UK - NATS Pay negotiations - latest rumours
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hold at SATAN/landedoutagain
Not correct, surely? This deal does not encompass the AUG 2010 RPI.
This pay deal is to cover the 2 year period 1st Jan 09 to 31st Dec 10. The relevant RPIs are the AUG 08 and Aug 09 RPI.
The AUG 10 RPI will be the basis for pay negotiations which should start around September 2010 for implementation on (or more likely after as they are never on time) 1st Jan 2011. This is the way we have always negotiated our pay deals,we can't chop and change to suit us, something people whinge about management doing...
It is only when we do 2 or 3 year deals that we look ahead at the next RPI speculatively (such as the last pay deal that underpinned our pay award depending on the RPI).
As for landedoutagains question about pensionable pay, I would hope that as we are not actually receiving a pay rise in Jan 2010 under this pay offer, the figures used would be the Aug 08 RPI (4.8%) and the pay award we receive (a maximum of 3% if we accept this deal). Thus the whole pay award is pensionable. If an RPI is negative, NATS cannot use this to reduce your pensionable pay!! FFS don't go giving the slimy gits any new ideas on how to run the pension benefits down!!!
This is a 2 year pay deal, but there will be no rise in Jan 2010. One rise backdated to Jan 2009 which will see us through to Jan 2011.
that's assuming AUG RPI will be that poor. also you are looking at RPI over a one year period. i.e. Aug 08 to aug 09. This deal is for 2 years and will also encompass the RPI for Aug 10 which will be positive
This pay deal is to cover the 2 year period 1st Jan 09 to 31st Dec 10. The relevant RPIs are the AUG 08 and Aug 09 RPI.
The AUG 10 RPI will be the basis for pay negotiations which should start around September 2010 for implementation on (or more likely after as they are never on time) 1st Jan 2011. This is the way we have always negotiated our pay deals,we can't chop and change to suit us, something people whinge about management doing...
It is only when we do 2 or 3 year deals that we look ahead at the next RPI speculatively (such as the last pay deal that underpinned our pay award depending on the RPI).
As for landedoutagains question about pensionable pay, I would hope that as we are not actually receiving a pay rise in Jan 2010 under this pay offer, the figures used would be the Aug 08 RPI (4.8%) and the pay award we receive (a maximum of 3% if we accept this deal). Thus the whole pay award is pensionable. If an RPI is negative, NATS cannot use this to reduce your pensionable pay!! FFS don't go giving the slimy gits any new ideas on how to run the pension benefits down!!!
This is a 2 year pay deal, but there will be no rise in Jan 2010. One rise backdated to Jan 2009 which will see us through to Jan 2011.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Home
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why would they even know it exists?
On a more general note (not addressed at the quoted poster)
Yes, being an ATCO is a skilled job with a level of responsibility for the safety of many people. That's why you earn massively over the national average. Nobody has a problem with that. Yes, you have to work night shifts.. but you get a hefty additional payment for that too. Try doing a night shift in a city centre A&E, then come back and tell us you have it tough. While you're there, ask the Docs how many early go's they get. Ask them if they got paid a salary to train... and how many years it took them. Then ask how much they earn.
ATSA, ATCE, STAR, MSG... We all know we play an important role. In spite of the constant dismissive negativity from the drama queens. We work hard and we are good at our jobs (in most cases). We don't need you to tell us so...
For every engineer or support staff at CTC doing a 12 hour day to meet a deadline who rolls their eyes and chuckles at the latest "all you do is sit in starbucks!" from Mr Stereotypical ATCO, before getting on with their job... There is a stereotypical ATCO taking a hissy fit at any suggestion that they don't have the bestest, hardest most brill job in the world.
Or, to cut a long story short: Get over yourselves.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: FG11
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Me Me Me
Perhaps because they like to be informed? show an interest in the industry in which they work? Form a balanced view on the issues for themselves?
ffs
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Pay Offer (for hold at SATAN)
Just to make things clear:
1. The offer covers the period Jan 09 to Dec 10. The RPI figures used will be Aug 08 (4.8%) and Aug 09 (forecast between -3.0% to -3.5%).
2. The blended RPI is forecast to be between 1.3% and 1.8% (our underpin is 2%) As it stands the offer will give us at least an RPI deal over 2 years if the Aug 09 RPI is more negative than -1.8%. There are NO forecasts predicting it to be 'better' than this.
3. Whatever the rise turns out to be between 2% to 3% is backdated to Jan 09. It is a pay rise for 2009 but taking into account the RPI figure for Aug 09. This means that as the RPI in Aug 08 was 4.8%, then ALL of the rise offered will be pensionable and within the Pension Agreement.
4. As all of the pay rise is related to Jan 09 and not the period Jan 2010 to Dec 2010, then the Pension Agreement has no effect in 2010 and pay and pensionable pay remains the same for all of 2010.
As I've said before, it is up to everyone to decide for themselves how they will vote but it is important that they do vote and that they understand the offer and not rely on others mistaken interpretations of what they think it means. If anyone is unsure, please speak with one of the team or the reps who were involved in the negotiations. (oh, and vote YES, or no
)
Hope this makes it a bit clearer
1. The offer covers the period Jan 09 to Dec 10. The RPI figures used will be Aug 08 (4.8%) and Aug 09 (forecast between -3.0% to -3.5%).
2. The blended RPI is forecast to be between 1.3% and 1.8% (our underpin is 2%) As it stands the offer will give us at least an RPI deal over 2 years if the Aug 09 RPI is more negative than -1.8%. There are NO forecasts predicting it to be 'better' than this.
3. Whatever the rise turns out to be between 2% to 3% is backdated to Jan 09. It is a pay rise for 2009 but taking into account the RPI figure for Aug 09. This means that as the RPI in Aug 08 was 4.8%, then ALL of the rise offered will be pensionable and within the Pension Agreement.
4. As all of the pay rise is related to Jan 09 and not the period Jan 2010 to Dec 2010, then the Pension Agreement has no effect in 2010 and pay and pensionable pay remains the same for all of 2010.
As I've said before, it is up to everyone to decide for themselves how they will vote but it is important that they do vote and that they understand the offer and not rely on others mistaken interpretations of what they think it means. If anyone is unsure, please speak with one of the team or the reps who were involved in the negotiations. (oh, and vote YES, or no
)Hope this makes it a bit clearer
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: 29 Acacia Road
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
anotherthing - I agree, I read this to be a two year deal (for 09/10) which is based on the rpi from (aug08, aug09). The aug 10 rpi is a red herring here as thats what we wuold expect the next pay deal to be based on!
The only unknown is the figure three and a bit months from now, which is quite close given that it is a two year deal, and there is the 1% buffer built in too.
Im not advocating which way to vote (I dont know myself yet!), but I dont think this deal is as bad as it seems...
ps. apologies for repetition with above post!
The only unknown is the figure three and a bit months from now, which is quite close given that it is a two year deal, and there is the 1% buffer built in too.
Im not advocating which way to vote (I dont know myself yet!), but I dont think this deal is as bad as it seems...
ps. apologies for repetition with above post!
Last edited by landedoutagain; 8th May 2009 at 11:14. Reason: crossed with jonny b good, and ps
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know this is the off topic bit and I was in two minds as to create a separate threat but....
There is no justification to think that ATCOs would be the only ones in court should an accident arise. Engineers and bosses can be charged as well, because they are the ones that produce and sign off safety cases etc.
How many ATCOs have been charged in UK for safety offences?
Engineers and Management have been charged in other industries (e.g. Rail). there is no reason to think they are exempt just in ATC business
There is no justification to think that ATCOs would be the only ones in court should an accident arise. Engineers and bosses can be charged as well, because they are the ones that produce and sign off safety cases etc.
How many ATCOs have been charged in UK for safety offences?
Engineers and Management have been charged in other industries (e.g. Rail). there is no reason to think they are exempt just in ATC business
Join Date: May 2007
Location: swanwick carp lake
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you only need to look at the new comments helpfulness vote on natsnet to see how the ballot will play out.
comments based around a vote yes theme are received with many more positive votes than the vote no themed comments.
I predict 80-20 yes vote.
comments based around a vote yes theme are received with many more positive votes than the vote no themed comments.
I predict 80-20 yes vote.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Home
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So how would they (the ones that would be motivated (and would you look at an accountants forum to get a balanced opinion on aviation accountancy?)) know to look for a discussion about a payrise within an ATC organisation in a forum called 'professional PILOTS rumour network'?!!!!
ffs
ffs
A balanced opinion is formed by looking at an issue from a number of different perspectives.
Perspective isn't something you tend to see a lot of around here
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: South of UK
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
____________________________________________________________ ____
1 out of 1 readers found the last post useful
____________________________________________________________ ____
1 out of 1 readers found the last post useful
____________________________________________________________ ____
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: In my garden shed
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
that's assuming AUG RPI will be that poor. also you are looking at RPI over a one year period. i.e. Aug 08 to aug 09. This deal is for 2 years and will also encompass the RPI for Aug 10 which will be positive
sorry I wrote it in a rush. What I meant to say was that the latter part of the pay deal (period post-aug 2009* to dec2010) will fall in a period covered by the AUG10 RPI insofar as prices going up (inflation) NOTHING TO DO with the pay offer. i.e We will be tied into a one off 2-3% "deal" for 2 years, during which the average inflation (including aug08 rpi of 4.8%) will markedly higher than the 3% (aroung 1.5% per year) maxiumum offered, especially toward the latter part of the time period. In effect a pay cut in real terms.
(*AUG09 RPI figure will be the historical price data upto that date. subsequent shifts in RPI will be reflected in subsequent RPI data)
Jonny B Good, thank you for the explanation but I am quite happy and familiar with the terms of the pay deal. My post was to simply illustrate that prices will rise sooner and higher than the figures given tend to portray.
There are NO forecasts predicting it to be 'better' than this.
Economist were surpised today by the £50bn injection by the BoE/Govt. into the money supply which WILL have an inflationary effect. None of the forcasters predicted the current climate so I wouldn't gamble my future payrise on their assumptions. The situation is changing on a day to day basis.
The 2% underpinned is a red herring as NATS will renegotiate if RPI is worse that -3.5%: whilst they may not take money back from us (in the very unlikely event of it being that low) any subsequent deals (2011 onwards) will have some clawback (i.e. a smaller increase n pay or additional duties/days)
I for one believe that the deal is a poor one and that we shall be feeling the ramifications of for a long time. NATS will walk away with paying staff 3% over two years and splash the rest out on shareholders, directors etc. whilst inflation climbs and income/charges increase comensurately
I am more than happy to wait until AUG09 RPI figures are out before we vote on the deal - heck we've waited this long! And if it's a neagtive RPI in AUG09 so be it - at least it would be an informed decision.
Vote what you like - but i will VOTE NO!
Last edited by hold at SATAN; 8th May 2009 at 23:28.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Box Hill or Bust
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
jonny B good wrote:
And of course under slimy and fat boy there was going to be no more boom and bust and trust me I know what I'm doing with the economy. No wonder PB's going in April, his mates are going to be out on their arse in May 2010. Vote SNP! It's the only way.
2. There are NO forecasts predicting it to be 'better' than this.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: way down south
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ImnotanERIC,
Are we reading the same Natsnet site?
I get a strong NO vote theme coming through, also verbally. But having said that .. Thats what seemed to be in the air for the pension and look what happenend there!!
Voting No
And if voting SNP means we don't have to subsidise scotland then YES!! SNP all the way!! Not likely though..but thats another thread.
Are we reading the same Natsnet site?
I get a strong NO vote theme coming through, also verbally. But having said that .. Thats what seemed to be in the air for the pension and look what happenend there!! Voting No
And if voting SNP means we don't have to subsidise scotland then YES!! SNP all the way!! Not likely though..but thats another thread.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's one or two "tasty" comments from the No voters on NATS intranet, which is refreshing to see as most folks are scared to speak out on the NATS propaganda website 
. I suspect however most CTC staff who are commenting how lucky they are to even have a job will drag the" ATC" staff down with a Yes vote, as there are so many of them 
Fifth year of profit as NATS reaches half-way point on Strategic Plan - NATS for the year ended 31 March 2008.
NERL reported a profit before tax of £62.5m (2007:£86.3m), while NSL’s pre-tax profit of £11.5m (2007: £16.1m) reflected its restructuring costs.
These results were delivered against a background of a three per cent growth in traffic to nearly 2.5m flights for another record year.
More large profits this year too ...........
. I suspect however most CTC staff who are commenting how lucky they are to even have a job will drag the" ATC" staff down with a Yes vote, as there are so many of them Fifth year of profit as NATS reaches half-way point on Strategic Plan - NATS for the year ended 31 March 2008.
NERL reported a profit before tax of £62.5m (2007:£86.3m), while NSL’s pre-tax profit of £11.5m (2007: £16.1m) reflected its restructuring costs.
These results were delivered against a background of a three per cent growth in traffic to nearly 2.5m flights for another record year.
More large profits this year too ...........
Last edited by Vote NO; 9th May 2009 at 13:52.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And if voting SNP means we don't have to subsidise scotland then YES!! SNP all the way!! Not likely though..but thats another thread.
But then like much posted on this and other threads here I suppose.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: 24/7 Hardcore Heaven
Posts: 525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suspect however most CTC staff who are commenting how lucky they are to even have a job will drag the" ATC" staff down with a Yes vote, as there are so many of them
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vote No & Mr 777
The Pay Offer is a Core Pay Offer, which applies to all staff across the 3 unions. This means that it has to be accepted by all 3 trade unions (ATCO, ATSS, PCS) for it to go ahead. As a result, contrary to what you have written above, the folks at CTC will not decide the outcome, especially for the ATCO Branch (very few ATCOS based at CTC). This was also the case with the pension vote, with each union holding a seperate ballot and all 3 needing to agree to pass any result.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: 24/7 Hardcore Heaven
Posts: 525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That may be...but I'd say that £15 a month entitles me to have my own opinion. Which means a NO vote from me.
Also, if you go back to the pension vote and remove the apathetic 30% who didn't vote, the ATCO branch was rather less favourable (yes, I know it still got voted in) towards the propositions put forward.
Also, if you go back to the pension vote and remove the apathetic 30% who didn't vote, the ATCO branch was rather less favourable (yes, I know it still got voted in) towards the propositions put forward.