NATS Lose Gatwick Contract (Split thread)
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: looking out of the window
Posts: 554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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?
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?
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Southern England
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Southern England
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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".
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".
Last edited by ZOOKER; 19th Jul 2014 at 22:04.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: On a foreign shore trying a new wine diet. So far, I've lost 3days!
Age: 75
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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".
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".
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: England
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The race to the bottom (line) accelerates. 
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.
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.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
awarded the contract to the German DFS which won’t allow UK companies to bid for ATC contracts in their country.
THere are non DFS Towers in Germany.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Southern England
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.