I'm all for thinning out jobs that are not required - as any business should do on a continual basis, but how do they arrive at the number of ATSAs they are asking for at Swanwick?
Are they all operational ATSAs?
Operational ATSAs are essential to safety - our number one priority. How come we can suddenly afford to lose so many without impacting on service delivery?
If we truly can lose so many without an impact on service delivery, why has it taken a recession for management to take this step?
If we can lose so many operational ATSAs, just how many non-Ops staff does that mean we truly don't need?
If we have been grossly overstaffed, then the heads of management should roll for being incompetent.
I just hope that once the dust settles, we are left with good ATSAs... there are a couple on the watch I am on in TC who would not be missed - generally the younger ones.
Unfortunately the older ones (who at least on my watch) tend to be more diligent, are probably the ones who will find VR terms more atractive - especially with rental allowances coming to an end this year after the TC move from WD.