CMR on the move

[surplus1]

I would not want anything we do to adversely affect the ASA pilots. I expect our MEC to consult with them directly and to respect their concerns fully.

They are our friends as well as our allies and that is how it should stay.

 

[CMRoutlaw]

Taking us independant?

Surplus,
Nice post. I had to take a few coffee breaks in the middle but you have some valid points. I don't necessarily agree with the overwhelming consensus among the senior pilots at Comair that Freddie is a hatchet man. I think there is a good possibility that Grinstein told him to spruce up Comair so it could be sold and if that's the case, Fred could be the man in charge. What's better...CEO of an independant regional or a middle manager at Delta? Most people who like a challenge (and I think Fred does) would take the CEO job. Assuming I'm right, Fred's interest actually are alligned with ours in that he want's Comair to be a growing, profitable company in the future.
If we have to take a freeze/concessions to get there, then so be it but I don't see how it's a race to the bottom as long as our contract is still higher than our DCI counterparts. As a matter of fact, until we get all of the carriers close to one another, we will always get the short end of the stick. That's no big deal for all you senior captains out there but it blows for FOs looking at a ten year upgrade. Don't start preaching about holding up the professioin...we simply want the same job advancement and oppurtunities to accept new challenges that you had.
Can we not compete without being subsidized by Delta? I think we can if we are flexible and I think we'd be better off in the long run by being spun off by Delta. I think that's where Fred has been told to take us and until he has been caught lying red-handed, I will give him the benefit of the doubt.
As for why he would go around the MEC...his job is to communicate his plan and goals. Maybe he doesn't trust the MEC to communicate everything to us and after the RFP debacle last year, I don't either. He's just doing his job and we shouldn't be surprised.
I'll wait for the details of this proposal to come out but from what I've heard so far, I'm leaning "yes". I can't shut my mouth in the name of unity if I disagree with the hardliners. I get the impression from them that you are free to be heard as long as you don't disagree and I for one resent that.

 

[doh]

Surplus,

Awesome post, I could not agree more!

Outlaw,
The RFP debacle was so because it was NOT!!! a bid. If it had been then we would be growing. Lowest overall cost should equal lowest bid. It did'nt because they had already decided where the aircraft were going, period. There's the bald face lie that Phred has been caught in. Still ready to give him the benefit of the doubt? We should still be willing to negotiate something good for every one, but tread lightly!

 

[FDJ2]

Please cut and paste where I made any of those assertions. I never made the first two points and the third is true. The J4J agreement was rammed down the throats of the MEC, splitting the MEC, under threat of all the jobs going away ( like CC Air already proved ).

You know, you're right, I mistakenly attributed "N's" incorrect delcaration for yours. By your above comments, I take it that you agree that the PSA J4J protocol that required an alteration to the PSA PWA was in fact not unilaterally done by mainline pilots, but rather agreed to by the overwhelming majority of the PSA MEC. I take it that you must also agree that the PSA MEC was aware of the 50-50 ratio called for in the J4J protocol when they ratified J4J inaccordance with the ALPA Constitution and By-Laws.

However, your statement that the opportunity to fly larger jet aircraft, as a result of the unfortunate concessions extracted from the US pilots somehow split the PSA MEC lacks credibility. The PSA MEC overwhelmingly supported this agreement by a vote of 8-1. Having only one dissenting vote can hardly be characterized as splitting an MEC. You can, of course, characterize this agreement any way you want, but then again no one ever voted for you or authorized you to speak for the PSA pilots. Given that, I think I'll go with the characterization given by someone who was, Capt Barnett, as opposed to the rhetoric of others.

"We are extremely pleased to reach a settlement with our management for this aircraft" said Capt. William Barnett, secretary-treasurer of the PSA pilots’ unit of ALPA. "We want to see PSA prosper and grow. The operation of these larger jets will help us to provide better service and coverage for our portion of the US Airways network."

 

[bvt1151]

Surplus,

Awesome post, I could not agree more!

Outlaw,
The RFP debacle was so because it was NOT!!! a bid. If it had been then we would be growing. Lowest overall cost should equal lowest bid. It did'nt because they had already decided where the aircraft were going, period. There's the bald face lie that Phred has been caught in. Still ready to give him the benefit of the doubt? We should still be willing to negotiate something good for every one, but tread lightly!

If you can't prove it, how is it a bold faced lie?

 

[jetflyer]

Surplus,

The first year F.O.s would not get stuck at the 1st year pay rate. When they get off PROBATION, they will go to the second year pay which is I believe around $37.00 an hour.

I think you believed they would be stuck at first year pay. Going to second year pay isn't a bad deal for the junior F.O.s. If anything they have the most to benefit. They will get 2nd year pay and be off reserve very, very quickly with the hiring of approximately 400 pilots.

The bottom 200 F.O.s CURRENTLY on the Comair list will all be off reserve, for which currently there is no end, and the Junior Lineholders and commuters will benefit GREATLY by much much better lines(with 400 additional pilots below them they'll be half way up the F.O. list and atleast hope hope for their and their families future).

I respectfully think you're concern for the JUNIOR pilots is simply misguided. I think they have more to gain than anyone on the list.

Why do you think the attrition has been coming from JUNIOR F.O.s at Comair the last year??? They had lost hope for the future. They were giving up and going to CHQ!! NO LIE. I know many many F.O.s that wish they were at CHQ and not Comair. I'm not one of them.

I talked first in a group and then one on one with Fred Butrell today in one of the wings of Concourse C.

I was impressed. He is a true leader, no lie. I DO NOT believe he's some half crazed lunatic trying to rape our contract. He came across as a leader that wanted to make Comair better. He wanted suggestions. He is very very open to suggestions. He said he's been in the PILOT'S LOUNGE till 11:00 and 11:30 the last two nights getting advice and talking with pilots and flight attendants to find out our concerns.

At one point he said gooberishly with a Jim Kerry like grin something to the effect that, "I love aviation. I'm just an aviation dork that's been lucky in this business. This is my passion"

He even drove the tug to push back one of the airplanes!

This may come as a shock to people. MIKE STUART, Senior Vice President, Aircraft Operations RESIGNED TODAY. I know he's not very well liked by many pilots so I thought people might want to hear the story I was told from a line check-airmen. This may or may not be 100% true. The story as I was told from my Captain today who is a very respected Line Check-Airman at Comair is this:

Fred has talked to many, many people and asked how to improve Comair. He's been talking almost every day since he's been here to pilots, flight attendants, rampers, and all other employees. Many complained about the APUs being deferred for the maximum 10 days even in the 100 degree summers and -20 degree winters. It's RIDICULOUS and we all know it. He told Mike Stuart a while back to arrange to have the APUs working within 2 days of the deferral. Mike Stuart supposedly did NOTHING to make this happen. Fred didn't like this.
He told Mike to listen to him and wanted them to develop a relationship of trust and working together OR that Mike Stuart could RESIGN. Mike Stuart then resigned.

Thought those that hadn't heard that would be interested to hear it. He's Don Osmondson's ,the VP of Flt Ops, boss to those that haven't heard of him. Crazy.

Good luck to all at Comair no matter what happens at Comair.

Oh and what will happen at Comair if the vote comes down NO on this????
Anybody think Delta won't just to prove their point let Comair shrink as the planes reach the end of their lives. I personally think they will just to keep their WHIPSAW game alive. Should Comair become the first to suffer from the whipsaw?? I hope it doesn't end up that way. ASA, Skywest, and CHQ have all gotten growth at Comair's expense. Granted ASA pilots had absolutely no choice and I hold no grudges against you guys.
I think it's time to stop protecting the profession and protect ourselves!

Jet

 

[surplus1]

Surplus,
Nice post. I had to take a few coffee breaks in the middle but you have some valid points. I don't necessarily agree with the overwhelming consensus among the senior pilots at Comair that Freddie is a hatchet man.

Thanks for your comments. I did warn you that it was going to be long. From my perspective and I hope yours as well, it does not matter whether or not FB is a "hatchet man" or any other name you like better. What is important is that he has made a proposal that will affect the future of all Comair pilots one way or another. I fell that he is entitled to a response. However, that response should NOT be a YES/NO vote that doesn't consider our options. That would be the same as having no union at all. This was not a "take it or leave it" proposal, it was the beginning and the introduction of a modified concept (compared to what we've heard before). We have heard what he had to say, now it is his turn to hear what we have to say. What we need, in my opinion, is an itelligent and well thought out response, not a knee jerk reaction. That's what I'm advocating.

That's no big deal for all you senior captains out there but it blows for FOs looking at a ten year upgrade. Don't start preaching about holding up the professioin...we simply want the same job advancement and oppurtunities to accept new challenges that you had.

It is just as much a big deal for senior captains, junior captains, senior F/O's and junior F/O. That was the major focus of what I had to say. We as a pilot group cannot have some members of our family that are more important than other members. We're all in this together. You don't seem to realize that.

If we protect the senior captains and ignore the most junior first officer, we have failed. If we protect the most junior first officer and do not protect the senior captains we have also failed. There is no point in giving you opportunities for advancement if that means when you get there, there is nothing left worth having. By the same token, hanging on to everything we seniors now have, and feeding you to the wolves to do it would be an equal disaster for all of us. We must find the way to balance whatever we do so that each one of us, from the most senior captain to the very last new hire on the property today, retains as much as possible of what we have. I cannot ask you to sacrifice your future so that I can keep everything that I have. You cannot ask me to give up everything I have so that you can be advanced, only to discover than when you get there, there's not much worth having. That doesn't make sense. If we are to make a sacrifice for the growth of our Company, Comair, then we must make that sacrifice together in a way that benefits all of us, as much as is possible. What I have seen of the current proposal does NOT do that. The hit on our probationary pilots would be huge compared to everyone else. That is not fair to them and we must do something to fix it.

I'm not concerned about "protecting the profession". My only concern is protecting the interests of Comair pilots fairly; all of them! I don't even know how many probationary pilots we currently have but, I do know that I can't allow them to take a $14 to $18 per hour hit, when they complete probation, just so that my hit will only be $4. That is grossly unfair. It would create a "B-scale" and divide this pilot group for the next 10 years, at a minimum. I can't agree to that.

It does not matter whether we remain a Delta subsidiary or we are spun off. Either way, the impact of an unfair solution will hurt this pilot group. If you "belong", which I assume you do, then we must work together in the interests of our group as a whole. That's how I see it.

If we allow this President or any other president of this company, now or in the future, to go around our MEC and negotiate directly with individual groups of pilots, we will set ourselves up for the perfect slaughter. That kind of thinking is not beneficial to anyone that's a Comair pilot.

If you do not trust the people that are currently running our union, then change those people to someone that you do trust. But, don't cut off your nose to spite your face by trusting your management more than you trust your fellow pilots. Sorory, but that's not smart. And the RFP was not a debacle. At that time, the decision to hold the line was the right decision.

I'll wait for the details of this proposal to come out but from what I've heard so far, I'm leaning "yes". I can't shut my mouth in the name of unity if I disagree with the hardliners. I get the impression from them that you are free to be heard as long as you don't disagree and I for one resent that.

I'm not a "hardliner". I did not ask you to "shut your mouth" and I would not want you to do that. As long as you remain a Comair pilot you have a right to express your opinion on any issue that we face and disagreement does not upset me. However, attempts to divide the pilot group against itself and create factions based on self-interest does upset me, and I will do all I can to prevent that. In truth, I resent attempts to destroy our unity far more than anything else I can think of.

The reason is simple: I know the benefits of unity. I also know the price of not having it. "A house divided against itself cannot stand."

It is time to talk with the Company. It is NOT time to sell our souls to the company store.

 

[doh]

bvt,

Explain to me how the "lowest overall cost" operater can't get any bids. Phred said we would not grow until we gave a pay cut. He is also the author of the RFP. If it was a straight bid like he said, then the "lowest overall cost" (those are Gerry Grinstein's words) would get all the flying. Ergo, Phred is lying. Or else please tell me how the "bid" failed.
P.S. Looking at my previous post I see I made a couple of typos. My apologies to the grammer gods.

 

[701EV]

Surplus1,

Well thought out!

Very nicely done!

I sure hope that you will be woking with JC and CT on this. You bring up a lot of valid points!

701EV

 

[172driver]

Surplus and Jet,

You both have made some excellent points. I have tried to stay quiet about "the memo" so far because, as Surplus pointed out, there could be a lot written between the lines. Seems to me that a lot of people are basing their opinions of the memo on how they feel about Mr. Buttrell.

Those who feel he is just another Lorenzo type, here to reduce labor costs, are very suspicious and almost paranoid about the memo. There is much basis for this paranoia in the history of airline labor relations. Those who have been around for a while or who have educated themselves seem to be taking a harder look at what is not stated in the memo rather than what is.

Those who are newer at the company or who are generally trusting of authority are reading this thing and wondering what all the paranoia is about. Regardless of what you think, you have to hand it to Mr. Buttrell for being extremely shrewd. He played up all of our hopes and downplayed or phrased well all of our concerns. He did get the excitement flowing. He has been all over the airport, pumping people up, glad-handing, trying to earn our confidence. A big change from past styles. A lot of people are seeing this management change as the light at the end of the tunnel and thus are willing to listen to his proposal and take it at closer to face value.

If there is a difference of opinion in the pilot group right now, I see it as a result of different levels of trust, not seniority. I am a fairly junior FO but if I have learned anything about this pilot group it's this: Comair pilots have been through a lot together and understand what it's like to be at the bottom of the list as well as the top, the bottom of the labor market as well as the top. They have been through battles with management and bear the scars. The senior guys have never sold the juniors down the river and vice versa. Our contract is the best in the industry but, by far, the biggest gap on the pay scale between us and other airlines is at the FO level. Every other regional has thrown their FO's under the bus.

Thus, I trust the senior guys not to throw away my shot at an upgrade or a stable career and I hope they trust me not to slash their pay for my own self-interest. We must wait and see exactly what this proposal contains when put into 'lawyer-ese.'

The MEC knows what our wish list is and I have no doubt they are hammering Fred with it right now. If the proposal is indeed simple and straightforward, as Fred asserts, it should be no problem to get 1st yr guys to 2nd yr pay, guarantee a delivery schedule with snapbacks and retro pay, keep 401k and vacation accrual progressing normally, assure that these are growth airframes, not replacements, etc. Write it all up as it appears if you interpret the memo in the most favorable manner, hand it to Fred, have him and GG sign it, and we've got a deal, all in less than 3 wks. If not, then I'm afraid Fred will have lost some trust from his supporters. We shall see...

On another note, at the risk of becoming Surplus-esque:

The CL65 is a wonderful airplane for 100-400 NM markets. Huge improvement over the turboprops. However, we are misusing the poor things. They were meant to do CVG-TYS in the mid 20's, not JFK-MCI in the mid 30's. We're stretching passenger and aircraft endurance limits and spreading too little revenue too thin on those legs.

The 170 is a very nice fit and the logical next step for the 'regionals.' Better range, more comfort, and first class for the all important business traveller. Make no mistake, Delta sees this and WILL operate many of these airplanes. For once, they are being smart and proactive. I believe we must do the same as the 170's will be THE growth aircraft for DCI and we would like to have some of that action.

Do I think we should have to give something up to grow an already profitable company? No. All we are doing is giving up our money to allow them more profit in order to buy more assets to gain more profit. In a perfect world, this would never happen. In fact, it's ridiculous and would be laughed at in any other industry.

Do I think we are willing to? Yes. Alas, it is not a perfect world. Actually, I think the press release about the first 16 170's that went to Republic made a lot of sense. As much as we would like to pretend we are a separate entity from DAL, we are not, especially when it comes to securing financing. As I said, Delta is going to operate these planes. Republic is able to provide the financing thus they got the planes.

Would Delta rather see us get them? Probably so as we provide them a bigger profit margin. Do they want us to have them bad enough to just give them to us, regardless of our 'contentious labor union?' I don't think so. Can they finance them without our givebacks? That, I don't know. Will they? NO! Those who are saying we will get these planes no matter what we do are fooling themselves. Management does not like to be made to look soft or stupid. They will let us stagnate indefinitely if we want to be stubborn.

So, it is up to us. We must see the negotiated proposal, not the memo, and decide. What are they asking for? What are we getting in return? What will happen if we say no?

 

[surplus1]

Surplus,

The first year F.O.s would not get stuck at the 1st year pay rate. When they get off PROBATION, they will go to the second year pay which is I believe around $37.00 an hour.

The proposal, as published in the memo, is not clear on that. If you are correct, that would satisfy me with respect to that particular concern.

I think you believed they would be stuck at first year pay. Going to second year pay isn't a bad deal for the junior F.O.s. If anything they have the most to benefit. They will get 2nd year pay and be off reserve very, very quickly with the hiring of approximately 400 pilots.

I did not necessarily believe that would happen but based on what I've seen, in writing, it could easily happen. If you are correct and the probationary pilots would go to increment pay at the end of probation, regardless of when a freeze begins, I say again I would personally be ok with that part.

The bottom 200 F.O.s CURRENTLY on the Comair list will all be off reserve, for which currently there is no end, and the Junior Lineholders and commuters will benefit GREATLY by much much better lines(with 400 additional pilots below them they'll be half way up the F.O. list and atleast hope hope for their and their families future).

I recognize all the QOL enhancement you mention as being of considerable value. If there is growth, those things would be realized and the benefit is acknowledged. However, there is more to the book than the cover. Just as our decision should not be allowed to harm FO's more than others it also should not favor first officers more than others. That is why the details must be worked out and all options considered.

I respectfully think you're concern for the JUNIOR pilots is simply misguided. I think they have more to gain than anyone on the list.

Perhaps my concern for the junior pilots is not justified due to lack of information but it is not misguided.

The only source of information that I have is the memo from Mr. Buttrell and his ad hoc statements, both of which generated my concerns. If you have better information that's great. However, one of the things I have learned over time, the hard way, is that you can believe none of what you hear and only half of what you see. I am therefore extremely suspicious of promises and have little faith in "the big picture" when it is not backed up with contractual details. As my mother would have said, "the proof of the pudding is the pot". I've been in this business long enough to learn that you don't pay good money for wishes or promises, you exchange it only for hard data and solid contracts.

None of the questions or concerns that I have expressed are intended to generate the rejection of a legitimate proposal. However, before I'm willing to sign on the dotted line, I would like to see the concepts of the proposal translated to something I can chew on. Promises are made to be broken. Contractual language offers at least some modicum of security. That's what I want. In my view, only successful negotiations can produce a finished product; not blind sided proposals without detail.

Why do you think the attrition has been coming from JUNIOR F.O.s at Comair the last year??? They had lost hope for the future. They were giving up and going to CHQ!! NO LIE. I know many many F.O.s that wish they were at CHQ and not Comair. I'm not one of them.

No offense intended but those who have "lost hope for the future" as the result of one year with no growth probably don't have the stomach for this business in the first place and would do better to get out of it or to go somewhere else for they make "weak sisters". Likewise those that would feel better at CHQ should head in that direction post haste. I'm not willing to make any sacrifices for folks that don't have a stake in this airline. It may sound cruel to some but, as I tried to say earlier, to me, this is not about "preserving the profession" for somebody else (who wouldn't do that for me) nor is it about helping anyone to get PIC time so that he/she can go somewhere else. I don't hate or dislike those that seek what they percieve to be greener pastures. But, I have no desire to help pay their way. On the other hand I am willing to invest in the future of Comair and of Comair pilots.

I do not believe in the idea that pilots can buy growth with their compensation. However, I do believe that long-term growth is necessary for the health of a Company and I am ameanable to helping my Company stay in the running. Therefore, I am willing to invest in the growth of Comair for the benefit of Comair pilots, not for the benefit of those using this airline as a waypoint to another. Those folks can invest in themselves.

Like any sensible investor, I need to understand what I'm investing in, what the reasonably expected return on my investment will be, how and when that return will be realized and the details surrounding the transaction. It is not enough to whisper "it's such a deal" in my ear. I won't buy promises but I will invest in security. There is no future in throwing good money after bad. There's a bright future from a well made investment.

At one point he said gooberishly with a Jim Kerry like grin something to the effect that, "I love aviation. I'm just an aviation dork that's been lucky in this business. This is my passion"

I like people with "passion" but only when they are females. After a while however, the passion wears off and you begin to focus on whether or not she can cook. There is nothing passionate about a turkey from which the giblets were not removed before the baking, a flat souffle or the taste of burnt toast. Passion has long been the nemesis of the airline pilot. It has never produced a successful airline, a career without furlough, a big pay check or a bountiful retirement. Those goodies come from clear thinking, sound judgement, limited risk taking and prudent investment. In contrast, too much passion usually produces a large alimony payment.

He even drove the tug to push back one of the airplanes!

Impressive.

This is may come as a shock to people. MIKE STUART, Senior Vice President, Aircraft Operations RESIGNED TODAY.

If FB can be credited with this he has won many, many points. Now if he can follow that up with the departure of the "pied Piper" we can order a few Pizzas and celebrate in Ops.

I think it's time to stop protecting the profession and protect ourselves!

I think you might want to do a little more thinking. If "the profession" is destroyed or made undesirable there will be nothing to protect ourselves for. When it stands alone, self interest has little or no value as an investment. I think you may have unwittingly revealed a chink in your armour. I ask only that you think with more depth.

 

[Nindiri]

If it passes, will people be willing to negotiate again in a year or two to get the newly hired 400 pilots off of reserve? I'm not saying you should or should not, just saying that it's a decision you'll be faced with in the near future because the bottom of the list will always be on reserve. Do you think that the economic picture a couple of years from now will give you more leverage to gain additional growth without further contract freezes?

 

[BluDevAv8r]

.....

 

[surplus1]

172driver,

Excellent post sir. You have captured the essence of what I've been trying to say. And, more importantly, you have made some high quality points of your own that I had neglected. [Even at the risk of Surplus-esque ... LOL]. It just goes to show that CRM does work, even on a fourm. I wish I knew you personally. Perhaps I'll get lucky and we'll meet one day.

Thanks again for a quality effort.

Would Delta rather see us get them? Probably so as we provide them a bigger profit margin. Do they want us to have them bad enough to just give them to us, regardless of our 'contentious labor union?' I don't think so.

You and I agree on those points.

Can they finance them without our givebacks? That, I don't know. Will they? NO! Those who are saying we will get these planes no matter what we do are fooling themselves. Management does not like to be made to look soft or stupid. They will let us stagnate indefinitely if we want to be stubborn.

Yes; in terms of money they can finance them without givebacks. There is no way we could give enough to even come close to paying, in real dollars, the leases on 35 airplanes with givebacks. However, although intangible, the psychological impact of a concessionary agreement will definitely help. It has a lot of "good will" value to the lender.

Although I don't like to say it, the answer to your "will they" is just as you say; NO. If we stonewall, their reaction is almost certain to be very much as you predict, and for the very reasons you state. While they now have a different CEO from the one during our strike, and a different President, we must not forget that senior management officials may develop different business plans than those of other sernior managers, but where the rubber meets the road in labor relations, their thought process is not much different. It is more about power than it is about money.

Don't forget, during our strike they took a $700 million dollar hit over 89 days to save $50 million over 5 years. It wasn't about the money then, it was about the power. If they are rejected out of hand, they will do it again, and this time it will be much cheaper for them. Result: we'll take it in the shorts.

So, it is up to us. We must see the negotiated proposal, not the memo, and decide. What are they asking for? What are we getting in return? What will happen if we say no?

I like your closing and I like your questions. I would take the liberty of adding one more question that I believe we must answer, perhaps inserted before your last. What will happen if we say yes?

If we cannot answer that question before we sign, it will not matter much what happens if we say no.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

 

[172driver]

If it passes, will people be willing to negotiate again in a year or two to get the newly hired 400 pilots off of reserve? I'm not saying you should or should not, just saying that it's a decision you'll be faced with in the near future because the bottom of the list will always be on reserve. Do you think that the economic picture a couple of years from now will give you more leverage to gain additional growth without further contract freezes?

It just depends what's on the table, conditions of the economy and the company at the time. We are not currently negotiating solely to get people off of reserve, by the way.

Some see this as a possible avenue to kickstart a stagnant company which has been ruthlessly undercut in a highly competitive market. There is no indication that DAL has any motivation to grow us now or in the future without some kind of concession on our part. Our competitors have already accepted much less and DAL has shown that they are more than happy to reward them.

If the proposal shakes out as written, we still have an industry leading contract. I have no doubt that we would accept no less than that. All we can ask is for other groups to do the same when their next turn comes up, which leads nicely into the second question.

If we go into negotiations in 01/06, as scheduled, what do we have to bargain with? We are already at the top and have been for five years. Our competitors have fallen short and are growing like wildfire as a result. If we are able to trade pay raises and our amendable date for a little growth now, it will give said competitors a chance to show some cojones and top us, give us some movement, introduce us to the soon to be growing 170 market, and possibly allow us to negotiate in a more favorable climate.

Or...they could lowball again and we'd all continue this lovely spiral. I have more faith than that, however. I am not a big CHQ hater. They achieved big gains last time, not industry leading, but they had a long way to go and were a much smaller carrier than they will be next time. If it happens again though...grrr.