As far as the shipper is concerned, really for non-performance they get nothing back. They want to build in at the beginning, right in the service agreement, a feature to say that if you do not perform, these are the consequences.
You have to do that. If you don't do it, if you allow the non-performance to take place and then say, “you can complain about it later, and by the way, even if you win the arbitration you're not going to get any money back”...well, why would anyone do that?
Why wouldn't we allow the agreement to define, if there is non-performance, what kind of penalty would be in place? When you write something, you want to know how, if something goes wrong, you are going to be punished or how much money you are going to pay. If not, then a service agreement really doesn't really have much force.
This is the crux of it. If you don't punish non-performance, why have an agreement?