I agree, I think that the idea of paying individual bonuses would be reprehensible but I don't believe that that is what the proposal is saying. What I think the proposal refers to is increased cost must equal increased performance and that the individual airline would agree a sliding scale based on performance. The slide obviously would go both ways. Somewhat reminiscient of a free market idea. Poor service = an appropriate pre-arranged/agreed fee and by contrast a top class service = a payment over and above at an agreed upon additional levy.
Perhaps a minimum could be agreed upon simply making an upward sliding scale thereafter based on improved performance.
Since the top-end that Ryanair is proposing appears to be over and above the increase that NATS has proposed is this not reasonable? Is it unjust? Does it not make an arbitrary increase more sensible?
As for ATCOs being individually paid that was not the intention, I believe, rather a rising tide floats all boats.
The point Ryanair appear to making quite reasonably is why pay more with no gurantee of improved efficiencies (not to say that NATS or individual ATCOs are inefficient) but there is no agreement on service but yet an arbitrary increase is imposed - there's no comeback and everyone is running a business not a charity.
Intervention, however, seems very necessary in an "ideal" state-sponsored world but may be illegal as that's the law at an EU Competition level.
Therefore, perhaps a buyout is on the cards??? Does this not seem to make sense? Or an agreement to meet in the middle somewhere - before the wheels fall off and the NATS negotiating position vis-a-vis any solution is TOTALLY eroded and bankruptcy is the only outcome .