NATS Lose Gatwick Contract (Split thread)

[Pi55ed Off]

Oh dear, DFS have got Gatwick.

Let's hope NATS treat the guys there better than they did the Birmingham staff after that contract loss.

[ZOOKER]

Very sad to read that the NATS bid for EGKK has been unsuccessful. :uhoh:

[LadyAtco]

Just shows that in a real contest, NATS cannot compete.They have been molly coddled by the UK Government for far too long.Manchester’s next, then Cardiff.

The “sad part” is that the Spanish owners of Gatwick have ignored UK industry and the UK ATC profession and awarded the contract to the German DFS which won’t allow UK companies to bid for ATC contracts in their country.

It will be very interesting to see the terms & conditions which DFS will offer to the current NATS ATCOs and what NATS can do about stemming the haemorrhaging of all their ATC contracts. The answer was probably in the 'Reids'.

[T250]

Very good news today, change is good!

What does the contract change mean in terms of the actual practicalities of the operation? For example, will NATS remove and take away their equipment or is it most likely this will stay in addition to the current structure of the unit as it is 'NATS style' for example, without any ATSAs etc

[GT3]

t will be very interesting to see the terms & conditions which DFS will offer to the current NATS ATCOs

Under UK law they will be on the same terms and conditions under TUPE legislation.

[whitelighter]

Change is good for who?

No doubt staff, equipment and service will remain. I guess it's cheaper for the airport and now the profit from the contract goes over seas as well.

Or are you a non-NATS ATCO who expects to walk into a KK job just because the management has changed?

[good egg]

Yes, but how long does TUPE last for?

[GAPSTER]

I'd like to understand what you mean by 'change is good' as well

[P160]

Lady Atco, perhaps you should check your facts before you post, twice now you have made yourself look foolish by making incorrect statements, by the way, Gatwick hasn't had "Spanish" owners for several years, GIP are American.

[10W]

The airport owner will own the equipment in the Tower. NATS was forced down that road during privatisation by the Government, presumably to stop NATS ripping everything out if they lost a contract.

Not sure about the supply of data, from radar feeds, etc, and the cost of maintenance for NATS bespoke equipment. Presumably NATS can charge for that after change over at commercial rates. Or DFS can supply it's own.

[Squawk 7500]

Is this the end of NSL?

[T250]

Change is good in terms of there no longer being a rather unfair monopoly of ATC services at the major airports being provided by NATS.

Like what Ladyatco said, NATS have had an unfair advantage being partly subsidised by government and it is very refreshing to see this is now being broken up just like all modern industries are and should be, into a free market.

You sort of answered your own question too, if all the equipment, staff and service are to remain and continue, why does it have to be NATS that provides this, why not give someone else a chance to perhaps bring more innovation and a different approach in the future.

And no, I'm not a non-NATS ATCO but I'm sure there are a few out there who are also very happy with today's news for the points I mention above and more.

[whitelighter]

By being replaced by a company which is, instead, massively subsidised by the German government?

[ZOOKER]

Me too T250.
Not all of the change I have seen in ATC has been good.
Step up to the microphone please….
Do you have a problem with the services that NATS provide?

[T250]

whitelighter, it comes down to a choice between more of the same and something new.

Unfortunately on this occasion the owners of LGW saw more potential and innovation (or whatever it was) in DFS than in NATS, is this something that you find wrong or incorrect? :\ nothing lasts forever...

[10W]

I wonder what innovation DFS can bring realistically ?

Gatwick shifts up to 55 aircraft an hour already so hard to see that drastically improving. It is also well ensconced in London TMA airspace so will have to fit in with the greater good of the TMA, controlled by NATS.

Or maybe the innovation is being able to do it with a large Government subsidy with no questions asked, along with insider knowledge of all NATS business practices and finances ? ;)

[Roadrunner Once]

Why would the German government want to subsidise the provision of ATC at a British airport?

[zkdli]

Loss leader for the real target

[italiancars]

Under TUPE conditions pension doesn't need to be matched like other T's & C's, therefore fairly easy to see how to construct a rival bid that is less, when you have a smaller pension provision overhead to factor in.

There is a caveat though; Any NATS employees that has been in employment since before part privatisation has a security blanket to protect the pension they currently receive if NATS loose any contracts, i.e. Birmingham, Gatwick. If the incumbent provider doesn't match the pension, NATS have to offer them a job elsewhere within the business. A large number of employees have exercised this right at Birmingham, maybe more than expected, and who knows how many at Gatwick also have that option and then choose to do the same.

This may open up opportunities to ATCO's from other units, as happened at Birmingham, but the training backlog created by this can be huge and in many ways only a success with the contribution and not an immeasurable amount of goodwill of the current ATCO's that are OJTI rated within the unit.

It could be argued though that in a few years any contracts lost by NATS, or indeed any new ones that they want to look at in the UK could be bid for with lower overheads as they would no longer have the burden of the final salary pension to factor in. They would be a leaner meaner company with a more competitive edge.

[zonoma]

Now that Gatwick is going to the German hands, what incentive is there for NATS to implement point merge for KK as part of the LAMP 1a project?

[Una Due Tfc]

Didn't DFS bid for a 25% stake in NATS recently?

[Squawk 7500]

I just hope DFS(TTC) don't do to our T&Cs what NATS(FerroNATS) did to AENA's...

[whitelighter]

Why stop at 20%.

Why not 30, or 40?

And how many days does the airport need to be closed if the controllers withdraw labour for any savings to be written off?

[Squawk 7500]

Power to the people

[Squawk 7500]

FerroNATS ATCOs are on about one third of what AENA ATCOs were earning at the same airports.

[QuestionMaster]

Remind me never to take legal advice off Yahoo !

Tupe doesn't last for 12 months - It's indefinite. Essentially the new company takes on the old company's T&Cs as part of the employee's contract of employment (excluding a couple of things around pensions etc).

Yahoo is correct that they would be within their rights at any time to make everyone redundant and have them reapply for their jobs with a 50% pay cut however they would have to conclusively prove that that was nothing to do with the switchover. In essence the onus would be on DFS to prove that at the time of signing the contract they could not have predicted the need to do this. If they could not prove that any employee affected would have the right of legal redress.

Under Tupe DFS have (almost) exactly the same rights to change contracts that NATS do now. And the same potential ramifications if they do.

[eglnyt]

Like what Ladyatco said, NATS have had an unfair advantage being partly subsidised by government and it is very refreshing to see this is now being broken up just like all modern industries are and should be, into a free market.

An interesting claim. Perhaps you could share with the rest of us your knowledge of how NATS is partly subsidised by the Government.

[eglnyt]

I'm not sure that doing a deal that let the Treasury run away with £700+ Million and left the company in a perilous financial position and then giving £65 Million of it back at the same commercial terms as the other equity investor is a subsidy.

[ZOOKER]

A good friend of mine has pointed out elsewhere that EGKK operates the busiest and most efficient single-runway operation anywhere in the world.
This has been achieved by the development of procedures and techniques that NATS have honed over the years to produce a sustained movement rate which I believe often exceeds 55 a/c per hour.
It is also achieved by fantastic teamwork and co-operation between NATS ATC staff who now sit not in the same building, but 80km apart, still making every 3/4 mile gap work.
Reading the various on-line press releases, it appears that the organisation which will take over EGKK is a wholly owned subsidiary of DFS called 'The Tower Company'. It was formed in 2005 to provide ATS at small and medium-sized airports, and has its HQ at Langen, near Frankfurt, from which a team of specialists provides management support for all airports. 'Solutions' include airfield operations, training and..'other'.
TTC will be setting up it's own U.K. company to provide these services.
The last statement could possibly indicate that it has more contracts in it's sights.
I'm sure over the next 2 years, (Mods permitting), this will be an interesting thread, and by 2016, (notwithstanding an eruption of Katla or other impinging crisis), we might see the benefits of this "refreshingly good change".

[On the beach]

I wonder what innovation DFS can bring realistically ?

How's about German ATCOs, for starters?

Okay, maybe not, but there's plenty of UK licenced ATCOs currently working overseas who may be tempted back for the right package. I'm sure they wouldn't have too much of a problem validating at KK. Trouble is they would cost a great deal more than the present incumbents.

The upside is that the current KK controllers who didn't want to stay at KK with DFS would find plenty of opportunities overseas, particularly in "the Gulf". No tax, but no pension either, but at least you can plan on it being dry for the "barbie". :ok:

[windowjob]

The race to the bottom (line) accelerates. :sad:
Never mind the quality of service you had before, just look how cheap it is!.
Now if only they could get trainees to pay for the priviledge of their OJTi just think how much cheaper that would make it - oh someone else has already done that with pilots.

[AroundAbout]

With any luck, this will signal bye bye Deakin.

I think Paul Barron is still available, and NATS can start getting back on track.

[nodelay]

On the beach - you give the impression from your thread that validating at Gatwick is easy.

It isn't.

[His dudeness]

awarded the contract to the German DFS which won’t allow UK companies to bid for ATC contracts in their country.

DFS is NOT in a position to forbid - or allow - foreign companies to bid for ATC contracts in D.

THere are non DFS Towers in Germany.

[MattUpNorth]

Rumour on the street is that the innovation with be a UK company, with DFS R&D back-up, implementing automated ground ATC and lighting Gatwick to reduce staff.:=

[zkdli]

I didn't know that! Name three please.
Thanks zkdli

[Squawk 7500]

Dortmund
Sylt
Paderborn

[eglnyt]

You could try Schwerin-Parchim, Augsburg and Braunschweig-Wolfsburg which are among the 10 where Austro Control provide ATS Services. They are all what are described as Regional airports.

[Gonzo]

MattUpNrth, just like any major airport.

They are all looking at such systems.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

That I must see!

[luv pringles]

I guess costs are going to be reduced, just a matter of where

[Minesapint]

Ya see, you leave and the ship sinks! ;):D

[LadyAtco]

The bottom line is “money”.

DFS won the contract simply because they were cheaper than NATS. Same reason as the Birmingham contract and the next NATS one !!

NATS ATCOs are some of the best in the world, as are many other ATCOs, however their management still think like civil servants. They are not in the same ‘commercial’ world as other contractors.

NATS needs to wake up, think about cutting their overheads and their bloated head office set up. They need to cut ATCO salaries and staff more realistically, down to competitive levels and then they will be able to compete. It will take several years and lots of contract losses before they do wake up tho’.

As for DFS, if they cannot attract at least 14 ATCOs and 6 OJTIs from the current NATS staff they will struggle to take over. So current staff, here is your ideal (short term) blackmail opportunity. Hold out until the last day of the TUPE transfer and watch DFS squirm. They will have to offer you incredible benefits to attract the 14 ATCOs required. But, you do need to stick together as divided you will fall !!

DFS only need ADV/ADI ratings so it won’t be that difficult to attract foreign ATCOs with those skills.

[ZOOKER]

Seriously though……….It's worrying…And anyone who dis-agrees is telling fibs.

[anotherthing]

Zooker,

I agree, it is worrying and I think the rot has set in. Too busy trying to conquer the world and trumpeting the opening of new offices around the World, whilst taking our eye off the ball in the UK.

Birmingham are fairly often calling TC to ask us to reduce the inbound flow due to lack of staff... one wonders if Gatwick will be the same...

I know Gatwick wanted to up their game regarding number of movements this year... looking at 60+ per hour throughout the day. This was all dependant on information sharing systems and technology developed by NATS. Obviously they will not get access to this now unless they pay, which will in turn make the DFS contract more expensive than the headline figure that they have tendered, unless of course Gatwick owners decide they do not want more movements per hour, which I doubt.

[Ceannairceach]

As the 2014 NATS Annual Report & Accounts says;

"I thank (ex-NATS senior manager heavily involved in this deal only a few months after resigning from NATS) for his long service to NATS and the foundation he provided for its growth strategy."

Quite :E

[2 sheds]

As for DFS, if they cannot attract at least 14 ATCOs and 6 OJTIs from the current NATS staff they will struggle to take over.

Why would they not "attract" those numbers - where else would they be going? I am sure that the present incumbents do not need LadyAtco's advice - better off just smiling nicely and not mentioning the war.

2 s

Damn - just mentioned the war, but I think I got away with it.

[Ceannairceach]

LadyAtco - when you say NATS needs to cut ATCO salaries I think you insinuate that NATS overpays it's ATCOs compared to those operating on a more commercial basis. And in some cases this is indeed true. Not sure it's the case with DFS though.

Interesting to note that DFS runs on a totally not-for-profit basis, unlike NATS, and is wholly owned and subsidised by the government, unlike NATS.

Perhaps actually it is DFS that aren't quite competing on a level commercial playing field.

[Nimmer]

2 sheds disagree, Lady ATCO is spot on. DFS need the controllers, Gatwick guys and girls it is time to stand together and negotiate your T's and C's as one.

DFS may indeed recruit controllers to work at Gatwick, as you say 2 sheds, but these controllers still need to be trained by the controllers whose job they are taking. I personally wouldn't be trying too hard to train this controller, unless of course there is a cash incentive!!!

I would see this as good opportunity to make a very high salary, with a few bonuses, including extra cash for UCE, OJTI, cash for trainees who validate. Etc

The words HOW MUCH, need to the big part of a Gatwick controllers phraseology, plus the words, NO, and oh yes, sorry we are not turning up for work tomorrow, unless you do as we say!!!

It's a fight, you need to have guts and big balls and everybody needs to stand together as one. Probably best to form your own union.

Of course this last statement is where it will collapse, the will always be one or two who are selfish and weak.

Good luck, a part of me would love to be there stirring it up.

[Use the Force]

I don't think NATS needs to cut it's salaries!

It is a benchmark. The controllers work at the busiest regional airports and Britain's only hub. They control the the upper airways and the TMA's.

It has been a guideline for non NATS units to judge what to pay their controllers. The more a NATS controller gets payed, the more a non NATS controller could demand or walk to a better unit that pays better.

There are Radar controllers out there getting payed very well for doing not a lot. They get payed well because there aren't many of them. :p:p

There are not countless numbers of people willing to self sponsor to become controllers, unlike our pilot cousins. Why would there be, the view is not as good.
This I feel has also been misunderstood by every ATS provider that think our salaries should be aligned with pilots.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

A past general manager at Heathrow, who was an ATCO, told us once that we had no idea how much power was in our hands. 'nuff said.

[2 sheds]

DFS may indeed recruit controllers to work at Gatwick, as you say 2 sheds, but these controllers still need to be trained by the controllers whose job they are taking.
I thought that I was saying that there is no reason why most of the current ATCOs would not stay at Gatwick!

2 s

[Gonzo]

I thought we were still waiting for evidence that DFS is 'subsidised' by the German government.

[Not Long Now]

Anotherthing, "I know Gatwick wanted to up their game regarding number of movements this year... looking at 60+ per hour throughout the day. This was all dependant on information sharing systems and technology developed by NATS. Obviously they will not get access to this now unless they pay, which will in turn make the DFS contract more expensive than the headline figure that they have tendered, unless of course Gatwick owners decide they do not want more movements per hour, which I doubt."
Surely that's up to GAL if they want to get involved in improving things. Presumably DFS are simply contracted to provide ATC. Any increase derived from whatever systems from NATS would have to be extra funds from GAL if they deem it worthy?

[samotnik]

Lady ATCO, what are these "competitive levels" of salary in your opinion? 60k? 30k? Or maybe a "will work for food" level?

[Tomohawk]

I know Gatwick wanted to up their game regarding number of movements this year... looking at 60+ per hour throughout the day. This was all dependant on information sharing systems and technology developed by NATS. Obviously they will not get access to this now unless they pay, which will in turn make the DFS contract more expensive than the headline figure that they have tendered, unless of course Gatwick owners decide they do not want more movements per hour, which I doubt.

Gatwick will still be a customer of NATS will they not? The DFS contract is for the Tower services. Approach Radar services will still be provided by NATS from TC at Swanwick. So the NATS-Gatwick Airport relationship does not end here.

Birmingham are fairly often calling TC to ask us to reduce the inbound flow due to lack of staff... one wonders if Gatwick will be the same...

One questions who the current ANSP is at EGBB? And why the unit is not properly manned?

I thought we were still waiting for evidence that DFS is 'subsidised' by the German government.

We are still indeed waiting. Despite the shock and even outrage on this thread that Gatwick dare subcontract a different provider...


It is indeed worrying though. And whoever it was that said NATS and it's management are stuck in a public sector mindset was probably nearest the mark.

Thoughts to our colleagues at Gatwick who are in a very uncertain time with no doubt some difficult months ahead.

[luv pringles]

A past general manager at Heathrow, who was an ATCO, told us once that we had no idea how much power was in our hands. 'nuff said.


I suppose that was about 50 years ago, didn't you leave about 20 years ago, The world has moved on.

[anotherthing]

Not Long Now, Tomohawk

Yes it is up to GAL and that is my point. They want(ed) the extra movements. If they still do then they will have to pay NATs which means the overall contract for services will cost more than just the DFS contract. I understand that NATS were going to practically give GAL the tools to up the runway occupancy rate as part of any contract; obviously now that is not an option, therefore if GAL do not want to stand still, they will need to pay NATS so that is extra money in addition to the DFS contract.

As for why BB is not properly manned; no idea. However it is true, time to time they phone TC for assistance

[Nimmer]

Luv Pringles, the world hasn't moved on. Controllers still have a lot of power, we just choose not to use it.

DFS need planes landing and departing at Gatwick airport, they can't do that without controllers, fact. The Gatwick controllers could demand a huge premium to do that job, they won't of course because they worry about losing their jobs.

However if they stand up for themselves and stay together, a wage rise can be obtained. Unfortunately too many people think like yourself.

[The Many Tentacles]

I'd heard a rumour the other day that Birmingham had asked or needed to move the handover day back due to things not being ready

[luv pringles]

Can anyone show me where it states NATS, lost the contract because of ATCO wages. As i understand it it was the overall cost, could that include adding pension costs? head office staff? could that be the reason?

[Squawk 7500]

We've only been told that the decision was based on overall cost.
What would happen if all Gatwick OJTIs refused to train and examine?

[TCAS FAN]

Squawk 7500

If such a refusal occurred, next NSL contract to go would be Edinburgh (which the Gatwick owners have a controlling interest?). CAA is not about to allow Gatwick to shutdown due to a lack of ATCOs with LUE, Green Field LUE will be issued following simulator training (all flight procedures in the public domain, via the UK AIP) and airport operator has copies of MATS 2.

NSL already in the handover mode at Brum, cannot imagine they would let the news media view them as prejudicing safety by refusing to facilitate a seamless transition at Gatwick. After Gatwick they should have the process perfected!

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

TCAS FAN. I assume that you are not an aviation professional. It takes much, much more to train controllers than just a bit of simulator training, a copy of MATS II and then a green field stamp on their ticket. At the busiest units even experienced controllers can take many months to validate, i.e. to be able to work solo. Gatwick is a complex operation and the controllers are a highly skilled group which could not be replaced overnight.

[TCAS FAN]

Heathrow Director

I believe that 46 years in the ATM business does qualify me for professional status. If, but only if, some form of non-cooperation with training and or UE examining was forthcoming, technology and Green Field ULEs could be used to mitigate the issue. Simulation is a practical resolution of the problem, but is achievable Ever heard of aircrew type rating zero time simulation?

I know its possible I've done similar many years ago when the SERCO predecessor tried to pull the same non training stunt, fortunately the British Ambassador and government intervention resulted in a few days (yes days!) live training before we took over. Within minutes of taking over watch my first call was "MAYDAY, MAYDAY......" Simulator training paid off and all ended well.

Do not imagine that we will ever see "NATS refuse to train new Gatwick Air Traffic Controllers" in the tabloid headlines. As I said previously, they will have perfected the transition process by the time that Gatwick is handed over. Could even form a transition team, where will it move onto next Aberporth, Cardiff, Edinburgh, Manchester.......?

[Squawk 7500]

Agree with HD. If the CAA handed out green field tickets for busy aerodromes like Gatwick, it makes a complete mockery of our lengthy training and validation process.

[TCAS FAN]

Squawk 7500

Although unlikely it is achievable if the new ANSP demonstrates to SARG that the new staff are competent following simulator training.

Your speculation that NATS will refuse training/examination is not going to happen if they wish to maintain their business credibility. The Brum process of seconding new ANSP staff to NATS for training and UE will no doubt have to be invoked for insurance purposes.

The way things are going is DFS going to simplify future transition arrangements by buying NSL?

[Vercingetorix]

TCAS FAN
46 years in the ATM business does qualify me for professional status

Does that also include any actual ATC operational time or are you just an office wallah driving the 'Brown Bomber'?

If DFS takes over on a Greenfield site basis I foresee a long period of flow control until the operation is deemed to be safe.

Interesting times in which we live.:eek:

P.s. As an addendum your Moniker TCAS Fan, is that because you need to use/rely on TCAS to solve basic foreseeable ATC incidents rather than use your nous?.

[TCAS FAN]

Vercingetorix

Licensed ATCO on my 21st birthday, ADV/ADI/APP/APS/Area and still with a current validation to provide ATS, all the deskwork ever needed to run ATS Units and sell on my experience to help other ANSP attain EU ANSP Cerification . Enough to drop the "professional" issue and get back on Thread?

[Satellite Man]

It is hard to stand together when another ANSP is taking over. There is always someone who wants to get a better cut and break lines. I have seen it already.

[Vercingetorix]

TCAS
that makes two of us, best of luck. :cool:

[Satellite Man]

That has already happened at AENA. They will force the ATCOs to train the new controllers one way or another. The government will back the new ANSP and things will get pretty bad.

They might even send the army to Gatwick like they did with AENA. That was all a show! The former transport minister, that idiot called José Blanco, even said that all the Spanish airspace could be controlled by military controllers replacing us at once, hahahaa.. that was a pretty good joke until it proved wrong.

Maybe the best way is negotiating better terms for all the controllers, as long as they stand together. That's feasible and realistic.

[chevvron]

What's all this about NATS Management being 'civil service' minded? NATS hasn't been part of the civil service since 1975 and before I retired nearly 6 years ago, they were bringing in senior management from outside industries who had little or no knowledge of how aviation works, the now ex C/Ex Paul Barron being one.

[chevvron]

Well despite TCAS FAN's apparent ATC experience, he obviously doesn't realise the NATS controllers at Aberporth are APS only carrying out an MOD (DPA) operation (range control), the airport being AFIS not ATC.
Personally I only fly non-transponder aircraft and look forward to filing an airprox on someone responding to an RA without looking out of the cockpit.

[Vercingetorix]

TCAS FAN comes across as a management type who believes that experience is no substitute for having a basic 2,2 Uni qualification.
I go with HD and Squawk 7500.

Interesting times.

P.S. TCAS FAN, call me if you need some input! :cool:

[TCAS FAN]

Vercingetorix

Something you've probably heard many times before, something along the lines of "if you cannot validate you can always instruct, if you cannot instruct, you can manage". Fortunately I, as I suspect you may also, manged to do all three simultaneously up to retirement, only to be tempted back when I got bored.

Chevvron

Know Aberporth is APS (of a sort) but a NSL contract ripe for plucking, maybe by another MOD savy ANSP (who I believe you know) who could do it considerably cheaper, time for a close shave?

[chevvron]

TCAS FAN: I know there is already another (UK based) ANSP bidding for Aberporth Range (they told me back in March).
I was tempted to make a comeback by this same ANSP, especially with the salary offered, but I preferred to do the odd day as a FISO instead of full time ATC - I lasted all of 2 weeks after I retired before I started FISO training!

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<only to be tempted back when I got bored.>>

The word "insane" springs readily to mind! (Sorry)

[TCAS FAN]

Heathrow Director

Not insane, would never have got through the validation or the medical, personal choice, makes much more sense to me to keep the old grey matter going, with the advantage of paying for the next cruise or long haul holiday, before I get too aged or infirm to enjoy them.

Lets get back to the thread, or start a new one "1001 things that you wanted to know about TCAS FAN".

How about the staff at Gatwick "to be TUPEd or not to be TUPEd, that is the question?". Will NSL have a job for them if the latter is chosen?

[chevvron]

Have to agree about keeping the grey matter going, that's why I FISO.
Plenty of people 'retiring'* at other NSL units so there should be vacancies.
*They may even be offered 'inducements' to retire early if they're at the top of the salary scale; I know of one who went this way, said he was made 'an offer he couldn't refuse'.
My old unit seems to be constantly short of staff, always having to bandbox positions.

[saintex2002]

HEATHROW DIRECTORA past general manager at Heathrow, who was an ATCO, told us once that we had no idea how much power was in our hands. 'nuff said.
luv pringlesI suppose that was about 50 years ago, didn't you leave about 20 years ago, The world has moved on.
NimmerLuv Pringles, the world hasn't moved on. Controllers still have a lot of power, we just choose not to use it.
DFS need planes landing and departing at Gatwick airport, they can't do that without controllers, fact. The Gatwick controllers could demand a huge premium to do that job, they won't of course because they worry about losing their jobs.
However if they stand up for themselves and stay together, a wage rise can be obtained. Unfortunately too many people think like yourself.

No other solution than calling #EUATCOsCOLLECTIVE to take over the #EUATMcontrols... Just think about it...

#saintex2002

[Tomohawk]

It's a real shame that off the back of Birmingham, NATS lost another one (and a bigger one at that). And everyone seems so surprised and shocked? (not just the shop floor staff but the management?)

Did anything happen within NATS after Birmingham? Any inward looking, cross examination of what went wrong? Or did we just think Birmingham Airport were a bunch chancers who'd cobble together a cheap in house solution and just about get away with it because it's not that busy an airfield? In the mean time it seems NATS carrys on business as usual and here we are again...

At least the bid team have been congratulated for doing a great job!

[obwan]

I am constantly amazed by the number of people who feel they have to continue working to "keep the old grey matter going ". There's a big beautiful world out there to explore and we are not given long to explore it. The thought of spending a retirement talking to puddle jumpers fills me with horror. Get out there and smell the flowers,it'll be gone soon enough. To return to the loss of contract issue most of my working life the constant whinge was how bad NATS management was , well now people will have a chance to experience a new order; maybe in a year or so the staff at EGKK and EGBB can let us all know how it's all panning out.:ugh:

[Level bust]

Having been out sourced to NATS from Local Government some 12 years ago I was not impressed by NATS management at all, and I thought Local Government wasn't that good.

The only good thing to get out of it was the pension scheme, which I have taken and run and having no regrets at all.

Especially the way things are going in NSL.

[TCAS FAN]

Level bust

Me too!

[Nimmer]

I have mused over a 24 hour period, and feel I can't hold back. TCAS Fan You are talking complete Cr*p, there is no way the safety regulator in the UK will allow a green field validation at a major international airport.

As for 2 days live training and then controlling a 55 hour at Gatwick, WTF!!!

Oh but it will be fine because I have read the procedures!!! Total boll**ks

Your list of qualifications sounds mightily impressive, but how about adding a few
validations that we might of heard of into the mix, I will start with a list of my own, as I think this may prove that I might actually know what I am talking about.

Gatwick and Essex radar, Gatwick tower, Dubai tower and radar, Luton radar.

[possibleconsequences]

Didn't the NATS controllers lose the chance of sticking together when Area was split from Airports (was it around 2000?). I do remember voices back then saying that was the thin end of the wedge.It now seems the fatter end of the wedge is arriving.

As a current (non NATS) controller i'd be rather reluctant to fly out of Gatwick if i knew the ATCO's there were trained only on a sim and given green field status! However, as a non NATS controller i can also see the pressures to drive down costs from NATS levels. There will be sufficient new ATCO's willing to work for say 60% to 70% (debate?) of current NATS salaries who, presumably, can be properly trained in time.

[terrain safe]

I'm sorry, but the problem isn't the ATCO salaries. I work at a London airport as a tower only (although do have and validated approach), if I leave and go to a nearby non NATS airfield I would, if I joined at the top of the scale where I am now, have a reasonably large pay rise. We operate with less staff than a few years ago, and work all the hours we can. There are less support staff than before so the extra costs, apart from pensions (which are decreasing as there are less staff on them as newer ones arrive), the costs have never been lower relatively. HH started with about 20 people. How many now? All a case of the tail wagging the dog I'm afraid.

[chevvron]

TCAS FAN; if you want to keep the grey matter exercised by FISO ing, I know of an airfield in Wales which is looking for FISOs, but then I guess you probably know about that already!

[Squawk 7500]

Terrain safe,
Which non-NATS airfield near to london is paying more than NATS top spine point??

[The Many Tentacles]

When the word "safety" is replaced in several documents by the words "acceptable risk" I think we can all see where the motivation lies, regardless of what else is going on

[anotherthing]

LookingForaJob


I have no idea whether what NATS does warrants the higher costs but the fact is that there are other ANSPs in Europe which demonstrably are able to provide high quality services and whose costs for doing so are lower
Only on headline figures... it is not a level playing field... NATS costs include pension costs, the vast majority of other ANSPs do not include these in their costs as they are subsidised by their governement.

That said, it is the hand NATS has been dealt with PPP; no point whingeing too much about it; we (NATS) needs to prove that the extra cost is worth it to the customers.

I get sick of BA et al complaining that we pass through pension costs to them, the customer... that is exactly what every service industry does, BA included!!

Gatwick will not achieve more movements per hour now without paying NATS over and above the cost of the DFS contract as the 60+ movements per hour they are hoping for is reliant on systems etc designed and supplied by NATS who will, hopefully, not give this away for peanuts. The LTMA works fairly well given the outdated procedures (being revamped as we speak)... it is not in NATS interest as a company to up the delivery numbers to Gatwick without passing on the cost as it will have a staffing implication in the LTMA.

[ZOOKER]

As Tentacles points out, it's interesting how the language in ATC has changed. I remember reading an article on the internal intranet from office-dwelling bod about ways to "incentivise our controllers.
The word 'incentivise' was used about 3 times in one paragraph.

[PeltonLevel]

Following a link from Richard Deakin's latest blog (http://nats.aero/blog/2014/07/competition-can-deliver-change-europe/) (http://nats.aero/blog/2014/07/competition-can-deliver-change-europe/), I see that the main reason DFS gave when it announced earlier this month that it plans to increase air navigation charges was its “unmanageable” pension obligations!(http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ain-air-transport-perspective/2014-06-17/germanys-dfs-airlines-clash-over-cost-increase):{

[soaringhigh650]

The LTMA works fairly well given the outdated procedures (being revamped as we speak)...

Y'all better make sure the new design doesn't exclude transit GA/VFR flights with Class A airspace or PRNAV airspace or telephone PPR or other unnecessary requirements.

:*

We are watching as well as the UK Government GA Red Tape Panel (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/315312/ga-panel-report.pdf).

[GAPSTER]

Oooooh,bit scary that

[Gonzo]

SH,

I assume you're familiar with the PBN IR that will come from EASA?

[Nimmer]

Soaring high, my old pal, that report is 83 pages of total cr@p that basically says nothing, you will still be soaring low!!!

[soaringhigh650]

Gonzo,

I assume you're familiar with the PBN IR that will come from EASA?

Not exactly but if I can recertify my PA28 to PRNAV quickly and cheaply then in principle I don't have a problem.

Nimmer,

that report is 83 pages of total cr@p that basically says nothing

Ah my old anti-GA pal. We meet again. Are you still working for National Airline Traffic Services Limited? 'Cos you won't be for much longer! :E

[Nimmer]

Explain, how and why won't I be working for NATS?

Plus I am not anti GA, just today I gave a lovely service both traffic and a crossing service across both Gatwiick and Luton zone.

However my basic failing is I just love catching fish!!!

[qsyenroute]

Well at least we know it will be a"safe and efficient" service. It must be true DFS said so several times in the press release.
I suppose the ATCOs will be on zero hours contracts like their Gatwick colleagues on baggage (not) handling. So instead of a four delay at the luggage carousel, the punters wait 4 hours in the holding pattern for a landing slot. Nice one EGKK.

[mhk77]

What surprises me is that people are so surprised that NATS have lost another contract.

This has been coming for a long time and from speaking to colleagues who work for or who have worked for other ANSPs in Europe, NATS are a dinosaur who need to move into the real world quickly.

Manchester and Stansted, both owned by MAG, must be ripe for plucking now as well.

Give it 10-15years and I wouldn't be surprised if NATS consisted of the Enroute side plus Heathrow.

[ZOOKER]

If I remember correctly, 'Dinosaurs' were very successful animals.
NATS has changed beyond all recognition in recent years.
There is an old saying…….."Buy in haste, repent at leisure". The next 10 years in Surrey could be very interesting.

[obwan]

Wise words Mr Zook. unfortunately like everything else in this paradise we live in services every where are paired to the bone and only the cheapest will do; and as has been pointed out before what you get is the non baggage handling shambles that is going on at EGKK; people want cheap then they have to put up with degraded service.:ugh:

[mhk77]

They were very successful Zooker.

In their time.

But like all things, the world changes and moves on.

I'm only voicing my opinion but listening to other ATCOs from other ANSPs and to friends in NATS, it does sound to me like NATS is falling behind and relying on the past to sell their product.

Why shouldn't Gatwick or Birmingham go elsewhere for the provision of ATC if they think they can get a better deal? We all do it in everyday life.

Hopefully NATS management will learn some lessons very quickly and keep hold of their remaining contracts, then come back stronger when Gatwick is tendered again in years to come.

If they want it that is.

Maybe I'm a cynic but part of me thinks, as I mentioned previously, that there's a bigger game at play here and we'll see a gradual dismantling of the airport side of the business with the exception of Heathrow. Then NATS will concentrate on the enroute and oceanic side and on growing overseas.

Or I could be talking out of my ar*e completely.

Will be interesting to see what the next 5-10years bring.

[ILS RWY27L]

mhk77: Don't think you're talking out of your rear end one bit.

On the contrary, completely agree with you. The next five to ten years certainly will prove interesting.

It's the NATS mentality which considers itself a cut above the rest that is losing the NSL contracts. The "we are the best - cogito ergo sum: we must always charge a premium" attitude will likely continue to be the downfall of NSL.

The Gatwick ATC contract wasn't awarded merely on cost. Yes, it was and always is a large, large factor, but how can people honestly say that any one of the several, large ANSPs that exist cannot do an equally safe and efficient, if not better job? What coherent proof does NATS have that says it is impossible? None, it's pure inward-looking arrogance in my mind! Someone mentioned having the mentality of Civvy Servants - they're right!

DFS provide very high safety and efficiency in their numerous operations across Germany, while continuing to add and develop innovation. NATS have achieved the increased capacity etc at Gatwick, there's no doubt, but they are not the only 'ATC Gods' with that capability!

[ZOOKER]

"they are not the only 'ATC Gods' with that capability!".
But why are they not allowed to 'compete' for ATC contracts throughout Europe then?
If the state-owned DFS can do EGKK, surely the PPP'd NATS should be able to bid for EDDF, EDDS, EDDM, EDDH, EDDK, etc?

[Crazy Voyager]

This leads on a broader question.

Is ATC fit for privatisation?

Both at Brum and Gatters the change has been to either an in-house solution, or a contract over 10 years.

The shortest contract options I have heard off are over 5 years.

If each contract is 5 years, and there is at least a 12 month changeover period at the end, it means these things run over several company budgets (and probably at least 2 almost completely different boards/high level mangement teams).

The combination of this being so very long term (in a world where short term financial gain seems to be everything) combined with the potential massive loss to the economy if several of these contracts go wrong at once, makes me wonder if the Germans may have got this one right.

By not allowing the major airports ATC to leave the monopoly the have safegaurded their national interest. Making sure the major airports (that in some ways help fuel the national economy) shouldn't be under risk of a transfer of contract going wrong. At the same time they allow their regional airports to open bids for ATC, but on a national scale a loss of Paderborn isn't going to have ahuge effect. If Frankfurt shut down for a week though, that would be, interesting.


Privatisation can be very good, but I'm not convinced everything is better privatised. The second largest airport in the UK might be one of those things, interesting years ahead for sure.

[ZOOKER]

Er, because I didn't know that they are. So why haven't they?

[Gingerbread Man]

If I remember correctly, 'Dinosaurs' were very successful animals.
NATS has changed beyond all recognition in recent years.
There is an old saying…….."Buy in haste, repent at leisure". The next 10 years in Surrey could be very interesting.

I thought the last time I sent something to the CAA, Gatwick was in West Sussex? :8

P.S. My favourite dinosaur was the Pedantosaurus.

[GAPSTER]

Interesting to see how well the tabloid style jokes about tanks,sausages,them coming over here etc.etc. went down amongst the staff.As that side cracking roadshow passed through about a week before the result was announced I wonder how well judged that is now felt to be...

[ZOOKER]

Gingerbread Man,
Ha ha, well-spotted. That bit of The U.K. south-east of Daventry has always been somewhat of a grey-area to me.
Carry on...

[chevvron]

Aviation House (CAA) is situated on the original airport which is in Sussex, but I think you'll find the postal address of the present airport is Horley, which is in Surrey, so ZOOKER is correct.

[TCAS FAN]

From the London Airport Gatwick website:

Write to us at:

Customer Services
6th floor, Destinations Place
South Terminal
Gatwick Airport
West Sussex RH6 0NP

So that would appear to at least put the runways in West Sussex, what about the Tower and North Terminal?

[TCAS FAN]

Solved, all of the Airport (old and new) is within West Sussex.

West Sussex County Council Interactive Map (iMap) (http://www2.westsussex.gov.uk/lvmaps/imap.html)

Back to the thread?

[Brian 48nav]

I've kept all my maps from my Herc' nav' days and in the old one- inch OS sheet 182, Brighton & Worthing, it shows quite clearly that Gatwick was in Surrey. The county boundary was on the old Horley to Crawley road at a place called County Oak.


My guess is that under Local Government re-organisation in 1974, when, if you remember, places like the counties of Avon and Cleveland were formed, Crawley in West Sussex had it's boundary changed to absorb the airport - perhaps because the vast majority of the KK workforce lived there.

[LEGAL TENDER]

Does this necessarily have to be a bad thing?
What if it turns out to be a good thing for the controllers & staff at Gatwick?

I have no factual evidence to back my statement, but purely on a gut feeling, I think I'd rather work for DFS than NATS. Especially on the airports / towers side of things...

There is a story** saying that one of the now key figures at DFS for delivering this Gatwick deal used to be at the top of NATS airports.. and used to be heralded as a champion of all things NATS, expansion, brand values, integrity - and now has become a DFS villain?
Maybe not all that NATSglitters™ is NATSgold™?


**The events depicted in this story are fictitious. Any similarity to any real life person or fact is merely coincidental."

[windowjob]

All this debate about which County Gatwick is in is symptomatic of the problem in NATS.
We get so worried about such details and spend huge amounts of time and resources to ensure we use the "best maps [to ISO 9002], best people and meticulous research to get the gold plated answer" when really it don't matter!
Just put Gatwick Airport on the envelope and it will get there.

Privatisation stuffed us by not having regulated airports (unlike Germany), pension costs on the company (unlike Germany) plus loans against the company to buy it.
Having HUGE HQ costs (unlike the DFS company set up to compete) means there's no way NATS can compete on price despite paring the operational stuff to the minimum (and below!)
We set up FerroNATS to do the same in Spain, but there's no way they'll get the big Airports.

The crazy scenario looming in the future - European Countries will provide ATC at their own large important airports (except the UK cos we didn't regulate them) and have foreign companies do the rest of the country's airports cheaper!

Sadly, I can see NSL collapsing, helped by "advisors" who once worked for us - what happened to commercial confidentiality in their contracts?

I just hope NERL isn't in a similar position regarding competition, otherwise last one to leave turn off the radar.:(

[nodelay]

Just like to say that despite all the uncertainty and debate amongst all you lovely NATS and non NATS people, we pushed 904 off a single stretch of Tarmac at Gatwick on Friday.

[saintex2002]

Originally Posted by LookingForAJob
As a certified ANSP, they are.

ATCOs are definitely certified too... and it seems more and more urgent to take over the #EUATMcontrols and become ourselves our own proper ANSP... Time to call #EUATCOsCOLLECTIVE and carry on our own stuff... #WeJustCanWin...
@saintex2002

[DaveReidUK]

we pushed 904 off a single stretch of Tarmac at Gatwick on FridayWith 904 departures, I'm surprised you had room for any arrivals. :O

[saintex2002]

Right LFAJ, right... :ok:
But the point LFAJ, the point...
Isn't it time to leave these licensed years and decide to change with certified years ?... To be on our own and just work for us ?...
#EUATCOsCOLLECTIVE
#JustThinkAboutIt
@saintex2002

[GAPSTER]

I know a few who really should be certified

[saintex2002]

When one is watching such a chaos in the EUATM... Joking is not the appropriate answer... Need more guts to win this war...
#EUATCOsCOLLECTIVE
@saintex2002

[Norwegian Blue]

Hi all – I haven’t joined the conversation before now for two main reasons:

I hate the bunfights and willy waving contests that many of these threads often descend into.

I needed a little time to research some of the issues discussed here.

Today I wrote a lengthy email to my MP stating my concerns over the Gatwick situation and the implications it may have, not only for NSL, but any other ANSP bidding for airport contracts within the UK. I suggest others do the same. I shan’t disclose the full details of that missive but have outlined the points (trying to stick purely to bare facts) thus:

Gatwick airport are owned by Global Infrastructure Partners. The former Chief Executive of NATS (Prior to Richard Deakin) is a consultant to GIP (as stated on his Linked In profile). Some time late last year it appears that either DFS showed an interest in bidding for Gatwick - or GIP themselves approached DFS and asked them to tender (I am not certain but have heard rumours that the latter was the case).

Some time last year, the Managing Director of NSL, a person who is intimately acquainted with NATS commercial bids (and, as Managing Director, was responsible for protecting the future of the company) decided to resign from NATS. He left NSL on 6th December 2013. It appears that he then became “involved” with the DFS bid “very soon” after leaving. It would be interesting to know the actual timescales involved and I believe this to be an issue worthy of further investigation.

Then there is the issue of whether this was a totally fair playing field or not. For that we need to look at company structures. I think some of the conversations earlier in the thread have veered a little towards blind alleys and red herrings – specifically over whether either the DFS or NATS are subsidised by their respective Governments – this is missing the point.
When NATS was part-privatised, the NSL (airports) side of the business was “ring fenced” to prevent NERL from being able to subsidise the NSL business (therefore making them an unfair competitor in the market). Consequently, NSL pay a significant amount of money in payment for NATS corporate overheads - making it difficult for NSL to remain competitive.

DFS is wholly owned by the German Government. There is no evidence that they are “subsidised” by the Government (just as NATS were not subsidised prior to PPP – they were, in fact, net contributors to the Treasury). However, they enjoy all the protection that being a government agency involves. The DFS provides ATC services at 4 centres and 16 major airports – it has no competition at any of these units, no other ANSP is able to compete for business there. The majority of the rest of the “smaller” airports within Germany are run by The Tower Company. A number of other airports are run by Austro Control – this is not as a result of competition but by agreement - and with the cooperation of DFS.

Effectively there is no competition within Germany for airport business – the DFS appear to hold an almost complete monopoly – ironic, considering some of the crowing on this site about breaking the “NATS monopoly”. The Tower Company are a wholly owned subsidiary of the DFS – much like NSL is to NATS. The difference is that they do not appear to be subject to the same level of “ring fencing” as NSL and are therefore not hindered by the same onerous level of corporate overheads.

NSL have always operated in a competitive environment but are to be replaced by an ANSP that enjoys a total monopoly in its own country. For those non-NATS ATCOs applauding this result, think of this – if you find competing against NSL difficult, how much easier do you think it will be to compete against the DFS/Tower Company – or whatever it decides to call its UK operation?

So my question to my MP is this: is it fair or correct that a non-UK company is allowed to bid for a major piece of UK business, apparently free to operate in a way from which our main UK provider is prevented?

As for some of the comments about NATS being “too public sector minded” and a “dinosaur” – I find this a little unfair. Do we really believe a completely government owned organisation that does not need to compete within its own national boundaries is somehow sharper and less bound to the Jurassic Era?? I do not believe this to be the case – merely that they were lucky the two previously mentioned individuals became “available”.

Over on the NATS thread somebody stated that the NSL bid team “sc”*&ed up” – maybe it needs to be investigated whether they “sc”*&ed up” or were “sc”*&ed over”.

I’ve already written to my MP – I suggest those of you who are similarly concerned do the same.

[robin]

Nicely put

Problem is the Govt doesn't give a flying f**k about UK assets transferring into the hands of foreign government-owned companies. The whole of the UK is up for sale.

Ministers just want them not to be on the public account and they really don't worry about who owns things and have got into all sorts of problems in the past. No-one in Govt knows how to write a contract for these things and that has led to some juicy scandals - not that they care

[Gonzo]

Norwegian Blue,

Assuming you work for NATS, you might want to check out the latest comments on the Gatwick news item.

[kcockayne]

LookingForAJob

I, more or less, agree with everything you say. But, I yearn for the certainty of days gone by !

Nothing that happens nowadays can be said to be favouring the overall interests of the ATCO, whether it's new technology or a more "commercial" approach.

Privatisation, Part-Privatisation ? - Not for me !

[saintex2002]

LookingForAJob.. You have PM..

[Norwegian Blue]

Thanks for the heads-up Gonzo – Obviously I hadn’t seen it before posting! However, I still stand by what I said. There is something smelly about this

Looking For a Job – Thanks, you too make your points eloquently – and I can see where you’re coming from but I have a slightly different take. Firstly, I am more than happy to accept if my conclusions are somehow incorrect – please let me know where you believe I may have erred. They were drawn from internet research and talking to contacts both within and outside the company (including a couple of contacts who have worked for DFS).

Also - this is not just "whinging" about losing a contract. This is being alarmed about the way this contract may have been handled. You rightly say that the UK market has been a competitive environment for a long time. However, we will have to agree to differ about whether NATS has received preferential treatment in the past. Personally, I don’t agree but I get where you’re coming from. Despite what many think, it has never been an easy task for NATS to acquire or protect an airport contract and we have lost as well as gained over the years (Birmingham, for example). However, the "NATS bashing" (not from your good self, I hasten to add) I do find a little irksome. Complaints are rare that, say, Airservices have preferential treatment in Australia or, likewise, the FAA in the US - or even the DFS in Germany.

You state that we have a competitive market in Europe but that is just my point. This is not actually the case. Can you imagine the furore in France or Germany if NATS were to take the contracts for CDG or FRA? My background is also not restricted to NATS and the UK – and I can assure you that such a thing would be vehemently opposed in several quarters in those countries – especially if NATS were viewed as being allowed to operate in a way from which their national providers were prohibited. ATCOs in both of these countries are not so concerned about "keeping their powder dry".

As far as staff movement is concerned – fair enough, but we are not just talking about a couple of middle managers. We are talking about the former chief executive and a managing director – I’d just like to be assured that the "timings" add up.

I sense that we probably share similar concerns about the way aviation and in particular, air navigation service provision is heading – these are challenging times. I’m one of those "dinosaurs" that feels ATC is not a fit subject for privatisation but, "hey ho", we have what we have and, as you rightly say, the World is changing. However, the "business is business" angle I see differently. Fine, if we were in a truly open and competitive market where all providers were free to operate and compete everywhere. However we are not, we are in an incredibly one-sided market – and this is where it is not just business - there are politics involved. It is, after all, politicians who created this situation in the first place!

Finally, spare a thought for our colleagues who are worried about what will be happening to them in the future – and those of us who are worried about who is next and whether this could even mean the end of NATS as an airport ANSP! I think it’s about time I thought about collecting my pension (while I still have one)!

[Mantovani]

I'm sure accountants and senior managers leave or retire from DFS & The Tower Company regularly. It's time NATS hired one or two of them.

After all as they say in Germany, Was ist sauce für die gans ist sauce für die gans. ;)

[Saintsman]

As NATS is part German owned already, why would there be a furore in Germany if they were to win contracts out there?

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<FWIW, under European-wide legal systems, individuals are normally licensed whilst organisations are certified.>>

I've now realised - Lookingforajob lacks a sense of humour! A lot of people I worked with should have been certified... but it was always the real loonies that made the best ATCOs.

[anotherthing]

Currently on leave so have not seen latest intranet re Gatwick.

If there was something illegal about DFS bid then fair enough, NATS has a point regarding appeal etc.

However if the complaint is just because DFS has a different structure re funding/costings than NATS (set up when we went through PPP) then I'm afarid we just need to suck it up.

NATS proclaims to be a World Leader in ATC... maybe the fact is that we are too complacent....

[throw a dyce]

Too expensive more like.The CTC overheads are killing NSL.:hmm:

[eglnyt]

Too expensive more like.The CTC overheads are killing NSL

A comment presumably based on detailed knowledge of the costing of the NATS Gatwick bid or perhaps just an assumption on your part.

In this case you needed a certain amount of "overhead" to be invited to bid. If price were everything and capability beyond the immediate Tower operation wasn't required it would have been a very different short list. DFS is just as capable as NATS, in some areas more capable because it hasn't been subject to quite as much pressure on costs over the last 15 years.

We don't know the details of either bid and probably never will but it is always easier for the newcomer to bid low than it is for the incumbent. The newcomer can take a loss justified on the benefit of breaking into a new market and establishing a presence whereas taking a loss just to retain existing business is a very quick way of ending up with no business at all.

[TCAS FAN]

anotherthing

"NATS proclaims to be a World Leader in ATC... "

Concorde was a World Leader in passenger flying - it failed because it was not cost effective. I believe that there is a parallel with NSL.

[Ceannairceach]

"NATS has been granted a court injunction blocking Gatwick airport chiefs from concluding a deal with German rival DFS to provide tower services."

From :

Injunction blocks German move on Gatwick | Air Traffic Management | Air Traffic Management - ATM and CMS Industry online, the latest air traffic control industry, CAA, ANSP, SESAR and NEXTGEN news, events, supplier directory and magazine (http://www.airtrafficmanagement.net/2014/10/injunction-blocks-german-move-on-gatwick/)

[Squawk 7500]

It unfortunately counts for very little. Gatwick may be forced to go through the process again, properly, but they will surely still award DFS the gig.

[T250]

Not great to bite the hand that feeds you, wonder how Gatwick Airport Limited now see NATS having sought an injunction against them for a business decision that they disagree with. It's almost childish.

[EastofKoksy]

Seems futile to me. A court might find fault in the process used to award the contract to DFS and order a re-run. However contracts can be awarded on all sorts of qualitative issues as well as objective criteria that will be decided by Gatwick not by a court. I would be very surprised if Gatwick go out of their way to admit they got it wrong!

[hangten]

Business' are not people, I don't think one taking another to court necessarily leaves the same sour grapes as if you sued your neighbour over his fence (or whatever). It's just business. I don't know the details but in theory it could be something serious like DFS being given the opportunity to change their bid after the close date on advice from Gatwick. Even if Gatwick simply don't provide NATS with enough feedback then they are able to start a legal process.

If Gatwick are forced to go through the process again then NATS can bid again and if Gatwick don't award them the contract they will have to justify to NATS why not. Virgin Trains have recently had a similar experience, this is nothing new:

BBC News - West Coast line: Branson to bid again in two years (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-27917711)

[45 before POL]

Very interesting. As a business having to rerun the contract negotiations. Gatwick have a real chance of really squeezing this deal. Let's see what curve ball comes out of this. :E

As for the gatwick controllers...I hope you get some sort of stability soon as it's the impact on you that we all hope for a positive outcome.

[Data Dad]

Full text of the High Court decision is here:

NATS (Services) Ltd v Gatwick Airport Ltd & Anor [2014] EWHC 3133 (TCC) (02 October 2014) (http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/TCC/2014/3133.html)

An interesting read - if you can wade through the legal jargon.

Thoughts are with those colleagues at Gatwick who have even more uncertainty to deal with.....

DD

[Echo123]

Thanks for the link, Data Dad.
As far as I can see, the document covers a request by NATS for an injunction to be placed on GAL preventing them going ahead with the new contract with DFS until the complaint by NATS regarding the tender process is settled by a trial in court.
It also states that if GAL win then NATS have to pay damages but if NATS win then instead of damages GAL has to award them the contract.
I can't see anything that tells me what NATS complaint about the procurement process actually is. Maybe I just missed it!

[Mantovani]

From what I understand Gatwick and DFS came to an agreement not to divulge details of their contract.

All very intriguing.

[Del Prado]

From what I understand Gatwick and DFS came to an agreement not to divulge details of their contract.

All very intriguing.

Paul Reid leading the DFS bid, Paul Barron a senior advisor to GIP, I suppose a close personal relationship would more likely lead to a lack of transparency.

[Mantovani]

Paul Reid leading the DFS bid, Paul Barron a senior advisor to GIP

Birds of a feather...

[TCAS FAN]

I see that the Safeskys website no longer invites applications for ATCOs at Aberporth, has NATS managed to retain the contract?

[Tim91]

What's the latest on this situation? It's gone very quiet, what sort of time scale do these legal battles usually pan out for?

[Rossoneri]

I don't think this legal battle will rage for too long...

[GAPSTER]

All done...non-disclosed out of court settlement,contract remains with DFS.

[vespasia]

All done...non-disclosed out of court settlement,contract remains with DFS.

Love to see where you got that info from Gapster, though I'd be very surprised given that the legal challenge revolves around more issues than the cash.....or are you just being mischievous:mad:

[Gonzo]

No, he's not being mischevious.

[vespasia]

Be nice if someone could have told us at Gatwick first then!

[Gonzo]

Check the Hub

[GAPSTER]

Ta Gonzo.

Wouldn't try to create mischief over an issue like this vespasia, my sympathies are entirely with you guys at LGW.

[ZOOKER]

Sad to hear this, especially given the identities of 2 of the individuals in the plot.
Best wishes EGKK folks.

[Topjet]

Although it's non disclosed, won't it have to show up in the annual accounts next year? If anyone is clever enough to workout under what guise it's there as.

[Ceannairceach]

After being told that we were contesting the contract as "a matter of high principle" it would appear that those same high principles are saleable, just like pretty much everything else these days.

[Nimmer]

Yep, and it is time For the Gatwick controllers to unite and negotiate themselves the best deal they can. If the planes aren't moving on the first day of the DFS take over then the proverbial hits the fan.

Stand firm boys and girls, kick prospect out, form your own union and demand mega bucks, they will pay, they have to.

Stop training new controllers, make yourselves essential. Also the closer to the take over, stop OJTI, UCE, and any other extras.

From now on when asked to do anything your first words have to be "how much"

[kcockayne]

Nimmer

Who are you kidding ?

[BigDaddyBoxMeal]

Yep, and it is time For the Gatwick controllers to unite and negotiate themselves the best deal they can. If the planes aren't moving on the first day of the DFS take over then the proverbial hits the fan.

Stand firm boys and girls, kick prospect out, form your own union and demand mega bucks, they will pay, they have to.

Stop training new controllers, make yourselves essential. Also the closer to the take over, stop OJTI, UCE, and any other extras.

From now on when asked to do anything your first words have to be "how much"

Why do it just because NATS have lost the contract?

What's to stop Swanwick, Aberdeen, Heathrow or Wattisham doing the same? Or Ibiza, Valencia, Seville, Alicante?

[eglnyt]

What's to stop Swanwick, Aberdeen, Heathrow or Wattisham doing the same? Or Ibiza, Valencia, Seville, Alicante?

What stops controllers at Spanish towers doing the same thing is an interesting bit of Spanish law which makes it illegal.

[Nimmer]

Kcockayne agree mate, but it's a good idea. If only!!!!

[kcockayne]

Nimmer

I'm totally with you but, I can't ever see it happening !

[Gonzo]

Nimmer,

Why 'kick Prospect out' when they seem to have been pretty effective at Birmingham?

[Brumbrum]

'Why 'kick Prospect out' when they seem to have been pretty effective at Birmingham?'

Where are you getting your info? Certainly not the feeling at the unit.

If I was at Gatwick I'd be worried.

[Mantovani]

The staff at Gatwick should certainly make it abundantly clear that unless their T&Cs including pensions are guaranteed for the length of the DFS contract then it will be an extremely rocky road.

Actions speak louder than words and they should start the negotiations with a bang and let the new management know they mean business.

[N90-EWR]

Reading this thread makes me dread ATC privatization. I never thought I'd be saying this, but I rather have the FAA as my employer than any private company.

[Crazy Voyager]

I always find it funny that in Europe politicans are saying that privatisation is great. It will save costs and make the market more efficent.

Another thing that is very popular is comparing the European ATC system to the US system. The US system is often listed as having higher productivity and a lower cost base (although I believe ATC delays are higher than in Europe).

However, the US ATC system is run by the FAA, a goverment agency. If the US system is so good, why was the European system privatised?


I think however there's a fundamental error above, I'm trying to apply logic to politicans :ugh:

[Mantovani]

As far as I am aware only the UK has privatised their air traffic control. The rest of European ATC is run by governments.

Consequently there are a stupid number of centres in Europe. Even in the UK we have two. I've lost count of how many the French have.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

N90-EWR... wise words. IMHO the worst thing that happened here was privatisation of the ATC service.

[Mantovani]

The pre-privatisation National Air Traffic Services may have been good for the Air Traffic Controllers but the now privatised NATS has delivered reductions in costs to the airlines which in turn benefits Joe Public all without compromising safety.

I know it's trendy to knock the privatisation of Government bodies but no one at NATS is starving and the customers are getting a better deal.

[ZOOKER]

"Even in the UK we have two"

And what a good thing that is.

[samotnik]

Mantovani, what is the real difference between a single ACC centre manned by 300 ATCOs, compared to two ACCs manned by 150 ATCOs each?

Yes, politicians are telling us that we should have as few "ATC centers" as Americans do, but they forget to mention that the job has to be done, tin pushed through no matter how we organise it.

[Mantovani]

The overheads: buildings maintenance, management, support staff, support services, means it costs more to run two centres than it does to run one.

Of course any ATC centre needs a backup in case of a catastrophic event but the Prestwick centre could not handle the Swanwick business and visa versa.

That may well change should NATS's management ever realise their dream of virtualisation but that is some years off yet and way off the original topic.

[ZOOKER]

All those people involved in building maintenance, support services, etc...
So, you put them out of work........
The non-starving ATCO's left have to pay more tax to subsidise the 'dole-money' for the folks who are now unemployed.
How would you sort the salaries out for a single U.K. centre, bearing in mind that Swanwick and Prestwick ATCOs/ATSAs are are on different salary scales?...For doing the same job.
"Virtualisation". That's a new word added to my vocabulary. Today has not been wasted after all.
P.S.......What does it mean? :E

[Mantovani]

Virtualisation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtualization)

By now everyone who works for NATS should have had a briefing on this new golden dawn.

It's the next big thing.

[ZOOKER]

Wot, like 'Tunnels In The sky' (CCF), 'ODID' 'CASPIAN' and 'Destinations'?

[Mantovani]

No. Virtualisation is a technology. It's already in use in other industries and NATS now wants to use it in ATC.

This is way off topic. I apologise.

[ZOOKER]

Is this why EGKK are going for the DFS option then?

Phew !...Nicely back on track.

[Nimmer]

Don't apologise, tell us more, I am intrigued!!!

[terrain safe]

Virtualisation

By now everyone who works for NATS should have had a briefing on this new golden dawn.

It's the next big thing.

Not heard a dickie bird about it. Mind you it would be cock all use in a VCR unless we're going to get all Minority Report about it. But then life doesn't exist outside centres does it.

[GAPSTER]

Don't say anything to Nimmer....he's using his fishing rod again:}

[DC10RealMan]

I am so glad that I am retired.

[Nimmer]

I am not fishing, I have put my rod away for December!!!

[250 kts]

I am not fishing, I have put my rod away for December!!!

Have a look at ATCOS.co.uk Public Site (http://www.atcos.co.uk) and you may find a statement on what a good deal Prospect did for the Birmingham controllers. You need to be a Prospect member to get access I believe.

[TCAS FAN]

A possible consolation prize for NATS, I hear that the Aberporth & Ranges contract is to be renewed by QinetiQ. Hard luck Safeskys, coming back for more in seven years time? Enjoy Llanbedr!

[chevvron]

And meanwhile, Qinetiq are looking to make more use of Llanbedr under Safeskys after closing it several years ago when it was SERCO.

[TCAS FAN]

Blwyddyn newydd dda Chevvron

My post #9 on the Llanbedr Airfield thread indicates how successful QQ have been to date with that current pie (unmanned of course) in the sky.

At least NATS have kept the Ranges contract, with West Wales Airport Watchkeeper UAVs apparently providing most of their current and foreseeable future business.

[chevvron]

Sorry don't speak old Cornwellian, could you translate?.

[25 DME FIX]

Blwyddyn newydd dda Chevvron = Happy New Year Chevvron! From across the water in God's Country.


I think that the writer was passing you a greeting, no need for the sarcasm.

[Mantovani]

Thought this thread was about NATS losing the Gatwick contract...

Haven't had any proper debate or update on the actual topic at hand for a while

The update is after losing the Gatwick contract NATS management have decided that NSL needs is a drastic reduction in their cost base.

Things are going to get very interesting over the next year or so.

[Squawk 7500]

It will be very interesting indeed. Although, I believe the cost reductions will be mostly coming from support services rather than the operational side of things. All part of the contract price though.

[Mantovani]

The bit of the email that surprised me was the mentioning of new T&Cs.

New T&Cs never easy to get through but NATS management must be encouraged by the lack of fight shown by the staff when they rushed through the last pension scheme changes.

[hangten]

I believe the cost reductions will be mostly coming from support services

What's your basis for this belief?

[Angels-One-Five]

But the pension scheme change were on a 'you keep yours, we're asking you to shaft the new guy'

Might be a bit different if people are asked to change their T&Cs. Since recruitment is all but frozen I can't see much point in changing T&Cs just for new starters.

[Squawk 7500]

Hangten,

That's the answer given to me by the union after the email was sent out

[250 kts]

But the pension scheme change were on a 'you keep yours, we're asking you to shaft the new guy'

Not sure they're "shafted" when the company is still contributing up to 18%. A colleague of mine is on the new scheme and his fund is predicting over £1m on retirement and he joined in his late 20s.

[Squawk 7500]

'Predicting £1m' but a market crash could wipe out the vast majority of a pot a few years prior to retirement. On the flip side - invest in the right funds and manage the account well and it could easily outperform that estimate. It's all a gamble, but it ain't secure. Then again, it seems the DB scheme might not be for much longer...

[TCAS FAN]

What is the current state of play with transfer of the ANSP to DFS?

[Conspiracy Theories]

The current state of play i think is that ANS has offered the DC scheme as well as a very competitive wage. Some would say just as good as the previous service provider.
Does anyone have a clue about the out of court settlement NATS received to back off?

[Marvo]

As an Orange mini bus driver, can I ask if the tower controllers at EGKK will remain or will they be replaced? Whilst on airport standby a few of us pilots were chatting and a quick straw poll voted the Gatwick team the best in the UK (We've never been to LHR). Managing a single strip of Tarmac as well as they do is no easy task. Fingers crossed for all of the LGW tower team. Summer 2016 will be carnage if many of them leave.

[Ratatat]

Some are staying and transferring to the new provider.
The rest will stay on at Gatwick as employees of NATS for a period that will be agreed between the incoming and outgoing providers and then they will retire or get posted to another NATS unit as and when new recruits are trained and validated.
Summer 16 staffing levels will be fine.

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

Out of curiousity, what date do NATs leave the Tower at Gatwick?

[T250]

The transition date is from 0001 on Tuesday 1st March.

Originally meant to be in October 2015, however pushed back due to legal action between NATS and GAL (Gatwick Airport Ltd), initiated by NATS over how the contract was rewarded. Apparently this was settled out of court.

[118.70]

BBC Surrey tweets :

TRAVEL: #Gatwick (https://twitter.com/hashtag/Gatwick?src=hash): Some arriving & departing flights are being delayed by up to 20 minutes due to Air Traffic Control staffing issues

I wonder what that's all about .

[Occams Razor]

BBC Surrey tweets :

TRAVEL: #Gatwick (https://twitter.com/hashtag/Gatwick?src=hash): Some arriving & departing flights are being delayed by up to 20 minutes due to Air Traffic Control staffing issues

I wonder what that's all about .
Eurocontrol Network Ops Portal says there have been delays at Luton, Stansted and Gatwick due to ATC staffing issues. No AAVAs today at Swanwick?

[Not Long Now]

Got to love LAMP. Just wait till summer schedules kick in.

[zonoma]

Kick in? Splutter in, if they can find a gap!!

[ZOOKER]

Chatting to a colleague from Swan Wick recently............Hinted they may be 50+ ATCOs short this summer.
If true, how has this happened?

[T250]

Short of ATCOs at Stansted too if the external recruitment drive is anything to go by? What's going on :bored:

[Nimmer]

Short of ATCOs at Stansted too if the external recruitment drive is anything to go by? What's going on :bored:

I think NATS may have let too many controllers go on VR!! When the numbers were announced a few of us mentioned that we may struggle this summer, off course what do we know!! It's not even summer traffic levels yet, watch this space!,

[Not Long Now]

Give lots of people VR and stop recruiting because somebody in an office has done a study which says we have more than enough staff for today. Be a little surprised when several staff retire, a few lose their medicals, get pregnant, leave anyway...Oh, and then change the airspace so you need lots more staff. What's that? Traffic levels are expected to rise? But nobody told us....

[anotherthing]

Zooker,

We will not be 50+ controllers short. Probably half that.

Interestingly when the VR was announced a couple of years ago the (now) CEO attended a watch meeting. I asked him (and this is the best recollection of the question) "Given NATS' previous inability to predict required staff numbers, are you happy that the amount of people being released on VR is sensible? Then went on to explain that I started at NATS we had shiftwork in the college, my course had about 60 people as we were so short of controllers and someone panicked. No one thought that if the same ration of people passed out of the college then there would not be enough resource to train them at the units. 3 months later half the course was held over!

In his answer Mr Rolfe acknowledged past mistakes but assured us that the number crunching was correct.

So now we are short of people and traffic is going to grow at a greater rate over the next few years.

The next train crash will be when the current crop of controllers in their mid forties retire... there is a huge number in that age bracket...

[Spambhoy]

Zooker,

We will not be 50+ controllers short. Probably half that.

Interestingly when the VR was announced a couple of years ago the (now) CEO attended a watch meeting. I asked him (and this is the best recollection of the question) "Given NATS' previous inability to predict required staff numbers, are you happy that the amount of people being released on VR is sensible? Then went on to explain that I started at NATS we had shiftwork in the college, my course had about 60 people as we were so short of controllers and someone panicked. No one thought that if the same ration of people passed out of the college then there would not be enough resource to train them at the units. 3 months later half the course was held over!

In his answer Mr Rolfe acknowledged past mistakes but assured us that the number crunching was correct.

So now we are short of people and traffic is going to grow at a greater rate over the next few years.

The next train crash will be when the current crop of controllers in their mid forties retire... there is a huge number in that age bracket...

Word is, Glasgow,Aberdeen and Southampton contracts have been agreed and signed ( for how many years or an extension to the current I don't know ). Another NATS NSL "top team" member is about to bite the dust and Edinburgh looks likely to follow Birmingham and Gatwick. NSL are on a shaky peg having allowed too many airport engineers , in addition to the controllers, to leave under VR as well.

Somebody knows what they are doing, not.

[terrain safe]

I believe that NSL management don't have a clue about anything. I asked management 4 years ago why we weren't recruiting when it was quiet, so that when it got busy NATS was ahead of the game. The response was along lines that we don't need any more staff despite me seeing this happen for the third time in my years in NATS. Personally, I think NSL has a maximum of 5 years. All the contracts we lose are because of the 'overheads'. That's all the massive amount of management that we have to carry. Company is F@[]ed.

[chevvron]

That's all the massive amount of management that we have to carry. Company is F@[]ed.
When I visited Whitely back in 2008 at a weekend for sim training, the route to the sims took me past several areas with desks mounted with PCs as far as the eye could see. I wondered who they were for and what the occupants actually did.

[Del Prado]

Does 'just culture' extend to management?

[obwan]

Having made several visits there over the last few months, I can report back that most ATCOs are still unsure


I would imagine that the workers at Whitely, like the admin. and support staff at any large organisation do an excellent job keeping the wheels turning for the rest of us. I am also equally sure that they do not enjoy the "early go" perks which seem to be regarded as a right by the operational staff.

[Spambhoy]

[QUOTE=obwan;9337866]Having made several visits there over the last few months, I can report back that most ATCOs are still unsure


I would imagine that the workers at Whitely, like the admin. and support staff at any large organisation do an excellent job keeping the wheels turning for the rest of us. I am also equally sure that they do not enjoy the "early go" perks which seem to be regarded as a right by the operational staff.

In fairness, I appreciate what you are saying, but, for obvious reasons, their salary scales make VR and "early gos" unattractive.

I wholeheartedly agree that their contribution, to the bigger picture, is very much appreciated.

[ZOOKER]

The staffing thing is not a new phenomenon. Somewhere, in the archives, i have a letter, dated mid-late 1980s, asking if I would be interested in VR/early retirement, or whatever it was called back then. It was signed by the same gentleman, (nice chap actually), who had been one of the 3 ATCOs on my 'final selection board' about 8 years previously.
The present problems stem partially from the 1970s 'oil-crisis', and the present top-down/tail-wagging-the dog staffing structure which was partially engineered by 'Red'.

[terrain safe]

Early Go? What's that? Doesn't exist any more at many airports. Bit like a responsibility free break really.

[Spambhoy]

Early Go? What's that? Doesn't exist any more at many airports. Bit like a responsibility free break really.

You're wrong. 5 early go's in the Scottish central belt in the last 3 years, in airports. Management have no easier decision than "writing off" a big salary against the "pay off". It's a no brainier. What the, so called, numpties in charge are now doing is ( rather worryingly), let's try this and see what happens. It's a risk strategy, in a safety critical environment, that can only end one way. Sadly, that involves every other member of the travelling community.

Whilst I have no desire to return to the havoc of the eighties, it's more or less inevitable that we are heading in that fateful direction.

[ZOOKER]

I remember having 5 'EG's in one cycle.

[kcockayne]

I remember having 5 'EG's in one cycle.

What about the "not bother to turn up in the first place". Never mind EGS!

[Minesthechevy]

IIRC the official terminology was that you were rostered for Sector 8........

[obwan]

IIRC the official terminology was that you were rostered for Sector 8........



Much better organisation. I remember going in for afternoon duty at 1400 and being sent home at 1430, complete waste of an afternoon. Indicative of the current level of management I'd say. pip pip

[3miles]

I believe that NSL management don't have a clue about anything. I asked management 4 years ago why we weren't recruiting when it was quiet, so that when it got busy NATS was ahead of the game. The response was along lines that we don't need any more staff despite me seeing this happen for the third time in my years in NATS. Personally, I think NSL has a maximum of 5 years. All the contracts we lose are because of the 'overheads'. That's all the massive amount of management that we have to carry. Company is F@[]ed.

Or the massive amount of cost we carry paying moaning ATCOS, on early goes, extra supplements for just being alive all of which don't exist at non Nats units. If your prediction comes right, you'll be able to see the difference when you no longer working for the fxxxxx company...remember a company is everyone not just a select few, and while I agree their is dross always in all areas that probably could do with a good kicking out...the it's not me attitude doesn't make a successful company. You'll probably find that actually most Manager's you refer to are only earning as much as an ATSA 4.

[terrain safe]

3 miles. You really don't have a clue. Early go? At my unit we don't get them except for one shift where you might get away 30 mins early very occasionally (Bit like Friday afternoon. :)). I have worked beyond the end of my shift many times as well, as the wheels fell off again, but I got nothing for it, but I care about the people I work with and giving my very best.

Extra supplements? Only one we get is for working shifts and bank holidays. That is the same for everyone, even the units that close over Christmas or New Year, so not massive. Non-NATS airfields are a comparable salary to mine.

The Manager I was referring to was the head of HR. The only other one I deal with is the Unit GM and they earn more than me or an ATSA 4.

Just remember the moaning ATCOs do work hard, and if I work for another company so what. I started outside NATS, I still got paid, and had the usual management BS. Plus ce change. (apologies for the appalling French)

[3miles]

3 miles. You really don't have a clue. Early go? At my unit we don't get them except for one shift where you might get away 30 mins early very occasionally (Bit like Friday afternoon. :)). I have worked beyond the end of my shift many times as well, as the wheels fell off again, but I got nothing for it, but I care about the people I work with and giving my very best.

Extra supplements? Only one we get is for working shifts and bank holidays. That is the same for everyone, even the units that close over Christmas or New Year, so not massive. Non-NATS airfields are a comparable salary to mine.

The Manager I was referring to was the head of HR. The only other one I deal with is the Unit GM and they earn more than me or an ATSA 4.

Just remember the moaning ATCOs do work hard, and if I work for another company so what. I started outside NATS, I still got paid, and had the usual management BS. Plus ce change. (apologies for the appalling French)

My 4 ratings say I do have a clue - along with the comments the airport customer make. OJTI, UCE, AAVA, UHP, TOIL, lunchen voucher(payment now) and now gone but home to duty. Interestingly how many times have you called your GM in the evening, weekends etc...and just remember who the safety accountability also sits with and would equally be in court should something go wrong, of course there always one option if you don't like management choices become one instead and make the changes you think should be.

[EastofKoksy]

Fat finger!

[chevvron]

I think NATS may have let too many controllers go on VR!! When the numbers were announced a few of us mentioned that we may struggle this summer, off course what do we know!! It's not even summer traffic levels yet, watch this space!,
More likely NATS miscalculated the number opting to stay with the 'new' ANSPs at Birmingham, Gatwick and Edinburgh.

NATS HR Dept always seem to operate in cloud-cuckoo land, assuming the offers they make to existing staff to be irresistible.
Both myself and talkdownman have personal experience of this.

[AyrTC]

Now that it appears common knowledge that allegedly NATS lite ( NSL not NSL ) 🤔 have won the Gatwick ATC contract I thought it would be interesting to resurrect this thread to review the comments. As mentioned earlier on the ATC COVID thread “discuss”😎
Rgds
AyrTC

[escaped.atco]

Nats lite? Would that also be known as the Solutions brand? Wonder how long it'll take for the takeover to complete, should be done and dusted by the summer from their previous experience. I wish the staff at LGW all the very best of luck. They'll need it.

[Packer27L]

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.....

NATS Solutions (aka “NATS lite”) contract starting in 18 months (Oct22). No explanation given by ANS to staff but the suspicion is they overcharged and under delivered on projects and staff numbers.....so I am told.

Good luck to all those involved, I do miss the place sometimes.

[chevvron]

Now that it appears common knowledge that NATS lite ( NSL not NSL ) 🤔 have won the Gatwick ATC contract I thought it would be interesting to resurrect this thread to review the comments. As mentioned earlier on the ATC COVID thread “discuss”😎
Rgds
AyrTC
:D:ok:
Did Safeskys not bid for it then?:E
(Gisajobs successors don't seem to be interested in ATC contracts)
Wonder what effect this will have on the potential contract for a certain airfield in Kent.

[mike current]

Wonder what effect this will have on the potential contract for a certain airfield in Kent.

The overflow lorry park?

I think that will continue to be its main function..

[Buster the Bear]

Is this the slippery slope for all NATS airport contracts? NATS Solutions to bid at renewal?

[chevvron]

The overflow lorry park?

I think that will continue to be its main function..
Riveroak apparently hope to re-open in about May 2022; they'll need all that time to 'de-contaminate' (probably re-surface) the runway from all that oil dripped by lorries on the surface.

[250 kts]

There is a serious danger of a domino effect now. If other airport operators see the likes of Gatwick being bid for and won by NATS solutions, then why wouldn't they want the same? Serious stuff and Prospect will have their work cut out over the next few months.

[Gonzo]

I don’t think anyone should be surprised by this, least of all by the fact that ‘full fat’ NSL didn’t bid.

Wasn’t it admitted as part of the ‘launch’ of Solutions that any further contract tender where NSL was not the incumbent would see a Solutions bid?

[mike current]

What are the differences between an NSL and a Solutions contract in practical terms for the staff?
The final salary pension no longer applies to new contracts anyway, so there's no difference there.

[Gonzo]

Different pay scales, so one could argue it’s more of an issue for anyone joining the unit after the takeover, who won’t be TUPE’d.

[escaped.atco]

The LGW contract will be an interesting one. In theory they should have retained their NATS original Terms & Conditions when they were transferred to ANS, if so it should be a straightforward process to TUPE again back into the NATS brand albeit under the Solutions name. There may well be lots of things that older staff members did under NATS, continued to do under ANS and will again continue to do under Solutions. I've heard a variety of rumours that the LGW staff had in some cases negotiated better Terms & Conditions for certain practises that they had under NATS originally - fair play to them for doing so - it'll be interesting to see if NATS are happy to let that continue or will they try and bring them back to standard practise. The NATS handbook will no longer apply in lots of areas, the ANS handbook will be what they have used and should be what is brought with them. In reality I'm sure NATS will want them aligned as closely as possible to the real NATS. Pay scales, not sure how they have diverged over the time they have been with ANS, they will have to fight for their own pay deals rather than getting a blanket deal that Prospect has agreed for real NATS. NATSAGs, if theres been any new ones in the last few years they wont apply to Solutions.

Having reread through this thread, there was a lot of talk about NATS arrogance and how this was contributory to losing the contract in the first place. What has changed??? I believe LGW were short staffed and struggling to get trainees through, or happily chopping them if rumours were to be believed to prove a point! NATS have no trainees in the college at present, I understand prospect wont allow real NATS staff to go work for a Solutions unit so where are they going to get recruits from?

As the Solutions model gets used more, the large standard NATS Terms and Conditions normal package is going to get fragmented and diluted as different airports will be using different handbooks and practises etc. That group bargaining power will soon disappear, interesting times ahead.