Effect of Phil Trenery Still Being Felt

[derg]

Here's what happened in our bankruptcy at Southernjets.

The union signed NDA's.

However, there was the "official" word that came either via the company or via the union.

There was the "I know a guy who knows a guy who was at the meeting who said..." data stream.

There was the "I heard during a line check airman meeting with the CEO, who said..." data stream.

And there were "The Cabal" which more or less were smaller syndicates of people who would gather information and try to draw lines.

Here's the problem. The company will, with 100% certainty, draw a picture so incredibly bleak that those that are bound by the NDA's are going to want to gouge their eyes out. Now they can't necessarily talk about it, because of the NDA's, so the general population isn't going to have an opportunity to give it the "sniff test" and they will drive a deep disconnect between the union and the general pilot population if you're not careful and if the company is being, unfortunately, "Smart" about it.

And yes, there will be threats of bloody demise followed by promises of "sunny days" by the company if you only agree to concessions (which you will fight for DECADES to get back what you gave up)

The union will form an EF&A team in order to crosscheck what the company is telling them, but you have to be very careful because you need to know both WHO is on the EF&A team and if they have any ulterior motives involved because you will be expected to treat the findings of the EF&A team as absolute gospel.

A good union leadership will question the EF&A findings and present the information to the pilot group as a "You're big boys, here's the information, vote/act accordingly"

A bad union leadership will NOT question the EF&A findings and present the information to the pilot group as "Look, we've had TOP MEN on this and if you can't see this, you're an idiot. This is what we need to do and you're a ruh'TARD if you don't agree".

Oh, BTW, chances are when you ask a question and if your answer is "I'm sorry but that's proprietary", just turn on CNBC. This morning's proprietary seekrit information is lunchtime's Maria Bartiromo's headline.

Good luck boys. Been down that road and I hope for the best for you guys.

VERIFY VERIFY VERIFY.

I know some of the people involved in this particular situation, and they're honorable people, but VERIFY VERIFY VERIFY.

Ask questions and keep asking them until you get answers.

And with those answers, VERIFY VERIFY VERIFY.

We got duped left and right through our bankruptcy process.

 

[Roger Roger]

Nah honestly that is some of the best inside analysis on the thread so far. We have to remember, in all of this, that we are betting on a company run by morons. Complete and utter morons. Morons who have no stake in this company. Morons who expect us to make up for their mistakes.

Life isn't fair, and these morons will never get whats coming to them. I think we have to ignore our collective anger at them because they are going to cash out no matter which way this goes. Do we want to act as a unified pilot group? Do we want to limp along and trust in Menke? Would we rather just go to bankruptcy right now, restructure, and pray we get through this as unscathed as possible losing 1/4-1/3 of the seniority list and lower wages all the way around with a potential of "snapping back" (Mesaba style).

I've gotta see the financials first before I make any decision. And remember, he signs his name SEAN!!!

See, that's a problem. These guys (at least the very top management, maybe not so much middle management) are NOT morons. They are very, very smart and skilled at what they do. Unfortunately, "what they do" is NOT running an airline, it is making gobs of money for themselves and the board. They can't run an airline worth beans, and don't care that the people in charge of the everyday stuff can't either. But they sure know how to take care of number 1 and don't underestimate their intelligence in screwing you over to benefit them.

 

[kellwolf]

You will have to explain that more to me. I think you're ignoring the fact that Mesaba choose NOT to exert it's contract scope and made Colgan a part of us immediately when Trenary was done signing ownership for Mesaba. Although usually I go down this road of what I think you said, then you slow me down and explain, and then I say "oh no kidding, God I'm dumb, ok thanks for explaining". I think, over time, it's been shown you're a little brighter bulb than me so just spell it out for me a little. Phone call works too.

If Colgan had been absorbed into Mesaba, the end result would have been the same. Saabs at XJ getting parked, flying reduced at Colgan and very little (if any) growth on the Q400 means those guys would have still been on the street. At best (for them), they might be back months later after the dust settled from a court battle over the scope clauses of 9E and XJ.

Sure, I think the furloughs were in a scary place, but I think it was symbiotic, Pinnacle was grossly understaffed and our furloughs helped you guys bandaid the self induced problem, especially that accelerated class (which I thought got worked out I may be wrong).

You mean the accelerated class the FAA put the brakes on because 9E was screwing it up so badly? No doubt the furloughs helped at the time bandaid the problem. But here we are months later, and there's no silver lining for 9E guys. I've tried hard to find one, believe me, to pass along. I think a lot of it stems from the seniority list integration and how the quotas were set up. Sure I jumped a -900 CA that was 5 years senior to me, but it doesn't matter when I can't exercise those seniority rights for another 4 years. Meanwhile, I get jumped by Colgan guys (only by 6 months, though), but they CAN exercise their seniority rights by bidding JFK CA and winding up senior to me. A lot of our guys aren't seeing upgrade because there are XJ Saab guys bidding CA ahead of them. Without the JCBA, those guys would be -900 FOs, not -200 CAs. There's a direct result of it benefiting them that has nothing to do with scope. I guess I should amend my statement to say there are a lot of Saab FOs and -200/Saab CAs that are happy for the JCBA.

Nah honestly that is some of the best inside analysis on the thread so far. We have to remember, in all of this, that we are betting on a company run by morons. Complete and utter morons. Morons who have no stake in this company. Morons who expect us to make up for their mistakes.

And therein lies my dilemma. How long do I fix these guys' mistakes? I've been making it happen as a CA for the past 4 years when they kept screwing it up at the management level. Can't staff? No problem, we'll just JM the junior guys to cover that problem. We have no clue why airplanes aren't leaving on time. Must be the CAs making us late. At what point do I draw the line? I was okay with an insurance premium hike for the JCBA. It was inevitable considering where health care costs have gone since 1999. It was balanced out by an okay pay raise. After all was said and done, I wasn't bringing home THAT much more (unless you factor in the 4 hour min day and 100% cancellation), but it was still a raise. A 5% cut would erase that completely and then some. Three things you don't mess with if you want to keep me happy: my money, my time off and my family. These concessions, no matter how they get spun, will mess with all three.

I've gotta see the financials first before I make any decision. And remember, he signs his name SEAN!!!

I'll look at them, but there better be some QoL improvements and some serious snapbacks SOON for me to even ponder a "yes" vote.

 

[jynxyjoe]

See, that's a problem. These guys (at least the very top management, maybe not so much middle management) are NOT morons. They are very, very smart and skilled at what they do. Unfortunately, "what they do" is NOT running an airline, it is making gobs of money for themselves and the board. They can't run an airline worth beans, and don't care that the people in charge of the everyday stuff can't either. But they sure know how to take care of number 1 and don't underestimate their intelligence in screwing you over to benefit them.

How am I underestimating them? I've said multiple times they are going to make out like bandits either way this goes. They are tasked with running an airline believe it or not, and at that they are morons. Here's some of Sean's contract:

Major Responsibilities
The CEO oversees a wide portfolio of responsibilities across five primary domains:
Operations
·Ensure that Pinnacle is an industry leader in safety across all facets of its business and that Company adheres to all safety-related regulations and policies.
·Ensure that Company maintains a strong focus on operational quality and reliability as the most important performance objective, given its criticality to customer satisfaction and retention.
·Through his or her team, oversees the day-to-day operations of the carrier, ensuring adherence to high levels of safety, customer service, cost control, on-time and financial performance. Displays, and acts on, a real and ongoing concern for the delivery of outstanding customer service and operating integrity by probing into daily operating performances and spending time “in the field.”
·Through a team of qualified deputies, provides active leadership in the resolution of operational issues as they arise.
·Ensures that the airline meets all government and corporate regulations and policies on an ongoing basis. Addresses potential deviations immediately.
·Ensures that the airline has full emergency preparedness. Leads and manages the response process when, and if, emergencies occur.

Strategy and Finance
·Leads the development of the overall strategic direction and business plan for Pinnacle by orchestrating an ongoing planning process which produces a clear and compelling corporate vision and mid- and long-term business objectives.
·Identifies, evaluates, pursues and, as appropriate, executes important strategic initiatives to evolve the Pinnacle business model in the areas of new capacity purchase agreements, pro-rate agreements, new business lines, new fleet types, and mergers and acquisitions.
·Engages the Board in the evaluation and selection of new strategic alternatives such as those outlined above. Based on the broad direction provided by the strategic plan, develops and gains approval for the airline’s annual business plan, operating plan and operating budget.
·Manages ongoing business and operating performance against the plans and budgets above, on a quarterly, monthly and weekly basis.
·Provides timely and accurate reporting on financial and operating results and other special projects and initiatives under his or her direction.
·Ensures that the airline secures and maintains appropriate funding and capitalization and that it evolves toward an optimal capital structure suited to its business needs.
·Drives the airline’s growth trajectory to ensure that it secures the scale necessary to achieve commercial and financial success.
·Partnering with the chief financial officer, manages the airline’s relationships with the investor community and stock market analysts. Defines, articulates and promulgates the Pinnacle “story” to key external constituents, most notably the investor and analyst community.


Commercial
·Develops and implements an effective revenue diversification strategy for Company that ensures, over time, a balanced and diversified portfolio.
·Ensures that Pinnacle develops and maintains, in the face of current and future competition, a compelling and differentiable customer value proposition that drives profitable growth.
·Plays the lead role in cultivating, negotiating, transacting and managing major customer relationships with major airlines, charter customers and other parties.

Organization and Human Resources
·Develops and maintains an organizational plan for all key functions within the airline that details the organization’s personnel needs as a function of the airline’s strategic and operating plans. Ensures that major functional “holes” in the organization are addressed and that the organization grows alongside the carrier’s revenue base, all while maintaining a lean cost structure.
·Provides strong and inspired leadership to all the employees of Pinnacle, promoting and maintaining strong employee morale. Establishes high expectations for all employees with regard to performance and adherence to company values.
·Plays the lead role in nurturing and evolving the corporate culture for the airline in a manner consistent with the business focus of Company and shareholder return expectations.
·Plays a key role in the ongoing nurturing and management of productive, trust-based relations with labor leaders, building on the healthy context in place today at Company.

Constituent Management
·Manages the overall relationship with the Board of Directors, keeping the group fully abreast of developments and issues. Engages the Board in discussion and decision making on key strategic issues as they arise.
·Working through key internal functions, negotiates and oversees important commercial arrangements with aircraft suppliers, aircraft lessors, airports, maintenance, repair and overhaul service providers and other suppliers.
·Manages relationships with senior representatives of various key external constituents and functions as the primary external ambassador for the carrier.
·Ensures that Pinnacle maintains productive and beneficial relationships with the media and the public at large.

I'm only going to get into hyperbole and hysterics to a point.

 

[SpiceWeasel]

Why does everyone who wants to wait until "the facts come out" think that the "no concessions" folks are all hyperbole and hysterics? There is a very clear history of concessions in this industry, in the last 11 years, that says that if you give concessions you are still riding the train into bankruptcy.

Buck this trend and give the big middle finger to management, folks. As an aside, why does it really seem that it's mostly Colgan guys that are cool with concessions? You've been under the iron fist of terrible Pinnacle management since early 2007, how do you still have any goodwill toward this place?

My completely uneducated guess is that we are going to file 1113c regardless of the concessionary TA vote. So therefore I find it disappointing that the MEC is not holding the line.

 

[jynxyjoe]

If Colgan had been absorbed into Mesaba, the end result would have been the same. Saabs at XJ getting parked, flying reduced at Colgan and very little (if any) growth on the Q400 means those guys would have still been on the street. At best (for them), they might be back months later after the dust settled from a court battle over the scope clauses of 9E and XJ.

Eh I don't know if the result would have been the same. Pinnacle, grossly and incompetantly understaffed and Mesaba/Colgan heartily overstaffed becoming moreso every day. If Trenary tried to move the jets 20 or whatever percent allowed by our scope to your side... well anyway you can connect the dots. If you come to a different and better conclusion (for pinnacle) than me that's fine, I'm not going to argue with you about it. We've got more important issues than hashing out who was going to make out worse in our hypothetical situation.

You mean the accelerated class the FAA put the brakes on because 9E was screwing it up so badly?NICE No doubt the furloughs helped at the time bandaid the problem. But here we are months later, and there's no silver lining for 9E guys. I've tried hard to find one, believe me, to pass along. I think a lot of it stems from the seniority list integration and how the quotas were set up. Sure I jumped a -900 CA that was 5 years senior to me, but it doesn't matter when I can't exercise those seniority rights for another 4 years. Meanwhile, I get jumped by Colgan guys (only by 6 months, though), but they CAN exercise their seniority rights by bidding JFK CA and winding up senior to me. A lot of our guys aren't seeing upgrade because there are XJ Saab guys bidding CA ahead of them. Without the JCBA, those guys would be -900 FOs, not -200 CAs. There's a direct result of it benefiting them that has nothing to do with scope. I guess I should amend my statement to say there are a lot of Saab FOs and -200/Saab CAs that are happy for the JCBA.

Sure I agree with the whole part here. The merger was ineptly handled and there are very few on the combined list who got much out of this. However, you're forgetting to list guys like me who did ok on the SLI and got a five dollar raise or something per hour. Still a lot of people that did poorly, probably outnumbering those that did well. Next moth we may come to another conclusion though.

And therein lies my dilemma. How long do I fix these guys' mistakes? I've been making it happen as a CA for the past 4 years when they kept screwing it up at the management level. Can't staff? No problem, we'll just JM the junior guys to cover that problem. We have no clue why airplanes aren't leaving on time. Must be the CAs making us late. At what point do I draw the line? I was okay with an insurance premium hike for the JCBA. It was inevitable considering where health care costs have gone since 1999. It was balanced out by an okay pay raise. After all was said and done, I wasn't bringing home THAT much more (unless you factor in the 4 hour min day and 100% cancellation), but it was still a raise. A 5% cut would erase that completely and then some. Three things you don't mess with if you want to keep me happy: my money, my time off and my family. These concessions, no matter how they get spun, will mess with all three.

And even if we park as many jets as I think they will you'll still be a captain or a very senior FO. This may simply be too much to ask. You do realize though, that you're going to get a pay cut one way or the other, voluntarily or forced (worst case both)?

I'll look at them, but there better be some QoL improvements and some serious snapbacks SOON for me to even ponder a "yes" vote.

Yeah, and I don't think that's what's coming. It's a "here's a avenue out without chapter 11 guys!" session. BUT I HAVEN'T SEEN ANYTHING YET. I could be completely wrong.

 

[jynxyjoe]

Why does everyone who wants to wait until "the facts come out" think that the "no concessions" folks are all hyperbole and hysterics? There is a very clear history of concessions in this industry, in the last 11 years, that says that if you give concessions you are still riding the train into bankruptcy.

Buck this trend and give the big middle finger to management, folks. As an aside, why does it really seem that it's mostly Colgan guys that are cool with concessions? You've been under the iron fist of terrible Pinnacle management since early 2007, how do you still have any goodwill toward this place?

My completely uneducated guess is that we are going to file 1113c regardless of the concessionary TA vote. So therefore I find it disappointing that the MEC is not holding the line.

The Colgan guys were tossing up the "full pay to the last day" stuff before anyone I thought. That may just be my perception however, because it was so surprising.

Hysteria = emotional excess, in this case caused by concluding the outcome of a complex situation without the facts.
Hyperbole = the use of exaggeration as a rhetorical device or figure of speech.

There's plenty of hyperbole in this thread already, even some of my stuff could be shown as hyperbole due to my lack of evidence, and it feels like it's snowballing.

At this point we are simply looking back at the history of everyone elses bankruptcy (good) and using that alone to judge our situation (probably not a great idea for every decision). If your conclusions are so rational and self evident as you pretend, what is the problem with waiting for the facts that will back them? Ready, shoot, aim. We've got time to make a decision, I will take that time. Unless, do we get to avoid bankruptcy if I shout "FULL PAY TO THE LAST DAY" from my windows? Is there a benefit to making up my mind immediately?

 

[kellwolf]

And even if we park as many jets as I think they will you'll still be a captain or a very senior FO. This may simply be too much to ask. You do realize though, that you're going to get a pay cut one way or the other, voluntarily or forced (worst case both)?

I'd rather them shove it down my throat than just roll over again. I'm sorry, but I've been beaten too many times at this company. Eventually, the dog runs away. I'm HOPING to be gone from this hell hole before long, but I don't want to sell my fellow pilots down the river in the process. The trust in the management team has long since evaporated. I was willing to give Menke a shot, but I'm not impressed at this point. Other than pep talks and a "go team" attitude, it seems like the same ship with a different skipper. I'm not sure if we're going to park jets. For them to do that, they'd have to re-negotiate the entire ASA with Delta since we're already at our contractual minimum on the -200. If we park jets, that's less income. Sure, it lowers costs, but it lowers income as well. I'm willing to bet the income is more important than the costs at this point. Parking 10-20 jets when we fly as many as we do is not going to reduce the costs that much. The economies of scale are already pretty high. We don't need to park airplanes. We need to eliminate corporate waste and park middle management positions handed out like candy. Currently we have a THIRTEEN VPs listed on the website as well as the President/CEO and 3 senior VPs. At least they finally combined the VP of 9E and Colgan into the same position. It's the standard knee jerk "get the money from labor when we're in trouble" reaction. Menke did a good job laying out plans for cost cutting and re-organization when he got here. When the costs didn't get shaved off overnight, however, they went to the playbook and play #1: squeeze labor. If us not giving 5% sends us into bankruptcy, we were headed there anyway. Like Cencal pointed out above, there's room in the operation to trim that much $$$ off without taking it from labor. Rather than set us against each other, why not work together to try to cut costs....at least for half a year or so.

 

[derg]

We need to eliminate corporate waste and park middle management positions handed out like candy. Currently we have a THIRTEEN VPs listed on the website as well as the President/CEO and 3 senior VPs. At least they finally combined the VP of 9E and Colgan into the same position. It's the standard knee jerk "get the money from labor when we're in trouble" reaction.

Post of the day.

 

[Roger Roger]

Post of the day.

8 bosses, Bob. Eight.

 

[undsioux1]

I'd rather them shove it down my throat than just roll over again. I'm sorry, but I've been beaten too many times at this company.

Other than pep talks and a "go team" attitude, it seems like the same ship with a different skipper.

We don't need to park airplanes. We need to eliminate corporate waste and park middle management positions handed out like candy. Currently we have a THIRTEEN VPs listed on the website as well as the President/CEO and 3 senior VPs. At least they finally combined the VP of 9E and Colgan into the same position.

If us not giving 5% sends us into bankruptcy, we were headed there anyway. Like Cencal pointed out above, there's room in the operation to trim that much $$$ off without taking it from labor.

Kellwolf for the win!!

 

[jynxyjoe]

I'd rather them shove it down my throat than just roll over again. I'm sorry, but I've been beaten too many times at this company. Eventually, the dog runs away. I'm HOPING to be gone from this hell hole before long, but I don't want to sell my fellow pilots down the river in the process. The trust in the management team has long since evaporated. I was willing to give Menke a shot, but I'm not impressed at this point. Other than pep talks and a "go team" attitude, it seems like the same ship with a different skipper. I'm not sure if we're going to park jets. For them to do that, they'd have to re-negotiate the entire ASA with Delta since we're already at our contractual minimum on the -200. If we park jets, that's less income. Sure, it lowers costs, but it lowers income as well. I'm willing to bet the income is more important than the costs at this point. Parking 10-20 jets when we fly as many as we do is not going to reduce the costs that much. The economies of scale are already pretty high. We don't need to park airplanes. We need to eliminate corporate waste and park middle management positions handed out like candy. Currently we have a THIRTEEN VPs listed on the website as well as the President/CEO and 3 senior VPs. At least they finally combined the VP of 9E and Colgan into the same position. It's the standard knee jerk "get the money from labor when we're in trouble" reaction. Menke did a good job laying out plans for cost cutting and re-organization when he got here. When the costs didn't get shaved off overnight, however, they went to the playbook and play #1: squeeze labor. If us not giving 5% sends us into bankruptcy, we were headed there anyway. Like Cencal pointed out above, there's room in the operation to trim that much $$$ off without taking it from labor. Rather than set us against each other, why not work together to try to cut costs....at least for half a year or so.

That's fair.

I like Roger Roger's post as well.

 

[sherpa]

So NWA, American, DAL, UAL, UsAirways, Frontier and probably more all gave concessions just to go sit in bankruptcy court anyway, but our case is different how? I'm not saying we are not in a bad pinch, but explain to me how this is different. That is the key question for me that needs to be answered to get me off my starting position of NO.

 

[derg]

So NWA, American, DAL, UAL, UsAirways, Frontier and probably more all gave concessions just to go sit in bankruptcy court anyway, but our case is different how? I'm not saying we are not in a bad pinch, but explain to me how this is different. That is the key question for me that needs to be answered to get me off my starting position of NO.

Well, the "big carrot" is going to be avoiding the uncertainty of the 1113(c) process where they'll threaten that the judge will throw EEEEEEVERYTHING out and give the company exactly what it wants.

But if they throw it out, I think (don't quote me on this), you're open to "self help".

Talk to your strike preparedness committee chair about this. If you don't get an answer, take it to the ALPA national strike chair. If he doesn't give you an answer, he's one of my homeboys and I'll get on his ass to answer. Unless he's already resigned.

 

[Seggy]

But if they throw it out, I think (don't quote me on this), you're open to "self help".

You are NOT open to self help.

Once again, wait for the information to get out there. Our situation IS different than the others that recently went through this.

 

[derg]

You are NOT open to self help.

Once again, wait for the information to get out there. Our situation IS different than the others that recently went through this.

Muchos gracias.

 

[ClarkGriswold]

I agree with Delta not parking jets, they need the feed that they rely so heavily on. I hear big D is primarily just pissed off at us not staffing our airline properly thus creating performance issues. So who knows...

I'd rather them shove it down my throat than just roll over again. I'm sorry, but I've been beaten too many times at this company. Eventually, the dog runs away. I'm HOPING to be gone from this hell hole before long, but I don't want to sell my fellow pilots down the river in the process. The trust in the management team has long since evaporated. I was willing to give Menke a shot, but I'm not impressed at this point. Other than pep talks and a "go team" attitude, it seems like the same ship with a different skipper. I'm not sure if we're going to park jets. For them to do that, they'd have to re-negotiate the entire ASA with Delta since we're already at our contractual minimum on the -200. If we park jets, that's less income. Sure, it lowers costs, but it lowers income as well. I'm willing to bet the income is more important than the costs at this point. Parking 10-20 jets when we fly as many as we do is not going to reduce the costs that much. The economies of scale are already pretty high. We don't need to park airplanes. We need to eliminate corporate waste and park middle management positions handed out like candy. Currently we have a THIRTEEN VPs listed on the website as well as the President/CEO and 3 senior VPs. At least they finally combined the VP of 9E and Colgan into the same position. It's the standard knee jerk "get the money from labor when we're in trouble" reaction. Menke did a good job laying out plans for cost cutting and re-organization when he got here. When the costs didn't get shaved off overnight, however, they went to the playbook and play #1: squeeze labor. If us not giving 5% sends us into bankruptcy, we were headed there anyway. Like Cencal pointed out above, there's room in the operation to trim that much $$$ off without taking it from labor. Rather than set us against each other, why not work together to try to cut costs....at least for half a year or so.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

The people doing the Economic & Financial Analysis (E&FA) work here are topnotch. I know them, and they can definitely be counted on to do a thorough analysis and provide factual data to the union leadership. You also have a topnotch MEC Chairman whose integrity really can't be questioned. You also have Seggy, and I don't think anyone around here would question his integrity, either. In the end, you should listen to all of these people (among others) and reach a decision based on logic, not emotion. As Seggy pointed out, every situation is different, so your case won't be the same as Delta's or anyone else's. They are all unique. Learn from history, but also realize that every situation is different.

Good luck. This industry really sucks sometimes.

 

[kellwolf]

Like I said, I'll listen, but I stand by what I said earlier. I'm not giving up something for nothing just to financially slide backwards from where we were under the 99 agreement. There needs to be QoL adjustments in exchange for us giving up 5% of our $$$ as well as hard snap back provisions with a SHORT timeline. Also needs to be a clause (not that it will do any good) that protects us from being shafted if we go into bankruptcy anyway. Anything short of those things, and it's a serious up hill climb for my vote.

 

[undsioux1]

Like I said, I'll listen, but I stand by what I said earlier. I'm not giving up something for nothing just to financially slide backwards from where we were under the 99 agreement. There needs to be QoL adjustments in exchange for us giving up 5% of our $$$ as well as hard snap back provisions with a SHORT timeline. Also needs to be a clause (not that it will do any good) that protects us from being shafted if we go into bankruptcy anyway. Anything short of those things, and it's a serious up hill climb for my vote.

This is the biggest thing that gets me. According to the email sent out last night, the company is NOT proposing any sort of snap-backs in the event this grand plan DOES work and the company financially recovers. I think that would significantly help in getting the pilots to agree to cuts.