Del Prado
I know what you mean
I
know this is not just about ATCO's - I know NATS is about a hell of a lot more than just ATCO's.
However it is a fact that shift workers - ATCOs/ATSAs/ATCEs, have a lower than average life expectancy.
However that life expectancy has risen since records began, along with the life expectancy of everyone else in the developed world.
It worries me that the 'experts' only just stumbled across the fact in the past 18 months. Of course the fact that it helps strengthen the 'we can't afford the pension' case is a coincidence
.
Also, if they had taken account of the fact several years ago, the underlying rate that NATS should have been paying (but haven't been) would have been slightly higher, meaning that the difference between that rate and the new anticipated rate would not have been as large.
However, that would not have the same impact, so wasn't to the benefit of NATS!
Mind you, I'm also a bit disconcerted that our money 'experts' within NATS have only just heard about SMART pensions...
I'm not really into conspiracy theories, I don't give a damn who does the vote count and I don't give a damn about the numbered voting sheets... however I do believe that NATS have manoeuvred the company into this position deliberately.
We were being pushed into this scenario, it was a case of 'when', not 'if'.