TAD
Nail on the head there. Without wanting to sound like we (collective) are up our own backside (for anyone who is not in the ATC business), ATCOS, ATSA's and, to a slightly lesser extent (though local knowledge of systems etc is extremely important), ATCE's are fairly unique in that if they were to down tools, you could not get someone else just to walk in and take over (like the firemens strike for instance).
Even qualified ATCOs/ATSAs would need to be trained (and pass the exam board), to work at a specific unit. Who would do the training and examining - oh, that would be the people who currently worked there!
ProM,
In reply to your statement - I'll admit that the way some outfits run airports, there could be a perceived reduction in manpower requirements - if they really went for it, any contract winner could possibly shave one or two off the staff list, it would be uncomfortable for those that remained, but could be achieved within the framework of working hour laws.
However, there is such a shortage of ATCO's that anyone who has been valid at a 'busy'ish unit should be able to walk into another job fairly easily.
If I was an NSL employee, I would not be worried about being laid off, as per Fenellas incorrect statements (it won't happen to the vast majority of staff, those that may find themselves in that position could walk into another job easily).
I would be worried about leaving the employ of a large company that is to be fair, still damned good to work for compared to a real job! However, it would take a brave person to bet against the statement that NATS will try to sell of all or part of NSL, especially if they manage to force a lower cost pension through.
... And although I stated
...still damned good to work for compared to a real job...
above, that does not mean we should allow any reduction in our Ts and Cs.
In any career or company, having above average Ts&Cs or an above average Pension Scheme
is not an acceptable excuse to erode it - it should actually be protected more zealously.