Those of us who are still employed by NATS and or who are union members might dissagree with the above two posts :=

DC10....some of us voted "no" to the pension, remember.

BD...why do you even bother??:ugh:

Vote No.

I did say that I was surprised to be in agreement with BDiONU and you are right that I am not employed by nats anymore, however one of the primary reasons amongst others that I decided to retire from nats was the fear for the future of my pension fund and in my opinion the unwillingness and/or inability of the unions and its members to defend THEIR pension and its benefits. I would suggest that my path will be trod more frequently as more and more of your older colleagues follow my example due to concerns about the managements intentions and employees commitment to their pension and its excellent financial benefits.

Aaawww mate! I love you too :-) but in a manly sort of way you understand ;-)

BD

DC10RealMan

You had the option of being of the age that retirement would work for you without too much of a penalty,

Please bear in mind (considering your stance and posts during the pension debate) that many of the people you are berating are not of the age that early retirement is feasible. The fact we stay with the company does not make us people who have no backbone to take action like you did - we have no real choice.

We said exactly the same things as you did, and voted 'No'. Unfortunately we are stuck with it, even though many of us believe that the MOU is not worth the paper it is written on.

Amongst many of the predictions I made before the 'yes' vote went through were: (copied from the thread titled "What happens within NATS after the pension results are in??")

Prediction 1.

'The Vote'

62% Yes
38% No

Prediction 2.

Swiftly followed by a complete shafting on the annual pay award (I reckon 3% - which would be less than RPI)...

Prediction 3.

3-5% overall reduction in NATS staff by Jul 009.

Prediction 4.

Departure of Mr Barron within 18 months of changing the pension scheme.

Prediction 5.

Break up and shelving of some NSL contracts within 60 months of pension scheme change.

Also earlier talk that the MOU was not worth the paper it was written on given the track history of NATS.

So, prediction 3 was a bit on the lean side as it turns out, prediction 4 might be a pipe dream, prediction 5 - wait to see what happens at the Special Delegates Conference.


Enjoy your retirement, for what it's worth I think you made entirely the correct decision to go early for the very reasons you state.

The reason some of us spout of on this forum is because it is the only way to get opinions across to people outside of our normal circle. Exactly what you were doing 4 or 5 months ago.

If people (as is their right) ignore certain points of view, then there's nowt much else that can be done.

It's quite telling that very few of those who spouted off "Vote yes save jobs" - who also spout off "get in the real world you can't expect a pay rise" have gone quiet and have nothing to say about redundancies and the Barrons pay rise.

These are the people that are happy to bend over and be shafted... unfortunately they sem to be in the majority.

Spot on, anotherthing. I'd like to see them (and that includes NON UNION MEMEBERS TOO) try and defend a 9% payrise......well, come on then, here's your chance.

Anotherthing.

Yes you are quite right and I apologise unreservedly to those who voted no and are too young to retire and are stuck with it. I served for nearly thirty years in the CAA and nats at various units and to see colleagues and friends, some of whom I have worked with for years and care deeply about being royally shafted by "flybynights" such as Mr Barron and his friend Mr Bliar really annoys me and sometimes I get a bit carried away.
I cant even get any comfort from watching the world-famous Northwich Victoria F.C. nowadays!!!

http://www.google.co.uk/images?q=tbn...009/02/ear.jpg ...................Silence :}

So everyone who is not in the Union is Barron follower eh!

I dont defend his reputed rise, neither did I his 14% last year and I did stand up at his CTC Bar stool session and ask him to justify it.

I was in the Union for 15 years but resigned 3 years ago as I was not happy with the way things were going. So no moaning, just voted with my feet/wallet.

I now have my application form to rejoin subject to them making a stance over the pay awards and I sincereley hope that they do.

IMHO there are too many people who are poor performers and take union membership as a kind of insurance policy. Do you believe that these people would stand up for anything because again IMHO they will take whatever they can and be thankful.

FDP,

Of course not all non-Union members are pro-management. But there are one or two who see fit to tell Union members to take a pro-management stance in order to meet their own needs.

Anyway, as Vote No has so subtley put it, SILENCE. Come on, I'm sure even you pro-management can find some kind of BS justification for a 9% payrise for PB.

PCG's are not getting any rise I hear but that will be reviewed in September.

Track Jitter

Okay no pay rise, but are they also giving up bonuses?

Aren't some of them "giving up" their jobs and taking a shed load of money when they go this year? :eek:

Yes. Big list of people announced yesterday.

No idea as to how much money is involved, but managers saying, they made me an offer I couldn't refuse, kinda says it all.

My mate up north reckons all five Watch "Managers":rolleyes: at Scottish are going this year. They must have finished ticking the boxes:yuk:

3 (from airways), leaving next March.

Vote NoI heard that one is too important to go!

TCAS FANI'm sure they will have earned them :hmm:

I'm not PCG but exactly why should they give up their bonus ? If a proportion of your pay is based on meeting particular targets and you meet them why shouldn't you get that money ? The bonuses aren't extra money, they are part of their pay. If you are fortunate enough to get ALL your pay regardless of performance why are you so jealous of those who aren't so lucky ? As an engineering grade I had a small amount of my pay subject to meeting three targets. Having met those targets I would have been rightly annoyed if the money hadn't been paid and would think the PCGs would have similar views, especially as some of their targets are likely to be subjective rather than objective so they never really stand a chance of getting all of it. You can't compare PCG bonuses with our payrise. The only thing you can compare is their payrise and it looks as though they won't be getting one.

As I've said before you won't find me defending his salary because like many others I don't buy the need to pay for quality line and think it's an obscene amount of money that can't possibly be justified. However 9% must be pretty close to what a controller with 5 years service not yet at top of scale would be expecting with spine point + RPI.

Can't comment for the ATC side but at CTC a lot of those who have gone or are going seem to have accepted offers which are much lower than the published VR terms. If the VR terms are shed loads of money then you have the union to thank for that.

:rolleyes:.................................................. ............................................................ .................................................... :rolleyes:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/174/4...b6319cef_o.png

This elephant is a bull.... fill in the missing word, S - -T
:E

eglnyt

Surely a lot of PCGs targets are met by the staff they "manage" working together to keep everything running smoothly..keeping down delays etc. So perhaps goodwill needs a sweetner to keep it just that ..goodwill.!! :hmm:

Hey! Perhaps no payrise until all staff that are going have gone ...don't want to pay them more than they have to??:sad: