Government to sell off their share in NATS?

[saintex2002]

As I said in this other thread ;
http://www.pprune.org/atc-issues/392...ship-nats.html

We are reaching all of us EU ATCOS the moment to ask who will run our job, into the whole EU FABs, the ones who want to make money on our shoulders or all of us to do it into a what you need corporation, society or what else but stop the chaos...
No more talks, we must act now as a whole EU ATCOS family...
We must meet at EU level and think about that and decide our future, if not just be ready to be all called losers...

[LostThePicture]

Therin lies a major problem - an apathetic union membership...

It's not Prospect's fault if the membership don't vote!

Sorry, but I would dispute these statements. This ENTIRE mess in which we find ourselves is Prospect's fault. There are people (no names, no packdrill) in the union who are far too high up the greasy pole of NATS management, which has resulted in people being poorly advised on the two recent ballots on pensions and pay. Prospect's recommendation, if you remember, was for the membership to vote Yes in each case. This despite the high probability of the company making well over £100 million in profits for the second year running, as proved to be the case. AND, having betrayed us on pensions, they allowed the pay ballot to be completed a matter of days before the company announced its record results - possibly the worst decision in the history of industrial relations.

Apathy in itself will not kill a ballot one way or the other - it is the people who have been poorly advised to vote Yes that have put us in this position, make no mistake. Given the massive difference of opinion that divided the workforce, it's only surprising that more people didn't abstain.

The only way my faith in the union will be restored is for the current team to be removed, be it by vote of no confidence or some other means. They have proven themselves to be management apologists twice and I would not trust them to act in our best interests in any negotiations in the future.

LTP

[Standard Noise]

[/QUOTE]Prospect's recommendation, if you remember, was for the membership to vote Yes in each case.[/QUOTE]
Oh, and your colleagues are too stupid to think for themselves are they?
I stand by my statement that it's not Prospect's fault if members don't vote, as going by your logic then everyone would have voted yes because that's what the union advised them to do.


7 December 2009

Government must NOT sell Air Traffic Control

Speculation that the Government will seek to sell down its share in the national air traffic provider NATS was today (Monday) attacked by Prospect, the union representing over 3,000 air traffic controllers, engineers and specialists.

Garry Graham, National Secretary for Aviation, said: “We fear that the Government is to announce a sell-off of its interest in NATS from 49% to 25% in the Pre-Budget Report on Wednesday.

“This proposed sell-off has nothing to do with supporting a safe and effective air traffic control system for the UK. It is merely a short-sighted attempt by Government to plug the hole in its finances.

“At a time when the Airline Group is seeking to ‘cut and run’ by selling their own stake in NATS, the speculation surrounding a potential Government sell-off introduces exactly the kind of instability we warned of at the time of privatisation.

“The reality is that our members working for NATS have served the airline industry and the travelling public well. We have one of the best safety records of any country despite UK airspace being some of the most congested and complex in the world. Delays remain at an historic low.

“If there is any truth in the speculation at all, our members will feel betrayed by the Government.”

Graham said Prospect has written to ministers seeking an urgent meeting and will be writing to all MPs to raise its concerns.

“We said at the time of the part-privatisation in 2001 and still maintain that air traffic control is too important to be left to the vagaries and instabilities of the market. No other Government in the world has gone down this route of privatisation.”

[250 kts]

The only way my faith in the union will be restored is for the current team to be removed, be it by vote of no confidence or some other means. They have proven themselves to be management apologists twice and I would not trust them to act in our best interests in any negotiations in the future.

I guess you'd better get out there and put your hat in the ring right now.

If I heard correctly after the recent conference, there was no one prepared to stand against the present people that you so roundly condemn.

We weren't betrayed on pensions or pay. We were presented with cases that every single highly paid and supposedly intelligent member was allowed to vote on. It's called democracy and if 30% can't be bothered to vote then we deserve to reap the rewards of such apathy.

Put up or shut up springs to mind. Oh and LTP, it may actually require you doing something other than just going into work and taking the money.

Still interested or conveniently leave it to others?

[ZOOKER]

Knots,
"the recent conference".
Is that 'the conference' that the membership at a certain proximal NATS unit allegedly knew nothing about?
Seems to have been a bit lacking in publicity this year.
'Hush-hush', under-the-hat, nice'n-cozy'!

[250 kts]

No Zooker. and if you were anything to with either NATS or ATC you would know what I was writing about.

Now go back down your hole and only come out when there is a subject on here that you actually know anything about. Reading the Ian Allan book of ATC really isn't good enough you know.

[ZOOKER]

In dental parlance: -
I think we have just touched a nerve!

[250 kts]

In basic parlance, you're a berk and everyone on here knows it but they're all afraid to say it.

In dental parlance: you're tolerated on here, a bit like a mouth ulcer.

The subject is way too important for us to be side tracked by the likes of you though so apologies from me to all of the genuine NATS employees who are on here.

Now which conference was it I was talking about that apparently no one knew about?

[Gonzo]

250kts, try the ignore function......works a treat.

[250 kts]

Sorry Gonzo you beat me to it.

[ZOOKER]

Gonzo,
'Ignore function' U/S is it?
Any chance of a visit to the patio-heater?

[Mirach Killer]

As Prospect state in their response the government is looking to reduce its interest from 49% to 25%. Sounds like an NSL sized chunk to me!

[LostThePicture]

Oh, and your colleagues are too stupid to think for themselves are they?

Frankly speaking, yes. The pensions and pay ballots were highly controversial issues within the company and the union membership relied on Prospect to direct them how to respond, particularly in the case of pensions which many - even intelligent - people do not necessarily fully understand. In each case this year the advice given by the union has been poor, to say the least, but that didn't stop the majority from taking that advice.

The likely view of the workforce is to be against privatisation; Mr Graham's statement appears at this stage to be aligned with this. If the majority of the workforce once again takes union advice, then you guys have nothing to worry about, do you? Apathy will not even come into the equation. But my view is that Mr Graham and his team have let us down in the past, so I wouldn't be at all surprised if it happened again.

We weren't betrayed on pensions or pay. We were presented with cases that every single highly paid and supposedly intelligent member was allowed to vote on. It's called democracy and if 30% can't be bothered to vote then we deserve to reap the rewards of such apathy.

I stand by my statement that it's not Prospect's fault if members don't vote, as going by your logic then everyone would have voted yes because that's what the union advised them to do.

I've made my views clear on whether I think Prospect were at fault / betrayed us / whatever. But I'll say it again - Apathy did not swing the vote one way or the other. People who didn't vote might not have been bothered, or maybe, given the persuasive arguments on both sides of the fence, they just wished to abstain. Either way, the net difference to the result would have been ZERO. Do you want me to draw you a graph?

If I heard correctly after the recent conference, there was no one prepared to stand against the present people that you so roundly condemn.

I'm a NATS ATCO and I heard nothing of this conference. And no, I'm not interested in participating myself. But I can recognise a conflict of interest when I see one, and as a member of the union I think I'm entitled to something better than the current regime.

LTP

[10W]

You need to blame your local reps, and not Prospect generally, if you knew nothing about the Annual Delegates Conference which is held every year, same place and same general time.

There's always stuff floating about our Ops Room weeks or months before it happens, including the motions, which we are normally asked by our local or watch reps to vote on.

[anotherthing]

LTP

30% (and more) of members not even being arsed to vote or even return a spoiled paper says one thing and one thing only to management... that they (management) can get away with almost anything because regardless of how hard (or otherwise) the union tries to fight our corner, a huge swathe of people won't bother voting when it comes to a ballot.

A big non turn out is as good as a vote in favour of the management proposal because management know that we are apathetic.

Maybe the apathy has been brought about because of past negotitations and people becoming disgruntled with the Union, but by not voting either way, we are putting out a huge message.

Hell a 90% 'yes' vote in favour of changes to the pension would have been better than a 30% no show - at least then management would realise that we do give a damn about what is happening within NATS and we are interested.

What we have now after the last two ballots is proof that a large number of members aren't bothered and don't give a stuff what happens within NATS.

Do we have a weak Union? Maybe, but collectively the membership is responsible for making them even weaker.

Draw as many graphs as you want... when you are at the negotiating table fights are lost or won as much on perception of strength and support as they are on accountancy profit and loss figures.

[250 kts]

I'm a NATS ATCO and I heard nothing of this conference.

LTP

Then as a Prospect member you need to get yourself more informed.

Maybe reading the Prospect notice board in the briefing room would be a start. If I remember rightly the advance details for the ANNUAL CONFERENCE-there's a clue there somewhere-were displayed from around the end of July for a conference in early November.

Just who let who down?

And no, I'm not interested in participating myself.

Then you deserve what you are given. Remember the guys who can be bothered do so in their own time most of the time. They deserve the respect and support of all of us who aren't involved. things won't always go the way we think they should but when you get 5 minutes just think how things would be without their efforts.

Stop moaning or get involved.

[ZOOKER]

Well, no news today, (PBR day).
I suspect any 'announcement' will be towards the end of January. - By then the two (sea-side) centre strategy will be a reality.
The next date for your diaries is the Queen's Birthday Honours List, when 'Sir PB CBE' will ride off into a glorious Ayrshire sunset, leaving his 'people' to mull over the smoking remains of their pensions.

[eglnyt]

Well, no news today, (PBR day).

Why were we expecting any news today ? The statement was made to both Houses of Parliament on Monday 7th.

[ZOOKER]

Oh sh*t, missed it!
Must have been at work.

If the statements were made to both Houses on Monday, why were the ATCO's union expecting information to be given in today's Pre-Budget Report?

[eglnyt]

If the statements were made to both Houses on Monday, why were the ATCO's union expecting information to be given in today's Pre-Budget Report?

Perhaps they didn't see the Sky News report which clearly said the announcement would be on Monday.