Republic announces order of 80 Bombardier C-Seriers Aircraft

Re: Republic announces order of 80 Bombardier C-Seriers Airc

What I'm wondering is how long we'll hear "Republic, Midwest, and Frontier" all in the same sentence. Correct me if I am wrong please, but essentially, they are taking 3 airlines and making them one new, larger airline. Correct?

Maybe I'm just too much of an optimist, but I see this as a potential awesome oppertunity for the RAH pilots to get a huge boost in pay/QOL. Of course, much easier said than done.
 
Re: Republic announces order of 80 Bombardier C-Seriers Airc

What I'm wondering is how long we'll hear "Republic, Midwest, and Frontier" all in the same sentence. Correct me if I am wrong please, but essentially, they are taking 3 airlines and making them one new, larger airline. Correct?

Maybe I'm just too much of an optimist, but I see this as a potential awesome oppertunity for the RAH pilots to get a huge boost in pay/QOL. Of course, much easier said than done.

I can see it now.

"Come visit our Republic's Midwest Frontier!"



Anyway, time will tell if this RAH stuff is good or bad, right now it leans toward bad, but a new contract could tell a different story.
 
Re: Republic announces order of 80 Bombardier C-Seriers Airc

Better than being on the streets, huh?

;)

Depends I guess. Especially on how you define "...being on the street." Some of us furloughed guys are not doing all that bad financially right now, and by some people's definition we are "on the street," but we're certainly not unemployed.

So, either on the street means no job at all, or it means - in pilot speak - out of a flying job, or out of an airline flying job.

35 x 75 = $2625 a month.

Annual comes out to $31500.

If it were me, I'd much rather continue spending my time away from a company that tops out pay at $35 a year while writing forecasts for 70-75k a year.

But hey - that's me.

Some people just have to fly.

I care how much money I make. I'm greedy like that. I'm not trying to just make it, I'm trying to make as much money as I can for numerous reasons. Obviously though, if your definition of on the street is the clear "unemployed" definition - then sure, a job that tops out at 35 an hour is beautiful. But when you have options and other skills, well - you have options and you don't have to yourself out to another regional operator.

Then again, I'm not aware of any company regional operator that really maxes out at $35 an hour. For FO maybe, but many of us don't plan on being career FOs at a regional. So, don't take what was said about a company topping out at 35 too personally.
 
Re: Republic announces order of 80 Bombardier C-Seriers Airc

It's a gear handle. GOSH!

I thought it was a pizza cutter until you said that. :) I got the three stripes, but I was always thinking "Why, Joe? Why a PIZZA CUTTER?"


What's Republic's current contract on flying an aircraft without a pay rate? The C series is essentially a 737 as far as seat count if memory serves me correctly, and right now the operation is capped at 99 seats on the pay rate. Much as that burns me up, but it seems RAH management is as creative as 9E's in finding loopholes in the existing CBA. I know our contract was EXTREMELY weak language as far as flying new airplanes. It simply says the two sides will "meet" on new pay rates. No set date on when the pay rates have to be fixed, and no language that would keep the company from just paying whatever to get them flying.

2015 is a long way away, and the C series is more or less a paper airplane for now. Anyone can have aircraft "on order." It's the aviation equivalent of buying oil futures, as Polar pointed out. Contract negotiations have taken on a very disheartening shade in the past couple of years. ASA was in negotiations for an eternity, and they need a more or less nuclear option to get a deal done. Pinnacle is looking at STILL negotiating for theirs when ASA starts RE-NEGOTIATING theirs. Needless to say, I don't have a lot of confidence in the "We'll get a deal done" crowd. I've seen how long it can drag out, I've seen that a sub-par deal can STILL be struck, and then you're right back where you started with a lot of uncertainty and a management with no real motivation to get the deal done. That may make me a negative Nancy to some, but it's a harsh reality.

I hope RAH pilots CAN get a good deal that allows them to move forward and be rewarded as pilots for what the company is becoming rather than an upper tier regional. The pay rates for the C series should be in the ball park of what majors are paying their 737 guys. However, I think the name "Bombardier" is gonna skew things. The other side is the "Dude, you're gettin' an Airbus" crowd. I know we've got guys here at 9E (not all of them junior guys either) that would sell their mother out for a bigger airplane and not much of a pay raise. I flew with a CA a few years ago that said he'd be fine flying a -900. When I asked him what he'd want in pay he said "Oh, I'm doing okay now." Basically, he's a Pinnacle lifer and was willing to go sub-par on pay just so he could keep his seniority and not have to interview anywhere else. These guys are almost as bad as the "will fly for free" new guys.
 
Re: Republic announces order of 80 Bombardier C-Seriers Airc

What I'm wondering is how long we'll hear "Republic, Midwest, and Frontier" all in the same sentence. Correct me if I am wrong please, but essentially, they are taking 3 airlines and making them one new, larger airline. Correct?

Maybe I'm just too much of an optimist, but I see this as a potential awesome oppertunity for the RAH pilots to get a huge boost in pay/QOL. Of course, much easier said than done.


That's a really neat sentiment, but historically that's not really how it goes. With most airline management teams viewing labor cost as something to be suppressed as much as possible, I'm not so sure we'll see much here.

Notable: I think Polar's right in that Republic is no longer a real 'regional' airline at all. Sure, they used regional feed to make their money and carve out a niche, but now they're using those assets to consume other companies for growth.

The thing that unnerves me is that the concept reminds me of how Texas Air grew and consumed several airlines and became what is now thought of as Continental.

Sure, Continental is a decent place to be now, but under Frank Lorenzo things were much different.

It would seem that Bedford hasn't been as heavy handed or as obvious in his methods, so what we're potentially looking at is a 'Texas Air 2.0'.

The multiple operating certificates, divisions, and other variations of the 'airline shell game' made it difficult for labor to get a fair shake under Texas Air.

Time will tell if Republic goes the same way with things.

I seriously hope not.
 
Re: Republic announces order of 80 Bombardier C-Seriers Airc

What's Republic's current contract on flying an aircraft without a pay rate?

There is language in RAH's current CBA regarding aircraft with no established pay scale.

The multiple operating certificates, divisions, and other variations of the 'airline shell game' made it difficult for labor to get a fair shake under Texas Air.

You should read the RAH CBA scope clause, as then you'd see that your assumption is very incorrect.

No matter how many certificates/entities there are, it operates as ONE airline from the CBA point of view.

Also, don't forget, there is a precedent for pay rates of aircraft larger than 99 seats now. It's the F9 CBA.

I'm going to project here, that the introduction of the F9 CBA to the mix will toss those parts into the current negotiations.
 
Re: Republic announces order of 80 Bombardier C-Seriers Airc

There is language in RAH's current CBA regarding aircraft with no established pay scale.



You should read the RAH CBA scope clause, as then you'd see that your assumption is very incorrect.

No matter how many certificates/entities there are, it operates as ONE airline from the CBA point of view.

Also, don't forget, there is a precedent for pay rates of aircraft larger than 99 seats now. It's the F9 CBA.

I'm going to project here, that the introduction of the F9 CBA to the mix will toss those parts into the current negotiations.

I hope you're right, and I think you've just presented the best argument that exists for getting a better contract out of this contract cycle.

EDIT: I should really say, I hope you're right AND I think you're right.
 
Re: Republic announces order of 80 Bombardier C-Seriers Airc

You should read the RAH CBA scope clause, as then you'd see that your assumption is very incorrect.

No matter how many certificates/entities there are, it operates as ONE airline from the CBA point of view.

Also, don't forget, there is a precedent for pay rates of aircraft larger than 99 seats now. It's the F9 CBA.

I'm going to project here, that the introduction of the F9 CBA to the mix will toss those parts into the current negotiations.

Welp, first, I'll state that my comment about the divisions in the pilot labor groups was about Texas Air specifically, not so much RAH. RAH, however, has demonstrated similar tactics in certain ways.

I'm sure that the Frontier pilots are really feeling like part of one big list right now.

I mean hey, it worked out okay for the Midwest pilots, right?

Forget the contract language for a second- look at the current activity of Republic in actual practice.
 
Re: Republic announces order of 80 Bombardier C-Seriers Airc

I'm sure that the Frontier pilots are really feeling like part of one big list right now.

Seriously? You're going down the emotional route? If you want to change the industry, you need to base statements on logic and fact, not just emotion.

Of course, no matter how an integration of groups go down, there are issues. Even the "smoothest" like DL/NWA.

However, due to provisions in the Republic CBA, they can't be whipsawed. They will be integrated. There will be short-term pain, but in the long term, a single contract representing all the group will be best interest in the longer term.

I mean hey, it worked out okay for the Midwest pilots, right?

Nice ploy for emotion.

Did the Midwest guys get screwed? Yes. By who? Their former management.

What would have made it right? How would they have transferred into the RW/F9 system without a methodology in place?

By implying this, you imply it's OK to usurp CBAs when it benefits a certain group.

How'd you feel if AMR made up a flowback program, usurping the Eagle CBA, and you end up on the street to keep a to-be furloughed American pilot employed? I mean, if that program was made up, and not part of YOUR CBA?

Forget the contract language for a second- look at the current activity of Republic in actual practice.

I can say, actually living under it, it works fine.

Oh, yeah. I forgot, I voted YES on that contract inspite of all of it's imperfections since it was a quantum improvement over the previous CBA.
 
Re: Republic announces order of 80 Bombardier C-Seriers Airc

Seriously? You're going down the emotional route? If you want to change the industry, you need to base statements on logic and fact, not just emotion.

Of course, no matter how an integration of groups go down, there are issues. Even the "smoothest" like DL/NWA.

However, due to provisions in the Republic CBA, they can't be whipsawed. They will be integrated. There will be short-term pain, but in the long term, a single contract representing all the group will be best interest in the longer term.

Nice ploy for emotion.

Did the Midwest guys get screwed? Yes. By who? Their former management.

What would have made it right? How would they have transferred into the RW/F9 system without a methodology in place?

By implying this, you imply it's OK to usurp CBAs when it benefits a certain group.

How'd you feel if AMR made up a flowback program, usurping the Eagle CBA, and you end up on the street to keep a to-be furloughed American pilot employed? I mean, if that program was made up, and not part of YOUR CBA?

I can say, actually living under it, it works fine.
Oh, yeah. I forgot, I voted YES on that contract inspite of all of it's imperfections since it was a quantum improvement over the previous CBA.

Forget whipsaw- when they get folded in, their current contract ceases to be, correct?

So let's forget the Frontier kids, then.

The Midwest bunch got their lunch eaten. Sure, the former Midwest management left the refrigerator door open, but who actually ate the lunch?

As for the AMR mess- sheesh. What a fiasco. I might note that the agreement you refer to was negotiated with the participation and willing compliance of both the APA, ALPA, AE, and AA management. The fact that it was horribly written, failed to accommodate the unforeseen, and is now a huge mess is sadonecrobeastiality. You're beating a dead horse with that one. Granted, I was nowhere near the company when it went down, but I am not actively involved in cleaning up the mess.

Seems like you're taking this a bit personally.

Why?
 
Re: Republic announces order of 80 Bombardier C-Seriers Airc

Forget whipsaw- when they get folded in, their current contract ceases to be, correct?

Yes and no. The CBA will be a combination of the two. So, in essence it would be a CBA made from parts from integrating CBAs. While the mechanism might vary (arbitration, mediation, or Section 6), the outcome will be the same.

The Midwest bunch got their lunch eaten. Sure, the former Midwest management left the refrigerator door open, but who actually ate the lunch?
OK, tell me a fair and legal way to integrate the Midwest pilots without violating the RAH or F9 CBAs.

I'm sure it would solve all kinds of issues.

System wide bid across all certificates in seniority order? Displace the RAH pilots? Displace the F9 pilots? Because the airframes were going away. There still would have been furloughs.

Which contract would you throw under the bus?

As for the AMR mess- sheesh. What a fiasco. I might note that the agreement you refer to was negotiated with the participation and willing compliance of both the APA, ALPA, AE, and AA management. The fact that it was horribly written, failed to accommodate the unforeseen, and is now a huge mess is sadonecrobeastiality. You're beating a dead horse with that one. Granted, I was nowhere near the company when it went down, but I am not actively involved in cleaning up the mess.
I made a mistake my not communicating clearly. I wasn't referring to the agreement presently in effect. I meant that what if Eagle and AMR decided to make a side agreement to protect the AMR furloughees and the resulting effect pushes all of the Eagle pilots on the street.

Seems like you're taking this a bit personally.

Why?
Sorry it seems that way. I don't, but I do get annoyed when people who know nothing about what they are talking make absurd statements.

I'd feel the same way if someone did that about Mesa, Comair, Eagle, LCC blah blah blah.

Your post made assumptions from an emotional point of view, not based on how CBAs work.
 
Re: Republic announces order of 80 Bombardier C-Seriers Airc

Yes and no. The CBA will be a combination of the two. So, in essence it would be a CBA made from parts from integrating CBAs. While the mechanism might vary (arbitration, mediation, or Section 6), the outcome will be the same.

OK, tell me a fair and legal way to integrate the Midwest pilots without violating the RAH or F9 CBAs.

I'm sure it would solve all kinds of issues.

System wide bid across all certificates in seniority order? Displace the RAH pilots? Displace the F9 pilots? Because the airframes were going away. There still would have been furloughs.

Which contract would you throw under the bus?

I made a mistake my not communicating clearly. I wasn't referring to the agreement presently in effect. I meant that what if Eagle and AMR decided to make a side agreement to protect the AMR furloughees and the resulting effect pushes all of the Eagle pilots on the street.

Sorry it seems that way. I don't, but I do get annoyed when people who know nothing about what they are talking make absurd statements.

I'd feel the same way if someone did that about Mesa, Comair, Eagle, LCC blah blah blah.

Your post made assumptions from an emotional point of view, not based on how CBAs work.


(First, to clarify a typo I made in my previous post, I AM actively involved in cleaning up the mess at AMR.)

As for Midwest, well. Sure, the airframes go away, then the pilots get furloughed, and then the brand get sold. Convenient! So now the Midwest brand continues to operate out of the same hubs, but with different equipment and pilots who work for less. Convenient! The fact that it was legally worked out doesn't make it ethical, or deleterious to people's careers or lives. It made business sense to someone on a macro level, so nevermind the casualties down the line. That's pure Lorenzo.

As for your scenario with the bump and flush at AMR, that's more or less what actually happened. It wasn't a total displacement to furlough of all Eagle pilots, but it was severe enough and of suitable duration to royally piss everybody off.

Still does. You wouldn't believe the stuff that zooms around on the net and in the crew rooms these days.

My issue with the Republic growth model is that it assumes the brand, takes on the market share, then effectively does what you suggested would happen at AMR. The problem is that while the RAH CBA might have issues with it, the acquired 'assets' are afforded little to no protection due to carefully planned legal trapdoors.

I may not be able to recite the RAH CBA by heart. I've never even read that damned thing, and I know you know that. I'm just saying that the growth model seems bad for pilots and flying as a career based on the way it's taking shape.


As for your attitude- it's back to 'shut up, junior!', again, is it?

Really?

I like you man, but it's getting hard to respect you. You're letting your own emotion overrule your logic. It does no good to alienate someone like me, really. Not for you, me, or anybody else. I'm just expressing my opinion on the emotional overtones of the situation, which, let's face it- is every bit a part of this career as hard bitten legal language is.

So why so angry?
 
Re: Republic announces order of 80 Bombardier C-Seriers Airc

There is language in RAH's current CBA regarding aircraft with no established pay scale.

I knew there was, but I don't know the wording.

You should read the RAH CBA scope clause, as then you'd see that your assumption is very incorrect.

No matter how many certificates/entities there are, it operates as ONE airline from the CBA point of view.

Also, don't forget, there is a precedent for pay rates of aircraft larger than 99 seats now. It's the F9 CBA.

I'm going to project here, that the introduction of the F9 CBA to the mix will toss those parts into the current negotiations.

Right, but if it's RAH's scope clause, how can you argue rates from the F9 CBA? The scope clause is supposed to keep everyone under one contract: the one the scope clause is included in. Now, what would be NICE is to have RAH's scope bring everyone under one clause with Frontier pay rates. I don't see Bedford going for that, and I don't really see how that's gonna play out in arbitration. When a scope clause is involved, I don't know of any historical precedence of the scope clause holding up but being able to pick and choose the good parts of the other carrier being integrated.

Also, unless the RAH guys can drag management kicking and screaming into a single carrier integration, expect a long drawn out fight in keeping Frontier separate from the other operation. I see the potential for a NASTY revenue stream shell game, too. I thought Pinnacle had a good scope clause when we bought Colgan. Reading it, we SHOULD be all one list right now. The arbitrator thought so, too.....then changed his mind. Years later, here we are still two companies, one growing and one stagnant, with revenues moving back and forth thanks to the "holding" company and management walking a thin line skirting the edge of single carrier operations as much as they can without going over.
 
Re: Republic announces order of 80 Bombardier C-Seriers Airc

Charlie look at what Martin is saying. He agrees Midwest pilots got f-ed but he also asking you how do you fix it without F-ing over the RAH and F9 pilots.
 
Re: Republic announces order of 80 Bombardier C-Seriers Airc

I knew there was, but I don't know the wording.

RAH CBA said:
ARTICLE 21
NEW AIRCRAFT
Should the Company announce its intent to place into revenue service aircraft
other than aircraft for which rates are specified in this Agreement, the rates for
that aircraft will be determined as follows:
1. The Company will give the Union notice of its intent to introduce the new
equipment at least six (6) months prior to the estimated scheduled
revenue service date, or within thirty (30) days after entering into the
contract for procurement or lease of the new aircraft type, whichever is
later in time.
2. The parties will meet within (15) days following written request by either
party to negotiate rates of pay for such aircraft type. Should negotiations
result in an agreement, the new aircraft type will be flown in accordance
with the terms of the agreement. If negotiations do not result in an
agreement within one hundred (100) days from the date of
commencement of negotiations, either party may submit the dispute to
final and binding interest arbitration.
3. The dispute shall be heard before an arbitrator selected in accordance
with the procedures set forth in Article 18 (Resolution of Disputes).
4. The Hearing will be conducted as soon as possible but in no event more
than three (3) months after arbitrator selection, unless mutually agreed
otherwise. Briefing by the parties, if any, will be completed within thirty
(30) days after the hearing date. The arbitrator shall issue a decision no
later than sixty (60) days after the close of the hearing or of receipt of the
parties brief, whichever is later.
5. Upon final agreement, or issuance of the arbitrators decision, as the case
may be, retroactive compensation, if applicable, will be paid to all pilots
who operate a disputed aircraft type placed in revenue service before the
parties’ agreement became effective or the award issued.
6. Nothing set forth in this Article shall prevent the Company from introducing
a new aircraft type into revenue service before agreement is reached over
the rates applicable to that aircraft, as long as the pay rates assigned to
such aircraft type are not less than the rates provided by this Article or the
principal Agreement for aircraft with similar power plant (turboprop or jet)
and seat range that either includes the number of seats in the new aircraft
type or has a seat range not greater than the number seats in the disputed
aircraft. If the aircraft is smaller (less seats) than any other aircraft for
which pay scales have been established by this Agreement then, subject
to the provisions of this article, the Company will establish a rate for the
new aircraft until a negotiated rate has been agreed to by the parties. The
negotiated rate will be retroactive to the implementation of the new aircraft
type.



Right, but if it's RAH's scope clause, how can you argue rates from the F9 CBA? The scope clause is supposed to keep everyone under one contract: the one the scope clause is included in. Now, what would be NICE is to have RAH's scope bring everyone under one clause with Frontier pay rates. I don't see Bedford going for that, and I don't really see how that's gonna play out in arbitration. When a scope clause is involved, I don't know of any historical precedence of the scope clause holding up but being able to pick and choose the good parts of the other carrier being integrated.

Also, unless the RAH guys can drag management kicking and screaming into a single carrier integration, expect a long drawn out fight in keeping Frontier separate from the other operation. I see the potential for a NASTY revenue stream shell game, too. I thought Pinnacle had a good scope clause when we bought Colgan. Reading it, we SHOULD be all one list right now. The arbitrator thought so, too.....then changed his mind. Years later, here we are still two companies, one growing and one stagnant, with revenues moving back and forth thanks to the "holding" company and management walking a thin line skirting the edge of single carrier operations as much as they can without going over.

RAH CBA said:
H. Successorship and Mergers
1. This Agreement including the rates of pay, rules and working
conditions set forth in this Agreement shall be binding upon any
successor or assign of the Company unless and until changed in
accordance with the provisions of the Railway Labor Act, as
amended. For purposes of this paragraph, a Successor or assign
shall be defined as an entity which acquires all or substantially all of
the assets or equity of a Company through a single transaction or
multi-step related transaction which closes within a twelve (12)
month period.
2. No contract or other legally binding commitment involving the
transfer of ownership or control pursuant to a Successorship
transaction, whether by sale, transfer or lease of the Company,
Parent or Subsidiary of the Parent, or substantially all of the assets
of any entity, will be signed or otherwise entered into unless it is
agreed as a material and irrevocable condition of entering into,
concluding and implementing such transaction that this Agreement
including the rates of pay, rules and working conditions set forth in
this Agreement will be assumed by the successor employer and
employees on the then current Chautauqua Airlines system
seniority list will be employed in accordance with the provisions of
this Agreement. The Company shall give notice of the existence of
this Agreement to any purchaser, transferee, lessee, or assignee of
the operation covered by this Agreement or any substantial part
thereof. Such notice shall be in writing with a copy to the Union, at
the time the seller, transferor, or lessor executes a definitive
agreement with respect to a transaction as herein described.
3. In the event of a merger of airline operations between the Company
and another air carrier the Company will require, as a condition of
any such operational merger that provisions be included requiring
that the surviving carrier shall provide for fair and equitable
integration of the pre-merger pilots’ seniority lists in accordance
with Articles 3 and 13 of the Allegheny Mohawk LPPs.
1.4
4. Integration of the pilot groups shall not occur until the pilot seniority
lists are merged pursuant to procedures as described above.
5. The following additional requirements shall be applicable in the
event of a merger, purchase or acquisition involving the Company,
regardless of the identity of the surviving carrier or whether formerly
separate operations are to be integrated.
a. Unless and until any operational merger is finally
effectuated, the Union will continue to be recognized as the
representative of the pre-merger Company pilots, so long as
such recognition is consistent with the Railway Labor Act
and any applicable rulings or orders of the National
Mediation Board. Recognition of a post-merger
representative shall be governed by the Railway Labor Act
and by any applicable rulings or orders of the National
Mediation Board.
b. Subject to applicable securities and other laws and
regulations, the Company will review with the union the
details of any material agreements relating to Successorship
transactions in a timely manner, provided that no financial or
other confidential business information need be disclosed
unless suitable arrangements are made for protecting the
confidentiality and use of such information.
c. The operations of the Company and those of the other air
carrier shall be kept separate unless and until the processes
described in paragraph b above is completed and the
seniority lists of the two pilot groups are integrated in
accordance with Sections 3 and 13 of the Allegheny-
Mohawk Labor Protective Provisions are completed. During
such time of separate operations, neither aircraft nor pilots
shall be interchanged without the Union’s written consent.
d. Until the processes described in paragraph c above are
completed, no flight deck crew member covered by this
Agreement shall be reduced in status or pay category as an
effect of the merger, purchase or acquisition.
e. During the period of separate operations pilots on the
Chautauqua Pilots System Seniority List prior to the merger,
purchase, or acquisition shall operate all aircraft on hand at
the Company, all aircraft on firm order to the Company and
all aircraft acquired by the Company other than as a result of
the transaction after public announcement of the acquisition
in accordance with this Agreement, provided however that
nothing herein shall be construed to prevent fleet reductions
which are attributable to economic or other reasons and
conditions not related to the transaction, or the retirement of
existing aircraft in the normal course of business.
f. The Company or surviving carrier, if different than the
Company, shall meet promptly with the Union upon request
to negotiate the implementation of the requirements of this
Article.

So, that is pretty much the same language in all contracts +/-.

It's not like all this stuff is made up on-the-fly as is often purported by people who speculate in public.
 
Re: Republic announces order of 80 Bombardier C-Seriers Airc

Charlie look at what Martin is saying. He agrees Midwest pilots got f-ed but he also asking you how do you fix it without F-ing over the RAH and F9 pilots.

Which was my point, really.

If RAH management knew that language forced their hand a certain way, and that made purging old labor pools a certainty, well, that's all the easier for them, then, correct?
 
Re: Republic announces order of 80 Bombardier C-Seriers Airc

Right, but if it's RAH's scope clause, how can you argue rates from the F9 CBA? The scope clause is supposed to keep everyone under one contract: the one the scope clause is included in.

I believe the amalgamation process after the official SLI is complete does just that, it amalgamates (unites / joins) the two contracts. The way I read it and I could be way off base is that they take the RAH contract and add stuff from the F9 contract that isn't directly touched on in the RAH one. (ie Airbus rates)
 
Back
Top