Fair enough. To be honest I have no idea what a band 1 2 3 or 4 unit is paid. If a band 1 unit suddenly became a band 3 unit then so be it, but my original argument is what would the rest of the band 3 units feel about this. Surely they would want to become a band 5 unit then, and what would a band 5 unit feel about that. If they kept a band 1 unit as a band 1 unit, but increased there pay, then surely every other band would want a similar pay rise. Its a vicious circle, and impossible to make everyone happy.

Its available on the intranet http://natsnet/intranet/notices/rela...N2007-11-3.xls

BD

I just assume that everyone is on the pay that NATS warrants acceptable. If it wasn't acceptable then noone would work there. The way I see it, it is human nature. It is human nature for a KK controller, to look up the road and think they have comparible jobs with LL. A LC controller believing they have more complex traffic than SS. We all want more, we all think we have the hardest jobs, control the busiest traffic, and without looking at figures, I assume all NATS units get paid more than NON NATS units.

OK..Well why dont you explain why you feel you should be paid closer to a band 5 unit .Why is the banding system flawed. It is not an argument to say, I want more money, I deserve more money. We all want that, but why is the banding system flawed, could it not be your professional pride that is flawed??

Unless you are a fool I suspect not everyone thinks they are as busy as Swanwick or Heathrow, so don't think even Gatwick would expect to be paid the same (no disrespect intended).

It is the gulf between the bands that is the problem. Please listen to what is being said.

Also some non-Nats airfields pay comparitively the same as Nats regional airports but it has been the pension that has kept staff within Nats. That has now changed and seems only to get worse. I have no loyalty to Nats and if my terms are eroded will look elsewhere, but you also have to remember that there are other factors involved such as families to take into account so it isn't as simple as Anyway need to start shift soon to go and sit with my thumb up my bum doing very little in accordance with my banding :}

In the last review on Banding,it was interesting how Prospect fudged and twiddled things to avoid changing anything.The scores in there true form showed Aberdeen ahead of other units on complexity etc.It's busier than a certain Band 3 units,but surprise surprise there was no change.Even the Prospect rep there has complained to Prospect down south.
Anyway nothing will ever change.Once the ATCO 2/3 split was agreed by the majority at the bigger unit,then the smaller units fate was sealed.The Banding exercise just widened the gap,so now the difference is what a lot of people earn.
People have voted with their feet before,and will do so again.NATS/NSL is not a pleasant company to work for anymore,and they don't deserve the people that work for them.Especially at the smaller units,who just get fed all the rubbish and left overs.

manny fred (and other newer joiners)

for a full debate on banding and the history of NATS/CAA ATCO pay over the last 30 odd years look at this thread which I started last September

Rgds

DD

Well, i've kept my mouth shut on this issue so far, mainly because I cannot suffer all the management arse-licking bs that has been peddled...but I'm about ready for a rant now :)

Pension YES voters (and that includes those didn't vote YES but still told everyone else it was a good idea)....congratulations on..
1) Selling our pension down the river. Funny how the MOU hasn't been written yet and management are looking to cut the cost of the pension still further.
2) F***ing us over on our t & c. You reckoned that a YES vote on the pension would have no bearing on this....that would be why PB and his chums are stamping their jackboots all over us now...BECAUSE WE HAVE NO SPINE FOR A FIGHT.
3) Paving the way for NSL to go bye bye. Again, you believed the Union, who in turn believed the management and now look where we are...Special Delegates Conference.

See you in another 3 months for another rant when no doubt we'll have had a pay freeze, spine point freeze, NSL is gone and PB has upgraded to a Lambo Murcielago..

What part of 'Democratic vote' do you not understand? The Yes vote won, get over it and pick up your teddies. :}

BD

Perhaps NSL will go, but the aeroplanes worked by NSL will still exist, and need a service.

Might not be altogether a bad thing. At least there'd be the possibility of moving between units if they were all independent.

You are right mr. 777.... we did tell them. :uhoh:

Probably half of CTC gone as well :eek:

Anyone noticed "SERCO" :* is appearing more often on Nats intranet. Me thinks they have a foot in the door.....:suspect:

http://i266.photobucket.com/albums/i...ert/Turkey.jpg

!!!! it....lets sell CTC instead!!:}:}

"White elephant" springs to mind .........:oh:

I see that on page 13 of the Profile magazine lots of other Prospect branches have achieved decent pay rises. Out of the 12 groups quoted 5 got more than 4%, 4 got more than 3.5% and 2 got more than 3%. From that I would expect Prospect to achieve a minimum of 3.5% with no productivity strings attached, if management want to attach some strings then we want proper renumeration for it in addition to the cost of living rise, preferably add more spine points to the top of the scale that aren't affected by the cr@p new pension cap.
The cost of living rise of August 2008 RPI, which was 4.8%, is the baseline of what we deserve without us giving more productivity. Over the last 5 years the pay deals have been above RPI because we have given something away to management each time. There is not much left to give other than more flexible rostering, additional attendances and taking on extra jobs, inparticularly at NSL with ATCOs doing ATSA tasks.

mr.777
I totally agree with your rant, the "yes" vote has invited the fox into the coup and it is now starting its feast.

It's pay back time for the majority sitting on there hands in the run up to PPP. Anyone who had worked outside NATS could have told you what was coming. Bend over, here it comes again!

Yes the pension which was supposed to have been done and dusted and protected for another 15years is already rearing its head as a levering tool in managements pay negotiations! their quote of a modest offer of 1.25% is certainly an insult as especially as this was offered being non-pensionable!(big string!) They have started already as this would devalue the pension further and chip away. As for the new schemers that start next month, this would have no effect as 9% contribution on salary is 9% thus down the line they have set their stall out, less members in the scheme later on would leave a yes vote by the new schemers......the unions stance of "working together".....some must be thinking now thats more like...."working for management".....time for change of view by the union:E:E:E

Any news on the latest pay talks today? :\


24 hours have elapsed, any news :confused:

Management have already been allowed to degrade our pension... we let them.

I remember, just a few months, ago that the 'yes' men all claimed on here that a cap on pensionable pay rises would not be much of a burden to the employees as any chance of a rise greater than RPI+ 0.5% in the next few years was minimal.

Now that we've bent over and taken it, management are trying to wriggle out of even more pension payments.

Good work chaps, I hope the union really stand firm this time, it's long overdue that they do.

Any news from the latest meeting??

Why we should hold out for a decent rise