NATS Pensions (Split from Pay 2009 thread)
StandupfortheUlstermen
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Peoples' Democratic Republic of Wurzelsetshire
Age: 53
Posts: 1,182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having been a union rep in two different unions (Unison & Amicus/MSF) during my sojourn from NATS, I know only too well that it's a thankless task. But as I always said to the guys I represented, 'you need to tell me what you want before I go banging on the management's door. No good bitching that what we ended up with wasn't what you wanted.'
At my last unit, they had a habit of promoting the union reps to positions where they had to give the union job up. Still, I'm sure NATS has figured out that having a poacher wearing the gamekeeper's jacket is a handy thing for them.
At my last unit, they had a habit of promoting the union reps to positions where they had to give the union job up. Still, I'm sure NATS has figured out that having a poacher wearing the gamekeeper's jacket is a handy thing for them.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Emma,
Why should you pay extra for full time representation?
Surely that is what the "union" is all about. If the union does not represent your interests, then you should be talking to Trading Standards.
An analogy for you:-
If, when moving house, you employed a solicitor who cared about the other party's interests more than yours, you would be extremely unhappy.
The French controller's union has testicles, one reason why their standard of living is better than yours.
In France:-
Changing Le Pension? - NON!
Fermature Le ATC Centre d' Aix-en-Provence, se déplacer 300 km du nord avec Cartus? - NON!
Le PPP? - ZOOT ALLORS!!!
Qui est La Barron Rouge?
Do you know any UK ATC Staff who have retired and moved to France? - OUI
Do you know any French ATC Staff who have retired and moved to the UK? - NON
!
Why should you pay extra for full time representation?
Surely that is what the "union" is all about. If the union does not represent your interests, then you should be talking to Trading Standards.
An analogy for you:-
If, when moving house, you employed a solicitor who cared about the other party's interests more than yours, you would be extremely unhappy.
The French controller's union has testicles, one reason why their standard of living is better than yours.
In France:-
Changing Le Pension? - NON!
Fermature Le ATC Centre d' Aix-en-Provence, se déplacer 300 km du nord avec Cartus? - NON!
Le PPP? - ZOOT ALLORS!!!
Qui est La Barron Rouge?
Do you know any UK ATC Staff who have retired and moved to France? - OUI
Do you know any French ATC Staff who have retired and moved to the UK? - NON
! Last edited by ZOOKER; 7th Aug 2008 at 20:41.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cheshire, California, Geneva, and Paris
Age: 67
Posts: 867
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At Swanwick the pension situation has been top of the canteen talk agenda for some time and a couple of very pertinent points have been brought up. It has been suggested that the privatisation "trust of promise" only covers employees in post prior to 2001 and that any vote to change the pension arrangements would have to be agreed by the majority of employees of NATS.
I would like to suggest that if this is so then we "oldsters" are either in the minority already or will be very shortly if you include the many adminisrators and other non ATC staff in post at Swanwick and the CTC. This will be compounded by "oldsters" who the changes do not affect voting for the proposed changes to receive the inevitable "bung" which goes with these "improvements" to our pension fund.
I would like to suggest that if this is so then we "oldsters" are either in the minority already or will be very shortly if you include the many adminisrators and other non ATC staff in post at Swanwick and the CTC. This will be compounded by "oldsters" who the changes do not affect voting for the proposed changes to receive the inevitable "bung" which goes with these "improvements" to our pension fund.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Working To Rule
As has been correctly pointed out, any 'working to rule' would mean that we would have to forego any possible early go's.
Are people so precious about 30-40 minutes at the end of one shift in 6 that they would not be willing to do this?
Any working to rule would hurt the company far more than it would hurt us. Things to be considered as doable would be:
a. Dropping sectors above the MUR.
b. If not the above, insisting that if we are required (for staffing purposes) to move from one sector to the other - we ensure we get half an hour break before we do so and not move immediately from one seat to the other (safety implication).
c. No AAVAs
d. Training - ensure that we are fully happy that we have enough continuity before training someone
e. Splitting sectors every way they can be split more often (Safety again, after all, are you really in a fit state of mind to work sectors bandboxed when you are worried about what is happening to your pension? Is it worth the risk?)
f. Refuse to do the secondary duites that you do not get paid for i.e. writing the roster or attending workshops for new procedures etc
I'm sure there are many other instances os goodwill that we could refuse to carry out, safety is always a good reason, no one can pick you up on it.
As for early go's - I for one advocate that we have 2 cycles whereby no one gets an early go. The reason I say this is that some pathetic idiots (certainly on my watch) think it's a right, not a privilege, and whinge all the time about it.
These people have never worked in jobs where early go's are unheard off... a bit of a reality check would do them good every now and again!!
REVOLUTION,
Your post about pay rises and MUR is a valid one, but I have one concern - there are a few ATCO's who are near to retirement who have had a productive career and are now finding it a bit difficult to work the core sectors... Do you not feel that there should be some discretion for these people?
I fully agree though that someone who is in the early stages of their career should have an MUR to receive full benefits.
If they are not good enough to hold MUR, they should not be on the unit. There are a few people around who are in this position (having been trained on a non core sector after SVC/TVC, and then unable to cross over through inability), yet their course mates who failed to validate on a core sector after SVC/TVC get chopped, sometimes not even being given a second chance at another unit.
I know life is not fair, but why if we bin people who cannot do a core sector from the offing, do we hold onto people who through luck get to train on a non core sector instead of a core one, then do nothing else?
Are people so precious about 30-40 minutes at the end of one shift in 6 that they would not be willing to do this?
Any working to rule would hurt the company far more than it would hurt us. Things to be considered as doable would be:
a. Dropping sectors above the MUR.
b. If not the above, insisting that if we are required (for staffing purposes) to move from one sector to the other - we ensure we get half an hour break before we do so and not move immediately from one seat to the other (safety implication).
c. No AAVAs
d. Training - ensure that we are fully happy that we have enough continuity before training someone
e. Splitting sectors every way they can be split more often (Safety again, after all, are you really in a fit state of mind to work sectors bandboxed when you are worried about what is happening to your pension? Is it worth the risk?)
f. Refuse to do the secondary duites that you do not get paid for i.e. writing the roster or attending workshops for new procedures etc
I'm sure there are many other instances os goodwill that we could refuse to carry out, safety is always a good reason, no one can pick you up on it.
As for early go's - I for one advocate that we have 2 cycles whereby no one gets an early go. The reason I say this is that some pathetic idiots (certainly on my watch) think it's a right, not a privilege, and whinge all the time about it.
These people have never worked in jobs where early go's are unheard off... a bit of a reality check would do them good every now and again!!
REVOLUTION,
Your post about pay rises and MUR is a valid one, but I have one concern - there are a few ATCO's who are near to retirement who have had a productive career and are now finding it a bit difficult to work the core sectors... Do you not feel that there should be some discretion for these people?
I fully agree though that someone who is in the early stages of their career should have an MUR to receive full benefits.
If they are not good enough to hold MUR, they should not be on the unit. There are a few people around who are in this position (having been trained on a non core sector after SVC/TVC, and then unable to cross over through inability), yet their course mates who failed to validate on a core sector after SVC/TVC get chopped, sometimes not even being given a second chance at another unit.
I know life is not fair, but why if we bin people who cannot do a core sector from the offing, do we hold onto people who through luck get to train on a non core sector instead of a core one, then do nothing else?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Just North of France
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An AAVA is paid at a flat rate for the shift, the rate is dependant on the banding of the unit and obviously is of more relative value to the junior ATCO's.
Thanks for joining the debate again, I appreciate both arguments for and against AAVA's, but some of the alternatives to a voluntary agreement may be even less appealling!
I look forward to hearing your views
Thanks for joining the debate again, I appreciate both arguments for and against AAVA's, but some of the alternatives to a voluntary agreement may be even less appealling!
I look forward to hearing your views
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Scotland, ATCO
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Firstly we need to be pushing the union to commission another valuation of our pension scheme using the amounts NATS should have been paying. Then we can see where the pension surplus really should be. I’m sure everyone will agree that the figures would be a lot healthier.This would help in a number of ways….firstly it shifts the “blame” for the reduction of the surplus to NATS management and not an unsustainable scheme/economic downturn etc etc etc
This would also be essential to present as evidence to bolster public support in the event of strike action!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Just North of France
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
121.375
I agree entirely.
As I said before, would we even be asking these questions now had NATS been coughing up what they should have been paying into the scheme.
Even now the trustees are still allowing them to get away with a reduced rate, whilst posting profits and paying dividends. WTF is going on?
I agree entirely.
As I said before, would we even be asking these questions now had NATS been coughing up what they should have been paying into the scheme.
Even now the trustees are still allowing them to get away with a reduced rate, whilst posting profits and paying dividends. WTF is going on?
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Home
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On pensions - I would expect to see the tone of messages coming from the TU to alter soon.... in order to show a clear distance between the negotiating sides. Gridlock.
On pay - We may well end up getting something around the expected RPI + 0.5 - 1% but I very much doubt it will all come as part of a 'core' pay offer. Rather, I'd expect to see a core offer under RPI with a multitude of agreements on efficiencies and trimming of costs paying for the rest. The message coming from NATS is 'whatever payrise you get has to be paid for with savings for us'. But thats been the case in recent years.
On a general note - reading these NATS discussions I think it's often forgotten that there are people who work for NATS, doing 40-50 hours a week and supporting a family on £20-£25k. They are also most often the ones who are made to work harder and longer to cover for job cuts made to fund increases. No, they don't wear a headset - but their gas went up by the same 35%, their petrol costs just as much - they just don't have the Ferrari to put it in
On pay - We may well end up getting something around the expected RPI + 0.5 - 1% but I very much doubt it will all come as part of a 'core' pay offer. Rather, I'd expect to see a core offer under RPI with a multitude of agreements on efficiencies and trimming of costs paying for the rest. The message coming from NATS is 'whatever payrise you get has to be paid for with savings for us'. But thats been the case in recent years.
On a general note - reading these NATS discussions I think it's often forgotten that there are people who work for NATS, doing 40-50 hours a week and supporting a family on £20-£25k. They are also most often the ones who are made to work harder and longer to cover for job cuts made to fund increases. No, they don't wear a headset - but their gas went up by the same 35%, their petrol costs just as much - they just don't have the Ferrari to put it in
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: South
Age: 64
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The past year has been an extremely volatile time for the Markets in which our pension scheme invests so much of our funds.
I don't think it'd be wise to make any long term decisions based on this period.
We should also be wary of any statistics bandied about as we all know with a little bit of skill and a little bit of spin they can be made to prove anything.
I don't think it'd be wise to make any long term decisions based on this period.
We should also be wary of any statistics bandied about as we all know with a little bit of skill and a little bit of spin they can be made to prove anything.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Hampshire
Age: 59
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Defend Our Pay & Pensions
The most important thing here is that the different types of employee stick together. ATCO, Engineer, Scientist, ATSA should be united. NATS senior management will try to divide and rule. We want no separate pay deals, no separate pension deals!. My faith in the union leadership to defend our iinterests is at an all time low. We should demand the company increases its contribution to the pension fund to take it FURTHER into surplus. Also we should go back to single year pay deals and settle for nothing less than RPI + 1. It is clear the company wants to weaken the Pension in order to close the scheme and split up NATS. NSL would almost certainly be sold first. The answer is simple...defend the Pension Scheme and get a decent pay rise for all and the company is less attractive for a potential buyer...which is what we want. Secure your pension, more pay and one whole NATS sounds simple to me. We just need some sort of gutsy leadership from TUs. Failing that the Union risks wildcat action by disgruntled ATCOs & other staff.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Home
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Call a strike on pay? No...
Call a strike on pension? Yes.
On the question about MACC getting band 5... erm... no mention I know of. Have heard some ridiculous demands from a few of those having to move though.
Call a strike on pension? Yes.
On the question about MACC getting band 5... erm... no mention I know of. Have heard some ridiculous demands from a few of those having to move though.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
goldfrog,
i dont envy you working those ours at all.
there will always be a divide between ops staff and the other, many aspects of the company. the majority of it stems from high above and we always play into their hands. the main point here is pay and pensions, the latter should be none negotiable for all of us. regardless of hours worked in any given week, that is our job, whatever it may be. NATS has indeed lost its way since PPP and is now a business run by externally drafted types who have no clue about providing a safe service, let alone actual ATC but are near wholly concerned with profit and delays.
if we let the company take it easy on pay and pensions this time round, it will not be remembered by the company in 3 to 7 years and they will stiff our pensions for good then. THEY were allowed to take a payment holiday by ALL of us who voted. its time they made it up and admitted responsibility for their actions. if they have to use some of their 'record profits' for the last year and get the pension fund sorted. so be it.
i dont envy you working those ours at all.
there will always be a divide between ops staff and the other, many aspects of the company. the majority of it stems from high above and we always play into their hands. the main point here is pay and pensions, the latter should be none negotiable for all of us. regardless of hours worked in any given week, that is our job, whatever it may be. NATS has indeed lost its way since PPP and is now a business run by externally drafted types who have no clue about providing a safe service, let alone actual ATC but are near wholly concerned with profit and delays.
if we let the company take it easy on pay and pensions this time round, it will not be remembered by the company in 3 to 7 years and they will stiff our pensions for good then. THEY were allowed to take a payment holiday by ALL of us who voted. its time they made it up and admitted responsibility for their actions. if they have to use some of their 'record profits' for the last year and get the pension fund sorted. so be it.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Up North
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MNT
Watch the exodus when the pension goes. I come to work everyday because I love my job, not the company, managers or new initiative makers wasting precious money on things like destinations and 'Lost Horizons'.
I am not a company man and believe this company has gone far too commercial. Air traffic should not be handled like this as everything comes down to cost and profit rather than safety. I appreciate we need some backroom staff and if you actually read my post I was talking about the numerous administrators and manager this that and the other that we are brimming with. They are just mainly based at CTC. I count engineering as front line staff and the guys at my unit are well respected and part of the team. I do not feel however that I am part of the HR team etc or vice versa and the only thing in common is we work for NATS.
Watch the exodus when the pension goes. I come to work everyday because I love my job, not the company, managers or new initiative makers wasting precious money on things like destinations and 'Lost Horizons'.
I am not a company man and believe this company has gone far too commercial. Air traffic should not be handled like this as everything comes down to cost and profit rather than safety. I appreciate we need some backroom staff and if you actually read my post I was talking about the numerous administrators and manager this that and the other that we are brimming with. They are just mainly based at CTC. I count engineering as front line staff and the guys at my unit are well respected and part of the team. I do not feel however that I am part of the HR team etc or vice versa and the only thing in common is we work for NATS.
