), to some degree, directly in their back pockets.
Anyway, this isn't my formula but the formula approved by the BEC/management team.
Don't blame me if it doesn't make any sense, I just ran the figures through their model.
If there are significant flaws with it, it will affect everyone (with MACC being a big loser especially), to some degree, directly in their back pockets.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: somewhere out there
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it's pretty well accepted that we will be the big losers here at MACC.
Although if my fellow area controllers have their way so will NATS as well. I just hope they have enough fingers to add up the delays come March 1st.
Although if my fellow area controllers have their way so will NATS as well. I just hope they have enough fingers to add up the delays come March 1st.