I attended one in the last few days and have been pleasantly surprised at the proposed limitations on the controllers being able to do the Met task.
Well that'll be a comfort to NSL ATCOs and ATSAs everywhere, given that you work in a large grey box in Hampshire...
"we would roster an extra ATCO for the night shift to cover the extra duties"
This sounds like a suspiciously hollow promise to try and paper over the cracks in another poor piece of negotiation. Realistically, the risk of snow disruption (for example) covers three months of the year, so I suppose all airports affected by the MET clause will be rostering an extra night ATCO for three months, promulgated on the 20th of the preceding month? I doubt it.
As I understand it, the units affected by the MET clause will likely be swamped in the ballot by those that are largely unaffected. HTD payments went west because those that weren't eligible for HTD (the majority) still got a vote in the ballot. And now Prospect are allowing it to happen again, only there appears to be much more at stake here. Shame on them.
LTP