The problem with arguing Delta plus X% is determining how that number is defined. Kirby would gladly sign a contract with rates well in excess of Delta if we gave concessions for expensive work rules and soft money. What is the per capita comparison of money spent on pilots when factoring in insurance, retirement, work rules, profit sharing, etc? When looking at the big picture, we could potentially have rates that are less than Delta, yet exceed the Delta plus X% argument through other contractual gains. The company is going to hold pretty firm on the total cost of the contract when comparing our deal to the competition. Knowing that, how do we as a pilot group define what an industry leading contract looks like considering that is a negotiation between two self interested parties, not a situation where we simply send the company a bill? It should be interesting to see where this goes in the upcoming weeks/months.