I don't think there is anybody that "supports" the "amalgamation" as it has been coined. It is the successorship section of the CBA. It is just what we are stuck with at this point. I think the frustration comes from knowing that since we are destined to lose this "minor" dispute in the eyes of an arbitrator, why are we delaying the inevitable? The answer is because our union leadership would rather risk the viability of the airline and it's relationship with valuable business partners to perpetuate attrition. I understand it, I just don't agree. IMO, it won't change the path nor the substance of the negotiations. In this day and age during this unprecedented time in our industry, I think diplomacy would have yielded greater results. If anything were to happen that resulted in the loss of a contract, the union is at risk of liability for condoning the SHOP and BOOT and perhaps even for just the perception that the union condoned such a hard line stance from the labor group and perhaps we could all be out of jobs. You think BK cares? NO! He is retired.