Latest rumour on 2002 pay....??!!
Thread Starter
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
From: In the South
Latest rumour on 2002 pay....??!!
OK, so we've all read the NATS PAY pages and the feeling seems to be an overwhelming Rejection with a capital R. I heard a RUMOUR a day or two ago that management were considering an offer of 3.7% for year 2002. I haven't heard anything else on this and do not know if it would be linked to a two year pay deal. I'm sure there must be somebody else out there that can add to this.
If not, well I did say it was only a rumour
Cotton wool for clouds and a bottle top for the sun!
If not, well I did say it was only a rumour
Cotton wool for clouds and a bottle top for the sun!
Thread Starter
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
From: In the South
Roland (I can't believe its not) butter
This is completey different from the initial two year deal offering the 3.7% as a second year deal. As I said initially this is a rumour that has been banded around as a pay offer for 2002 and not as the second year of a 2 year pay deal. If you'd read the post correctly in the first instance then there would have been no need for you to have wasted your time posting such a time wasting reply
Stick to book keeping(profile) and chill out!!
Who said I'm not NATS?
Cotton wool for clouds and a bottle top for the sun!
This is completey different from the initial two year deal offering the 3.7% as a second year deal. As I said initially this is a rumour that has been banded around as a pay offer for 2002 and not as the second year of a 2 year pay deal. If you'd read the post correctly in the first instance then there would have been no need for you to have wasted your time posting such a time wasting reply
Stick to book keeping(profile) and chill out!!Who said I'm not NATS?
Cotton wool for clouds and a bottle top for the sun!
Last edited by nodelay; 27th April 2002 at 21:37.
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
From: Swanwick
OK, so we've all read the NATS PAY pages and the feeling seems to be an overwhelming Rejection with a capital R.
Wrong.
All you have read are comments from the usual whingers.
Don't forget that NATS consists of lots of people performing various jobs and functions, the majority of which will vote to accept the pay deal.
Regards
APC
Wrong.
All you have read are comments from the usual whingers.
Don't forget that NATS consists of lots of people performing various jobs and functions, the majority of which will vote to accept the pay deal.
Regards
APC
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
From: Bermuda Shorts and Cessna Caravans
Applycarbheat
The 143 people out of the 166 who voted in the straw poll on here to reject the offer (85.63%) will be delighted to see you refer to them as whingers.
NATS pay proposal poll
The 143 people out of the 166 who voted in the straw poll on here to reject the offer (85.63%) will be delighted to see you refer to them as whingers.
NATS pay proposal poll
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
From: Scotland
As a non-ATCO I agree. It's a secure well paid job with lots of time off and 30 minutes break every 2 hours - no matter how quiet you've been.
This will probably change when individual rostering comes in and CRATCOH is modernised.
This will probably change when individual rostering comes in and CRATCOH is modernised.
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 856
Likes: 0
From: I sell sea shells by the sea shore
But then, without us "whingeing" operational ATCOs, who actually do a damn fine job (customer comments, not mine), with all the responsibilty that it entails, YOU wouldn't HAVE any job would you?
Rgds BEX
P.S. CRATCOH hasn't existed for a while now. SRATCOH is what you think you mean. Pity...
Rgds BEX
P.S. CRATCOH hasn't existed for a while now. SRATCOH is what you think you mean. Pity...
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
From: Here to Eternity
Oooh.. handbags everyone....!!
without each part of the company the other parts couldn't function. Fancy running the whole shebang yourself??... no, didn't think so.
P.S. the rumour about a 3.7% offer this year? No chance. Think maybe someone got their wires crossed when reading the communication about the 2 year deal.
As I heard it the reason the unions are happy to do a 2 year deal is they reckon that a certain Mr Bush may decide to destabilise certain oil producing countries even further in the coming months, leading to increasing oil prices and a downturn in air traffic due to military action... and so if we can tie up a guaranteed deal now we'll be better off. In the words of King Kenny Dalglish "mibbes aye... mibbes naw"
without each part of the company the other parts couldn't function. Fancy running the whole shebang yourself??... no, didn't think so.
P.S. the rumour about a 3.7% offer this year? No chance. Think maybe someone got their wires crossed when reading the communication about the 2 year deal.
As I heard it the reason the unions are happy to do a 2 year deal is they reckon that a certain Mr Bush may decide to destabilise certain oil producing countries even further in the coming months, leading to increasing oil prices and a downturn in air traffic due to military action... and so if we can tie up a guaranteed deal now we'll be better off. In the words of King Kenny Dalglish "mibbes aye... mibbes naw"
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
From: Scotland
BEX I stand corrected, SRATCOH it is. Whatever it's called it will be overhauled soon - that's unavoidable. ATCO wages are by far the biggest expense the company has, so getting them working more efficiently is an obvious target for the bean counters.
Undercover is right. The working ATCO relies on a whole lot of people to be able to do the job well. Many don't seem to realise this in NATS and instead see themselves as the star of the show – an attitude which can annoy the rest of us.
NATS has a published plan to lose 1000 engineers over the next ten years or less. That’s 2 out of every three currently employed. Against this background I’m sure you can see why the fuss being kicked up about the current pay round is being described as “whinging”
Undercover is right. The working ATCO relies on a whole lot of people to be able to do the job well. Many don't seem to realise this in NATS and instead see themselves as the star of the show – an attitude which can annoy the rest of us.
NATS has a published plan to lose 1000 engineers over the next ten years or less. That’s 2 out of every three currently employed. Against this background I’m sure you can see why the fuss being kicked up about the current pay round is being described as “whinging”
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 856
Likes: 0
From: I sell sea shells by the sea shore
As I've said MANY times before, I have the upmost admiration for our engineers. I have also said here that I believe the way our engineering staff have been treated is nothing short of a tragedy.
I question the need for the "other" office staff. People like the ORO for instance. Cost a fortune, contribute zero...except upsetting all and sundry for no appreciable reason.
As for individual rosters, I'm suprised that this hasn't come up sooner. Rostering depts in most of the members of TAG have pretty sophisticated tools for crewing their aeroplanes, taking into account the relevant CAP, Crew qualifications, the Route and crew preferences (bids). I'm amazed that our rosters haven't been "contracted out" to one of these depts.
BEX
I question the need for the "other" office staff. People like the ORO for instance. Cost a fortune, contribute zero...except upsetting all and sundry for no appreciable reason.
As for individual rosters, I'm suprised that this hasn't come up sooner. Rostering depts in most of the members of TAG have pretty sophisticated tools for crewing their aeroplanes, taking into account the relevant CAP, Crew qualifications, the Route and crew preferences (bids). I'm amazed that our rosters haven't been "contracted out" to one of these depts.
BEX
Moderator
Joined: Jul 1997
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 3,231
Likes: 21
From: Europe
Nats_Not_Funny
SRATCOH is a legal requirement placed on ATS providers by the Regulator, i.e. the CAA. It is not something NATS dreamt up for it's ATCO staff as part of their conditions. It is not something that NATS has any control over.
So what makes you think that it will be amended ?? Whatever NATS management want their ATC staff to do, it will have to be within the laws of the land.
SRATCOH is a legal requirement placed on ATS providers by the Regulator, i.e. the CAA. It is not something NATS dreamt up for it's ATCO staff as part of their conditions. It is not something that NATS has any control over.
So what makes you think that it will be amended ?? Whatever NATS management want their ATC staff to do, it will have to be within the laws of the land.