It has just been confirmed to me by another senior source that the existing pension cannot be touched so long as NATS remains solvent (excluding a 100% vote or Act of Parliament).
He also opined that future pay differentials are a risky and needless strategy for NATS because setting up a new pension scheme for new employees addresses the issue at hand and also sends the right signal to the regulator. Having achieved that, a question for the NATS board would then be, "What is the point in picking a fight with the unions by trying to introduce pay differentials when the longterm aim has been met?". Would the upset to the service and bad publicity be worth the short term gain to NATS when they have got what they really want, i.e. control of the longterm liability?
So, if there is to be no impact on our pension and if there is little risk of the board picking a fight over differentials, I have to ask the question again...
What would we be striking for? Make that clear to me and I will consider supporting it.
.4