Nogbad
Isuspect you are right to suggest that this was presented as a fait accompli.
Of course, this is really what unions are for; not just to negotiate good Ts & Cs but also to ensure management don't expose individuals by operating the system without necessary safeguards. Mr Neilsen didn't make the decision to do that but I do believe he should have refused to accept it.
Hypothetical scenario:
ATCO comes on duty, deselects the phones, switches of the STCA and then tells another sector 20 yards away that he will do his sector at the same time. A mid-air collision results. The ATCO's defence? He hasn't any. The responsibility lies with those who take the decisions to operate the system wthout appropriate safeguards. In this case it was not Mr Neilsen.
Kontrolor
My understanding is there was 7 minutes betwen the estimates of these two aircraft? If that is correct then accepting them at the same level is not unreasonable in a radar environment. Having said that, human beings will make mistakes and this is precisely why systems must never be run without reasonable slack and leeway.
I'd love to see the safety case that covered the circumstances that existed.
I have no vendetta but I am anxious to ensure that neither myself or my colleagues end up in jail because of irresponsible management decisions. They must be seen to carry the responsibility for this or a dangerous precedent is set.
.4