NATS Pensions (Split from Pay 2009 thread)
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: I sell sea shells by the sea shore
Posts: 856
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You will note from the Railway Pension website that ex BR employees were and indeed are still COMPLETELY protected and continue to enjoy a Final Salary scheme. Indeed the employer is REQUIRED by law to maintain the scheme for those protected staff.
BEX
BEX
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: I sell sea shells by the sea shore
Posts: 856
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
two year veterans that seem to populate the knee jerk reactionary corner.
NEVER forget. NATS management (or management of any private company) don't have the employees best interests t heart. Their prime task is to run a profit making company and return dividends. In other words, they will always be biased.
One more thing. Deloitte, who were involved in advising NATS about CAAPS have been taken to court over the bad advice they gave to a company, whih subsequently went into liquidation because of their inaccurate report. So, probably NOT the best advisors then
BEX
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Over by there see
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ifaxu wrote .... its all very well saying things will improve in the financial markets given time. which they will. but it will all be a bit late if Nats has gone bust and our pension scheme wound up. and be under no illusion, any new buyer or government bail out will not honour our pension rights.
will any new buyer buy a company when the workforce won't work for them without their current Ts n Cs??? I think not. Will the government allow no flights over uk airspace??? ditto
we only need to stick together and fight this constant undermining of our Ts n Cs
Nats has made profits of X amount of million over the past few years how much of this is due to management starving our pension sceme?
first it was one pension, then it was two but no cange to our Ts and Cs, now well, if we do nothing we may as well start the search for different jobs! because in a few years it will be RPI - 0.5% then rpi - 1% until we are all on the new scheme because it will be better financially
each agreement management take something from us lets just let it keep happening eh??????
If we have to we stick up for ourselves I know I will, my belief is it will never get that far!
will any new buyer buy a company when the workforce won't work for them without their current Ts n Cs??? I think not. Will the government allow no flights over uk airspace??? ditto
we only need to stick together and fight this constant undermining of our Ts n Cs
Nats has made profits of X amount of million over the past few years how much of this is due to management starving our pension sceme?
first it was one pension, then it was two but no cange to our Ts and Cs, now well, if we do nothing we may as well start the search for different jobs! because in a few years it will be RPI - 0.5% then rpi - 1% until we are all on the new scheme because it will be better financially
each agreement management take something from us lets just let it keep happening eh??????
If we have to we stick up for ourselves I know I will, my belief is it will never get that far!
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sunny Warwickshire
Posts: 438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Deloitte hit by record £750,000 fine for failings in wealth management arm - Business News, Business - The Independent
It is also possible for us as union members to call for a special conference to be convened to discuss the pensions issue.
If what has been said above is true then MACC and ScACC are already doing this, just write to the union requesting a special conference, include your name and membership number.
Alternatively ask your local rep to produce the letter and get everyone on the unit who wants to sign it, then send it off.
If I remember rightly there needs to be about 170 signatures in total for a request for a special conference.
If one is convened, you can then tell your rep what you want and the matter can be debated.
The union have negotiated this deal without any mandate to do so. At the very least a special conference should be called even if it is to give the union a mandate to negotiate on our behalf and discuss what exactly WE want from these negotiations.
I may just speak to my rep when I'm back in and get him to do this.
It is also possible for us as union members to call for a special conference to be convened to discuss the pensions issue.
If what has been said above is true then MACC and ScACC are already doing this, just write to the union requesting a special conference, include your name and membership number.
Alternatively ask your local rep to produce the letter and get everyone on the unit who wants to sign it, then send it off.
If I remember rightly there needs to be about 170 signatures in total for a request for a special conference.
If one is convened, you can then tell your rep what you want and the matter can be debated.
The union have negotiated this deal without any mandate to do so. At the very least a special conference should be called even if it is to give the union a mandate to negotiate on our behalf and discuss what exactly WE want from these negotiations.
I may just speak to my rep when I'm back in and get him to do this.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: South
Age: 64
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There seems to be a large number of people against the proposed changes to the NATS pension but with both NATS management and the NTUS proposing a YES vote for these changes who is going to marshal the NO vote?
It certainly needs organising and organising fast.
I think it should also have the same privileges as the YES vote; time off for meetings, company website space, notice board space, access to staff data lists, internal mail facilities etc etc etc.
There are 3 main sections of NATS – Controllers, Admin and Engineers and they all need to be onboard.
It certainly needs organising and organising fast.
I think it should also have the same privileges as the YES vote; time off for meetings, company website space, notice board space, access to staff data lists, internal mail facilities etc etc etc.
There are 3 main sections of NATS – Controllers, Admin and Engineers and they all need to be onboard.
Beady Eye
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATCO
ATSA
ATCE
STAR (SCIENCE, TECHNICAL, ANALYTICAL & RESEARCH GROUP)
&
MSG (MANAGERIAL AND SUPPORT GROUP)
BD
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
who cares what we are.
we all need to vote no.... and to be honest, the feeling at our large and influential unit is that anyone voting yes had better had some thick damn skin and keep their heads down.
we all need to vote no.... and to be honest, the feeling at our large and influential unit is that anyone voting yes had better had some thick damn skin and keep their heads down.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: By the Sea-side
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh great. Now we are getting threats. Ee, it 'minds me of t'days of old down t'pit.
Will you be coming down from your large and influential unit to intimidate and bully us at our small and insignificant one then?
I will vote how I think best, not you. I may vote no, or I may vote yes, but it will be my vote.
Will you be coming down from your large and influential unit to intimidate and bully us at our small and insignificant one then?
I will vote how I think best, not you. I may vote no, or I may vote yes, but it will be my vote.
I hate Illinois Nazis
Join Date: May 2004
Location: alton
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well said dances with boffins. I will happily provide king louis with my home address via private e-mail and he can come down and try to intimidate me if i decide to vote yes! think he may get more than he bargained for though. Weasel!
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm with you, DwB, I've already seen what could be seen to as intimidation.
Of course, the 'anonymous' nature of internet bulletin boards sometimes works against reasoned debate.
Of course, the 'anonymous' nature of internet bulletin boards sometimes works against reasoned debate.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: South
Age: 64
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Everybody needs to calm down. We live in a democracy and no one need ever fear any retribution for however they vote.
Let's not let this thread deteriorate into a squabble; your pension is far too important and far too imperilled for that.
Let's just have constructive ideas and factual argument please.
Let's not let this thread deteriorate into a squabble; your pension is far too important and far too imperilled for that.
Let's just have constructive ideas and factual argument please.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Dahn Saa'af
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Delving deep in the Nats annual report and accounts linky reveals some interesting facts and figures.
1.Profits were reduced by the repayment of £65Million in high interest (11.5%) perpetual shareholder loan notes financed in part by the group’s strong
operating cash flows. The repayment incurred an early
redemption charge of £15.8Million!...in other words a healthy profit for shareholders without actually being seen as 'profit'!.
2. At 31 March 2008, measured under international accounting
standards, the pension scheme had a surplus of assets over
liabilities of £413.5m compared with a surplus of £238.6m
at 31 March 2007. This varies greatly from the figures being spouted as to why the pension scheme is at risk.
Who is telling the truth??
1.Profits were reduced by the repayment of £65Million in high interest (11.5%) perpetual shareholder loan notes financed in part by the group’s strong
operating cash flows. The repayment incurred an early
redemption charge of £15.8Million!...in other words a healthy profit for shareholders without actually being seen as 'profit'!.
2. At 31 March 2008, measured under international accounting
standards, the pension scheme had a surplus of assets over
liabilities of £413.5m compared with a surplus of £238.6m
at 31 March 2007. This varies greatly from the figures being spouted as to why the pension scheme is at risk.
Who is telling the truth??
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Lymington
Age: 59
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
king louis said:
what unit is this?
At my large and influential unit, most people I spoke to are disgusted by this proposal but I have heard nothing of people being gunned down mid opinion etc?
and to be honest, the feeling at our large and influential unit is that anyone voting yes had better had some thick damn skin and keep their heads down.
At my large and influential unit, most people I spoke to are disgusted by this proposal but I have heard nothing of people being gunned down mid opinion etc?
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Costa Packet
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NATS SECTION OF CAAPS SCHEDULE OF CONTRIBUTIONS MARCH 2008 - MARCH 2013
There was no shortfall when this document was signed 20th March 08 and the employer contributions were agreed untill March 2013
ImageShack - Hosting :: image1sm1.jpg
There was no shortfall when this document was signed 20th March 08 and the employer contributions were agreed untill March 2013
ImageShack - Hosting :: image1sm1.jpg
Last edited by Air.Farce.1; 29th Sep 2008 at 17:04.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: The land common sense forgot
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was a petition for special conference doing the rounds at MACC and ScOACC that basically went along the lines of the negotiating team is not to agree to anything on the pension front without first consulting the membership.
It needs 170 signatures but at least twice that number should be possible.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: South
Age: 64
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So who on here honestly thinks the pension scheme is viable as it stands?
I think it suits the owners to have a hobbled pension scheme as NATS would be worth more in a sale.
I certainly don't believe we should be making any long term decisions in such unusual financial times.
I also think we need a truely independent financial accessment of the fund and NATS's ability to maintain its contributions.
I also think the cost through put rubbish is the biggest pile of
I have heard in a long time.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Auld Reekie
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
There was a petition for special conference doing the rounds at MACC and ScOACC that basically went along the lines of the negotiating team is not to agree to anything on the pension front without first consulting the membership.
It should also be coming out at the southern units too in the next few days. Ask your reps.
It needs 170 signatures but at least twice that number should be possible
There was a petition for special conference doing the rounds at MACC and ScOACC that basically went along the lines of the negotiating team is not to agree to anything on the pension front without first consulting the membership.
It should also be coming out at the southern units too in the next few days. Ask your reps.
It needs 170 signatures but at least twice that number should be possible
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Auld Reekie
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2. At 31 March 2008, measured under international accounting
standards, the pension scheme had a surplus of assets over
liabilities of £413.5m compared with a surplus of £238.6m
at 31 March 2007.
standards, the pension scheme had a surplus of assets over
liabilities of £413.5m compared with a surplus of £238.6m
at 31 March 2007.
I think it'd make interesting reading around the ops room
