True, maybe a poor choice of words. I knew what I meant though.

It it were "my business" I would not have bid for contracts that are not making any real return if what I have heard is corrrect.

That's a delightfully optimistic way to describe a LOSS!

I've got a sneaky feeling that,just after the pay deal has been negotiated, we'll find that we've made a meaty little profit. Volcanic ash will probably account for pretty much the same as the relocation projects of previous years. I accept we won't have the proceeds of the sale of EGLL tower to cushion the blow:mad: but we'll be okay.
By the way Grim, we haven't been safe, orderly or expeditious for some years now. I don't think we can entirely blame NATS for that, but I'd hazard a guess they had a hand in it.

Lord Hutton today published his initial findings of his public sector pensions review.

(initial findings are technically known as softening up)

He basically said final salary schemes where doomed and everyone was going to have to pay more into their schemes and take less out later.

NATS's original pension scheme was tied to the CAA pension scheme until it was re-negotiated the other year.

In the light of the subsequent MoU the Unions should refuse point blank to discuss any ramifications whatsoever of the CAA pension scheme be changed.

Been there, done that, tough titty :)

See ASDA has closed it's final salary scheme after closing it to new members five years ago. WalesOnline - Business - Business News - Asda axes final salary pension scheme

See many similarities here to what Nats has gone through, MOU or not I think we had better watch out, especially if they start dangling offers of 25% of Salary lump sums to accept it, :mad:'s

Pay
 

Any truth to the rumour that East Mids got +4%?

It's not always as back & white as that though. some of the loss-making contracts are worth keeping due to the effect they have on the other marginal ones when you look at the overall picture.

Corporate overheads are a cost spread accross all of those contracts. The fewer you have, the larger the portion each one is "burdened" with. Drop one loss-maker and you might find 2 that are currently just about breaking even will become loss-making.

Hence the way they are attacking those overheads with such enthusiasm!

So is the whole of NATS not going to get a proper pay rise simply because NSL is hard up?

Does this mean NSL management won't be getting any of their bonuses?

NERL made massive profits last year, the shareholders got weighed in, Barron walked off with a cool £1,000,000. The very least we in NERL deserve is an inflation rate pay rise.

Our toil earned the money, why should we not be properly rewarded.

Why should the bosses get all the money as us sweet FA?

NSL Gibraltar +3% on the first Nov

I am sure they will more than ever, after the "swift" introduction of EFPS and the ethnic cleansing of ATSAs that is being carried out!

The sale of the whole thing is iminent.

NSL isn't making enough to fund a pay rise because it selling its services too cheaply.

NSL provides an excellent service and it shouldn't be afraid to charge for that excellence.

The airports are tightly integrated with TC & NERL systems. This tight integration is made possible because NSL & NERL are part of the same group.

If BAA or GIP think they could get the same through put of aircraft by employing someone like SERCO to do their ATC they'd be in for a very big surprise.

I'd like at least RPI+1 pay rise to compensate for last, in real terms, pay cut .

I'd also like to see the end of the AAVA agreement. It's up for renegotiation and management are desperate to make it permanent. (with good reason. they can run short and still provide a service with the occasional £550 paid out instead of employing the correct number of ATCOs)

Prospect is going to start asking questions of us soon, we should all start thinking of what we want and what we're prepared to do for it.

Why would management offer us more than 1.5%, the origional offer??

They know the membership is week, (you only need to look at the pension ballot to realise that), 30% didn't vote, remember?? What will people do if we don't get a decent rise, strike??? Can't see that, after all I know we don't need public support, but you can see the quotes from the press and on TV, Top of the scale band 5 pay(£94,000). The golden final salary pension(for the moment), even the new deal is better than some that other workers have got in the country.

Then they will stand outside Swanwick watching all the lovely cars drive in, whilst the strikers stand around the Harrods catering truck!!!!!!

Stop second validations, work to rule, some will most won't.


AAVA agreement I say keep it going, but double it. £1000 after tax per shift, then we get some good money to invest, management have to pay large amounts to get the shifts covered. When it starts costing big bucks, proper staff numbers will appear. You will never stop people doing overtime/AAVA's especially when we have such a huge difference between the top and the bottom of the scale, so lets get a better rate for them.

And you last had anything other than a monopoly was when? NSL live every day with the distinct possibility that a contract coulod be lost.

When the recession bit we were asked to help our customer out...we lost staff..what did you do?

Not every airport is connected to TC...the country extends north of Watford..

<<< .the country extends north of Watford..>>

Jeez things HAVE changed since I retired.... how does that work then?:8

No one is disputing NSL is operating in a very tough commercial environment but NATS is forbidden from subsidising NSL with NERL profits.

What happens if NSL can't afford to pay a pay rise for the next 5 years and NERL continues to make very healthy profits?

IMHO there are going to be huge tensions.


PS: I'd be wrong to assume that NSL is the only part of NATS to have suffered job cuts.

Mantovani, you have fallen for the management propoganda. There is no need for NERL to subsidise NSL when the latter makes a profit in it's own right, £15,260.66 per employee in the year to 31st March 2010. The only problem is our beloved cash loving management don't see this as enough.

There's subsidies and there's "subsidies".

I agree that public sympathy would be hard to maintain in such circumstances. However there are also NATS employees earning below the ~£26k threshold that the government thinks acceptable for people who dont ever work to receive. We don't all drive Ferraris, rake in overtime and still get early go's... That sounded a little bitter... wasnt intended, my point being there are low earners who are worth fighting for.

How about just having the correct number of people employed? You pretend your argument is to force an end to AAVA by making it prohibitively expensive, however it's pretty obvious it's just bigger pound signs you're seeing... Stop the AAVAs and stop letting them get away with not staffing correctly.