UK - NATS Pay negotiations - latest rumours
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Paul Barron's talent for management was evident early on - he organised nights out for his friends, then he became a union rep and a supervisor. The poker fan says that his real skill is that he can read people and situations well"
Maybe this gave him the idea of "Working Together"
Maybe this gave him the idea of "Working Together"
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cheshire, California, Geneva, and Paris
Age: 67
Posts: 867
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Barron was a union rep and supervisor, maybe he is now the role model for some of the younger prospect reps that I saw giving the pensions brief late last year. They certainly dressed like and used the management buzz-words like candidates from the Apprentice.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surely that depends 777. If he has found ways of reducing back room staff and thus saving money without affecting performance isn't that good? ATCOS on here are always saying there are too many non ops staff
I'm not saying he has, I don't know who has gone, but I'd bet its not ATCOs
I'm not saying he has, I don't know who has gone, but I'd bet its not ATCOs
and no E G's all we can go on at the moment?
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: 24/7 Hardcore Heaven
Posts: 525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ProM
I hear what you're saying. I just think 9% in the current climate is a p*ss-take, regardless of cost-cuts.
And, no it won't be ATCOs going...there aren't enough of us as it is!
I hear what you're saying. I just think 9% in the current climate is a p*ss-take, regardless of cost-cuts.
And, no it won't be ATCOs going...there aren't enough of us as it is!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
non op GSs??
What a ridiculous idea.
We are allowed one per watch at the moment and that's enough. GS's need to be current to be any good at, well GS'ing.
I would go completely the other way - give all the middle managers the paperwork that they have passed down to Gs's/LASs - at least that way they (middle managers) will then be gainfully employed instead of scrabbling about for things to do... Yes, I mean you lot Safety and Training managers etc!!.
Then approach suitable controllers (by suitable I mean common sense decisions to approach people who are diligent and not just lazy feckwits), with say 5 years or more operational experience, and ask them if they want to go on the GS/LAS roster.
The more the merrier and the GS position then becomes just another role rostered on the monthly watchbill, volunteers would do it maybe 2 or 3 times a month at the most.
Give said volunteers half a pay spine for doing it.
The result - more diligent supervisors who give a monkeys about what is going on around them, instead of having supervisors at the moment who are so weighed down by extraneous duties that they are not giving the GS primary role (which should be assisting controllers run the sectors in their sector group) the attention it should have.
Lazy Gss will soon be rumbled - as it stands we have some supervisors who aren't valid in all roles, and/or that are more concerned with their social life than with being proactive in keeping coordinators informed etc.
ProM
I have always been an advocate for cutting superfluous staff if it was done properly. i.e. a study carried out and those roles that are overstaffed get trimmed. Unfortunately I don't think the redundancies have been done that way.
Also, why did it take an economic downturn for Barron to decide to 'cut the fat', if that is indeed what has happened? Surely a good businessman would aim to run a lean organisation all the time? The Times article I pointed your way lays claims from Barron that he has revolutionised NATS in his tenure... not very well if that's the case.
He can't say he has been running a lean organisation if he is saying that the roles that have just been cut/amalgamated were superfluous. He can't have it both ways!!
Truth be told, I actually think our management team have been lazy and downright negligent with regards to manpower. While the economy is good, many companies get away with poor business practices and overstaffing; especially those with a monopoly.
When the economy turns bad and they start scrambling around to make savings, you soon see how slack the reins were held before.
As for early go's I'm with Yahoo - I don't really care about them - they are a nice to have item but at the end of the day we are paid to work certain hours. It makes sense to let people go if sectors are legitimately bandboxing, and to tell the truth the company will not gain anything by keeping ATCOs/ATSAs back. Keeping sectors open for the hell of it won't conjure up traffic that just doesn't exist at those times!!
Personally I get hacked off with a lot of people who whinge about early go's and seem to see them as a right, not a privilege. If I had my way, I'd run the Ops room for a month with no early gos, then revert to normal practices... at least then people might appreciate them for what they are - a perk.
I honestly don't see any benefit for management in stopping early go's - maybe some watches need to be told to be more sensible about it, but that's by the by.
The problem management might find - and the Union should be stressing this extremely loudly - is that if they take away little perks like early go's (which have no impact on the business), then people might turn around and stop doing all the things that they do for nothing over and above their contract. For example, extra sectors above MUR.
Around 85%+ of ATCOs in the TC Ops room do extra sectors for no reward. The Ops room would not run without it. Management need to be very careful about how they approach things.
What a ridiculous idea.
We are allowed one per watch at the moment and that's enough. GS's need to be current to be any good at, well GS'ing.
I would go completely the other way - give all the middle managers the paperwork that they have passed down to Gs's/LASs - at least that way they (middle managers) will then be gainfully employed instead of scrabbling about for things to do... Yes, I mean you lot Safety and Training managers etc!!.
Then approach suitable controllers (by suitable I mean common sense decisions to approach people who are diligent and not just lazy feckwits), with say 5 years or more operational experience, and ask them if they want to go on the GS/LAS roster.
The more the merrier and the GS position then becomes just another role rostered on the monthly watchbill, volunteers would do it maybe 2 or 3 times a month at the most.
Give said volunteers half a pay spine for doing it.
The result - more diligent supervisors who give a monkeys about what is going on around them, instead of having supervisors at the moment who are so weighed down by extraneous duties that they are not giving the GS primary role (which should be assisting controllers run the sectors in their sector group) the attention it should have.
Lazy Gss will soon be rumbled - as it stands we have some supervisors who aren't valid in all roles, and/or that are more concerned with their social life than with being proactive in keeping coordinators informed etc.
ProM
I have always been an advocate for cutting superfluous staff if it was done properly. i.e. a study carried out and those roles that are overstaffed get trimmed. Unfortunately I don't think the redundancies have been done that way.
Also, why did it take an economic downturn for Barron to decide to 'cut the fat', if that is indeed what has happened? Surely a good businessman would aim to run a lean organisation all the time? The Times article I pointed your way lays claims from Barron that he has revolutionised NATS in his tenure... not very well if that's the case.
He can't say he has been running a lean organisation if he is saying that the roles that have just been cut/amalgamated were superfluous. He can't have it both ways!!
Truth be told, I actually think our management team have been lazy and downright negligent with regards to manpower. While the economy is good, many companies get away with poor business practices and overstaffing; especially those with a monopoly.
When the economy turns bad and they start scrambling around to make savings, you soon see how slack the reins were held before.
As for early go's I'm with Yahoo - I don't really care about them - they are a nice to have item but at the end of the day we are paid to work certain hours. It makes sense to let people go if sectors are legitimately bandboxing, and to tell the truth the company will not gain anything by keeping ATCOs/ATSAs back. Keeping sectors open for the hell of it won't conjure up traffic that just doesn't exist at those times!!
Personally I get hacked off with a lot of people who whinge about early go's and seem to see them as a right, not a privilege. If I had my way, I'd run the Ops room for a month with no early gos, then revert to normal practices... at least then people might appreciate them for what they are - a perk.
I honestly don't see any benefit for management in stopping early go's - maybe some watches need to be told to be more sensible about it, but that's by the by.
The problem management might find - and the Union should be stressing this extremely loudly - is that if they take away little perks like early go's (which have no impact on the business), then people might turn around and stop doing all the things that they do for nothing over and above their contract. For example, extra sectors above MUR.
Around 85%+ of ATCOs in the TC Ops room do extra sectors for no reward. The Ops room would not run without it. Management need to be very careful about how they approach things.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: In my garden shed
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whats Jasper Carrot doing, sitting on the consoles in the picture above?
Someone needs to adjust the verticle hold on that shirt. And didn't anybody tell him that stripes clash with twats
Someone needs to adjust the verticle hold on that shirt. And didn't anybody tell him that stripes clash with twats
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: South Coast
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My understanding is that MGT have not budged from the 'derisory' offer and that the last couple of meetings have been short lived as a result. Union (of which I am not currently a member) wont or rather can not ballot the members until MGT have made the offer a full and final one which is not the case.
So, it seems like the unions are playing hardball, but unfortunately this could go on for some time. Got this from bumping into an old colleague who is one of the negotiators this morning.
Any comments on union membership fine if PMed or on a seperate thread.
So, it seems like the unions are playing hardball, but unfortunately this could go on for some time. Got this from bumping into an old colleague who is one of the negotiators this morning.
Any comments on union membership fine if PMed or on a seperate thread.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why do the union agree to keep all talks confidential until concluded? It benefits nobody apart from management.
You can bet the management team go away and discuss any deal they are negotiating with whoever they feel like, while our union guys get browbeaten without the chance of getting feedback and support from the members.
You can bet the management team go away and discuss any deal they are negotiating with whoever they feel like, while our union guys get browbeaten without the chance of getting feedback and support from the members.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The poker fan says that his real skill is that he can read people and situations well
He did not do that well when he played poker with some of the ATCE's at Prestwick, he was first out I believe.
Beady Eye
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It does me too. Never read so much macho, testosterone fuelled BS in one thread. But it reminds me of chickens with their breasts all puffed up strutting around the chicken coup, clucking away.
The internet warriors in their full glory cluck, cluck, cluck!
BD
The internet warriors in their full glory cluck, cluck, cluck!
BD
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cheshire, California, Geneva, and Paris
Age: 67
Posts: 867
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Today is a "Red Letter Day" as much to my astonishment I have to agree with BDiONU. There is much determination on this website to make sure that you get a few percentage points on your salary even if it is non-pensionable OR ELSE!!!
You and your representatives allowed the management to change the terms and conditions of your pension scheme without a fight, changes that in the not too distant future will cost you all potentially hundreds of thousands of pounds. I know that you have a memorandum of understanding, but in my opinion it is not worth the paper it is written on.
Despite all the posturing on this website you and your union representatives will do nothing and the management know it.[/RIGHT][/LEFT][/RIGHT]
You and your representatives allowed the management to change the terms and conditions of your pension scheme without a fight, changes that in the not too distant future will cost you all potentially hundreds of thousands of pounds. I know that you have a memorandum of understanding, but in my opinion it is not worth the paper it is written on.
Despite all the posturing on this website you and your union representatives will do nothing and the management know it.[/RIGHT][/LEFT][/RIGHT]