Very true.

Judge Mitchell has run two relatively smooth bankruptcy cases involving US. Although his decisions have angered many employees, he has stuck with both the letter and intent of the law. The unions had ample opportunity to provide alternate management strategies for the Judge to consider. Few were presented and none were worthy.

This request is an area where he can make a ruling that demonstrates his knowledge of the company, employee performance at all levels, and the current marketplace in the airline and related industries. A decision to take the bonus request under advisement would be appropriate. It would provide time for the merger/ POR/ "multiple potential investors" to demonstrate that the retention bonuses are necessary for maximum return to the existing creditors.

One thing that bother me about all of this, was the quote earlier in the week indicating that there is more than one potential investor in the merger. The risk-reward ratio is too steep for me. Unless UA tanks in the near future (which has been my prediction for a while), I don't see an investment into the merged airline as being profitable for the foreseeable future.