Originally Posted by
BDiONU
The regulator has fired a warning shot over NATS bows in CP2 by not allowing the pass through of pension costs for those employed after 1st Jan 2006. The regulator has made it clear that if NATS do not take any action to reduce pension costs they will take further action in CP3. Further action means yet more reductions in route charges and less pass through of pension costs. The regulator has to take action because of pressure by the airlines to reduce the costs of charges made by the NATS monopoly.
Just curious, how does the regulator fund its own pension scheme?
Isn't what's good for the goose good for the gander?
As for being the most expensive in Europe, to quote our leader...
Barron acknowledges that "The airlines think we are far too expensive; they want to keep the pressure on and rightly challenge our costs." But he claims that "it is impossible to measure us against our European counterparts . . . our airspace does not compare." He continues, "No one else in Europe borrows several hundred million to run their business, has a regulator, has to absorb the cost of that regulation, has to pay for the buildings and land, etc. There are things we have to do because we are privatized that government-subsidized organizations do not. The regulator believes we are competitive with the rest of Europe. We know that we are among the best at what we do. So if our charge rate is the highest, it probably reflects what the real costs are. However, our target is not to be highest and to get that rate down successively year after year."