Siam, I am far from "deluded" as you would have me and my erstwhile colleagues.
It is you who are avoiding the issue. To quote you...
Nobody said the NATS scheme was in trouble but some time in the future it probably will be.
An assumption, based on what? Certainly not on any examination of CAAPS, it's assets or obligations.
These companies have been operating in the private sector for decades NATS only a few years
NATS is not a "true" private setor company, as you of course know.
If British companies are to carry the burden of these expensive schemes, the cost will reduce the amount of investment they are able to make therefore harming their competitiveness in the international market place.
More assumption. Do not "foreign" companies face the same burdens? Does NATS need to internationally competative? It has a monopoly on UK Area services and seems to have little difficulty in attractive UK aerodrome contracts.
The reason for these funds falling into the red is simple we are living longer.
Over simplification. The are many other reasons that other schemes aren't doing so well.
This coupled with falling returns in investments and Gordon Brown removing tax relief on dividends means these final salary pension schems are too costly no matter what job you ATCO or burger flipper
You don't seem to understand much about CAAPS investments. Income is not solely from dividends.
Just because other schemes may be in difficulty is not evidence that CAAPS is, or indeed will be in trouble. You make no comment about the suspicion that the real reason could be NATS management wanting to save money,and using other scheme problems as an excuse to tinker with CAAPS.
As before I await your detailed reasons as to why CAAPS specifically can't continue. Until then it remains apparent that you have some agenda to spread mis-information. The question bears an answer. Why?
Best wishes
BEX