Open meeting and the bonus issue!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Open meeting and the bonus issue!
I attended one of said open meetings today at manch and I was absolutely apalled at Mr Chisholms attitude with regard to the "issue" of our tampered-with bonus payments.
He basically said (and this is not a word for word quote) :
"Well I think it's only you controllers who seem to have the problem. It only ever seems to be the union reps who are complaining to me anyhow. Anyway, we all know what controllers are like, they always have some issue and some axe to grind or other. If it wasn't this it'd be something else"
My colleagues and I were absolutely and totally flabbergasted!
Mr Chisholm you are in for a huge shock matey! Surely you must be able to remember your time in the wings at LATCC and realise just how out of touch you really have become?
I couldn't believe just how dismissive he was of the whole thing. (Then again, it was him, so I almost expected it in another way.)
All the time this conflab was going on I was watching the airline group bods very very carefully and intently. The Irish chap, yes the new HR manager (don't know his name sorry!) seemed most most uncomfortable and kept flashing knowing looks to his 757 pilot colleague whislt squirming and going slightly red in the face. He actually seemed like a decent chap, let's hope so
I really do wonder where they (the AG) stand on this issue, as the matter was dealt with almost totally by Mr Chisholm.
I believe the panel got a hard time at the second meeting which was held after the one I attended. Again the issue was dodged apparently.
It all begs the question at the moment - who is the monkey and who is the organ grinder?
WOW!!! How surreal is that???????!!!!!
------------------
"Go around..I say again...go around"
Guest
Posts: n/a
Ref Colin Chis...Yes, he does seem to be on another planet, probably Uranus....(it's far away and spins on its side, unlike the all the other planets)
This is the same man who insists that there is not a shortage of ATC staff in NATS, despite the fact that every weekly delay summary this year has some reference to ATCO/CSC/ATSA shortage.
This is the same man who insists that ATCO morale is as good as it's ever been.
Colin seems to be adopting the Management style reported in the XMAS 1988 edition of a superb publication that some will remember fondly:
So much for an "open and inclusive" management.
Rgds BEX
This is the same man who insists that there is not a shortage of ATC staff in NATS, despite the fact that every weekly delay summary this year has some reference to ATCO/CSC/ATSA shortage.
This is the same man who insists that ATCO morale is as good as it's ever been.
Colin seems to be adopting the Management style reported in the XMAS 1988 edition of a superb publication that some will remember fondly:
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">But the iron jawed chairman had witty reposte ready ..."you air traffickers really p**s me off", he beamed, to thunderous applause. "The CAA (NATS) has the good grace to give you a bloody good job with an enormous salary and all you can do is **** it back in our faces", he continued, displaying that familiarity with rich language, the hallmark of all great orators.
When asked as to what his real feelings about the "beleaguered" air traffic controllers and assistants were, his reply was suitably charismatic: They can all F**K OFF". </font>
When asked as to what his real feelings about the "beleaguered" air traffic controllers and assistants were, his reply was suitably charismatic: They can all F**K OFF". </font>
Rgds BEX
Guest
Posts: n/a
I heard that a certain DFR manager at LATCC was recently sent a letter by mistake ,( it should have gone to someone with the same name who has recently retired), from an engineer friend, stating that he wished the guy well in retirement and that the senders bonus had been paid in full, to the tune of----in excess of £10000.
Semple also got around £32000, if I remember correctly from the annual report.
Time to wet the powder.
Semple also got around £32000, if I remember correctly from the annual report.
Time to wet the powder.
Guest
Posts: n/a
No No No,
niteflite had got it all wrong. This could not possibly be. CC has published an 'open letter' to staff, so he won't mind me quoting from it, and this could not possibly be the same CC that was at the meeting. For example in the letter:
He is somewhat 'disappointed' - that he was quoted in the union's open letter, where 'he said many things to find a way forward'. He wants 'to encourage constructive dialogue, openness and ultimately trust','That is easily destroyed by actions such as yours'. So really CC is trying very hard and it's the union's fault nobody likes him. This is not the CC at the meeting obviously.
Anyway he says that although he wasn't at the payround discussuions he knows there was 'no absolute guarantee' that the bonus would pay in full. However, he does admit that management could have 'signalled' the differences in the way the bonuses were calculated. He's 'disappointed (poor man - that's twice we've done it to him) that the union aren't prepared to acknowledge their share of failure,' when they didn't notice that the bonuses couldn't pay out in full. So whilst indicating strongly that the bonuses would pay, they didn't say they couldn't, so management didn't tell and the union didn't notice, so its the unions fault really and 1 point to management.
He says we have to move on since 'looking for scapegoats in management side does nothing to foster the openness, honesty and trust that you (rightly) say is so good for industrial relations.' You see this CC actually cares about good relations, it MUST be a different man.
This CC is 'prepared to accept some of the blame for staff feeling misled'. He wants to find 'constructive ways' of 'going forward', of setting aside 'this confrontational approach'.
Now obviously the man at Manchester could not possibly be interested in constructive ways of going forward, and he didn't sound very disappointed about anything and he certainly wasn't encouraging 'constructive dialogue, openness and ultimately trust' was he?
Now I know that all of you will answer me saying 'But no, you are mistaken, I was at that meeting and saw a man full of openness and such trust. He had much dialogue. Verily he was much disappointed but sayeth he and management had but misled us only but a little bit, but still he was full of woe and sorry that they had pulleth the wool of the sacred sheep over the eyes of the unions. He had a dream of a new world where we would live in harmony, both the managemites and the controllerites, forgetting about how we had smitteth each other and blasphemeth against each other and managed to pull a fast one. Where the people will be content and happy and not led astray into the wilderness to be confused with numbers and targets and percentage bonuses and confounded with the baser things such as money'
So I wait to be corrected, obviously it's all been a terrible mistake.
niteflite had got it all wrong. This could not possibly be. CC has published an 'open letter' to staff, so he won't mind me quoting from it, and this could not possibly be the same CC that was at the meeting. For example in the letter:
He is somewhat 'disappointed' - that he was quoted in the union's open letter, where 'he said many things to find a way forward'. He wants 'to encourage constructive dialogue, openness and ultimately trust','That is easily destroyed by actions such as yours'. So really CC is trying very hard and it's the union's fault nobody likes him. This is not the CC at the meeting obviously.
Anyway he says that although he wasn't at the payround discussuions he knows there was 'no absolute guarantee' that the bonus would pay in full. However, he does admit that management could have 'signalled' the differences in the way the bonuses were calculated. He's 'disappointed (poor man - that's twice we've done it to him) that the union aren't prepared to acknowledge their share of failure,' when they didn't notice that the bonuses couldn't pay out in full. So whilst indicating strongly that the bonuses would pay, they didn't say they couldn't, so management didn't tell and the union didn't notice, so its the unions fault really and 1 point to management.
He says we have to move on since 'looking for scapegoats in management side does nothing to foster the openness, honesty and trust that you (rightly) say is so good for industrial relations.' You see this CC actually cares about good relations, it MUST be a different man.
This CC is 'prepared to accept some of the blame for staff feeling misled'. He wants to find 'constructive ways' of 'going forward', of setting aside 'this confrontational approach'.
Now obviously the man at Manchester could not possibly be interested in constructive ways of going forward, and he didn't sound very disappointed about anything and he certainly wasn't encouraging 'constructive dialogue, openness and ultimately trust' was he?
Now I know that all of you will answer me saying 'But no, you are mistaken, I was at that meeting and saw a man full of openness and such trust. He had much dialogue. Verily he was much disappointed but sayeth he and management had but misled us only but a little bit, but still he was full of woe and sorry that they had pulleth the wool of the sacred sheep over the eyes of the unions. He had a dream of a new world where we would live in harmony, both the managemites and the controllerites, forgetting about how we had smitteth each other and blasphemeth against each other and managed to pull a fast one. Where the people will be content and happy and not led astray into the wilderness to be confused with numbers and targets and percentage bonuses and confounded with the baser things such as money'
So I wait to be corrected, obviously it's all been a terrible mistake.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Asda what a SUPERB post
I haven't laughed so much in ages........shame it's such a bl**dy serious subject. BUT the main thing I was laughing at ?
The ineptitude, idiocy, mendaciousness, and down right incompetance of the man in question.
Let's just hope the Airline Group see it too.
I haven't laughed so much in ages........shame it's such a bl**dy serious subject. BUT the main thing I was laughing at ?
The ineptitude, idiocy, mendaciousness, and down right incompetance of the man in question.
Let's just hope the Airline Group see it too.
