Let me start out by saying I have lots of friends at NK and feel for every single one of them. They have a lot of good people at their company. There but for the grace of God go I.

That being said, I think you're making personal what simply isn't. I have not once heard SK ever celebrating individual people losing their jobs, but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. The reality is in this business there are winners and losers. Not as people, but as companies. And SK has been saying for years now what most of us have known; the ULCC model, and especially NK, are not likely to succeed long term. As things have accelerated in that regard, the rhetoric surrounding it has shifted from a "when, not if," to a "how soon." You're interpreting that as actively rooting for their employees' losses of livelihood which is a huge leap in logic. Everything I've seen him say was factual and narrowly-focused on the competition between the businesses as singular entities.

His responsibility is to United. In this business, your gains often come at the expense of others. We knew that when we signed up, and none of us will know until the end of our careers if we made the right decision. For better or for worse, our current system doesn't afford leaders of businesses the opportunity to be sensitive to the individual employees at companies we're competing against. He would be derelict in his fiduciary duty to United if he said "let's leave our competitor alive to keep their employees working." I wouldn't expect any competitor not to try to kick United when it's down.

It's just business.