UK - NATS Pay negotiations - latest rumours
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry Nige, erm I mean Paul. 
Jonny, Jonny..I'll get it right eventually 
Cheers to all the team in the Union for the hard work they put in, whoever they are and regardless of whether I agree with recommendations or not.
I don't think the union position has been helped whatsoever by the apathy of its membership.
Jonny, Jonny..I'll get it right eventually Cheers to all the team in the Union for the hard work they put in, whoever they are and regardless of whether I agree with recommendations or not.
I don't think the union position has been helped whatsoever by the apathy of its membership.
Last edited by anotherthing; 1st May 2009 at 16:35.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: way down south
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We did in effect take a pay cut when we first moved down to Swanwick, didn't we, in losing our london weighting and Home-Duty??
May not have been a lot but it was a saving for the company.
It won't be long before we will be asked to come to work for nothing.. for the sheer joy of our work!!!(not)..any pride or pleasure is slowly but surely being chipped away at and what once was an enviable company to be in will become as mundane and soulless as any other money making one.
Mission complete Mr Barron.
May not have been a lot but it was a saving for the company.
It won't be long before we will be asked to come to work for nothing.. for the sheer joy of our work!!!(not)..any pride or pleasure is slowly but surely being chipped away at and what once was an enviable company to be in will become as mundane and soulless as any other money making one.
Mission complete Mr Barron.
StandupfortheUlstermen
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Peoples' Democratic Republic of Wurzelsetshire
Age: 53
Posts: 1,182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Taken from 'Profile' March 2009........
Government Actuaries Department 2008 payrise - 3.7%
Landmarc Support Services 2008 payrise - 4%
Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland 2008 payrise - 4.5%
Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission 2008 payrise - 4.1%
Scottish Prison Service 2008 payrise - 4.25%
So this union stands with us but happily fights for the deals listed above while telling us that 2% now, with a chance of another 1% if August 2009 RPI is in our favour and wants us to accept this over two years, is the best we can achieve by negotiation!!??
4.8% spread over two years maybe I could stomach, but 2% with an outside chance of another 1%? I don't think so.
Vote Yes and we're fecked for the second time in 9 months.
Vote NO and we can take our chances with other forms of persuasion.
I know which one I prefer.
Government Actuaries Department 2008 payrise - 3.7%
Landmarc Support Services 2008 payrise - 4%
Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland 2008 payrise - 4.5%
Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission 2008 payrise - 4.1%
Scottish Prison Service 2008 payrise - 4.25%
So this union stands with us but happily fights for the deals listed above while telling us that 2% now, with a chance of another 1% if August 2009 RPI is in our favour and wants us to accept this over two years, is the best we can achieve by negotiation!!??
4.8% spread over two years maybe I could stomach, but 2% with an outside chance of another 1%? I don't think so.
Vote Yes and we're fecked for the second time in 9 months.
Vote NO and we can take our chances with other forms of persuasion.
I know which one I prefer.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wel, the ballot closes on Thursday 18th June, the result will be published probably on the following Monday (22nd) with NATS yearly figures presented 2 or 3 days later.
I think I might just vote 'no' and hope that is the general consensus, so that we can wait to see just how big a profit we make in the annual accounts...
Throw that into the pot with the dividend we've foolishly paid, then see what NATS can actually afford to give as a pay rise, not what they want to give us.
I think I might just vote 'no' and hope that is the general consensus, so that we can wait to see just how big a profit we make in the annual accounts...
Throw that into the pot with the dividend we've foolishly paid, then see what NATS can actually afford to give as a pay rise, not what they want to give us.
Disappointed
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A definite no for me, without any reservation or doubt.
And I dearly hope we, as a workforce, don't capitulate in the face of immense company propaganda and what amounts to a whole pack of spin and lies.
We rolled over when it came to PPP, we rolled over when it came to working practices, and we even rolled over when it came to our pensions. This is the final stand....
And I dearly hope we, as a workforce, don't capitulate in the face of immense company propaganda and what amounts to a whole pack of spin and lies.
We rolled over when it came to PPP, we rolled over when it came to working practices, and we even rolled over when it came to our pensions. This is the final stand....
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anotherthing & Vote No
Thank you for your words of support in the job we do. I (dare I say we) appreciate the fact that some at least understand that the union guys (and ladies) try to do the best for the members. I appreciate you do not support the offer, and it is right that you vote as you believe. I hope everyone else takes the time to do the same, whatever the final outcome of the ballot (personally I'm still in the yes camp
)
I probably shouldn't rise to the bait of some on here, but I think the record needs to be set straght for some.
1. The Union reps do this voluntarily, much of it in their own time for no reward (no, we are not paid for it)
2. We all have our normal jobs too which means whatever we agree affects us the same as every other member.
3. If any members are unhappy with how the reps act/perform, then each year they can be removed (if the haven't already quit by then!)
4. If you want to remove them, then someone needs to be willing to step forward and do the job instead. Trust me, we would be happy for volunteers to come forward. Throwing stones from the side is easy when you don't have any responsability!
5. Many are correct about T's & C's constantly being under attack. That is true. The union mistake is having not alerted members to what is happening behind the scenes and communicating what is happening across the company. Hopefully we have learnt a hard lesson after the poor communications around the pension issue and the new website will go some way to rectifying this (ATCOs.co.uk)
6. Our collective strength comes from the fact that we are a united workforce. Speaking for the ATCO union, the SDC pulled us back together, and believe it or not, made NATS sit up and take notice. Being a collective force means we need to abide by the decisions of the majority, whether we all agree with them or not. This pay deal will be no different, the majority will decide. That is why it is important to vote. Apathy only helps management.
7. I've left the most important bit for last; it is not the unions who have made this offer. The unions simply negotiate the best deal they believe they can through the negotiation process, then put the final decision to members. That is how the negotiating process works. Of course the Unions will have a view on the offer, but so will every member. The 'Union' doesn't have a vote, each and every member does and that is where the power truly lies.
Remember, this is NOT an offer created by the union, the unions don't control NATS finances.This IS the NATS offer to staff, the final offer that NATS were willing to make to the Unions. If you are pi##ed off with the offer, please remember where the offer comes from.. NATS, not the unions
ps. probably going to get a bollocking for this but what the hell, it's a thankless task anyway
Thank you for your words of support in the job we do. I (dare I say we) appreciate the fact that some at least understand that the union guys (and ladies) try to do the best for the members. I appreciate you do not support the offer, and it is right that you vote as you believe. I hope everyone else takes the time to do the same, whatever the final outcome of the ballot (personally I'm still in the yes camp
)I probably shouldn't rise to the bait of some on here, but I think the record needs to be set straght for some.
1. The Union reps do this voluntarily, much of it in their own time for no reward (no, we are not paid for it)
2. We all have our normal jobs too which means whatever we agree affects us the same as every other member.
3. If any members are unhappy with how the reps act/perform, then each year they can be removed (if the haven't already quit by then!)
4. If you want to remove them, then someone needs to be willing to step forward and do the job instead. Trust me, we would be happy for volunteers to come forward. Throwing stones from the side is easy when you don't have any responsability!
5. Many are correct about T's & C's constantly being under attack. That is true. The union mistake is having not alerted members to what is happening behind the scenes and communicating what is happening across the company. Hopefully we have learnt a hard lesson after the poor communications around the pension issue and the new website will go some way to rectifying this (ATCOs.co.uk)
6. Our collective strength comes from the fact that we are a united workforce. Speaking for the ATCO union, the SDC pulled us back together, and believe it or not, made NATS sit up and take notice. Being a collective force means we need to abide by the decisions of the majority, whether we all agree with them or not. This pay deal will be no different, the majority will decide. That is why it is important to vote. Apathy only helps management.
7. I've left the most important bit for last; it is not the unions who have made this offer. The unions simply negotiate the best deal they believe they can through the negotiation process, then put the final decision to members. That is how the negotiating process works. Of course the Unions will have a view on the offer, but so will every member. The 'Union' doesn't have a vote, each and every member does and that is where the power truly lies.
Remember, this is NOT an offer created by the union, the unions don't control NATS finances.This IS the NATS offer to staff, the final offer that NATS were willing to make to the Unions. If you are pi##ed off with the offer, please remember where the offer comes from.. NATS, not the unions
ps. probably going to get a bollocking for this but what the hell, it's a thankless task anyway
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: here
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm very dissappointed with the deal and the way the company is being torn apart by PB and his Alstrom cronies. Some points to note.
1 PB should not be getting 9% + bonus while we get offered this real terms pay cut.
2 No dividend should be paid, the money should have gone into the pension or pay deal.
3 the vote should be delayed until the accounts are published so that we can realise just how much we are being taken for a ride.
4 if we can just hold out until PB leaves maybe the next guy will understand that when it comes to safety, you can't keep cutting back. Hopefully the company can recover from PB's wrecking of NATS.
I can't believe people are thinking of voting for this deal. If this gets voted through then NSL sale will be next, after that it will be the pension again, then they'll go for NERL and start re banding that. T+Cs down the toilet.
It is time for us all to take a stand. The way the company is being run is not acceptable. Make sure you use your vote to let management know this.
and relax......
1 PB should not be getting 9% + bonus while we get offered this real terms pay cut.
2 No dividend should be paid, the money should have gone into the pension or pay deal.
3 the vote should be delayed until the accounts are published so that we can realise just how much we are being taken for a ride.
4 if we can just hold out until PB leaves maybe the next guy will understand that when it comes to safety, you can't keep cutting back. Hopefully the company can recover from PB's wrecking of NATS.
I can't believe people are thinking of voting for this deal. If this gets voted through then NSL sale will be next, after that it will be the pension again, then they'll go for NERL and start re banding that. T+Cs down the toilet.
It is time for us all to take a stand. The way the company is being run is not acceptable. Make sure you use your vote to let management know this.
and relax......
Beady Eye
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4 if we can just hold out until PB leaves maybe the next guy will understand that when it comes to safety, you can't keep cutting back.
Hopefully the company can recover from PB's wrecking of NATS.
BD
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The land that taste forgot
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am still interested to see what rise NSL's Gib staff are offered.Free of Gordon Brown the economy here is still working and RPI is in the region of 4%
as we recieved a lower rise due to Gib's RPI beig lower than the UK's over the last 3 years i am curious to see if all of a sudden we will be "lucky" enough to be awarded the same rise as our UK counterperts.
Bet Serco staff get a decent wage rise this year!
as we recieved a lower rise due to Gib's RPI beig lower than the UK's over the last 3 years i am curious to see if all of a sudden we will be "lucky" enough to be awarded the same rise as our UK counterperts.
Bet Serco staff get a decent wage rise this year!
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: here
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BD,
here goes....
Safety is compromised when the controller doesn't have an ATSA there anymore to provide an extra pair of eyes due to cut backs due to lack of money. Safety is compromised when the college courses are not of a sufficient length to provide the best training possible due to financial restraints. Safety is compromised when the college concentrates on getting numbers out the door rather than quality. Safety is compromised when the controller is concerned with his pending relocation, his dwindling pension or the future of the company when they should only be thinking of keeping the planes apart.
What's been wrecked?
The pension and staff morale.
here goes....
Safety is compromised when the controller doesn't have an ATSA there anymore to provide an extra pair of eyes due to cut backs due to lack of money. Safety is compromised when the college courses are not of a sufficient length to provide the best training possible due to financial restraints. Safety is compromised when the college concentrates on getting numbers out the door rather than quality. Safety is compromised when the controller is concerned with his pending relocation, his dwindling pension or the future of the company when they should only be thinking of keeping the planes apart.
What's been wrecked?
The pension and staff morale.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: 24/7 Hardcore Heaven
Posts: 525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seen a lot of rumour on this site but nothing anywhere else, which makes me wonder about just how true this 'fact' is?
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Surrey
Age: 46
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jonny
True, but the union have "recommended" this deal, and as has been mentioned before about the pay deal (and before that, the pension issue) there are a lot of apathetic people who can't be bothered to put in the effort to learn a bit about the facts and figures involved in the deal, so if they see the union "recommending" the deal then they probably think its a good deal and so, will vote yes.
I for one would like to just see the union publish the actual deal on offer and leave us to make up our own minds, without making recommendations as these could lead some people to decide based solely on that, rather than the actual facts and figures involved. Speaking to some colleagues last night, they don't remember these sorts of things ever being "recommended" by the union in the past, so why are they now?!? I have always said that I fully appreciate the hard work that negotiators do on our behalf, but just feel that any fence-sitters could be swayed purely by the recommendation.
And before anyone fires off about "why don't you stand up and be counted"...I have!! I have just become union rep for my watch!!
FB
it is not the unions who have made this offer
I for one would like to just see the union publish the actual deal on offer and leave us to make up our own minds, without making recommendations as these could lead some people to decide based solely on that, rather than the actual facts and figures involved. Speaking to some colleagues last night, they don't remember these sorts of things ever being "recommended" by the union in the past, so why are they now?!? I have always said that I fully appreciate the hard work that negotiators do on our behalf, but just feel that any fence-sitters could be swayed purely by the recommendation.
And before anyone fires off about "why don't you stand up and be counted"...I have!! I have just become union rep for my watch!!
FB
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Southern England
Posts: 480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I for one would like to just see the union publish the actual deal on offer and leave us to make up our own minds, without making recommendations as these could lead some people to decide based solely on that, rather than the actual facts and figures involved.
As long as I can remember the ballot has always come with a note from the union with their recommendation. Unless management have insisted that the offer is put to the members before there is any further negotiation, that recommendation is always likely to be acceptance because the union would keep negotiating if it thought there was any more to be had.
Beady Eye
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Goodness only knows how long it would take to refute every rumour that goes around 
You mean the loss of the civil service mentality now we're a real company exposed to the real world? Although I do grant that we're very hamstrung in what we're allowed to charge.
I'm very in touch with the workforce, I am one! Also my department has suffered dramatic cuts in staff with no similar lose in demand for resource.
BD
As for what has been "wrecked" under the stewardship of PB...please tell me you are having laugh. Either that or you are seriously out of touch with how NATS workforce feel.
I'm very in touch with the workforce, I am one! Also my department has suffered dramatic cuts in staff with no similar lose in demand for resource.
BD
Beady Eye
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Safety is compromised when the college courses are not of a sufficient length to provide the best training possible due to financial restraints. Safety is compromised when the college concentrates on getting numbers out the door rather than quality.
Safety is compromised when the controller is concerned with his pending relocation, his dwindling pension or the future of the company when they should only be thinking of keeping the planes apart.
What's been wrecked? The pension and staff morale.
Cheers
BD
Join Date: May 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 351
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We have little money to spend on new equipment/technology to keep pace with (soon to be again) high traffic growth. We are losing highly skilled people at an alarming rate - which means that even if we had the money we don't have the people to spend it. Is this important? Hell yes as the BIG ANSP's are not ham strung semi privatised/regulated monopolies and they can spend tax payers money!
When PB was put in post I read an internet letter from a GEC employee that had been witness to the 'railway childrens' asset stripping fat cat ways
. PB is just repeating his actions. The next CE will be different, its how different. Hopefully he / she will have a cull on arrival - then see how much of a payoff this lot gets!
If new technology and investment is linked to safety and capacity gains (I believe it is) then this is the link. Concerned CTC pen pusher.
When PB was put in post I read an internet letter from a GEC employee that had been witness to the 'railway childrens' asset stripping fat cat ways
. PB is just repeating his actions. The next CE will be different, its how different. Hopefully he / she will have a cull on arrival - then see how much of a payoff this lot gets!If new technology and investment is linked to safety and capacity gains (I believe it is) then this is the link. Concerned CTC pen pusher.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BDiONU
Savings over safety...
3 cycles ago whilst on a nightshift I was chatting with an engineer who was in the TC Ops room working on the radar displays. (The big tv screens we ATCOs use to seperate aircraft, which unfortnately, keep flickering in TC... rather disconcerting).
The engineer stated that the displays should run with digital cards, but NATS were unwillng to pay out the extra cost and we were using analogue cards instead.
He stated that it was his and all his colleauges (the experts) belief that the problems with the screens would cease immediately with the use of digital cards.
I am only passing on what I was told by a specialist. Now some might say (and it would be management), that "the screens work as they are, but they flicker every now and again, but overall , safety is not compromised so that's good enough".
Since when in a safety critical industry is good enough, good enough?
Particularly when on the other hand management bleat on about the safety risk being 600% higher in TC than in any other unit?
Just one more example of the double standards that management employ, to suit their purposes.
Savings over safety...
3 cycles ago whilst on a nightshift I was chatting with an engineer who was in the TC Ops room working on the radar displays. (The big tv screens we ATCOs use to seperate aircraft, which unfortnately, keep flickering in TC... rather disconcerting).
The engineer stated that the displays should run with digital cards, but NATS were unwillng to pay out the extra cost and we were using analogue cards instead.
He stated that it was his and all his colleauges (the experts) belief that the problems with the screens would cease immediately with the use of digital cards.
I am only passing on what I was told by a specialist. Now some might say (and it would be management), that "the screens work as they are, but they flicker every now and again, but overall , safety is not compromised so that's good enough".
Since when in a safety critical industry is good enough, good enough?
Particularly when on the other hand management bleat on about the safety risk being 600% higher in TC than in any other unit?
Just one more example of the double standards that management employ, to suit their purposes.