I'm in the camp which thinks we should wait for the annual financial report to be published.

Managements claims of there not being enough money in the coffer's will hold a lot less credibility if it transpires their remuneration package's are similar to previous years.

When is the report due?

annual report normally comes out in June, at the same time they dish out another dividend.(they will). Traffic is up on last year, and with route charges based on rpi, management imo, will be keen to get the pay deal resolved before its published.

They can hardly say they have no cash, with two share dividends being paid in the last year already, record profits and a share price which has risen by 40%.

The annual report we are all waiting for may show a big reduction in profits. Remember the volcano and BA strikes. However, a 2% cut in corporation tax...now that is interesting!

I think it will reflect in the Annual results, however to use your name, it doesn't take rocket science to work out how much the profit would have been if you average the other months and assume the same yield for the couple of lean months due to external influences.

Remember, NATS have stated before (to keep pay awards down) that one-off profits (EGLL tower sale to name but one) should not be used as an indication of underlying profits...

The exact same can be used the other way - one off events that reduce profits should not be used to try to claim the company is not doing so well. I'm sure the union are well on top of this.

As an aside, we often hear of our customers and how they are finding it hard. I believe (from another source) that BAA and Virgin have recently given good pay awards to their workforce...

Pension review
 

The annual pension adjustment effective from 1 April 2011 in the main category is therefore 5.5% in line with the Retail Prices Index (RPI) to February 2011.
- Read this today from an official source. For the benefit of NATS, CAA and also HIAL Pensioners.

CP3
 

See:
Sustaining Improvements in NATS? Performance and Financial Resilience into the Future | Aviation | Transport

(or if you've got lots of patience:
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/5/ergdocs/...RLDecision.pdf)

We will have to get a decent rise to counter this...
 

Best paid jobs: A guide to UK salaries and wages 2010 | This is Money

evidently the ONS believe we have had an 11.2% pay cut in the last year, hopefully any rise will be enough to cover that!

I had heard whispers that Gatwick (GIP) were getting a pretty good pay deal... I've just read a union newsbrief stating that the result of their 2011-2013 pay ballot came back as:

Yes: 100%
No: 0%

Must've been good then!

@132.3 With a skill for misrepresenting information like that you should get a job advising the Labour front benches - I'm sure their TU funders could offer you a reasonable pay deal!

Anyone know what happened at the meeting on the 4th April? seems to have gone quiet again.

Some union members working for NSL had a circular last week regarding "conditions" attached to a pay deal. For conditions read ATCOs doing Met obs.

The briefing from the branch chair basically stated that the company still want to put an offer on the table that would involve the members accepting the extra responsibilities. Up until now the BEC has had the mandate that the pay deal should just be that - and that they will not accept anything that involves such significant changes to the way we work - a pay deal is a pay deal.

This circular was asking the membership if this is still the way they feel, stating that if it was the union would take this line, however it would make forward negotiations very difficult (for the entire company pay rise). They were asking for members views back, via reps, for a branch meeting some time this week. I assume nothing will move on a pay deal until that union meeting takes place.

Reading between the lines, there is an improved offer, it involves NSL accepting Met Obs, and the union are coming round to this idea and want to know if the NSL membership would accept. Despite their previous statements that they will reject such offers out of hand.

Still keeping my powder dry, will probably use it for a big firework display on my retirement, doubt I'll need it before then :ok:

If we can't negotiate a 2 or 3 year deal of at least RPI every year, using probably the strongest position we have ever had with the AAVA deal, Olypmics, EFD and iFACTS as negotiating tools, then we are finished.

Watch this space. The AAVA agreement will not be pulled on April 28th. The union will cave before then, and the current AAVA will carry on as normal "for the good of the company".

Despite having, what appear to be, a lot of bargaining chips, the union seem to be reluctant to actually use any of them, for any sort of betterment for its members.

Not impressed with anything the union has done for its members over the past 3 years.

Take a look at some of the Union reps.

Some are clearly management lackeys.
Others are doing their best to fight what is increasingly looking like a losing battle.

Some Prospect reps are being blatantly courted by NATS management.

Some PCS reps are purely out to raise their own profile to management in the hope that they may be considered more leniently when the axe falls.

When one PCS rep was recently asked why an influx of ATSA’s from AC into the TC ops room would be a problem, his response was that it would dilute the amount of overtime available to existing TC ATSA’s.

Given that level of self interest, along with all the other divisions that have been created, is it any wonder that management are having such an easy time running rings around the workforce?

I may be considered old fashioned and out of date but I would have thought that it is quite unethical for one group of employees to voluntarily offer to do another employees jobs to allow the management to make the latter group redundant.
To take on those duties for a pittance and with the connivance of the unions when the end result will be greater profits for the shareholders and bonuses for the management borders on ludicrous.

DC10RealMan - If there was a 'Like' button, I would have pressed it for your last comment:)

There are two parts to the pay deal; the core deal and the sectional deals.

The Unions can not allow sectional issues to pay any part in the core offer. That would set a terrible president and would mean all NATS employees would be held to ransom on a yearly basis while one set of staff’s working practices/conditions were targeted.

I thought George W Bush was a terrible president.