View Full Version : NATS Contract at EGCC
One of our chaps came back from a training conference this week with the news that there is "no way" that NATS will retain the EGCC contract. I know that there've been a lot a rumours lately about MA PLC starting their own "in house ATC" for their airfields; anyone know more??
niknak
26th Apr 2002, 23:01
The first question is, IF NATS lost the contract at MAN, where would MAN PLC get their atcos from?
Undoubtedly a few would want to stay, but the majority are experienced atcos with substantial service with NATS, who would not want to work for MAN.
Now that McNERC is on hold - which is where MAnchester Centre was going to go, where would the area guys work from?
It would take considerable strategic planning on MAN PLC's behalf to be able to give notice to NATS and take over full responsibility for the aerodrome and approach radar functions within one year. All very complicated, and I can't see it happening.
As for training within the MAN group, East Mids and Bournmouth, and in a fashion, Humberside, all have their own trainee atco programmes in place.
TarUnFeather
26th Apr 2002, 23:06
What does Area have to do with the contract ?? I don't see the problem :confused:
What I do see is too many people who are being arrogant enough to believe MAN can't survive without NATS. :(
spekesoftly
26th Apr 2002, 23:12
Even IF NATS lost the EGCC ATC contract, I see no reason why the Area function could not remain at its present location. As far as I know, they are two separate financial/contractual entities.
bagpuss lives
27th Apr 2002, 01:01
Yup - two entirely different entities - Area and Airport Services. Differeing budgets, different chains of command and a whole host of other differences that are far too tedious to mention here!
As I understand it the 3rd, 4th and 8th floors of the tower block building are simply rented from MAPLc on a commercial basis. Thus if (VERY big if) NATS were to lose the airport contract space for the ACC would be unaffected.
Rumour control has it that it would be most unlikely that NATS ACC would allow an outside contractor to use the space in the operations room currently filled by the approach consoles. So either MAPLc would have to find space for "them" and the new equipment elsewhere in the complex - the ACC would be booted out of it current premises - or NATS would retain APP functions under perhaps a new centralised approach unit for the TMA region. Hmmmm?
It's rumoured that it is written into the current contract between MAPLc and NATS (Airport Services) that should the agreement expire or not be renewed, a period of upto 12 months can be invoked in which NATS must train and handover the airport to any new contractors / ATS providers that may happen to chance along. Rumour sounds like boll***s to me but then again....... :D I don't think that can be done - years of experience taught in the space of one.
I'm not aware of many colleagues who would "swap sides" should another ATS provider win the contract but if push did eventually come to shove then who knows? There would be more at stake than money thats for sure. Housing, relocation costs, hassle, pension, employee relations, management chain and direction, SAFETY - all are thrown into the melting pot of uncertainty right now.
In response to an eariler posting I don't think it's arrogant at all - I simply believe that NATS are the best provider of ATS that MAPLc could wish for.
Look at how we handled the progression to R2 ops for example.
Faultless.
We are hardly overstaffed (ha!) and we have the fully experienced and well trained staff with the infrastructure already in place to do the job and do it very very well. What's more the ATCOs actually care about whats going on at the airport itself.
NATS' record is flawless at EGCC of that there can be no doubt.
Obviously there are other considerations for MAPLc - financial motivations may come to the fore, perhaps understandably along with the obvious prestige and commercial ease.
I hear the rumours on a rotation by rotation basis, I read the management releases, I talk to friends within MAPLc who tell me that the way forward is for them to think "in-house" yet still, even now, I just can't see the contract going anywhere else.
We'll see and await with open minds and hearts the outcome ;)
Never say never I say.
Cuddles
27th Apr 2002, 11:27
NF01, you're not overstaffed? Hmmmm interesting.
The Manager
27th Apr 2002, 17:15
All this could be very simple. Consider the following:-
The Approach facility is located else where. Should not be very difficult to find a small office for it at the airport.
How many staff are trained on both Area and Approach, thus people without an area licence will not be much use at EGCC.
What will NATS do with the staff, if they don't want to go to other Airports ?
MA PLC need controllers ?
It is possible that the staff will just be TUPE'd across with the new contract and MA PLC will become the new employer.
This could suit MA as they will get the same controllers that were there before.
NATS then do not have a problem with ' what to do' with the people who don't want to move from MAN but are not AREA trained.
;)
nippa
27th Apr 2002, 18:36
Hiya Manager
Do you work for MIA?
chiglet
28th Apr 2002, 08:26
Manager,
APC located in an office...somewhere
Not necessarily at EGCC:eek:
How much does MA (PLC) pay NATS for APC into MA (airport):rolleyes:
we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy
niknak
28th Apr 2002, 22:47
If and when McNErc is built, I understood that the MAN area function was to move there, with the centralised function for the Scottish airports also being relocated there.
Would MAN PLC pay (i.e would it be more cost effective at that time) for the APR function to be centralised at either McNerc or Swanick, leaving MAN PLC with just having to employ ADC staff, rather than having the overheads of staffing and maintaining their own radar functions.
We've been told that CCF for the Scottish TMA is "not on the agenda" for McNerc....
niknak
29th Apr 2002, 20:09
In which case 1261, it's a sure bet that it will happen.....:D
BEXIL160
30th Apr 2002, 06:53
For those interested..... when the CCF stage 2/4 room at LATCC was being checked out before opening several years ago, what is now the south bank (where Heathrow Dir etc sit) was configured as per MAN. Both APC and AREA.
I've no idea whether this was some sort of test, but imagine my surprise when I wandered in for a bit of "famil" to find a the displays all set for EGCC, not the LTMA :eek:
There's no room in the 2/4 room any more of course, but when TC moves to Swanwick, sooner rather than later, who knows?
Rgds BEX
Niknak - if they want to make me an ATCO 2 without having to do any training, that's fine by me! ('though I suppose the downside is that I'd have to do Glasgow radar)
The Manager
1st May 2002, 23:12
NF01
------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NATS' record is flawless at EGCC of that there can be no doubt.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The record is very, very good but I don't think you can describe it as flawless. I seem to remember a few AAIB reports.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Obviously there are other considerations for MAPLc - financial motivations may come to the fore, perhaps understandably along with the obvious prestige and commercial ease.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the end of the day it is surprising how much influence the FD (Finance Director) has. People in these positions usually only consider the balance sheet.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
...............way forward is for them to think "in-house" yet still, even now, I just can't see the contract going anywhere
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This could be a negotiating process, however the first rule is that you can only play call my bluff once. One day someone will see through you. I guess if MA PLC are considering it, then unless NATS come up with a good offer, they will do it.
It is amazing how many problems can be ignored until they actually arise.
Surely MA PLC will save themselves 8% a year without even thinking about it?
spekesoftly
2nd May 2002, 09:29
Just a couple of points to ponder. MAPLC are presently in the the process of changing the contracts for some of their existing staff.
What message does this send to the NATS ATCOs that MAPLC might wish to employ in the future, should ATC go 'in house' ?
Perhaps it is also relevant to learn from the current NATS/Prospect pay negotiations, where seemingly some ATCOs already perceive a disadvantageous 'loss of identity'.