In the North Sea case, management are putting money ahead of safety.
Wrong. It has nothing to do with money. It has everything to do with airspace utilisation. The implementation of a NEW-ADN airway wouldn't cost a penny beyond the costs of establishing it. The task could be taken on easily by the existing Tay sector controller. The result would be a better service for the customer and fewer dirty underpants for the controllers. Likewise in the upper air, better utilisation of the airspace would ensure more direct routings for the customer, relieve some of the pressure from LACC sectors 10 and 11 and allow the Humber sector controller to do the job he is supposed to do.
If anyone is to 'blame' it is the military who continually oppose the NEW-ADN airway and insisted on such huge danger areas. Whether or not they are justified is another argument that I'm not going to go into here.
while in this case (the NOTA), the ATCOs are putting money before safety.
As you know, this ATCO isn't taking that line of reasoning but I can understand the likes of Arran's view who is. Let's face it, if your airline decided to bring in a load of pilots from Eastern Europe and pay 'em half the wages you might be a bit upset. Extreme example, perhaps, but the same principal.