NSL/NERL split
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: southampton
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Correct me if I'm wrong, as this is the first I have heard about this.... I assume from previous posts that the redundancy terms are not quite what they once were and we're being offered £750 as a sweetener to accept them?
If this is the case I would imagine that the ATCOs will vote in favour and the ATSAs will vote no (as we're in Mr. Baron's sights). So I'll get £750 after tax and bugger all when they kick me out!! Great!! LOL
If this is the case I would imagine that the ATCOs will vote in favour and the ATSAs will vote no (as we're in Mr. Baron's sights). So I'll get £750 after tax and bugger all when they kick me out!! Great!! LOL
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Surrey
Age: 46
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would imagine that the ATCOs will vote in favour
FB
Join Date: May 2007
Location: swanwick carp lake
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i read the literature outside the ops room the other day and from what i understood of it, the redundancy terms are better after the propsed changes? can someone please explain why they are not. I am a bit of a dunce when it comes to such topics.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Over by there see
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ImnotanERIC,
From what I understand after reading the proposal, NATS have said that if we don't accept the new terms then they could give 6 months notice and then implement statuatory redundancy terms(ie. 1 week pay for every year etc). So NATS are making it look as if the terms are better. However IMHO if you compare the new terms to our current terms they are nowhere near as good.
Another ATCO who wont be voting for the new changes (even though £450 would make a nice dent in the credit card)
From what I understand after reading the proposal, NATS have said that if we don't accept the new terms then they could give 6 months notice and then implement statuatory redundancy terms(ie. 1 week pay for every year etc). So NATS are making it look as if the terms are better. However IMHO if you compare the new terms to our current terms they are nowhere near as good.
Another ATCO who wont be voting for the new changes (even though £450 would make a nice dent in the credit card)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Home
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The redundancy terms now (if accepted) will be better or worse for different groups. Those who would have got the big bucks previously will clearly miss out. However, some groups will get better terms e.g. those 60+ who previously would have got nothing at all but now will receive the same terms as everyone else.
It's a tough sell for the unions but, quite frankly, a no vote will have the simple outcome of NATS imposing statutory redundancy terms. They are completely within their rights to do so and no strike action would be legal as far as I know. With this deal you'll get 1 - 1.5 months salary for each year of service up to a maximum of 20. On statutory terms you'd get 1 week.
My advice is take the £750.
It's a tough sell for the unions but, quite frankly, a no vote will have the simple outcome of NATS imposing statutory redundancy terms. They are completely within their rights to do so and no strike action would be legal as far as I know. With this deal you'll get 1 - 1.5 months salary for each year of service up to a maximum of 20. On statutory terms you'd get 1 week.
My advice is take the £750.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Surrey
Age: 46
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand about the statutory redundancy terms and that is obviously the worst case scenario, but surely the deal on offer isn't that good or they wouldn't have to offer a £750 bung for it to be accepted?!?
FB
FB
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Home
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They know nobody would have wanted this change so the £750 is a sweetner, yes.
Basically... the old scheme had a whole load of steps in it, triggered by age and service. This meant that, for a certain amount of money, you could pay very little at the bottom and step it up many times so the guys in the top bracket got a wheelbarrow full.
Under new legislation you are only permitted 1 step up and this must be at age 41 and it must be a maximum ratio of 1.5:1
The result is that, if you wanted a scheme that gave the same payment at the top end, then the terms at the bottom end would be massively increased and the overall cost of a redundancy deal would go through the roof. That aint going to happen.
Basically... the old scheme had a whole load of steps in it, triggered by age and service. This meant that, for a certain amount of money, you could pay very little at the bottom and step it up many times so the guys in the top bracket got a wheelbarrow full.
Under new legislation you are only permitted 1 step up and this must be at age 41 and it must be a maximum ratio of 1.5:1
The result is that, if you wanted a scheme that gave the same payment at the top end, then the terms at the bottom end would be massively increased and the overall cost of a redundancy deal would go through the roof. That aint going to happen.
Last edited by Me Me Me Me; 31st May 2007 at 09:37.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Grim North
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fact is the unions had the Staff surplus agreement protected until 2011. This was no accident as redundancy would be very relevant to some come the TC move to Swanwick and MACC to Prestwick.
If this is the case then, this is why we should stick together. Stand up to NATS and fight like we use to fight for our T&C's. We do not have to strike, few of us can afford it, but we can work to rule and impose an OT ban. You will soon have NATS at the negotiating table when the delays start to bite. Be strong!
It's a tough sell for the unions but, quite frankly, a no vote will have the simple outcome of NATS imposing statutory redundancy terms.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: South
Age: 64
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From what I understand after reading the proposal, NATS have said that if we don't accept the new terms then they could give 6 months notice and then implement statuatory redundancy terms(ie. 1 week pay for every year etc).
My advice is take the £750.
If people in NERL vote for the £750 and people in NSL against the £750 what happens then?
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Home
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The vote is via the TU, not NATS. So it's not company specific.
At any rate, this is not something that can be divided by company. This is a legally required amendment to policy. It HAS to change for everyone regardless.
At any rate, this is not something that can be divided by company. This is a legally required amendment to policy. It HAS to change for everyone regardless.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Grim North
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i read the literature outside the ops room the other day and from what i understood of it, the redundancy terms are better after the propsed changes? can someone please explain why they are not. I am a bit of a dunce when it comes to such topics.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Home
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They may well do... but they both come under the umbrella of NATS Ltd, which has to replace illegal agreements now. Barron's made it clear they will look at T&Cs in NSL seperately in future but you can't take a seperate vote now on something that isn't a seperate issue.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Jones
you are argumentative, aren't you!!!
Tell you what, lets do as you propose and have a separate vote for NSL and NERL.... then, when it comes to the next set of pay talks (next year), we can do the same....
Wonder who will be better off in a separate pay deal - a large profit making NERL or ssmall profit NSL?!!
Stick together for everyones sake
you are argumentative, aren't you!!!
Tell you what, lets do as you propose and have a separate vote for NSL and NERL.... then, when it comes to the next set of pay talks (next year), we can do the same....
Wonder who will be better off in a separate pay deal - a large profit making NERL or ssmall profit NSL?!!
Stick together for everyones sake
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: South
Age: 64
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why is asking simple questions being argumentative?
I think the possibility of NSL being spun off means there should be separate ballots and I have yet to hear any cogent argument why there shouldn't be separate ballots.
I think the possibility of NSL being spun off means there should be separate ballots and I have yet to hear any cogent argument why there shouldn't be separate ballots.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr jones,
If you have a divided vote in one thing you must have it in all - that means that NSLill have less of an argument for a decent pay deal next time round... I can see my foot, now where's me shotgun?
If you have a divided vote in one thing you must have it in all - that means that NSLill have less of an argument for a decent pay deal next time round... I can see my foot, now where's me shotgun?