legislation
One of the things NATS, both NERL and NSL must consider when deciding and formulating any of it's policies, guidelines or rules with regards to emloyment, employee relations and decisions regarding the former is legislation.
There are many aspects of NATS edicts which are not legally tested which, if they were, may be proved to be either not lawful or untenable in a court of law.
This has proved to be just one example, others may (I stress may) be the same. These may include;
It's mobile grade policy and it's application,
It's known habit of restricting postings out of certain units'
The filling of vacancies with a dubious regard for the correct procedure (the Course Manager positions at the college have been seen by some as a 'done deal' before the VN's were sent out),
Its habit of changing terms of posting, position or timescales after candidates have been succesful at VN or assessment (and been notified as such) to suit the prevalent 'business need',
The controversial banding system.
All of these 'policies' (whilst pursued by the upper echelons) which are used on an everyday basis throughout NATS may not actually be lawful. Decisions taken on an arbitrary basis by everyday managers are often moaned about but are rarely challenged. There is a possibility (as has been proven in this case) that these decisions, if challenged in a court of law, may indeed be unlawful and unusable.
Who's to say that the examples above, if challenged, may be proven to be unlawful?
If this were to be the case, where does that leave NATS and the aftermath of their decision making?
Where would it leave those affected by, for example, the mobile grade (those undergoing a forced move) 'clause' or those affected byt the banding issues?
I would suggest that NATS needs to have a very serious rethink and re-assessment of these policies to ensure that they are in fact compliant with both UK and European law and not just assume because 'we say so' that they are before they are either;
Legally challenged or
Subjected to a court case by a (or many) disgruntled employees.
NATS are not above the law, if they believe they are then this well and truly has been a very timely wake up call to all of the decision makers within the company who may be showing a disregard for legislation when
making arbitrary decisions regarding employees.
It may also serve as encouragement for those who feel that decisions made by NATS are not beyond legal challenge if it is felt that those decisions are dubious in a legal sense where protection of rights is sought.