BDI
Yet another rebuffal, I'm sorry to say:
-
-
1) The reason the regulator has stopped pass through for new employees, and wishes to do so for all, is for the very reason explained earlier. It does not wish NATS to make short-term savings by cutting its contributions rates now, only to go to the airlines in a few year and say...oops, we have a shortfall so you need to make it up, please !!
-
-
2) Yes, in enroute, NATS is a 'monopoly'. BUT this pass through is a red herring. ALL companies, even regulated monopolies pass their pension costs onto their customers. You say NATS has the burden of not having 'pass through'. Well, please show me another regulated monoploy which does ?? NATS is no different from anyone else operating in a regulated environment.
-
Also, NATS only pay in 12.2%, a very low % by todays standards. YES, this is supported by the surplus, a surplus which appears to be increasing (as the triennial revue should soon show), and the surplus is the figure left over AFTER
ALL members are paid their pensions (and future payments are included in this).
-
-
3) YES, NATS are entitled to contribute at a rate of 12.2% and not 16% as they previously did. However, they are legally obliged to contribute at a rate which ensures the Pension Fund can meet all its commitments. Obviously, they therefore feel the scheme is doing so well, they need not contribute more (point of interest, the pass through is set at about 19% at the moment if they felt there was any looming problem with the fund!!)
-
-
4) I'm guessing that you agree with me that £30million a year into our pension fund is actually a small amount of money in corporate terms. A 12.2% rate is relatively small as a company contribution and the scheme is almost 'Self-funding' being worth over £2billion !!
-
-
5) Please stick to the facts...
NATS contributions are not rising. They were 16% prior to 9/11. They then feel to 0%, and are only at 12.2% now, with the surplus increasing year on year (see NATS own publised accounts).
-
Also, pensions are a long-term investment. YES, 10 yrs is a short time, it was used to show that the only time our HUGE surplus feel was after the equity crash from 9/11. Prior and post that, our savvy investers have consistently out performed the required market return, hence the
HUGE surplus is continuing to grow, even after pensions holidays and lower contributions from NATS.
-
-
Surely we do not want to go down the road of a 2 Tier NATS, with people doing the same job being paid differently (Yes, pensions is a payment). When payments from new members stop entering the current scheme, it makes the scheme more at risk as any long-term growth potential is removed. If there ever was another bad market crash, the scheme would then be more likely to face difficulty.
ONE NATS ONE PENSION
