Any news on the Birmingham ANSP
 

Thought today was D-Day as far as contracts were concerned.

With the effort gone into the new tower it would be a shame if NATS lost it but I understand it was looking dicey.

Anyone know anything more?

Gone back out to tender.Although the in house option is favourite with Serco as partners.A bit like the Fire Service partnership a few years back.

I can't envisage any sane NATS employees willing to work for SERCO, so where will SERCO be getting their staff from?

Now there's a novel idea...............:}

I imagine there will be no shortage of folks from the larger non-NATS airports willing to head to Brum for decent money - that's certainly what I've heard from my colleagues who've had interviews already. On the other hand, those current staff who are settled in the area with families will probably want to stay (as well as those who realise that if this change of contract is successful then there's no point in moving because there will be no 'safe' NSL locations to go to anyway).

Where is your information from?

The tendering process has been completed, so I can't imagine that it has gone out to tender again unless BHX management have moved the goalposts and changed their idea of what they want.
NATS have a year left (should they not win the contract) which means any additional tendering process would result in a significant delay (it's a slow process) and, I'm sure someone with more knowledge about these things will correct me, NATS being able to walk away at the end of their tenure, thereby leaving BHX up a creek.

radar707,

I remember when MAG were playing particularly hardball with NATS at the last contract negotiation. Some of us asked our managers why didn't NATS just call MAG's bluff and walk,knowing full well it would have left Manchester up a creek. Unfortunately (or fortunately, depends on your viewpoint I guess!) there are apparently clauses when these contracts are signed that in the event of a non renewal of a subsequent contract, there are mechanisms in place to prevent one side shafting the other. For example, the training of new controllers would potentially have to be provided by the outgoing ANSP so that when D-Day arrives, ATC provision doesn't come to a grinding halt for X months whilst the ANSP gets their staff trained up and validated.

Similarly, an agreement would be made regarding equipment and even things like MATS2 and other legal documents.


This is what we were told anyway....

mhk77, isn't that what the 1 year notice period is for? My understanding was that a decision needed to be made 1 year before end of contract to allow for such an eventuality. Therefore if they are restarting the tendering process (which takes around 6 months) they are shooting themselves in the foot as NATS can surely walk away or turn round and say "if you want another 6 months then it's gonna cost you £x,xxx,xxx)

As for the documentation NATS would simply sell the MATS2 to them for a price.

I have heard that official announcement will be made to staff tomorrow lunchtime, as yet NATS have not been informed of the decision and will be told tomorrow morning.

Bye NATS.....

Training your replacements, now there is a lovely job!!!! I would probably fail a few to be honest!!!

I've no doubt that some of the replacements (should replacements be required) won't make the required standards, just as some NATS people don't make the required standards :\:\

Do the individual controllers have to train?

There is no obligation to train. Thats a bridge that would need to be crossed if required.

I remember when NATS were attempting to train their replacements at Boscombe Down. Come D-day, not a single one had reached validation standard, so the RAF just went in and did it their own way which, as it was an MOD regulated airfield, they could do. Course it was a bit slow and chaotic for the first few weeks.

If NATS loses the contract for Birmingham (or any other airport for that matter) then the only ones to blame imho are the company's very most senior managers.

Could I venture a suggestion? Maybe Birmingham secretly don't want SERCO as the 'favoured bidder' otherwise I'm sure a decision would have been made by now. Out of the only 3 ANSPs in the UK, perhaps Birmingham are awaiting the outcome of the Gibraltar contract bids, and if Safeskys win that then they will have the credibility to become ANSP for Birmingham, then who knows? Coventry? Cardiff?

What an utterly pathetic thing to say. If NATS does lose the contract it won't be any potential new trainee's fault so why take it out on them? Lets hope you are not an OJTI at TC since you clearly lack the required professionalism.

Not surprised you're 'Lookingforajob' if you can only make such pathetic remarks.
NATS: Used to be run by ATCOs but now run by managers selected from outside the aviation world who know little about the profession.
SERCO: Run by accountants who couldn't care a toss.
Safeskys: Run by an ex controller who just wants to provide a decent service.
NB: I am NATS (Retd) and now a FISO not employed by Safeskys.

Grapevine rustlings suggest NATS lost the Birmingham contract today, can anyone confirm?

Confirmed. Official channels, not grapevine.