UK - NATS Pay negotiations - latest rumours
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cheshire, California, Geneva, and Paris
Age: 67
Posts: 867
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vote No.
I did say that I was surprised to be in agreement with BDiONU and you are right that I am not employed by nats anymore, however one of the primary reasons amongst others that I decided to retire from nats was the fear for the future of my pension fund and in my opinion the unwillingness and/or inability of the unions and its members to defend THEIR pension and its benefits. I would suggest that my path will be trod more frequently as more and more of your older colleagues follow my example due to concerns about the managements intentions and employees commitment to their pension and its excellent financial benefits.
I did say that I was surprised to be in agreement with BDiONU and you are right that I am not employed by nats anymore, however one of the primary reasons amongst others that I decided to retire from nats was the fear for the future of my pension fund and in my opinion the unwillingness and/or inability of the unions and its members to defend THEIR pension and its benefits. I would suggest that my path will be trod more frequently as more and more of your older colleagues follow my example due to concerns about the managements intentions and employees commitment to their pension and its excellent financial benefits.
Beady Eye
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DC10RealMan
You had the option of being of the age that retirement would work for you without too much of a penalty,
Please bear in mind (considering your stance and posts during the pension debate) that many of the people you are berating are not of the age that early retirement is feasible. The fact we stay with the company does not make us people who have no backbone to take action like you did - we have no real choice.
We said exactly the same things as you did, and voted 'No'. Unfortunately we are stuck with it, even though many of us believe that the MOU is not worth the paper it is written on.
Amongst many of the predictions I made before the 'yes' vote went through were: (copied from the thread titled "What happens within NATS after the pension results are in??")
Prediction 1.
'The Vote'
62% Yes
38% No
Prediction 2.
Swiftly followed by a complete shafting on the annual pay award (I reckon 3% - which would be less than RPI)...
Prediction 3.
3-5% overall reduction in NATS staff by Jul 009.
Prediction 4.
Departure of Mr Barron within 18 months of changing the pension scheme.
Prediction 5.
Break up and shelving of some NSL contracts within 60 months of pension scheme change.
Also earlier talk that the MOU was not worth the paper it was written on given the track history of NATS.
So, prediction 3 was a bit on the lean side as it turns out, prediction 4 might be a pipe dream, prediction 5 - wait to see what happens at the Special Delegates Conference.
Enjoy your retirement, for what it's worth I think you made entirely the correct decision to go early for the very reasons you state.
The reason some of us spout of on this forum is because it is the only way to get opinions across to people outside of our normal circle. Exactly what you were doing 4 or 5 months ago.
If people (as is their right) ignore certain points of view, then there's nowt much else that can be done.
It's quite telling that very few of those who spouted off "Vote yes save jobs" - who also spout off "get in the real world you can't expect a pay rise" have gone quiet and have nothing to say about redundancies and the Barrons pay rise.
These are the people that are happy to bend over and be shafted... unfortunately they sem to be in the majority.
You had the option of being of the age that retirement would work for you without too much of a penalty,
Please bear in mind (considering your stance and posts during the pension debate) that many of the people you are berating are not of the age that early retirement is feasible. The fact we stay with the company does not make us people who have no backbone to take action like you did - we have no real choice.
We said exactly the same things as you did, and voted 'No'. Unfortunately we are stuck with it, even though many of us believe that the MOU is not worth the paper it is written on.
Amongst many of the predictions I made before the 'yes' vote went through were: (copied from the thread titled "What happens within NATS after the pension results are in??")
Prediction 1.
'The Vote'
62% Yes
38% No
Prediction 2.
Swiftly followed by a complete shafting on the annual pay award (I reckon 3% - which would be less than RPI)...
Prediction 3.
3-5% overall reduction in NATS staff by Jul 009.
Prediction 4.
Departure of Mr Barron within 18 months of changing the pension scheme.
Prediction 5.
Break up and shelving of some NSL contracts within 60 months of pension scheme change.
Also earlier talk that the MOU was not worth the paper it was written on given the track history of NATS.
So, prediction 3 was a bit on the lean side as it turns out, prediction 4 might be a pipe dream, prediction 5 - wait to see what happens at the Special Delegates Conference.
Enjoy your retirement, for what it's worth I think you made entirely the correct decision to go early for the very reasons you state.
The reason some of us spout of on this forum is because it is the only way to get opinions across to people outside of our normal circle. Exactly what you were doing 4 or 5 months ago.
If people (as is their right) ignore certain points of view, then there's nowt much else that can be done.
It's quite telling that very few of those who spouted off "Vote yes save jobs" - who also spout off "get in the real world you can't expect a pay rise" have gone quiet and have nothing to say about redundancies and the Barrons pay rise.
These are the people that are happy to bend over and be shafted... unfortunately they sem to be in the majority.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: 24/7 Hardcore Heaven
Posts: 525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's quite telling that very few of those who spouted off "Vote yes save jobs" - who also spout off "get in the real world you can't expect a pay rise" have gone quiet and have nothing to say about redundancies and the Barrons pay rise.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cheshire, California, Geneva, and Paris
Age: 67
Posts: 867
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anotherthing.
Yes you are quite right and I apologise unreservedly to those who voted no and are too young to retire and are stuck with it. I served for nearly thirty years in the CAA and nats at various units and to see colleagues and friends, some of whom I have worked with for years and care deeply about being royally shafted by "flybynights" such as Mr Barron and his friend Mr Bliar really annoys me and sometimes I get a bit carried away.
I cant even get any comfort from watching the world-famous Northwich Victoria F.C. nowadays!!!
Yes you are quite right and I apologise unreservedly to those who voted no and are too young to retire and are stuck with it. I served for nearly thirty years in the CAA and nats at various units and to see colleagues and friends, some of whom I have worked with for years and care deeply about being royally shafted by "flybynights" such as Mr Barron and his friend Mr Bliar really annoys me and sometimes I get a bit carried away.
I cant even get any comfort from watching the world-famous Northwich Victoria F.C. nowadays!!!
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
It's quite telling that very few of those who spouted off "Vote yes save jobs" - who also spout off "get in the real world you can't expect a pay rise" have gone quiet and have nothing to say about redundancies and the Barrons pay rise.
mr.777
Spot on, anotherthing. I'd like to see them (and that includes NON UNION MEMBERS TOO) try and defend a 9% payrise......well, come on then, here's your chance.
It's quite telling that very few of those who spouted off "Vote yes save jobs" - who also spout off "get in the real world you can't expect a pay rise" have gone quiet and have nothing to say about redundancies and the Barrons pay rise.
mr.777
Spot on, anotherthing. I'd like to see them (and that includes NON UNION MEMBERS TOO) try and defend a 9% payrise......well, come on then, here's your chance.
...................Silence 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: South Coast
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So everyone who is not in the Union is Barron follower eh!
I dont defend his reputed rise, neither did I his 14% last year and I did stand up at his CTC Bar stool session and ask him to justify it.
I was in the Union for 15 years but resigned 3 years ago as I was not happy with the way things were going. So no moaning, just voted with my feet/wallet.
I now have my application form to rejoin subject to them making a stance over the pay awards and I sincereley hope that they do.
IMHO there are too many people who are poor performers and take union membership as a kind of insurance policy. Do you believe that these people would stand up for anything because again IMHO they will take whatever they can and be thankful.
I dont defend his reputed rise, neither did I his 14% last year and I did stand up at his CTC Bar stool session and ask him to justify it.
I was in the Union for 15 years but resigned 3 years ago as I was not happy with the way things were going. So no moaning, just voted with my feet/wallet.
I now have my application form to rejoin subject to them making a stance over the pay awards and I sincereley hope that they do.
IMHO there are too many people who are poor performers and take union membership as a kind of insurance policy. Do you believe that these people would stand up for anything because again IMHO they will take whatever they can and be thankful.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: 24/7 Hardcore Heaven
Posts: 525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FDP,
Of course not all non-Union members are pro-management. But there are one or two who see fit to tell Union members to take a pro-management stance in order to meet their own needs.
Anyway, as Vote No has so subtley put it, SILENCE. Come on, I'm sure even you pro-management can find some kind of BS justification for a 9% payrise for PB.
Of course not all non-Union members are pro-management. But there are one or two who see fit to tell Union members to take a pro-management stance in order to meet their own needs.
Anyway, as Vote No has so subtley put it, SILENCE. Come on, I'm sure even you pro-management can find some kind of BS justification for a 9% payrise for PB.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vote No
I heard that one is too important to go!
TCAS FAN
I'm sure they will have earned them 
My mate up north reckons all five Watch "Managers"
at Scottish are going this year. They must have finished ticking the boxes
at Scottish are going this year. They must have finished ticking the boxes
TCAS FAN
Okay no pay rise, but are they also giving up bonuses?
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Southern England
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay no pay rise, but are they also giving up bonuses?
I'm sure even you pro-management can find some kind of BS justification for a 9% payrise for PB
Aren't some of them "giving up" their jobs and taking a shed load of money when they go this year?
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.................................................. ............................................................ .................................................... 
This elephant is a bull.... fill in the missing word, S - -T
Last edited by Vote NO; 14th Apr 2009 at 16:20.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: way down south
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
eglnyt
Surely a lot of PCGs targets are met by the staff they "manage" working together to keep everything running smoothly..keeping down delays etc. So perhaps goodwill needs a sweetner to keep it just that ..goodwill.!!
Hey! Perhaps no payrise until all staff that are going have gone ...don't want to pay them more than they have to??
Surely a lot of PCGs targets are met by the staff they "manage" working together to keep everything running smoothly..keeping down delays etc. So perhaps goodwill needs a sweetner to keep it just that ..goodwill.!!
Hey! Perhaps no payrise until all staff that are going have gone ...don't want to pay them more than they have to??