Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Ground & Other Ops Forums > ATC Issues
Reload this Page >

NATS Pay Rise for 2009

ATC Issues A place where pilots may enter the 'lions den' that is Air Traffic Control in complete safety and find out the answers to all those obscure topics which you always wanted to know the answer to but were afraid to ask.

NATS Pay Rise for 2009

Old 30th Jul 2008, 10:16
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: South
Age: 60
Posts: 89
NATS Pay Rise for 2009

Has anyone heard anything about the negotiations?
MrJones is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2008, 16:17
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: In my garden shed
Posts: 230
...should this be in the NATS forum? possibly?
hold at SATAN is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2008, 20:12
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Near VTUU or EGPX
Age: 61
Posts: 300
Colleagues, do not despair, our powder is still dry !

Ha, bloody, ha !

I wonder what pittance we will settle for this time around.
The Fat Controller is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2008, 20:58
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: In the world
Posts: 205
Originally Posted by hold at SATAN
...should this be in the NATS forum? possibly?
Yes it should, perhaps PPRuNe Radar is on holiday (or at work).
Dizzee Rascal is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2008, 21:12
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 1,996
No it shouldn't.
NATS is, afterall, a PUBLIC private partnership, (PPP).

Last edited by ZOOKER; 30th Jul 2008 at 22:23.
ZOOKER is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2008, 08:24
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: In the world
Posts: 205
So what is the point of having a NATS forum on PPRuNe which only NATS staff can access, or ZOOKER are you saying the NATS forum should be made public?

Surely the subject of pay is one such subject that should be discussed in the private NATS forum.
Dizzee Rascal is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2008, 08:30
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,294
Zooker,

I personally think it should be in the NATS private forum, PPP or not.

However, I am happy for any Tom, Dick or Harriet to read about it because as pointed out above by kinglouis, NATS runs on the goodwill of its staff. The operational side cannot work otherwise. I for one have no qualms about asking the company for recognition of this fact.

They want to steal our pension and give us a 0% pay rise... they can try, but it will be their downfall.

For the original question - I have heard that the Union wants to settle the pension debate first, before moving onto the pay deal. Seems logical - the pension is a longer term thing and is ultimately the more important of the two.
anotherthing is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2008, 08:39
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: swanwick carp lake
Posts: 232
I think this will be a very interesting time for both negotiations.its funny when there are loads of rumours flying about. everyone has heard something different.
ImnotanERIC is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2008, 09:03
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Swanwick
Age: 38
Posts: 43
pay rises this year

Firstly I agree with most people, this should be in the NATS forum I thinks. PPP doesnt mean the public need to know all about whats in our pay packets. If the company want to declare it, thats its decision

i think this coming year is a big year for all us NATS employees... The threats to our terms and conditions are very real, and we should all (ATCOs and other staff) think seriously about what the company is offering, what the company is trying to take away, and whether we want to let it. You know whatever the company try and do with the pension, there will be some variety of bung thrown in, to try and lure us! I think the annual pay rise may be that bung...

The two should not be in any way attached to each other, and the union will hopefully hold to that! Pay is seperate from the pension, and if there was a bung it'd need to be bloody big... lol!

As for the goodwill of staff, well if NATS decided to try and take away something we treasure (our pension for example) then why would we conntinue to do more than our Minimum Unit Competency... Its just not in our interests. Wonder how TC East will survive for example?? There is no TC East... Without the cross validations, there is no NATS... The company knows this, and needs to tread carefully I thinks. Why would we ever need to strike like the french or the germans? we can stop the nats operation by simply doing our jobs and nothing more...
Medway Control is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2008, 11:40
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Scotland, ATCO
Posts: 74
Without getting silly figures, how much of a payrise would you be happy to accept?

Inflation atleast?

121decimal375 is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2008, 13:21
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southampton
Posts: 97
121.375

I'll take RPI as a minimum RPI +1% would be even better!!!
StillDark&Hungry is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2008, 16:57
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: swanwick carp lake
Posts: 232
we will surely get rpi wont we? (is that a silly assumption)

The thing about giving up ojti, extra validation, lce tickets etc is that when you have done it or even just threatened it , where do you go form there?
strike action would be painful, if only because public support would be next to none as tv pictures showed people turning up to picket in their M3's, porsche's, merc's etc.
In my opinion the pay negotiaions are nowhere near as important as pension talks. we could survive on our current wages and defer talks for one or two years as long as we dont cock up our pension!!!!!
ImnotanERIC is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2008, 18:21
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Just North of France
Posts: 82
Firstly, I would agree in the current climate that RPI plus 1% would be a fair offer.

ANOTHER THING

I didn't say that splitting the pay rise is necessarily a bad idea.

However, the minimum amount that is pensionable would have to be RPI, because if not your standard of living beyond pension age would not be keeping pace with the cost of living. Secondly, if you were drawing a pension from the fund, you automatically recieve an RPI increase anyway so they would be potentially doing better than those sustaining the fund.

Also, everybody knows that come next pay round, management would try and make the pensionable amount smaller yet again!

the cumulative effect of these seemingly small amounts would be significant further down the line.

I'm all for playing our part in keeping the fund open, but NATS need to make more of an effort now and realise the value of keeping employees happy!
AREA52 is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2008, 17:29
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Around
Age: 43
Posts: 83
For the life of me I can't understand the mentality of anyone who thinks we should be getting less than RPI+1% as an absolute bare minimum.

Since the last pay deal, we have each year worked more and more traffic. We have had it shoved down our throats that NATS last year was awarded 'Best ANSP in the world'. We have seen the likes of the Middle East, South Africa, New Zealand, Australia, Canada, Germany & Ireland start trying to recruit experienced controllers from overseas. We have also seen NATS advertising for experienced ATCOs along with falling numbers getting out of the College, and even fewer actually validating. This suggests to me that each year we as ATCOs get in an increasingly stronger position and so we should have approached the latest pay negotiations with that mind. And let's not forget that NATS is actually posting profits now.

As for the Pension. The day the politicians who said 'Our Skies are not for sale' give up their gold-plated final salary pensions should be the day that we agree to give up ours.
mhk77 is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2008, 17:33
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: 24/7 Hardcore Heaven
Posts: 526
No one is saying we WANT less than RPI+1% but what we want and what we're gonna get are 2 totally different things and i dont think people should be thinking we're automatically going to get anything as good as the last pay deal...rather we should be preparing for the worst.
Dont forget, NATS got their fingers badly burnt last time by agreeing to that RPI+ x% figure...can you see seriously see them doing that again? Barron may be many things but stupid he ain't.
mr.777 is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2008, 17:49
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Around
Age: 43
Posts: 83
Why should we be preparing for the worst?

How many ATCOs do you know of being made redundant in the latest credit crunch?

Is the demand for ATCOs falling worldwide or rising?

Are NATS or are they not recruiting experienced ATCOs?

How many units are now fully staffed and are running without the need for AAVAs/Sector Closures/Flow Restrictions?

I would suggest that WE have the upper hand in any negotiations NOT management.
mhk77 is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2008, 22:02
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Just North of France
Posts: 82
Mr 777

NATS are not affected by RPI in terms of what they charge and what they pay their staff, as the route charges are set out on a strict RPI minus formula. So no fingers were burnt as a result of the high RPI figure in SEP 07, as they take in more and pay out more. This of course does have a negative effect for the airlines as there costs increase more.

This is designed to gradually reduce the cost of chargeable units to the airlines, but as traffic generally increases, any reduction in unit cost should have little effect as the basic running costs of the company should remain much the same or even decrease as we reduce the number of centres in the UK and attempt to reduce existing costs (usually in the wrong areas!).

If traffic starts taking a significant downturn, then they/we will have a problem. This is however beyond our control!

Regards
AREA52 is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2008, 22:41
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The South
Posts: 106
Area52

I think what mr777 is meaning when talking about RPI is;
Off the top of my head, part of the last pay deal was based on the RPI of a certain month last year (August I think) and it turned out that the August RPI was higher than the surrounding months.

I may be wrong but I think that was the case.
DTY/LKS is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2008, 22:51
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: LACC
Posts: 49
NATS have plenty of room to save money by stopping these ridiculous community funds, awards nights and solar panels as a start. These shouldn't be funded whilst they're saying there's a problem with the pension pot.

Earlier posters have already mentioned the tax efficient way of paying into the pension, why won't they do this?

We shouldn't be settling for lower pay rises than normal either when we are the party in-demand. We can save those days for when we the supply demand curve is back in managements favour. Good will is why we have this issue now, by allowing them to stop payments for a period and not returning the favour.

And as somebody said; drop extra tickets, stop overtime. No need to strike. But I wouldnt be against it either. There's a reason why french controllers get cushy hours, pay and conditions and its because they are prepared to show management/government who are in control!
intherealworld is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2008, 01:43
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 99
intherealworld talks absolute sense.... i have said before and will say again, we are in a very good position to negotiate, like the french etc... lets not sell ourselves short.
if we get offered a crap deal.. vote NO.
and while the company is still spending 20k upwards for a day at a hotel in southampton rather than using CTC to talk about the new capital airspace, we should be aiming as high as we can
kinglouis is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.