Can you show us how your calculations that produced the requirement for employees to pay an extra 10%.
That's a ball park wild arsed guess based on the difference between the maximum amount that NATS said at the briefing it could pay, roughly 30%, and the funding figure without the propsal which it says it can't afford which was 42% at the briefing I went to. It could be less, could be more and the danger with this approach is that we shift some of the obligation to underwrite the scheme from NATS to us and once we do that we'll struggle to give it back if there's another crisis in the future.
NATS say they can't afford it, where is the evidence? How much profit would have been made this year without repaying loan notes, fees for early repayment, exceptionals for moving from WD?
I refer the gentleman to the many answers I've previously given but would prefer him to go and ask the Union negotiators why they believe NATS when it says it can't pay 42%.