Pay ballot result
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Shcotland
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ASG - you really have a chip on your shoulder about ATCOs don't you? To recap, the first vote for ATCOs, ATCEs and ATSAs was carried out simultaneously - we are all given freewill at birth - to explain, that gives us the right to make our own decisions. ATCOs voted against the deal - (not against ATSAs and ATCEs) - if you are suggesting that we are guilty of some kind of treason, then I think you are living in the 1970s.
S8D - 'reneged on the originally agreed offer' .......? In the words of Miss Olive Actory of Chewing the Fat .... 'I can definitely smell *****'
It's not agreed until it's voted on ... other wise WHY DO WE HAVE A VOTE. Go and buy a dictionary - then learn to read it.
S8D - 'reneged on the originally agreed offer' .......? In the words of Miss Olive Actory of Chewing the Fat .... 'I can definitely smell *****'
It's not agreed until it's voted on ... other wise WHY DO WE HAVE A VOTE. Go and buy a dictionary - then learn to read it.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Southern UK
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I understand it... the 3 branches that comprises the Central trade union Side all agreed to recommend the offer. Somewhere between the CTUS meeting and the ATCO's BEC meeting there was a change of heart and they (the ATCOs) decided to reccommend a No vote.
Is that incorrect??
If not, then who can blame PCS and the ATCE/Prospect for going back and recommending a Yes???
The whole thing is a bloody mess, and the sooner that all three branches become one, in the same union, the better. But I guess the ATCO's wont have that.......
(Edited for ambiguous and generally ****e grammar)
Is that incorrect??
If not, then who can blame PCS and the ATCE/Prospect for going back and recommending a Yes???
The whole thing is a bloody mess, and the sooner that all three branches become one, in the same union, the better. But I guess the ATCO's wont have that.......
(Edited for ambiguous and generally ****e grammar)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Down South
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You've got to love a weak mind. Always reverting to personal insults cos they can't grasp what a proper discussion involves.
To recap Aunt: I don't have a chip on my shoulder about ATCOs, I don't hate ATCOs and I think most ATCOs are very decent human beings. Obviously there are exceptions, as there are in all walks of life. We seem to find most of the exceptions ppruning.
Now back to the story. Us OPERATIONAL people deserve a decent pay rise. To that I think we all agree. What seems to be the bigger issue here is that the rest of us want parity with the ATCOs after there was a little struggle for power in the lower ranks of the company. Fair enough. ATCOs win every time no doubt. What the problem is, all you blind ATCOs who can't see the ATSA past the end of their nose as they tilt their head upwards (not all ATCOs by any means - as I said 95% of them are very decent nice people) is the way the other ranks are VALUED (remember that word? Was thrown about a bit a while ago). The other OPERATIONAL grades in the company feel very undervauled. For a start we have a management system everyone knows only too well do not love us mere foot soldiers. Then we have the "gods" who look down on us. Do you know how much hard work the rest of the company actually puts in so Mr. and Mrs ATCO can come into work, sit down and chat to planes all day long? Sure you have pressure and a hard job, but so do the rest of us. Now imagine, if you will, our friends the Managers who want to reward the ATCOs for whinging (Fair play to you - it worked), and kick the rest of us in the short and fuzzies and make us all feel like not actually working hard any more. All we want is a little recognition for the job we do. Just like you. We may be sheep at times when it comes to saying yes, but don't go getting excited and upset when we say no once in a while. Let us have our fight and see what happens. You've had ours and you won.
To recap Aunt: I don't have a chip on my shoulder about ATCOs, I don't hate ATCOs and I think most ATCOs are very decent human beings. Obviously there are exceptions, as there are in all walks of life. We seem to find most of the exceptions ppruning.
Now back to the story. Us OPERATIONAL people deserve a decent pay rise. To that I think we all agree. What seems to be the bigger issue here is that the rest of us want parity with the ATCOs after there was a little struggle for power in the lower ranks of the company. Fair enough. ATCOs win every time no doubt. What the problem is, all you blind ATCOs who can't see the ATSA past the end of their nose as they tilt their head upwards (not all ATCOs by any means - as I said 95% of them are very decent nice people) is the way the other ranks are VALUED (remember that word? Was thrown about a bit a while ago). The other OPERATIONAL grades in the company feel very undervauled. For a start we have a management system everyone knows only too well do not love us mere foot soldiers. Then we have the "gods" who look down on us. Do you know how much hard work the rest of the company actually puts in so Mr. and Mrs ATCO can come into work, sit down and chat to planes all day long? Sure you have pressure and a hard job, but so do the rest of us. Now imagine, if you will, our friends the Managers who want to reward the ATCOs for whinging (Fair play to you - it worked), and kick the rest of us in the short and fuzzies and make us all feel like not actually working hard any more. All we want is a little recognition for the job we do. Just like you. We may be sheep at times when it comes to saying yes, but don't go getting excited and upset when we say no once in a while. Let us have our fight and see what happens. You've had ours and you won.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Here to Eternity
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm afraid sector8 is right... sorry if that doesn't fit into the "ATCOs always right" world...
When the original deal was done, all TU parties INCLUDING ATCO branch agreed to recommend a "yes" vote to their members. The engineers and PCS stood by their word. The ATCO branch bottled it when their members obviously gave them an earful and went back on their word. That's the facts.
Now... the ATCOs then vote no, as is their right. It's not fair to say that all were lied to by management and the ATCOs saw through it as the reality is there is no money there to pay for this improved deal. So it wasn't a lie. The money will be found by going to the banks and begging for more loans, with the assurance that the conditions of the deal will bring cost savings.
So in effect, rather than "flexing muscle" and gaining a victory, the ATCOs rejection has got us into a situation of trading off our terms and conditions for a few extra quid.
As to the legality of the engineers and PCS now rejecting the original offer... If you read the small print on the ballot form, this was clearly seen as a condition of the vote. So perhaps a bit of credit should go to those who predicted such a shambles may occur.
Now the shoe is on the other foot. The ATCOs have got their pound of flesh... but will have to wait until the rest have been satisfied before getting a sniff of the readies.
Let's just hope that this concentration on short term gain doesn't end up with us selling out some of our future security, I for one, wouldn't think it's worth it.
When the original deal was done, all TU parties INCLUDING ATCO branch agreed to recommend a "yes" vote to their members. The engineers and PCS stood by their word. The ATCO branch bottled it when their members obviously gave them an earful and went back on their word. That's the facts.
Now... the ATCOs then vote no, as is their right. It's not fair to say that all were lied to by management and the ATCOs saw through it as the reality is there is no money there to pay for this improved deal. So it wasn't a lie. The money will be found by going to the banks and begging for more loans, with the assurance that the conditions of the deal will bring cost savings.
So in effect, rather than "flexing muscle" and gaining a victory, the ATCOs rejection has got us into a situation of trading off our terms and conditions for a few extra quid.
As to the legality of the engineers and PCS now rejecting the original offer... If you read the small print on the ballot form, this was clearly seen as a condition of the vote. So perhaps a bit of credit should go to those who predicted such a shambles may occur.
Now the shoe is on the other foot. The ATCOs have got their pound of flesh... but will have to wait until the rest have been satisfied before getting a sniff of the readies.
Let's just hope that this concentration on short term gain doesn't end up with us selling out some of our future security, I for one, wouldn't think it's worth it.
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: LACC
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually Undercover both you and sector8 are wrong.
At the conclusion of the CTUS pay negotiations the negotiating teams, including the ATCO one, agreed to recommend to their own BEC`s that the deal on offer was the best that could be achieved by negotiation. No more, no less.
The ATCO BEC, after discussions, decided to recomend rejection and make it perfectly clear that industrial action would be a distinct possibility if the members voted no.
It is the ATCO membership who rejected the deal very conclusively.
At the conclusion of the CTUS pay negotiations the negotiating teams, including the ATCO one, agreed to recommend to their own BEC`s that the deal on offer was the best that could be achieved by negotiation. No more, no less.
The ATCO BEC, after discussions, decided to recomend rejection and make it perfectly clear that industrial action would be a distinct possibility if the members voted no.
It is the ATCO membership who rejected the deal very conclusively.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Northwest
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just my own opinions but.......
I'm sorry if the assistants and engineers feel that they have been let down but this has been caused by the union negotiators and not the atco's themselves. They were wrong to come out of the original meeting with an agreement to recomend acceptance and then change their minds, I suspect they did this because they soon realised that the atco's would reject anyway as we are not sheep and are allowed to vote with our own free will and so wanted to save face. I think that the result of the improved ballot (approx 60-40) shows that just because the union recomends acceptance you still have the right to make up you're own mind. I personaly still voted no due to the strings attached but will accept with good grace the democratic result.
What I cannot understand on these forums is the fact that I have now said the above I will be seen by people to be anti engineer or assistant which I most definately am not. Good luck to them if they manage to get any more money out of the company and, I, for one will not mind not getting my back pay for a little while yet ( I've lasted 9 months already without it). Just don't expect me to fighting you're corner too vigorously as I beleive after you've already voted yes you can count yourself lucky to get any more!
I'm sorry if the assistants and engineers feel that they have been let down but this has been caused by the union negotiators and not the atco's themselves. They were wrong to come out of the original meeting with an agreement to recomend acceptance and then change their minds, I suspect they did this because they soon realised that the atco's would reject anyway as we are not sheep and are allowed to vote with our own free will and so wanted to save face. I think that the result of the improved ballot (approx 60-40) shows that just because the union recomends acceptance you still have the right to make up you're own mind. I personaly still voted no due to the strings attached but will accept with good grace the democratic result.
What I cannot understand on these forums is the fact that I have now said the above I will be seen by people to be anti engineer or assistant which I most definately am not. Good luck to them if they manage to get any more money out of the company and, I, for one will not mind not getting my back pay for a little while yet ( I've lasted 9 months already without it). Just don't expect me to fighting you're corner too vigorously as I beleive after you've already voted yes you can count yourself lucky to get any more!
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Dorset
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATSA's should all think carefully about the can of worms they may be opening by demanding more cash. If management need to save money long term, they may look at squeezing the ATSAs hard to get their money's worth. At the moment there is a shortage of ATCOs which is costing NATS a s**tload of cash- so more money for ATCOs is probably a long term investment for management. However (and I think this is very wrong) management don't value ATSAs the same way.
There is no comparable shortage of ATSAs to lend weight to your pay claim, so although you may get a comparable offer now, you can look forward to being made to work for every penny. ATSAs currently enjoy a fairly relaxed life most of the time- reading the paper, regular breaks and early goes. You may find yourselves working the 3 1/2 hour maximum I believe you can work before getting a 30 min break, staying later, no 1/2 days leave etc.
I happen to think this would be dreadful if it happened, and agree ATSAs and engineers deserve more respect from both ATCOs and management, but perhaps PCS should think long and hard about where it wants to take its members following its F**k up over pay this year.
There is no comparable shortage of ATSAs to lend weight to your pay claim, so although you may get a comparable offer now, you can look forward to being made to work for every penny. ATSAs currently enjoy a fairly relaxed life most of the time- reading the paper, regular breaks and early goes. You may find yourselves working the 3 1/2 hour maximum I believe you can work before getting a 30 min break, staying later, no 1/2 days leave etc.
I happen to think this would be dreadful if it happened, and agree ATSAs and engineers deserve more respect from both ATCOs and management, but perhaps PCS should think long and hard about where it wants to take its members following its F**k up over pay this year.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Here to Eternity
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A little pedantic Big Nose... ? 
Whatever the diplomatic wording, all of the TU negotiators agreed to go back to their respective BEC with a positive message that this was the best they were going to get.
No matter who said what, the outcome and the current situation remain the same.
Have my fingers crossed that management now make an acceptable offer and we can all get our money without having to take strike action... who wants to do overtime to land these pigs??
Whatever the diplomatic wording, all of the TU negotiators agreed to go back to their respective BEC with a positive message that this was the best they were going to get.
No matter who said what, the outcome and the current situation remain the same.
Have my fingers crossed that management now make an acceptable offer and we can all get our money without having to take strike action... who wants to do overtime to land these pigs??
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am on leave what is the current state of play, do we have to vote again?
I thought once the pay offer was accepted that was that.
I do not want to insult ATSAs & ATCE but this constant sniping will backfire on you badly, management will look at any excuse to further deplete your diminishing ranks.
It is your union negotiators you should be having ago at not atcos.
I thought once the pay offer was accepted that was that.
I do not want to insult ATSAs & ATCE but this constant sniping will backfire on you badly, management will look at any excuse to further deplete your diminishing ranks.
It is your union negotiators you should be having ago at not atcos.
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: LACC
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pedantic, no i don`t think so Undercover. Just pointing out that the ATCO`s decided to take the risk of industrial action and the ATSA`s and Engineers didn`t.
Quite happy to agree that we are in a mess, personally not bothered about my back pay or the introduction of overtime.
As you don`t tell us from your profile what you do in NATS i can`t coment on your final point
Quite happy to agree that we are in a mess, personally not bothered about my back pay or the introduction of overtime.
As you don`t tell us from your profile what you do in NATS i can`t coment on your final point
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Zerouali,
No windup, I am on leave all I know is from what I see here on PPrune and the Prospect website , which says that the ballot result was that of acceptance.
I did do a night duty overtime last night, and asked what was going on and was told that afurther 2% had been offered to ATSA's and ATCE's .Nobody could offer me further insight as to what is happening.
As an aside I didn't vote to accept and stood up at a meeting and said it is quite wrong that this has all happened.
But I must abide by the majority vote ,right or wrong, thats democracy.
flower
No windup, I am on leave all I know is from what I see here on PPrune and the Prospect website , which says that the ballot result was that of acceptance.
I did do a night duty overtime last night, and asked what was going on and was told that afurther 2% had been offered to ATSA's and ATCE's .Nobody could offer me further insight as to what is happening.
As an aside I didn't vote to accept and stood up at a meeting and said it is quite wrong that this has all happened.
But I must abide by the majority vote ,right or wrong, thats democracy.
flower
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: EGLL - ish
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is all getting very tiresome .....
I normally prefer to read rather than contribute.
These issues seem to be doing a pretty good job of dividing NATS staff into opposed camps. Not good new for starters.
We (NATS) are allegedly a "company". We all work for the same people. We all have colleagues who are ATSA, ATCO, ATCE plus all the other grades who hardly seem to get a mention.
I see far too many posts here that imply that there are only certain members of the "company" who deserve a pay rise of X. I guess I must be old fashioned. If a group of people have collectively done a bloody good job of handling more traffic against the odds then surely that group of people collectively deserve to be rewarded for it ???
I am neither ATCO, ATCE or ATSA (but I used to be one) I am merely classed in statistics as "other". I believe I work every bit as hard as my colleagues across NATS. I work long hours, sometimes I bring my work home .... and no my In Tray is never empty and always waiting for me on a Monday morning. Oh yes ... and half an hour for lunch !
I believe that we should all be rewarded for the hard work we are faced with. However we appear to be in danger of tearing ourselves apart from the inside with all this inter-unit bickering.
Lets all hope it is sorted out soon so we can get the money and get on with it
I normally prefer to read rather than contribute.
These issues seem to be doing a pretty good job of dividing NATS staff into opposed camps. Not good new for starters.
We (NATS) are allegedly a "company". We all work for the same people. We all have colleagues who are ATSA, ATCO, ATCE plus all the other grades who hardly seem to get a mention.
I see far too many posts here that imply that there are only certain members of the "company" who deserve a pay rise of X. I guess I must be old fashioned. If a group of people have collectively done a bloody good job of handling more traffic against the odds then surely that group of people collectively deserve to be rewarded for it ???
I am neither ATCO, ATCE or ATSA (but I used to be one) I am merely classed in statistics as "other". I believe I work every bit as hard as my colleagues across NATS. I work long hours, sometimes I bring my work home .... and no my In Tray is never empty and always waiting for me on a Monday morning. Oh yes ... and half an hour for lunch !
I believe that we should all be rewarded for the hard work we are faced with. However we appear to be in danger of tearing ourselves apart from the inside with all this inter-unit bickering.
Lets all hope it is sorted out soon so we can get the money and get on with it
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: LONDON
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a passage in the Bible about workers who had agreed to one Dinarius for a day's work. Other workers also agreed to a Dinarius but for only half a day's work. When the accounting came the first lot, having seen the second lot get a Dinarius for half a day's work expected to get more than they had agreed to but were rebuked by the landowner who stuck to the agreement they had made. They went away grumbling but had not been mistreated.
When the original vote went through some agreed to a deal. Others were not satisfied and negotiated a different one. However, out of jealousy, some of the first group now want to go back on their word and in so doing will hold up the payment for everybody. That seems rather self motivated to me. All sections had the chance to negotiate on the same terms. Why be envious of those who were prepared to take a risk and did better? That is not honourable.
Point 4
When the original vote went through some agreed to a deal. Others were not satisfied and negotiated a different one. However, out of jealousy, some of the first group now want to go back on their word and in so doing will hold up the payment for everybody. That seems rather self motivated to me. All sections had the chance to negotiate on the same terms. Why be envious of those who were prepared to take a risk and did better? That is not honourable.
Point 4
Last edited by 120.4; 15th Sep 2002 at 21:14.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Here to Eternity
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the biblical lesson .4...
just one small detail....
It was a conditional acceptance. The improved offer to others invoked that condition. So it did it's job.
Just don't like the shoe being on the other foot I reckon.
Da Silva... well said. Quite why the higher earners among us are grumbling about the lower earners getting a fair share of an increase is beyond me... well, actually it's not. I can see exactly why... but as my mother always told me; "If you can't find anything nice to say, say nothing at all"
just one small detail....
It was a conditional acceptance. The improved offer to others invoked that condition. So it did it's job.
Just don't like the shoe being on the other foot I reckon.
Da Silva... well said. Quite why the higher earners among us are grumbling about the lower earners getting a fair share of an increase is beyond me... well, actually it's not. I can see exactly why... but as my mother always told me; "If you can't find anything nice to say, say nothing at all"
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: By the Sea-side
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
da silva
An erudite post. You should contribute more often, although your calming words will probably have little effect on the more polarised opinions in this particular thread. Pity, because the venom here displayed is starting to worry quite a lot of us who would simply like to see a fair award to all emplyees of our fair company.
An erudite post. You should contribute more often, although your calming words will probably have little effect on the more polarised opinions in this particular thread. Pity, because the venom here displayed is starting to worry quite a lot of us who would simply like to see a fair award to all emplyees of our fair company.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: LONDON
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Undercover:
"It was a conditional acceptance..." Which means what exactly?
Do you mean that you were satisfied with the deal... unless others weren't... in which case you wouldn't be satisfied either? It was up to each individual to assess the offer on its merit. Having done that and expressed your satisfaction by ballot you have no such right of recall just because others weren't. Either the deal was fair to you or is wasn't and if you thought not, you should have had the courage to say so. The truth is that under the current circumstances the deal was not fair to the ATCOs and they expressed that view.
The Bible quote is appropriate.
Point 4
"It was a conditional acceptance..." Which means what exactly?
Do you mean that you were satisfied with the deal... unless others weren't... in which case you wouldn't be satisfied either? It was up to each individual to assess the offer on its merit. Having done that and expressed your satisfaction by ballot you have no such right of recall just because others weren't. Either the deal was fair to you or is wasn't and if you thought not, you should have had the courage to say so. The truth is that under the current circumstances the deal was not fair to the ATCOs and they expressed that view.
The Bible quote is appropriate.
Point 4