UK - NATS Pay negotiations - latest rumours

[10W]

That is what management said at the briefing.

I thought I was going to a briefing by the BEC, but you're right, after hearing their pitch it probably was management after all

[expediteoff]

LTP

"Much as I'd like us all to stick it to management throughout the entirety of July and August (for instance)"

Now there's an idea - On a purely individual basis of course!

[Use the Force]

As stated before,

Welcome to the private sector.

Ask yourselves a few questions,

If you were still government run would you have a similar pay increase?

Do you think that that the airport side of the business has as much value as the monopoly of the centres?

Do you honestly think that if you vote no there will be an improved offer?

Why do you think Gibraltar has no say? Did they not take that contract off Serco? It would not surprise me if they are running at a loss just to get into the European market.

The Airports could be done by different cheaper contractors of which there are a few. If NATS can not keep its cost down then it will probably get rid.

The few airports I have seen change hands, controllers do not leave on mass because they have a life in the area and TUPE means the transition is not too harsh. The airport does not suffer.

When with another company you will get your bog standard 3% per year if you agree to take on all these extra tasks to keep cost down and keep the contract. These companies do not recognise unions. Like it or look for another job, because there will be someone there ready to take your job or be trained to take your job.

If airport controllers wish to continue to work for NATS then sadly bite the bullet. It could get a whole lot worse.

[Flybywyre]

Interesting post above

Unfortunately written by someone that clearly has very little (if any) experience of the real world, business and commerce.

If NATS really does want to keep airport contracts then it must bite the bullet and reverse the damaging and crass decision to split NATS into two and calling them NSL and NERL.

[eglnyt]

If NATS really does want to keep airport contracts then it must bite the bullet and reverse the damaging and crass decision to split NATS into two and calling them NSL and NERL.

It wasn't a NATS decision and it isn't in NATS power to reverse it. The regulated business is kept seperate from the unregulated business by the terms of the NERL Licence and the possibility of infringing European competition law if it isn't. NATS can't use NERL money to keep NSL contracts and even if it could the NERL money is also being continually squeezed by the regulator.

NSL has two choices compete on price or compete on quality of service. The first is a race to the lowest price which it probably can't win. The second may lead to the loss of some contracts.

[Use the Force]

Flybywyre

"Unfortunately written by someone that clearly has very little (if any) experience of the real world, business and commerce.

If NATS really does want to keep airport contracts then it must bite the bullet and reverse the damaging and crass decision to split NATS into two and calling them NSL and NERL."

And the chances of that? Do not be so naive and thank you for agreeing.

[Flybywyre]

Another interesting post............this time from EGLNYT

However it does look like a load of Bull based on semantics. Some of it would appear to be plainly wrong.

It wasn't a NATS decision and it isn't in NATS power to reverse it.

Yes it was (Paul Baron) and yes it is given the right amount of lobbying.

The regulated business is kept seperate from the unregulated business

Are not NSL and NERL both regulated ?

How about some tangible evidence to back up what would seem at first glance an informed post.

But please spare us any nebulous comments like "possibility of infringing European competition law"

Cheers

[Rocket_Science]

rocket science. That is not what i said. That is what management said at the briefing.

Apologies terrain. I misunderstood your post.

Still the bottom line is management are trying to divide our strength and now we have to endure briefings where unit management will try and sell all deals as the best available and we should all be grateful we are getting anything!

Sorry, i just want a cost of living rise for myself and family. Surely it is not too much to ask from a profit making company when i did my bit last time around with a pay freeze when RPI remained on the whole positive. Oh, and those exec pay rises we're just to" draw a line under." How come exec pay is not subject to the same monetary pressures? LEADERSHIP IS BEST DONE BY SETTING AN EXAMPLE FFS!!!

[eglnyt]

How about some tangible evidence to back up what would seem at first glance an informed post.

The CAA Air Traffic Services and Competition Law Policy Document published in April 2006 would be a good place to start. You can find it on their website if you care to look.

But please spare us any nebulous comments like "possibility of infringing European competition law"

Originally it wasn't a possibility it was considered fact. It's now become a "possibility" because of the CAA's latest legal advice that NATS may not be an "undertaking" and therefore the legislation might not apply. We'll only know for sure if the lawyers get to argue it out in court all the way to the top and that isn't in anybody's interest because the end game there might be a forced split of NSL and NERL.

Yes it was (Paul Baron)

Sorry it wasn't. NERL and NSL came into being in 2001, Paul Barron arrived in 2004. He did split the two Chief Executive roles but they were already two different companies.

[250 kts]

Whether you define it as industrial action or not, the practicalities of a successful AAVA boycott dictate that the workforce would have to have the union involved (if only to orchestrate the timings of any such action), and that's not going to happen while Prospect is riddled with management apologists. Anyone fancy putting their head above the parapet and emailing "All AC" with a suggestion to boycott AAVAs? No, didn't think so.

Much as I'd like us all to stick it to management throughout the entirety of July and August (for instance), when it will hurt them the most, there are more than enough recently valid ATCOs - who have been paid peanuts at the college - who will say that they 'need' the money and consider themselves exempt from anything which isn't entirely watertight.
And it wouldn't only be them - does anyone remember the ATCO a couple of years back who suggested people take a stand and refuse to do AAVAs, while all the time continuing to volunteer for as many shifts as he could get his grubby little paws on?
Well, there'll be others like him, and only a TOTAL overtime boycott will really hurt management, so I don't see how it's workable.

No, it appears the only avenue left to register our discontent now is by firmly voting NO when the ballot comes round, and convince as many of our colleagues as possible to do the same.

LTP

I think I must have missed something here or Lost The Picture.

A ballot will shortly be taking place on pay. I'm not sure what you are trying to do here by "hurting management".

Are you trying to do it to get more staff on the unit, to hurt the customer or get a better pay offer?

[25check]

> ATSAs are getting paid for doing nothing and need to realise that they are holding the company back.

What an outrageous way to refer to a dedicated group of workers, many of whom have spent a lifetime with the company. Even the statement could be interpreted as bullying, but when it suits their aims it is obviously not an issue.

They are 'doing nothing' because the company has excluded them from as many tasks as possible, refusing to allocate any new tasks that might actually help the system to run better and safer because they 'don't wan't to have a reason not to get rid of them' (managements words).

I hope the NSL controllers realise what they would be signing up to with the met, with very little reward for extra tasks.

[BOBBLEHAT]

There are some crazy posts here. Written by people who appear to have little knowledge of what they are talking about.

Why do some want to bring down the company? Why don't you burn down your own house - the results will be similar in the long run.

I agree with the need for unity and those that have concerns about the MET aspects have my sympathy.

All will need to listen carefully to the briefings and get the FACTS. As for those that rubbish the guys doing the briefings - you have know idea of the time and effort they put in to deliver this. You don't have to agree with them but do them decency of a fair hearing and appreciate the position they are in of trying to balance the needs of ALL members and find a way forward that ensures continued terms and conditions for all.

For the person who thinks NSL is a regulated business........ you need to do some more homework before posting

[LostThePicture]

@250 kts

Thanks for regurgitating my entire post word for word. I'd honestly completely forgotten what I wrote two days ago. Or maybe you just get a thrill from using bandwidth unnecessarily?

If you'd cared to look at what I wrote in the context of some of the posts preceding it, you might have worked out that for the most part I was merely giving my opinion on how difficult it would be to make a stand on AAVAs, especially now, when the union are all ready to sign an "in perpetuity" agreement with management.

This is what you wrote last month. Now I'm confused. It would appear that one month ago you were ready to take a stand yourself. But now, after the union have stated their intention to accept an offer that sells smaller NSL units down the river and would commit volunteers to AAVAs at the current rate for the foreseeable future, my opinion seems unpalatable to you.
A touch hypocritical?

I think it's fair to say that there is a considerable amount of discontent being expressed both on here and on natsnet with regard to whether this is really the best that management can offer. The union arguably had the best possible bargaining position and have dropped the ball again. To close the ballot one week before company annual results are due makes them look like idiots (again).

I have no desire to "bring down the company" but it irritates me that management's complacency with regard to pay negotiations, LAS agreements and AAVAs is going to go basically unpunished.

It seems that with regard to pay negotiations, there are two types of people. Those that are happy to accept whatever Prospect put in front of them, and those that are capable of forming their own opinion. Unfortunately the former always seem to outnumber the latter.

LTP

[Flybywyre]

Bobblehat..............
If you are referring to my post about NSL and NERL being regulated then can I politely suggest you read my post again and note the question mark.
I was asking a question.
EGLYNT answered it, thank you.
In response to that answer I am sure that the new owners of NATS, whoever and whenever that will be, will either sell NSL to the highest bidder or bring it back into the NATS fold as a another section of NATS, just like the training section is.
Alternatively they could sell both NSL, the training section and any other section that they think they could flog off and just concentrate on the core business of ATC.
A bit like the airlines have done. They just concentrate on the core revenue side of the business, flying aeroplanes. Almost everything else has been farmed out, including training.
Just a thought

[vespasia]

Alternatively they could sell both NSL, the training section and any other section that they think they could flog off and just concentrate on the core business of ATC.

Nice to know you don't think NSL is ATC

[Flybywyre]

I suppose I could have worded it better but that is not what I meant (or think).............

[250 kts]

LTP,

Thanks for the reminder of my post in mid April. I see the date on that was before the revised offer was made. At that time it looked certain that there was no more money on the table and that there was a distinct possibility that we would be going into a period of "handbook overtime" and that the actions of the staff by doing overtime could easily undermine Prospect.

Anyway here we are a month on with the start of the ballot only a couple of weeks away. I think it imperative that people attend the briefings and listen to what the negotiators have to say.

commit volunteers to AAVAs at the current rate for the foreseeable future

Not sure how a volunteer can be committed-you either choose to do them or you don't-simple.

[BDiONU]

Originally Posted by 250 kts

Not sure how a volunteer can be committed-you either choose to do them or you don't-simple.

I think they're talking about the rate for enhanced (AKA golden) AAVAs where you are committing to doing 'x' many AAVAs over a certain period.

BD

[LostThePicture]

commit volunteers to AAVAs at the current rate for the foreseeable future...

...meaning that those who commit to do AAVAs will be doing them at the current rate (iFACTS excepted) for several years at the very least. Given that students are now paid peanuts, management will not be short of volunteers from among newly valid ATCOs. As a guide, an AAVA is now worth about 17% less than it was in 2003 and RPI is running at over 5%. You'll excuse me if I don't think this was the greatest piece of union negotiation, especially when Prospect had such a strong position after management tried to circumvent the rules regarding overtime.

As for attending a briefing, of course I will do so if Prospect deign to turn up on a day when I am at work. You have to understand though that the negotiators are NOT going to put a negative spin on something that they're recommending we accept. There comes a point where you have to draw your own conclusions. If you need to have yours spoon-fed to you, then you have my sympathy.

LTP

[The Fat Controller]

In view of the fact that the Prospect briefing team will be visiting every NATS unit twice, I think the onus is on US to get ourselves along to a session.

Please do not forget that your reps have been negotiating for almost a year to try and get us a decent deal.

I just hope that ALL NATS staff can, for once, be bothered to put a cross in a box and actually send in their vote