It is very important that everything happens in precisely the right order and the process is followed exactly with all the meetings called as required with the right people present at them. The alternative is doing it all again when the ballot result is thrown out by the court as invalid. In this case more haste does mean less speed.

And when "the concluding pay meeting" did end there were only two possible outcomes.

1) The NTUS agrees the deal and recommends it to the members.
2) The NTUS rejects the deal and ballots the members with a view to applying pressure to further negotiations.

Somehow the NTUS has found a third option of yet another meeting :ugh:

And I for one am certainly NOT content with the pace and the very cosy relationship that seems to exist between the NTUS and the NATS management.

Perhaps the "Union Heirarchy" would like to share that sensible debate with the members?

When I was a Union rep at West Drayton we achieved some pretty good deals from Richard everitt.

And I assume you did that single-handed did you-or did you, as a union rep recognise that there needs to be due process, just as there is now.

Now is the time for cool heads. Everything has to be done strictly by the book, let's not forget some members of the Airline Group have been successful in taking trade unions to the courts.

We need to remember we will be in dispute with the NATS Board not with the flying public. We shouldn't even think of disrupting traffic until we have exhausted all possibilities of getting a realistic offer from the Airline Group.

i have read quite a few pages now of information and thought maybe its time to put something on myelf.
one thing i will get out of the way is the fact that maybe the union didn't do us any favour 2 years ago or even 1 year ago but i honestly believe that they thought that it was the best thing that could have been achieved. from another point of view the members........where were they? its all good saying "well i voted no" or say the usual i never got a ballot.....well get a move on and make sure you personal details are updated. if you do not get a magazine every so often, then they do not have the correct details for you so change them and then stop whinging and get your say.

all this talk about lets ballot now....lets give the union time to set themselves and do it properly and not do it the wrong way so that it gets thrown out as mentioned. i am quite happy to be patient as i am sure this will all be back dated anyway.

one thing to bare in mind though (i think), not sure how it works at other units but in AC swanwick, (with iFACTS) we were not allowed to put in for any leave in May of this year because of the ifacts training roster so from the point of view of people needing to plan holidays, weddings, etc in particular families wanting to go away so that they can get the tickets cheaper well they couldn't........then it gets delayed a little and we can't put in for leave again during the winter until the ifacts training roster comes out and when it does, i find out i cannot take specific days off because of it. i know of some controllers that have other obligations and need those days off....i'm not too sure if this has been mentioned at all during the negotiations.

its time now that everyone made sure they got a vote albeit 90%+ YES or 90%+ NO but at least that will show that the union has got the ears of 90%+ of its members listening and management will then hopefully start bricking it after the union starts recommending NO.

It seems to be the "modern" way of pay negotiations - any pay 'rise' offered by management has to be offset by an erosion of terms & conditions - those T&C not affecting the management of course.

Anyone heard if the AAVA agreement has been reinstated?

I take it "keeping the business viable" as per the latest union communication basically means AAVA's are back! Hope the rate was boosted.
Still good on the negoitiators, movement from an immovable object, I wonder if someone's recent departure from the scene has had an effect?

The AAVA agreement is a huge bargaining chip, I hope it has not been given up without a similarly huge movement by the Board/Airline Group.

I have not seen any communication stating that the AAVA agreement is back in place, but I am not at work and the Prospect website is eerily quiet.

However if the agreement has been reinstated then I disagree with the above posts.

The AAVA agreement should never have been part of the negotiation on CORE pay in the first place.

We are due a decent pay rise without having to prostitute ourselves by giving other things away (met, AAVA etc).

Withdrawing from the AAVA agreement was a totally seperate issue from the pay talks.

I assume because the AAVA agreement was withdrawn prematurely due to management non conformance, it is within the right of the Union to reinstate it unilaterallly if they feel that the management will adhere to the rules?

When the AAVA agreement reaches its natural end then negotiations on that should take place, to include an increase in the rate which has stayed flat for years.

In agreement with Mantovani - By acknowledging the business need, whilst ensuring management conform, the Union have shown that they are not hell bent on ruining NATS. This can only go in our favour. It actually gives us more power when it comes to sticking out for a decent pay rise with no reduction in Ts&Cs.

The Union have proved that they are reasonable, now lets stick this out and get the pay rise the members deserve, without the distraction of side issues.

5.5% is reasonable...

1657: edited to add - just read an e-mail from Prospect. It had better be a significant betterment in offer from management for Prospect to be talking about recommending the offer - this is a huge U turn from what the union were putting about the past few weeks (stating they were miles apart).

This had better not be another cave-in by the Union - we've been hoodwinked enough over the past 3 or 4 ballots. Of course we will never know what the 'final offer' from last week was (apart from the many rumours), so we will never know if it is a cave-in :hmm:.

August 2010 RPI was 4.7%. Considering in the recent past we have had a below average pay rise (and a pay freeze), and considering the NATS Board pay awards, dividends and company performance during this time, 5.5% with no strings is not unreasonable.

Anything less than RPI without strings is a cave in imho.

... which is still a reduction in living standards over the past 3 years when you consider the pay freeze we had whilst we paid out millions in dividends, golden goodbyes and Board pay deals...

I understand there are 3 seperate offers on the table, one for Prospect ATCO, one for Prospect ATSS, one for PCS. Divide and conquer :mad:

We must have facts. What was on offer, what has changed and is now on offer? This would give some credibility to the whole process. Prospect please note. I'm all for a no vote unless there is evidence it's a good and fair deal (for all affected).

Or just a flat rate for all ATCOs in NATS? Setting aside the banding can of worms, AAVA is going to work on your rest or leave periods. Why should one persons free time be more valuable than anothers? Or maybe I should just get back to my big wooden spoon :E

notatthecollege

There will probably be a confidentiality or 'gentlemans' agreement in place that means the only offer we get to see is the final one (quite ususal during negotiations). We probably won't be told what was on offer when the possibility of Met/AAVAs and whatever else was being pursued by management.Therefore very difficult to see if there is any climb down. Interesting change in stance though from being miles apart a week ago to the prospect (sic) of the union recommending the offer tomorrow...

Prospect did state on their own website in Feb that members are suffering due lack of cost of living rises. That's a minimum of 4.75% this year to just stay even, never mind the pay freeze the year before.

The ATSA community have not been offered that...

Just seen the deal I am being offered....they can go take a running fcuk as far as I am concerned....and as far as O/T is concerned that will go the same way.....going to enjoy some days off for a change!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Put us out of our misery...Details!!!

I've seen the deal as well (I can't say what it is as I promised the person who told me that I wouldn't and I still want to be their friend), and when it comes out tomorrow I think overall the union have done a good job. I don't agree with all of it but overall I don't see how it could have been bettered. Any who think that shooting their mouth off or thinking of industrial action should think, will we get any more? I suspect that the pips are squeaking and we may disagree with it but that's the best offer around. Apparently it is substantively better that was on the table previously. But please wait until tomorrow, sit down, count to 20 and think could we do better. I think not.

Before people think "Oh you must be management or high up in the union" I am neither and I often don't agree with both of them but this time I can't see us getting any better. Don't forget that say a 4.5% deal also has an extra cost of 37% for the pension. That will really hurt NATS. So think for a while before spouting off please.

Now a deep breath....

So, it's less than 4.5% then :)

That's a no vote from me if it is. None of this, "could we do better", or "for the good of the company" nonesense.

Do you think these management big wigs think about "the good of the company" as they depart with their 7 figure golden handshake payments, no I don't think so, so why should I. I am concerned about the "good of me (and my fellow ATCOs)".

Yes, maybe it was the best that the union could get by negotiation, but that doesn't mean we have to accept it. A membership No vote would send them all back to the table.

I certainly don't want any of this short term clawback usage rubbish, or MET included in the offer. All I want is a reasonable pay offer, nothing more, nothing less, based on how much profit the company is making, and with no strings.

If they want any of these "extras", then they should pay for them to the individuals that are directly affected by them, not giving a pay rise to everyone, but being paid for in part by extra tasks being done by some. That's immorral, and totally unfair, and I hope that the union see that otherwise they are not representing their members, they are simply representing the majority group.

I await tomorrow's announcement, but I am not holding my breath.

When does the Annual Report come out?

Let's have any vote on this offer the week after we see how well the company is doing.