True. But he moved to the lead position on the board at his departure. TA2 came to a vote a quick five months after he left, in what was described as a carefully orchestrated succession plan that was several years in the making. Did he really misunderstand the potential for increased value to the pilots if we said no to TA1, or was he disingenuous in his failed attempt to influence the pilot vote?

Richard surely knew he'd be leaving before we would complete a renegotiation, so he either stated something as fact that was unknowable, or he didn't know what he was talking about. Either of these could be the case for EB's proclamations about furloughs.