As one of the employees who has experienced the "We've made a mistake, but you can sign the new contract, or you can leave" debacle (Believe me it really did happen) I'm willing to go to all the trouble of finding out what was in the letter and replying via email and snail. Trouble is, I'm away from home for a while, and I can't vote in the pay deal either, could some of you put 2 crosses in the rejection box for me. Either that, or can any of those attending my wedding on Saturday bring me a copy of the letter, I just need my ballot paper.

You can't do the best job if you're at serious odds with the management structure. Also if you don't feel valued, you don't give value.

Cuddles,

You're not the only one who hasn't seen the contents of the letter, our incompetent leader sent the letter to an address I have'nt lived at for 3 years, strange really when you consider all my other mail has made it to the correct address.

See you when you get back, hope you're enjoying yourself.

D8

Interesting to see which database they used for the mail out.

Got mine a day late - probably due to my address having the words SOUTHAMPTON put in the middle.

As I am not even in Hampshire no wonder postie was confused!!

Maybe I am due a posting!!!!!!

B-L

The Times 22 May 2002

"the Civil Aviation Authority said Nats had overstated its financial difficulties and was still due to make a 10 per cent return on its assets despite losing £190 million from the slump in demand for air travel after September 11. The CAA calculates that Nats will make up £163 million of the loss through extra efficiency gains and revenue increases.

Doug Andrew, the CAA’s economic regulation director, said that the remaining £27 million would be more than covered by a £79 million “buffer” agreed with the Government. "

That leaves £52 million in the kitty for pay raises! ;)

Now I'm feeling even more undervalued, I've STILL not got my letter. :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

Dunno why he bothered. I'm not an ATCO and I'm not (shock, horror, gasp) a member of the union (must be about the only one).

Meanwhile in other industries, e.g. maufacturing, people are given the work of two or three people who have become "cost savings". Thus equating to, possibly an instant 200% increase in work load. And all for the same pay they started on, or even a pay cut! This is a feeling that the ATCE's and suport staff will be getting used to over the next few years :mad: (20% in the next slash and burn I read). So you could argue that ATCE's et all are all ready paying for the pay rise, and will pay for next years.

Thus 6%, sorry 5.98% aint a lot, but it's better than nothing (or a p45 :o )

Still, give it enough years and the boot will be on the other foot. ATCO's being worked out of the system by technology. No you say? Tell that to the bloke who used to be a signal man... :eek:

I will now donn my flame proof suit. :)

So Spiggit,

if we follow your logic ATCOs should not fight for a better rise 'cause we'll all be out of a job anyway at some indeterminate date in the future?

and, therefore, we should all kowtow to whatever miserly offer management think they can get away with?

by the way, still a fair number of signalmen (women) in this country; they just don't all sit in cosy little signal boxes anymore.

and for what it's worth the average signalman earns about 90% of a train drivers salary - probably a greater percentage than the average ATCO compared to a pilots salary.

never mind I shouldn't worry that my salary is eroding in real terms, I should just be grateful I've got a job...

No.

Just contemplating the facts, and that things could be much worse than they are. And who knows what the future holds for us, ATCO, ACTE or ANother?

In the event of ATCOs pursuing their sectional pay claim, why should peeps who are not part of that pay claim vote down what has been offered to them?

Anyway, my thoughts don't matter cos I don't have a vote. ;)

Nice one Spiggot ...not a member of the union but happy to live on the backs of everyone else ...MAGGOT!!!

Spiggit,

....things could be much worse than they are.

Look on the Intranet (assuming you have access(NATS etc..)) under Ops and Performance, and you will see that there was a day in April this year where the daily movements were up on the figures for last year.

THINGS COULD ALWAYS BE WORSE. But actually things are getting better, so don't be so pessimistic.

Keep going around thinking like that and you undervalue yourself, your job and play straight into the hands of the purse string holder, who will agree whole heartedly with you then go away and have a good laugh and rub his hands.

One of the first signs that NATS may be preparing for a scrap may be the reason for something I recently heard.

Manager ATC at Swanwick is about to seek permission from SRG for sectors to be operated with just a single ATCO performing the T AND P role. There would be a 50% reduction in the Target Sector Flows to allow this to happen.

I would implore EVERY ATCO at Swanwick to go to their manager right now and tell them that they are not prepared to operate the system like this under any circumstances even if SRG give the go-ahead.

If ever there was a time for us to work this system as we were trained to do then this is it. Management are on the rack over staffing and they know it-let's stick together and get the par rise we deserve. Also speaking to a number of ATSAs, I wouldn't be surprised if they vote against their BEC and reject this s**t offer.

Not sure that ATSSD would even contemplate agreeing to single person operation.

No safety case you see.

Next up, even if you were to TRY to operate electronically on your own, may I suggest that 90% reduction in traffic is probably more reasonable.

Please don't forget. The Airlines get punished NOW when we have one or two people sick. Imagine a day or two of industrial action. You don't even NEED everyone to come out, and yes, I accept that some would not. It wouldn't really matter. The majority of ATCOs would. The system would not operate at a level anything close to what the airlines NEED.

The nub is simple. Settling the pay claim IS a LOT CHEAPER THAN ONE DAYS INDUSTRIAL ACTION. Are you listening airline members of TAG (and those airlines that aren't). Present us with a REASONABLE offer and you can put all this to rest, NOW.

Rgds BEX

250kts

"If ever there was a time for us to work this system as we were trained to do then this is it. Management are on the rack over staffing and they know it-let's stick together and get the pay rise we deserve."

I agree with you on all counts but I wonder if we should be talking about staffing/systems operation and pay rises in the same breath.

If it is wrong to suggest that you operate NERC in the manner being sought (which it is) then levels of pay have nothing to do with that. Are you going to say "give us a decent pay rise and we will accept the manning" even if that manning is dangerous? No, of course not: That would be trading safety and money which is not your intention. But if you talk of these issues in the same paragraph it suggests otherwise. Each argument ought to be fought on its own merits.

CJ

T & P bandboxed is perfectly workable. Only significant factor is someone accepts the safety accountabilities for the traffic loading for the sector. That will not be the sector ATCO.

Sound points Christopher. You will get public and media support for any action which concerns safety issues but little over pay. Blair can't wait to look tough on unions, especially people he can portray as highly paid (close on 3 times the national average) and only actually working c30 hours a week.

Good point CJ !

It may be a bit late in the day to make this point too, but I've read plenty about how grossly underpaid ATCOs in NATS believe themselves to be... I'm not going to argue with that either way... but I would suggest to all those going to vote against the current pay deal that your aspirations to significantly raise the level of remuneration for your job should not be addressed through an anual "COST OF LIVING" pay rise like this.
The intention of this pay deal is merely to keep current salary packages up to date with the increasing cost of day to day life. If you feel so strongly that the basic pay structure of the company is wrong then you should be looking for a re-negotiation of the pay grading structure, similar to that undertaken by non-operational staff a year or 2 ago.

As CJ has already pointed out. The best way to lose these arguments is to confuse them all and end up just sounding like a "typical moaning ATCO" -- not my words of course ;) :p

Undercover. you say -


Who says that ? The annual pay round addresses all issues associated with pay and not just a cost of living element otherwise we would never need a negotiation. Why otherwise would the unions submit pay claims for raising unit pay for Stansted, extending London weighting, rises for OJTIs and LCEs etc.

Sounds to me as if you are trying to explain the unexplainable management thinking in a rather poor fashion. Maybe that is why we are in this mess.

It was not a difficult decision to vote no for the first time in a decade.

Taken too literally perhaps...

The point I'm making is there is a difference between asking for an improvement to existing pay and conditions and actually asking for a complete overhaul of how the company structures salaries.
The desire of an ATCO to gain financial parity with a pilot - perhaps requiring a 20,30,40% increase in basic pay (for argument's sake) is simply not going to be addressed through this kind of pay negotiation. It is not the purpose of the negotiation nor should it be in my view. Such things are a different argument for a different time and place.

Slightly off the topic, but the proposal to operate T&P combined MUST fail on safety grounds. It is my understanding that one of the overriding principles of arranging NERC as it is was that after the LYD airmiss it was recommended that there should be TWO people listening to the frequency ALL the time. How would this new proposal square that one??

Or does safety not matter when there are less aircraft about???:confused: :eek: