Never fly on a fare lower then H.

If we give UA tons of revenue, they can afford to pay their employees at the top end of the scale. Just like "The Happy Times" of the late 1990s.

I'm sure the FAs appreciate the smiles and politeness we give them, but I bet they'd much more appreciate an extra $100 in our ticket price.

Of course, most of us won't do that. And UA can only cut non-labor costs so much (you have to maintain the planes to FAA standards, you have to make your payments to the airplane and airport lessors, you need to fuel the planes to get them to their destination).

They've shed over $2.5 billion in non-labor costs, and they've shed over $2.5 billion in labor costs. And passenger revenues are up a few tens of millions (maybe hundreds). Yet fuel prices have doubled in a year, UA is still spending hundreds of millions on re-organization costs, and pricing pressures remain, helping to hold down those passenger revenue increases.

So UA has to cut labor costs again - through layoffs and wage/benefit concessions.

If the unions don't want to accept it, then they have the option of going on unemployment.

They just need to decide whether or not they want to do it individually, or en masse.

I have a vested interest in UA flying, but if they do go under, I'll just fly a whole lot less and use the money for other things.