NATS training bond VS Airline Bond
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chester
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NATS training bond VS Airline Bond
As a UK cadet pilot to gain a type rating over 20 Months and owe £100,000 (unpaid throughout). Typically repaid over seven years
As a NATS controller my understanding is that you are paid and are bonded for three years after your three year training course ends? Can someone please advise how much you are bonded for?
As a NATS controller my understanding is that you are paid and are bonded for three years after your three year training course ends? Can someone please advise how much you are bonded for?
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Earthville
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No idea on figures but as far as I know you only have to pay NATS if you quit before the time period is up. If you are removed from training or validate and don't leave (why would you?) then again you don't owe anything. So it works differently to pilot training schemes.
I stand to be corrected by anybody with more accurate info though.
I stand to be corrected by anybody with more accurate info though.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because people were taking advantage of the system, as I'm sure you know Zooker. They'd sign the mobility agreement in full knowledge that they would only stay in NATS if they got unit X, complete the rating course, be sent to anywhere other than X, and so leave the company to work outside of NATS near to unit X, so presenting that unit with a 'free' trainee, who may have even approached validation at their original NATS unit to make themselves more employable.
NATS decided to take steps to prevent that happening. Can't blame them.
NATS decided to take steps to prevent that happening. Can't blame them.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Home away from home
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The NATS bond is 2 fold.
On completion of your basic training (when you get your first student rating) at the college you are bonded for 3 years, the bond drops by £1000 per month, so is a maximum of £36k if you quit directly after your student course.
On validation the second part kicks in which is the same thing again, drops by £1k per month for 3 years, so three years after validation your bond is gone.
If your training is terminated at any point the bond does not apply. Also all the above is from memory so there may be errors!
On completion of your basic training (when you get your first student rating) at the college you are bonded for 3 years, the bond drops by £1000 per month, so is a maximum of £36k if you quit directly after your student course.
On validation the second part kicks in which is the same thing again, drops by £1k per month for 3 years, so three years after validation your bond is gone.
If your training is terminated at any point the bond does not apply. Also all the above is from memory so there may be errors!
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Dorset
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because people were taking advantage of the system, as I'm sure you know Zooker. They'd sign the mobility agreement in full knowledge that they would only stay in NATS if they got unit X, complete the rating course, be sent to anywhere other than X, and so leave the company to work outside of NATS near to unit X, so presenting that unit with a 'free' trainee, who may have even approached validation at their original NATS unit to make themselves more employable.
NATS decided to take steps to prevent that happening. Can't blame them.
NATS decided to take steps to prevent that happening. Can't blame them.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: USA
Age: 66
Posts: 2,183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Zooker
I for one was happy to see bonding.
It was a complete PITA to have a trainee arrive...have the full attention of the OJT's and the rest of the team....getting them up to validation (with all the heart ache that that can attract) only for them to bugger off to a non state airfield as a proven entity.
Glad they are bonded...should have happened ages ago.
I for one was happy to see bonding.
It was a complete PITA to have a trainee arrive...have the full attention of the OJT's and the rest of the team....getting them up to validation (with all the heart ache that that can attract) only for them to bugger off to a non state airfield as a proven entity.
Glad they are bonded...should have happened ages ago.
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: UK
Age: 44
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm in the pro bonding camp also. I am bound under it. But have no issues with it. I applied to NATS. They accepted me, and gave me a posting.
They deserve some return on their investment.
They deserve some return on their investment.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: behind the fruit
Posts: 233
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They deserve some return on their investment.
They don't employ you out of charity!!
If they had found a way to do without ATCOs or to pay us half of what they do, they would have already done so!
They say less than 2% of applicants go on to validate, yet they see you as a cost/liability rather than an asset.
Wake up and smell the Costa* Coffee
*Swanwick branch
Rant over. Merry Christmas
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: UK
Age: 44
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LEGAL TENDER
Of course they don't employ us through charity. But they also aren't a charity or non profit organisation. It wouldn't be good business to keep losing your 'assets' to competitors. I'm sure you would agree.
We are all too aware of cost saving measures, to the detriment of our colleagues and our own terms and conditions. But if the likes of this bond were not in place, and the ATCOs were to continue walking out the door once they get their ticket. Would we not be in a worse place than we already are?
Granted it might cut down numbers and costs, but the majority of airports are running on bare bones as it is!
The bond keeps staff. Simples!
Of course they don't employ us through charity. But they also aren't a charity or non profit organisation. It wouldn't be good business to keep losing your 'assets' to competitors. I'm sure you would agree.
We are all too aware of cost saving measures, to the detriment of our colleagues and our own terms and conditions. But if the likes of this bond were not in place, and the ATCOs were to continue walking out the door once they get their ticket. Would we not be in a worse place than we already are?
Granted it might cut down numbers and costs, but the majority of airports are running on bare bones as it is!
The bond keeps staff. Simples!
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Home away from home
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are several ANSPs that will either not pay your or even have you pay for your ATC training, I'd rather have a bond and a basic salary (even though it is very low) than have to pay for my training and not be bonded.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Around
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would there be anything to be gained by NSL recruiting for each airport individually, the same way non-NATS units do? That way the problem of junior ATCOs sat fuming at the opposite end of the country to where they want to be, ready to jump ship at the first opportunity, would be reduced. Not sure how recruitment for LTCC, LL and KK might fit in to that model, but is it worth considering?
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You would still need to coordinate the recruitment centrally so that you had enough trainees for a course.
I think the mobile grade serves as a test of your resolve to join Nats and become a controller. They dont seem to struggle for applicants and I dont see a problem in paying the company back for the investment they make in you. If after that period you leave then so be it, but at least the company has had some return on the initial investment.
I think the mobile grade serves as a test of your resolve to join Nats and become a controller. They dont seem to struggle for applicants and I dont see a problem in paying the company back for the investment they make in you. If after that period you leave then so be it, but at least the company has had some return on the initial investment.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Around
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The company could have 40-odd years of return on its investment if people were happy where they were. As for the 'test of resolve', they're not applying to join a monastery.
I don't see any need for centrally coordinated recruitment, at least not for regional airports.
Unit identifies upcoming vacancy -> Unit recruits someone, perhaps one of the assistants at that unit -> Unit books that person onto the next available Basic & ADI course at CATC or Cwmbran.
I don't see any need for centrally coordinated recruitment, at least not for regional airports.
Unit identifies upcoming vacancy -> Unit recruits someone, perhaps one of the assistants at that unit -> Unit books that person onto the next available Basic & ADI course at CATC or Cwmbran.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bonding is a fair cop whenever training is provided gratis imho. The ANSP is paying for the trainee to learn certain skills, without a return on that outlay why would ANSP's bother?
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Middle Earth
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you broke the contract they could easily take you to court and win! You would probably land up paying paying the legal and collection fees on top of the training bond also.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: behind the fruit
Posts: 233
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The bond keeps staff. Simples!
