Bill, paranoia is on of those words that people use when they do not want to debate a concern or specific. It's not paranoia. It is looking at the language and the history of DALPA that makes one look to a scenario where the language would fail, not be defended, or renegotiated.

Exclusions, lead to more exclusions, or lawsuits from carriers like SKW if we defend our language. I have stated where I have my biggest concerns wrt to section 1, and many of them are when we negotiate our new TA in 2015-2016.

There are so many data points leading to further scope modifications that do not result in a long term vision that one must be in denial not to see; the 100 seat battle, as well as new provisions like Holding Company, will come under attack in the next round or two. What's a few thousand more pounds on a 76 seat allowance? It's breathing lifeblood in to. An operation that outsources not just our jobs but the jobs of all DAL employees. It's further erosion or modification of section 1 to facilitate a business plan.

Is 12% worth further modifications or erosion? When is enough enough? When is it time to change the paradigm of how we view small gauge flying and it's importance in better not just our careers but those after us?