eglnyt
We were talking about a sale of NATS. Selling off NSL is a different matter.
That is pure management speak and complete twaddle. I bet the employees of NSL are all comforted by that statement.
Furthermore, I bet all the staff at CTC etc who support NSL must be comforted by that statement... do you think if we sold off NSL we would keep anywhere near as many support jobs?
egnlyt - you seem remarkably well informed when it comes to finances, however the trend of your posts seems to indicate that you have a vested interest (beyond being a pension fund member) in gaining NATS a yes vote.
Your arguments are unravelling - you talk of possible job losses if we vote no then come out with the likes of the above
Slider57
Having studied Maths, I am struggling to see the arguement about the NATS management pension break. Yes it will have affected the pension but not on the scale some people are saying.
If however you have proof that the pension holiday has led to the huge defecit we now seem to have then please post it on NATSNET for all to see. As yet no one has shown me numbers that seem to add up.
You may have studied maths, however you need to read peoples posts more carefully.
The
FACT of the matter is, if NATS had not taken the pension holiday and paid in reduced contributins after that time, the deficit would not be as large as it is today. That's not even Maths, its basic primary school arithmetic.
What people are saying is if contributions had been kept up, then the deficit would not be as large... we are not saying that there would be no deficit
as for
We also seem to have the odd rant about our T& C's, compared to nurses/police/armed forces and hundreds of other lower paid workers out there, we have got a pretty good deal overall.
Not a valid argument - if you want to throw that into the pot, then I put it to you that compared to professional footballers/basketball players we have a pretty poor deal.
Just because Nurses get paid a woeful wage does not mean we need to accept degradation in our Ts & Cs - it's a totally separate argument.
swap places with some of the boys and girls in Afghanistan or Iraq. You might then appreciate how good a deal you have.
Again, completely irrelevant. Have you served in the armed forces? I have, I spent many years in the UK armed Forces before starting a second career with NATS. I have many friends who are still in and who are on active duty in all the different theatres.
I moved my ringfenced military penson into NATS to buy back years - if this proposal goes ahead, those years I have bought back (by my very service you are usingas an argument) will be worth less than if I had left them in my military pension. Please keep the argument relative. Comparison of different wages, conditions etc is irrelevant, because we can easily claim to be either seen off, or better off, depending how you massage the statistics and what profession(s) you use for comparison.