Wow, that one statement speaks volumes. About the controllers not being the most of the Air Traffic Employees. Why would there not be more controllers than support staff? Does it really take more support staff to keep the controllers procedures and equipment in order?

As to one union to cover more than just one. Take a look at NATCA.net and see how we look as a combination union. We don't have everyone in the agency, but we do cover quite a few of the specialties...

regards

Surely it is about time that the "them and us" (ATCOs and ATSAs) attitude is put in the past? Air traffic is about a number of people doing different things to keep the system working. Could an ATCO really do their job as efficiently as they do without an ATSA or ATCE to help? The ATCO function is recognised as the most important one - moving aircraft about is the ultimate aim - but it would be impossible without the equipment and people to work it and maintain it.

One union to represent everyone involved in the process would surely be more preferable than everyone doing their own thing!

Madge. Excellent.

Scott.

Yes there are more 'support staff' than ATCO's in NATS. The management ( and I do use that term so very loosely ) decided to get rid of over a thousand engineers and recruit truck loads (loads - Loaded - pun geddit (not you Scott - its a reference to a recruitment ad)).

This, as we knew, will not work. The COTS systems do not exist and we will require most of the engineers and specialists we have to carry through the business plan. NATS is now left with £780M debts and no paddle. Well done UK government!

Seen the trawl notice to go work with Nav Canada? Thats for Prestwick Oceanic being a copy of the Gander system. If engineers and specialists need to go work in Canada for two years (yeah right - 4 years I bet) then COTS its not..... nes pas?

Wow, that is amazing. No wonder NATS can't make any money with overhead like that....

regards

ATCO/ATSA/ATCE PAY DEAL
 

We would never be in this mess if people had the balls to threaten strike action when the Govt. said is was going to part privatise NATS.
Instead certain people jumped into bed with the "Airline group" blinded by the glossy image of "I'm Mandy- Fly me" (10 cc from the seventies for any youngsters!).

Castrated sheep would have had more bottle!

:mad: :mad: :mad:
:D

Ayr-Man Unfortunately the Trade Union Laws passed by the previous Government meant that strike action against privatisation was illegal and that we could only strike if we had a grievance with our current (at the time) employer. I do share your views though and wish that so many people did not have the "head in the sand attitude" thinking that it would not happen to us! What is needed is a concerted effort by all Unions involved to push for re-nationalisation of NATS, after all, The Government HAS to, by law provide an Air traffic service, unlike a rail service.

Nobody appears to have mentioned this but the majority of the Union voted to accept the pay offer.
Should not then a thrid of the Union accept the decision of the majority, or is that not how democracy works.

I know that ATSA & ATCE friends of mine, are p****d off, because it appears to them that, the Union members with the power, us ATCOs, only appear to care about ourselves.

White Rose

I'm no expert on union matters but can you explain to me how the tube drivers (just one example) have managed to instigate a series of one day strikes because there is the posibility of P.P.P??? Did they just say that that was their particular greivance against their employers??? why couldn't we have done the same??

Hairy Badger

What Union (singular) are you referring to?
As an ATCO surely you know that there is more than one.

with alacrity
 

1 Union, 3 branches

Hairy Badger

We already have 1 union with 2 branches that can't agree so I can't see how adding a third would make it better. 1 union with 1 branch would be more useful

1 union 3 unions ... whatever.... it would make no difference. There comes a point when the staff will be paid according to how difficult it is to replace them.

We have just passed that point.

Good luck to the ATSAs and engineers. If they negotiate well they will probably end up a system similar to the one which pays very different rates to ATCO 3s in towers and ATCO 2s in LACC. A b***dy painful negotiation that was for ATCOs. Airport ATSAs will get little and ATSA 4s at Swanwick will get a lot because they closed big bits of airspace.

Engineers on vital projects should get enough to buy their co-operation. Others will not. Does an ATCE 4 get the same all round the country ? If so then differentials will appear.

The ATCOs flexed just a little muscle and increased their worth in relative terms. They will do it again when management look for productivity increases.

Now the others should do the same to get fair reward. Only you can judge what is fair for your job in your part of the world.

2sixfour

Thanks for telling everyone what the future holds - I wish I had crystal balls.

Who is more important to the safety of air traffic? The engineer on a big project which may not be operational for another year or the one who maintains the equipment being used today?
Once again you display an incredible lack of knowledge about the work of others around you. A real "I've got mine, to hell with the rest of you." attitude.
With ATCOs like you who needs managers?

As to the silly idea that people should get paid in relation to how difficult they are to replace, what about paying people in relation to what they do?

Yes... let's negotiate seperate deals for each employee with consideration to their skills, experience, location, difficulty to replace, sickness record, hair colour, cup size and/or inside leg measurement....

I'm sure management would love to have all ATCOs on individual contracts - so they can shaft you all one by one. And if you are selfish and blinkered enough to believe all this elitist nonsense, then you deserve what you get.

We all need each other and we all should stick together.

In my opinion the extra offer to ATCOs looks like an entirely deliberate attempt to split the unions and the workforce. If they had thrown money at the ATCOs in any way other than on basic pay then the rest who voted for the original deal could have no complaint. Argument over. They knew that. They chose to give some of their staff extra and to hell with the rest... knowing exactly what response that would get.

I believe that NATS are in negotiations at the moment which could see a compromise deal in which everyone ends up with more than the original offer.

Don't take the bait... Stick together.

After all... 10% to an ATCO on £50k is still more money than 10% to an ATSA or MSG on £25k... so you can still feel superior if it excites you that much... ;)

Don't you think it is high time we all got out of our little boxes, threw away our individual little labels telling us how important we individually are, and accepted the fact that we are ALL members of the team that is the National Air Traffic Service? If we all pulled in the same direction as well as we manage to bicker amongst ourselves then who knows what we might achieve.

We each have a job to do. If one of us fails to do his/her job, life becomes more difficult or impossible for others regardless of grade/rank/call it what you will. One job - Air Traffic Control. One Union for all involved in Air Traffic Control. And while we are at it, why confine membership to those employed by NATS?

C'mon guys and gals. Focus your eyes on the middle distance and try to see the overall picture. Most of all, have a little respect for the other members of your team - including Tels.
:cool:

undercover - you have a touching faith in the management skills and planning. I just believe the NATS director who said the ATCO pay offer was a cock up.

I'd say less faith and more cynicism...


then again... cock up sounds more likely doesn't it!

As a relatively new member to pprune I get the impression that NATS engineers have a real problem with ATCO's. I wonder if they express as much venom towards other people who earn more than them. I have no problem with friends of mine who fly for BA and earn considerably more than I. We live and work in a free market economy. If you feel you are worth more than you currently earn then prove it by leaving and earning more. The same would apply to ATCO's who spend their time bleating about the pittance they get paid for such a difficult job. It's only difficult if you don't have the apptitude for it. Lets all take a long hard look around us and thank our lucky stars we do a job that we enjoy;and if you don't enjoy it GET OUT! Because life is just too short.

10 out of 10 for common sense but did you work for BA before privatisation ? If not you probably don't understand the internal politics and the detachment from the real world that most of us get away with in our daily jobs. If you did then you made a prety interesting transition which many in NATS could do in 10 years.

I am fortunate enough to be employed at a NATS unit where the atcos and engineers enjoy an excellent professional working relationship and have even been known to have a few beers togther! I have nothing but respect for the engineers and the skilled work that they accomplish.
We discuss operational problems, new equipment and even the ergonomics of the working environment without any serious problems whatsoever.
Conversely, I have been in the company of some engineers who seemed to have a real problem with atcos.
Being referred to as a 'Headset' rather than a grade,being called an overpaid airborne traffic warden or overpaid prima donna spring to mind.
Thankfully these individuals with a chip on both shoulders are no longer around.
Or are they?
It might be interesting to hear from engineers or anyone else for that matter who has a problem with atcos,what that problem exactly is.