Ok, so what you appear to be saying (re; the 5%) is that you now don't believe that safety should be affordable ie. there is some basic level of safety that does not need be "affordable", it is a must-have? Whilst attempting to stop the service-reduction juggernaut is admirable, picking little bits here and there that YOU consider worthy (and what needs to be affordable and what doesn't), without considering the whole, is somewhat laughable (read in context with your NAS effort).
If this all leads you to a full-on "charging-regime" crusade, then more power to you. You must understand my scepticism.
As it is, it looks as if the Airservices management tend to take little notice of their staff
Gold, absolute gold.