250kts please don't give them ideas!

Prospect say "NO" to a 1 year deal from January of 2% on pay and allowances; at last! Is this a fighting spirit being rekindled? Solidarity brothers!!

After Paul Barron's pay off and the extraordinary dividend payout to the Airline Group the offer to Staff was little more than a piss take.

That statement is nicely worded to engender division of the workforce. It implies that NERL can afford a larger payrise, but that NSL performance is effectively capping everyones award . A nice attempt at creating resentment and division.


And if an agreement comes down to depending on the the stated 'agreement on provision of met' it is a nice way to engender division between the ATSAs that do the met and everyone else - well done management:ugh:

For a moment there, I thought I had mistakenly clicked on the Spanish ATC thread!

I would just like to clarify something.
My understanding is that the size of the pay rise (if any) would be dependant upon one group of trade unionists agreeing to undertake the duties of other trade unionists which would allow the management to save money and increase their management bonuses by making the latter group redundant.
I presume my understanding of the situation is wrong or am I missing something?

Nope, you've pretty much covered it there except for the fact that the union whose members make up the 'latter group' are happy to roll over and be tickled.

I think the going rate is thirty pieces of silver.

For further clarification it also means that the majority of members would be voting to saddle the minority of us at regional units with the additional task of doing the MET for free whilst allowing the company to shed numerous ATSA posts.
I might add that for those of us that already do nightshift MET contingency to cover ATSA sickness it would effectively be a pay cut as we would lose the enhancement that we get for doing this.
Don't think I'll be in too much of a hurry to vote in favour of this! :ugh:

Woah woah woah, so where's this agreement that we're meant to be voting on regarding met contingency?

Was this the management proposal that was rejected by the union negotiating team?

The usual rumour + gossip x exaggeration at work I see....

Yeah, but was it rejected so quickly because of the paltry amount or because of the conditions? If the offer had been 4%, would things be different?

The inflation rate rise needs to be the base rise.

Anything else has to be on top of that.

Agreeing to do met while plugged in opens more cans of worms than is probably realised. As most met screens face away from aprons and runways (they don't actually want the ATSA's to see what's going on, we might prove useful) you will need to turn away from the safety critical area of responsibility. So when the controller is fighting with samos and a vehicle trundles onto the runway unnoticed, controller in the tower on their own (as getting ATSA's off nights is clearly a management desire) and the a/c short finals doesn't spot it either, then what happens? Let's hope NATS legal are on their A game that day in court! There's penny pinching and there's retrograde safety steps. The two don't mix

Why? An inflation matching rise for nothing may just be impossible especially for NSL. Not good but a fact of life I'm afraid.

Why? Are you saying we should just accept the fact that NATS has negotiated contracts on which the margins are so skinny that they're now, in the current inflationary environment, becoming potentially unaffordable for the company as a whole? Not our problem, I'm afraid.

Every year the pay negotiations come round, management say they have no money. This is how it's always been, and probably always will be. But given the recent history of record profits, sub-inflation pay rises and an incredible dividend policy, we're probably entitled to a bit more than the offer on the table.

LTP

I reeved an e-mail yesterday (as did everyone else in NATS), where the CEO stated that unlike many other ANSPs, NATS had an extremely good year with particular emphasis on hard work and excellent performance by staff.

Deserves a decent pay rise I would say...

But no worries for NERL. NSL guys are loving being in the real (commercial) world.

Divide and conquer eh? Thanks for the support 250kts.:hmm::hmm:

eastern,

Why the sarcastic look?

Not a matter of support. As I said a fact of life. Not sure what you expect anyone in NERL can do about the airport side of NATS.

Unless of course we're all happy to take a large pay rise and see a couple of the airport contracts get lost?

250 what happened to the one NATS that the union want to negotiate for?.

If the Met comes up as a part of the negotiation it will not impinge on you one iota but I bet most of you will happily vote yes if it means a few quid extra(never mind the crap that this will rain down on the ATSA's)

This company is divided...not by management...they have very little to do...we achieve it nicely ourselves.

I can hardly wait to retire from this bloody job.

250kts
how about a lower rise to make sure airport contracts are retained and people keep their jobs. Life is great if you work in monopoly, money is nothing, especially when Swanwick staff can turn up for avaa when the airspace is closed (ash)