LOL, no, but UA's shareholders are supposed to be happy. No one said to be happy, except Bobby Mc Ferrin. I just don't think the sky is falling, although getting hit on the head with an acorn isn't good news. It isn't great news for those seeking benefits, e in the 75k-100k range and the 150k plus range (or 90-99 segment range, as well.) I hear you, it sucks, just as C-scale wages sucked for me when I did the same work for 1/3 of the pay as an A scaler, back during the esop. I choose to stick it out, because I enjoy what I do, and it is close to my home. If UA still provides you a value-proposition that based on schedule routings and price, as well as ancillary benefits, then it is in your interest to stay. If someone else can meet your needs better, than it is in your interest to leave. Just because it isn't as good as it was, doesn't mean that it is as bad as the other options. In Jan 2002 (was in mgmt at that time) I suggested we (my co-workers) take a 10% paycut and work a longer work week, and asked others in my dept to as well, as I knew furloughs would come soon if budgets couldn't be met. Others didn't agree, they sad "I will not lose anything!" Well, the dept shed over 10% of the jobs, but no one lost base pay or work rules for another year. Sometimes taking a small hit is better than the alternative, but that is an individual choice that needs to be made by each person or their corporation, when travel is dictated by corporate policy.