Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

NWA reaches TA with pilots

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Falconjet said:
Shon: I realize that everything is all peaches and cream over there at jB, but just imagine for a moment if you will this scenario.

Say that jetBlue decided to bring on the E-190 to replace the Bus instead of augment it. They also decide that they would rather start over with a new company and new pilots to reduce their costs. This might reduce your pilot ranks by oh, 25-30%. On top of that those that are left will have to take a 20% pay cut.

I know it couldn’t happen because of that wonderful 5 year contract you have with them, but just for a moment imagine that jB management got a judge to throw out that nice 5 year furlough pay deal because they couldn’t abide by their agreement and still be competitive. So the bottom 25-30% of your pilot group just got the axe so that the company could go replace them with some newer, cheaper labor.

Do you think that jB pilots might consider forming a union to protect what was left of their interests if jB management had treated them that way? Do you think that maybe a few of the jB pilots might be less than thrilled with that turn of events and might want to demonstrate their feelings to management? Do you think that some of the ones not furloughed would decide that it might be better to look elsewhere for employment rather than stay behind after that kind of treatment from management?


With a strike vote the NW pilots are telling management loud and clear that IF the company was to impose those actions on them that the job wasn’t worth it to them anymore and they would withhold their services. At some point the job isn’t worth having if the working conditions forced upon you are too onerous and the pay too low. .


That is why they had the strike vote, and in my opinion that was the only way they had to let management know that they had finally had enough. Cards on the table, if you want a newco, you can have the whole enchilada. Did it hurt business? Probably, but some times you have to take a stand for what is right, and bear the consequences. If you want to blame someone, blame management, who refused to even negotiate with the union on the scope issue and wouldn't budge on their demand for wage cuts in the slightest. They pushed the issue to the brink, not the pilots.


I commend the pilots at NW for demonstrating this, and expect that those at Delta will soon follow with similar results.

I am not naïve enough to think that the mere presence of a union on the property could prevent furloughs, concessions or loss of scope. I do, however, feel that a united pilot group stands a better chance of protecting the majority’s interests than one that isn’t. I think these two cases demonstrate that very fact.


Best of luck to both the NW and DAL pilot groups.


FJ

FJ,

Wow, what an excellent summary of the events at NWA. Our MEC couldn't have said it any better.

I hope that our struggle gets communicated through out the pilot ranks at every airline.

Yes, it can happen at any airline. So be forewarned, and be ready to put it all on the line. An be ready to walk away from a career that could be changeg into to a lousy job .

It takes a tremendous amount of resolve from the entire pilot group, and a tremendous amount of sacrafice by each pilot.

Thank you for the support of the NWA pilot group.
 
Falconjet said:
Shon: I realize that everything is all peaches and cream over there at jB, but just imagine for a moment if you will this scenario.

Say that jetBlue decided to bring on the E-190 to replace the Bus instead of augment it. They also decide that they would rather start over with a new company and new pilots to reduce their costs. This might reduce your pilot ranks by oh, 25-30%. On top of that those that are left will have to take a 20% pay cut.

I know it couldn’t happen because of that wonderful 5 year contract you have with them, but just for a moment imagine that jB management got a judge to throw out that nice 5 year furlough pay deal because they couldn’t abide by their agreement and still be competitive. So the bottom 25-30% of your pilot group just got the axe so that the company could go replace them with some newer, cheaper labor.

Do you think that jB pilots might consider forming a union to protect what was left of their interests if jB management had treated them that way? Do you think that maybe a few of the jB pilots might be less than thrilled with that turn of events and might want to demonstrate their feelings to management? Do you think that some of the ones not furloughed would decide that it might be better to look elsewhere for employment rather than stay behind after that kind of treatment from management?


With a strike vote the NW pilots are telling management loud and clear that IF the company was to impose those actions on them that the job wasn’t worth it to them anymore and they would withhold their services. At some point the job isn’t worth having if the working conditions forced upon you are too onerous and the pay too low. .


That is why they had the strike vote, and in my opinion that was the only way they had to let management know that they had finally had enough. Cards on the table, if you want a newco, you can have the whole enchilada. Did it hurt business? Probably, but some times you have to take a stand for what is right, and bear the consequences. If you want to blame someone, blame management, who refused to even negotiate with the union on the scope issue and wouldn't budge on their demand for wage cuts in the slightest. They pushed the issue to the brink, not the pilots.


I commend the pilots at NW for demonstrating this, and expect that those at Delta will soon follow with similar results.

I am not naïve enough to think that the mere presence of a union on the property could prevent furloughs, concessions or loss of scope. I do, however, feel that a united pilot group stands a better chance of protecting the majority’s interests than one that isn’t. I think these two cases demonstrate that very fact.


Best of luck to both the NW and DAL pilot groups.


FJ

Where did you get the impression that shon works at B6? That's never been indicated in any of his postings, most of which I disagree with by the way.

Never miss an opportunity to take a shot though. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Because when SW came along they brought tract home living to the industry. Those who were all too happy to help them in their endevor have no right to criticize those concessions that may come to an airline near them soon.

Criticize who? Concessions have come to a lot of airlines near us. Where you been?
Home is where the heart is.. its ok if you live in a single-wide.
 
Last edited:
DTW320 said:
Thats a great question. Even though we haven't seen the details yet I've heard it has mainly come down to the differences in valuation of different items. .

this is a huge issue at Delta. For example the company offer puts no value at all on their scope request.

I suspect you will see the same at Delta. A deal will be reached that publicly will give the company what they are seeking, but the devil is in the details.
 
When the judge asked management what value they put on NEWCO and they said ZERO, he told them it was off the table. Revalued some items and probably added profit sharing and equity to finish the deal. Early retirement offer will be key to minimizing or eliminating more furloughs.
 
My Bad!

zonker said:
Where did you get the impression that shon works at B6? That's never been indicated in any of his postings, most of which I disagree with by the way.

Never miss an opportunity to take a shot though. :rolleyes:

Zonker: I'm not sure why I thought he did, but it was an honest mistake. I was just trying to illustrate a point, not slam jB.

Post wasn't meant to take a shot at anybody, just explain the issue as I see it.

FJ
 
Falconjet said:
Zonker: I'm not sure why I thought he did, but it was an honest mistake. I was just trying to illustrate a point, not slam jB.

Post wasn't meant to take a shot at anybody, just explain the issue as I see it.

FJ

It's cool. I didn't wanted to be associated with that guy.

:)
 
COpilot said:
Don't vote based on just a bullet point memo. Make sure you see a whole review of the contract, we found all kinds of back door B.S. in our Contract '02 after the book had already arrived.
Nahh, no need to read the whole TA; I voted no on POS '02 after looking over the bullet point memo. That was all I needed to see...
 
jbDC9 said:
Nahh, no need to read the whole TA; I voted no on POS '02 after looking over the bullet point memo. That was all I needed to see...

Have I missed the review of the TA? Has someone posted a synopsis? Sorry if I missed it elsewhere.
 
johnsonrod said:
Have I missed the review of the TA? Has someone posted a synopsis? Sorry if I missed it elsewhere.

No, we expect it to be out on monday, however, the F/A TA is out and I could show you that.
 
Southwest Pilots worry about their house, its simple. Our house is in order, always has been. We didn't tell you how to build your house. Why worry about our house?

No sir. We all live in different rooms OF THE SAME HOUSE. That's why we jack up the house one corner at a time.

Learn the history of your profession. 3/4 of an acre and a riding lawnmower does not make you part of the landed gentry.
 
xjhawk said:
so as per your pilot friend......okay how long would it take NWA to start a new certificate or aquire a new one?You say that they would abandon all their stock options and 100 million in bankruptcy releif which Mesaba (MAIR Holdings) to just leave behind such an investment? Lets see who owns a bunch of MAIR stock.....Carl polad....and from what i hear, a few others associated with NWA......not to mention the 30-40% stock in MAIR holdings with options for more....sounds like a bunch of bull that they would let MEsaba wither to nothing. But then i am hopeful for MEsaba since i am there now, as per My pilot friends posts over the last few weeks, you might have some inside info, but i seriously doubt it, i think you just like spreading rumors............
Oh God, what did pilotfriend say now? I have him on ignore, so I don't see his posts... always flamebait with that guy / gal / hermaphrodite / whatever.

Let me guess, he's saying Northwest won't put any conceeded 70-seaters at PCL or MSA but some Newco or new certificate or Mesa or something...?

Unlikely. Both PCL and MSA have a certificate and training department up and running for the 50-seaters and it's the same type. Northwest doesn't play nice with others, so any company that flies for more than one flag carrier is out of the race more than likely (99.9% more than likely). NWA wants to ditch the Avro, my bet has 70-seaters going to MSA as replacements so they don't kill off the airline.

My big question is the T.A. and MemRat: currently the NWA MEC position is that any agreement would have to undergo Member Ratification. What happens if it doesn't pass? Would the MEC be able to rescind MemRat and sign it anyway? Just curious...

Good luck over there, I hope you guys were able to lock in some good Scope restrictions for whatever concessions you made. It sucks to think that a DC-9 F/O is probably going to be making the same or less than what I make now as a CRJ CA ($70k). :(
 
Letter of Agreement for Sjet for FA's at NWA

LETTER OF AGREEMENT
Between
NORTHWEST AIRLINES INC
And
THE PROFESSIONAL FLIGHT ATTENDANTS ASSOCIATION
Whereas, the Company and PFAA have an interest in facilitating employment
opportunities for Flight Attendants who have been furloughed from the Company; and
Whereas, an opportunity exists for certain furloughed Northwest Airlines, Inc. Flight
Attendants to be hired as Flight Attendants by SJet (a potential 51-76 seat small jet
operator owned greater than 50% by Northwest Airlines, Inc.).
The following provisions will apply:
A Company Flight Attendants who are on layoff and who are selected to perform services
for SJet (SJet Flight Attendant) will, for purposes of the NWA/PFAA Agreement, be
considered to be on layoff from Northwest Airlines, Inc., pursuant to Section 14 of the
NWA/PFAA Agreement for all purposes during their terms of service as SJet Flight
Attendants. Such Flight Attendants will, during their terms of service at SJet, be treated consistently with other furloughed Northwest Airlines Flight Attendants for purposes of
seniority, pension, longevity for pay, vacation, sick leave and SIV Date adjustment.
B During the term of employment with SJet, all pay, benefits, pension, work rules,
policies and procedures shall be established by SJet. Flight Attendants in the service of
SJet shall have separate seniority dates for NWA and SJet and reside on the two
separate seniority lists simultaneously.
C Company Flight Attendants who are on layoff and who are not hired by SJet shall have
no recourse (against either NWA or SJet) under this Agreement to challenge the
decision of SJet not to hire them.
D Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 14 of the NWA/PFAA Agreement regarding
recall of furloughed Flight Attendants, the following provisions shall apply to Company
Flight Attendants who are on layoff and who are selected to perform services for SJet.
1. Minimum Term of Service
The recall rights of an SJet Flight Attendant shall be deemed modified to the extent
necessary to provide for a Minimum Term of Service at SJet of 18 months. Such
18-month Minimum Term of Service shall begin on the date of hire by SJet and
shall end after the completion of the 18th flying month of employment with SJet.
2. Maximum Monthly Recall
The recall rights of an SJet Flight Attendant shall be deemed modified to the extent
necessary to provide that SJet may limit the maximum number of SJet Flight
Attendants recalled to the Company to five (5) per month. Only SJet Flight
Attendants who have completed their 18-month Minimum Terms of Service shall
be eligible for recall by the Company (in seniority order as listed on the
NWA/PFAA System Seniority List).
3. Recall from SJet
a. Recall Bypass: An SJet Flight Attendant who has not completed her/his Minimum
Term of Service obligation to SJet, or is not one of the five (5) most senior SJet
Flight Attendants who has completed her/his Minimum Term of Service obligation
to SJet, and who would otherwise be eligible for recall by the Company, shall be
bypassed for recall until such time as s/he has both (i) become one of the five (5)
most senior SJet Flight Attendants who has completed her/his Minimum Term of
Service obligation to SJet; and (ii) would otherwise be subject to recall by the
Company.
b. If an SJet Flight Attendants’ employment at SJet is terminated for any reason
before the time that she/he would be eligible for recall by the Company pursuant to
subparagraph a., above, she/he shall nevertheless be bypassed for recall until such
time as she/he would have been eligible for recall by the Company pursuant to
subparagraph a., above.
c. If an SJet Flight Attendant is on layoff status with SJet at a time when she/he
would otherwise be recalled by the Company, his/her Minimum Term of Service
obligation to SJet shall be deemed satisfied, and he shall not be subject to the
Maximum Monthly Recall provisions of subparagraph 2., above.
d. The parties recognize that the Recall Bypass provisions of this Letter of Agreement
may result in junior NWA Flight Attendants being recalled prior to more senior
NWA Flight Attendants employed by SJet, and new hire NWA Flight Attendants
being hired before NWA Flight Attendants employed by SJet are recalled. The
parties agree that the presence of such junior Flight Attendants and/or new hire
Flight Attendants in active service at the Company shall not create a recall right for
NWA Flight Attendants employed by SJet who were bypassed for recall as
provided in this Letter of Agreement; rather, such furloughed NWA Flight
Attendants employed by SJet will only be recalled when a need for additional
Flight Attendants exists at NWA and such Flight Attendant is the senior-most
Flight Attendant eligible for recall. The parties further agree that the five (5) year
period of continuous layoff provided by Section 14 H. of the NWA/PFAA
Agreement shall be tolled during any period of time that a furloughed NWA Flight
Attendant employed by SJet has been bypassed as provided in this Letter of
Agreement, but in no case should a period of continuous layoff exceed 84 months.
4. The Company shall maintain a list, updated on a quarterly basis and provided to the
PFAA, of furloughed NWA Flight Attendants who are on the SJet system seniority
list. The list shall include, for each such Flight Attendant, the date she/he
completes (or is projected to complete) his/her Minimum Term of Service at SJet,
and whether she/he is eligible for recall or subject to the Recall Bypass provisions
of this Letter of Agreement.
5. Any furloughed NWA Flight Attendant employed by SJet whose recall is delayed
or bypassed as a result of this Letter of Agreement, shall not be eligible for NWA
pay, benefits or accruals of any kind, including but not limited to, pension,
longevity for pay, vacation, sick leave and SIV Date adjustments during the period
of the delay or bypass.
6. Any furloughed NWA Flight Attendant employed by SJet whose recall was
bypassed as a result of the Letter of Agreement, and who is later eligible for recall,
shall have the right under Section 14 of the NWA/PFAA Agreement to decline
recall, provided there is a junior Flight Attendant on layoff who is eligible for
recall.
7. For purposes of application of Section 12.C.9, of the NWA/PFAA Flight Attendant
Agreement, furloughed Flight Attendants employed by SJet whose recall has been
delayed or bypassed as a result of this Letter of Agreement shall not be considered
when determining whether the Company can or can not fill permanent vacancies
through the application of Letters of Preference.
SJet Preferential Hiring
1. NWA shall obtain from SJet a waiver should SJet implement a policy that would
otherwise require a furloughed NWA Flight Attendant resign his/her employment
at NWA to be eligible for employment at SJet as a Flight Attendant.
2. NWA shall obtain from SJet a commitment to hire as SJet Flight Attendants
furloughed NWA Flight Attendants who apply, subject to the following conditions:
a. The applicant must submit a properly completed application to SJet in compliance
with SJet’s standard Flight Attendant employment application process.
b. The applicant must (i) submit to the standard interview process required of Flight
Attendant applicants at SJet; (ii) pass the standard SJet background check and
medical evaluation for Flight Attendants.
c. With respect to laid off Flight Attendants whose applications are on file at any one
time at SJet, and who meet the hiring requirements described in subparagraph b.
above, SJet shall make offers of employment in seniority order as listed on the
NWA/PFAA Flight Attendant System Seniority List.
F In order to be hired at SJet pursuant to this Letter of Agreement, furloughed NWA
Flight Attendants shall first be required to sign the attached document acknowledging
his acceptance of the terms of this Letter of Agreement. Such Flight Attendant shall
provide the signed acknowledgement to SJet in accordance with the instructions set
forth on the attachment. The Company shall provide a copy of the signed
acknowledgement to the PFAA.
 
Now that strikes me as confusing. Sjet would likely be more than 50% owned by NWA, after all it is just a shell company, yet according to the above, NWA needs to negotiate with Sjet concerning the recall to mainline of furloughed F/A's and NWA needs to negotiate hiring of furloughed NWA F/A's with Sjet.

Is it just me or is this confusing?
 
"C Company Flight Attendants who are on layoff and who are not hired by SJet shall have
no recourse (against either NWA or SJet) under this Agreement to challenge the
decision of SJet not to hire them".

IOW, NWA can select who they want to hire to Sjet, without looking at recall seniority. Wow, did the F/A's pass this and is NWA proposing the same to the pilots?
 
Last edited:
Dizel8 said:
"C Company Flight Attendants who are on layoff and who are not hired by SJet shall have
no recourse (against either NWA or SJet) under this Agreement to challenge the
decision of SJet not to hire them".

IOW, NWA can select who they want to hire to Sjet, without looking at recall seniority. Wow, did the F/A's pass this and is NWA proposing the same to the pilots?
I've been told the you can replace the word Flight Attendant with the word pilot in that letter of agreement. However, I have not seen the pilot TA yet. SJet is a modified mini-NewCo with some restrictions allowing a better deal for mainline pilots. Remember now, this is IF the company chooses to start up an SJet. It may elect to RFP the flying, and if that happens F/A's, pilots(maybe) have no rights unless NWA controls 50% or more.
 
Last edited:
johnsonrod said:
Have I missed the review of the TA? Has someone posted a synopsis? Sorry if I missed it elsewhere.

No, ( POS "02 ) is short hand for our contract at Continental. Just from the vibes in here, it's sounds like it's going to be way to good to last when compared to the industry. I think I already heard that on the wire, IAH has said we will now need to review our cost structure.

For CO pilots, on our ALPA website you can see the NWA 1113 filing as a compression to the T/A (when its out). Might give a good example where CO, DL, or any other airline management might start to look.
 
COpilot said:
No, ( POS "02 ) is short hand for our contract at Continental. Just from the vibes in here, it's sounds like it's going to be way to good to last when compared to the industry. I think I already heard that on the wire, IAH has said we will now need to review our cost structure.

For CO pilots, on our ALPA website you can see the NWA 1113 filing as a compression to the T/A (when its out). Might give a good example where CO, DL, or any other airline management might start to look.


You hit the nail on the head, Legacy wise according to our company, and concessionary types in our union, AA now has one of the industry leading contracts.

What is happening to this profession.:crying:

AA

Our union also has NW information as well as the CAL contract. They would like us to take on CAL's productivity.
 
Last edited:
2. Maximum Monthly Recall
The recall rights of an SJet Flight Attendant shall be deemed modified to the extent
necessary to provide that SJet may limit the maximum number of SJet Flight
Attendants recalled to the Company to five (5) per month.
Wow - so NWA could only recall a max of 60 a year if they wanted to? Later in the agreement it says that this might result in NWA having new hire FA classes while other FAs are on furlough.

I only bring this up because YourPilotFriend says that the pilot TA is very similar.
 
iaflyer said:
I only bring this up because YourPilotFriend says that the pilot TA is very similar.

I have not read the TA for the pilots.
 
iaflyer said:
Wow - so NWA could only recall a max of 60 a year if they wanted to? Later in the agreement it says that this might result in NWA having new hire FA classes while other FAs are on furlough.

I only bring this up because YourPilotFriend says that the pilot TA is very similar.

Recall of f/a's from sjet would be limited to 5/month. Those who don't work at sjet can be recalled as fast as necessary. Combined with the 18 month commitment, it provides protection for sjet from unusually high attrition and/or training costs. Who will sjet be?
 
Food for thought

YourPilotFriend said:
I've been told the you can replace the word Flight Attendant with the word pilot in that letter of agreement. However, I have not seen the pilot TA yet. SJet is a modified mini-NewCo with some restrictions allowing a better deal for mainline pilots. Remember now, this is IF the company chooses to start up an SJet. It may elect to RFP the flying, and if that happens F/A's, pilots(maybe) have no rights unless NWA controls 50% or more.


NWA owns 40% or less of XJ/MAIR.
 
The TA Appears to be up
The Restructuring Agreement TA is now available on the pilots web
site at:

https://www.nwaalpa.org/pilots

As usual, your username is your employee number. Your password,
(unless you have changed it), is your ALPA number with no leading
zero and no dash.

===========================================================================
This message is from the FastMail! service of the NWA MEC.

To change the email address that FastMail! is sent to, please visit:

http://www.nwaalpa.org/pilots/settings
 
DTW320 said:
Dear little shon,

Here is your original claim:

Then you go on to detail how NWA enplaned pax are down 6.5% YTD compared to 2005. But NWA ASM's are down 11.9% for the same period. So shon, using "elementary mathmatics" please tell us how pax decreasing much less % wise than the capacity is decreasing = passengers shying away from the airline due to the strike threat. Oh yeah, you also never answered the ? about how reaching a TA is bad for the airline and pilots as you claimed in your original post. Typical.

Maybe you should go practice "elementary mathmatics" on your 150hr logbook in your c150 and come back when you get a clue.


Enplaned passengers -- this number represents actual enplanements. The revenue loss that resulted from the strike threat and the decrease in bookings is much higher and is not accurately reflected in this number. The same is happening at Delta -- where too a TA will be reached one way or another.

As for how reaching a TA is bad for the airline -- that was not my point. If the pilots wanted to strike they should have stood their ground. The threat of a strike followed by a TA helps neither group. And for all you naysayers who will go claiming that this TA will never pass (the MEC is already encouraging members to ratify it).

It will take years for NWA to recover and guys like you will forever complain how the company screwed you and did not give you your entitlements (which would be based, of course on seniority, and not merit).
 
I wondered how long it would take Shone to pipe in - what a KOOK! Get over yourself guy! We get it, you're anti-Union. I may not be all that pleased with ALPA, but when I get my NWA job back in the next 14 years and you are still flying your RJ wishing you made the Show I'll just keep on laughing!

D!ck.....

Baja.
 
As for how reaching a TA is bad for the airline -- that was not my point. If the pilots wanted to strike they should have stood their ground. The threat of a strike followed by a TA helps neither group.

SHON,

Now let me get this right, you state the pilots should go ahead and strike even with a TA because they said they would.

Are you a complete idiot?

The strike threat was to force the company to the negotiating table and if there is an agreement, the strike strike threat disappears. The objective is to get an agreement, not to strike.
 
Can anyone tell me if NW is funding the retirement. At DL the Co. is letting it die a slow death and this is one of the holdups in negotiations.
 
shon7 said:
Enplaned passengers -- this number represents actual enplanements. The revenue loss that resulted from the strike threat and the decrease in bookings is much higher and is not accurately reflected in this number. The same is happening at Delta -- where too a TA will be reached one way or another.

As for how reaching a TA is bad for the airline -- that was not my point. If the pilots wanted to strike they should have stood their ground. The threat of a strike followed by a TA helps neither group. And for all you naysayers who will go claiming that this TA will never pass (the MEC is already encouraging members to ratify it).

It will take years for NWA to recover and guys like you will forever complain how the company screwed you and did not give you your entitlements (which would be based, of course on seniority, and not merit).

Those enplanement numbers may be correct, but the fact is that the employees have every right to complain, because they are getting screwed. It's not an employee problem, it's a revenue problem. Further, under the RLA the company can drag it's heels during the next round of negotiations and force the employees to work under the same contract for years. Where is the equity and "merit" in that?

Further, your post implies that employees are somehow lazy or do not care about their company because they're on a seniority list, which is of course complete garbage.
 
zonker said:
Further, your post implies that employees are somehow lazy or do not care about their company because they're on a seniority list, which is of course complete garbage.
BINGO!

Employees care about employees just as much as management motivates them to. When a management group cares about its employees and SHOWS that concern through their ACTIONS, an employee group will bend over backwards to help the company whenever they can.

However, when an employee group gets abused by their management group that shows through their ACTIONS that they care nothing for the well-being of the employees, that employee group will work JUST HARD ENOUGH not to get fired, and NO FURTHER.

The onus is on management to incentivize their employees to care. Professionals will do their job, to insinuate they somehow will not JUST BECAUSE they're unionized? Pure garbage. Smoke crack lately?
 
Last edited:

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom