I guess I forgot that Kai used the term bargaining credit, my bad. However, look at what he was talking about in the transcript. It was about minimum block hours, plan percentage, and international code share limits. Our position at the time was no change in the size or number of RJ's above 50 seats. There was no bargaining credit sought for that change as our position was no change. So even your transcript shows that we were not talking about larger RJ's for bargaining credit. The transcript also shows that the numbers were devised by the company and not by ALPA.

You also have to differentiate between the arbitration position and the real bargaining position which as you know are often different. In the arbitration, you have to put things in the most positive light for your case. Like I said, I forgot that he had used the term bargaining credit.

There was no credit sought nor was any credit given for the scope change to 76 seat aircraft in the final deal which was the only significant change. I saw the entire breakdown on costing and there is no line for scope there. That is a fact that you want to ignore.

Can you now describe for me how a non-IBB bargaining goes? It seems that you get to describe anything you don't like as IBB. Shouldn't you have some idea of how it should be? We used the same bargaining process in C2K and in bankruptcy. Were they both IBB bargaining or neither?