TR
If the company was to ask for volunteers within the ATCO community for redundancy, then would this not get round the fact we are still recruiting and training?
If no volunteers came forward, then NATS would not be able to just bin people, but a volunteer is a volunteer? I could be wrong.
The facts are that there is a downturn in traffic at the moment - if (supposition), a load of ATCOs who were 2 or 3 years from normal retirement volunteered to go early, it would not really impact on the company.
This is because when traffic rises again (which it will) in a couple of years time, the current college trainees will be just validating at units. The ATCOs who volunteered would have been retiring anyways, so would not have been able to cover the return of traffic!
The problem would lie if ATCOs with quite a few years left to retirement left on VR, then in 2 years time we would be down that number, plus the natural losses through retirement. We would then be playing catch up - something the chaps and chappesses at Heathrow tower could tell you about - still suffering 20 odd years after a large (shortsighted) cut in ATCO numbers.
fchan
You have a valid point - but the majority of Non valid ATCOs we have are in posts of such seniority that the pay is not ATCO pay as such, but PCG. The pay wouldhave been at about that level whoever was in post.
They (ex ATCOs) are generally in those posts because a prerequisite is to have been a valid ATCO. Most of those types of job have (quite rightly because of the knowledge required) that prerequisite.
The real question is not who should fill them, but which of those posts are actually required e.g. at Swanwick, do we really need 5 (or any) Safety and Training Managers (to give just one example from many)?
If no, then what becomes of the people in the jobs? Do we take them back into Ops rooms to try and re-validate them (when we are trying to cut costs), or do we show them the door, which is perfectly legal with PCGs?
The problem those people have is they chose to stick their head above the parapet when they took a PCG. Many a wise ATCO has stated that when you give up your license, you are losing a fair bit of protection. It may be galling to some, but ATCOs with a licence are fairly well protected because of the nature of the job.
These aren't good times and I don't like seeing anyone losing their jobs, but NATS needs to streamline, and has done since well before the current financial climate kicked in.
(Management - take note) - Streamlining does not mean getting rid of people/roles that are required in a mindless cost cutting exercise, but does mean evaluating roles and numbers correctly and then adjusting employee numbers. Unfortunately, this is not something that NATS has historically been good at.