following the filing of a motion to reject the collective bargaining agreement, but this may be extended. The court is required to rule on any motion for rejection within 30 days after the commencement of a hearing unless otherwise agreed by the parties. Until court approval of the rejection of the collective bargaining agreement, the debtor must comply with all of its provisions. If the court does not issue a timely ruling, the debtor may terminate or alter the provisions of the agreement pending court action. (d)(2). The court also may authorize the debtor to implement "interim changes in the terms, conditions, wages, benefits or work rules provided by a collective bargaining agreement" if those changes are "essential to the continuation of the debtor's business or in order to avoid irreparable damage to the estate." 11 U.S.C. §§1113(d), (e) and (f). The debtor's rejection of the collective bargaining agreement does not terminate the debtor's duty to bargain with the union under the NLRA. Even if a bankruptcy court permits the debtor to reject the entire collective bargaining agreement, the debtor may unilaterally implement only those changes in employment contracts contained in its §1113 proposal to modify the agreement. Terms and conditions unaffected by the debtor's §1113 proposal may not be changed unilaterally without exhausting the NLRA's bargaining requirements. Law Under the NLRA, the employer may unilaterally change working conditions after reaching a legitimate impasse in bargaining, and may then implement only those changes that were reasonably contemplated within the proposals that the union had rejected in good faith bargaining. Courts have recognized the employees' right to strike in situations where debtors have obtained court orders rejecting collective bargaining agreements under §1113, except that an arbitration agreement may be enforced via injunction where the underlying collective bargaining agreement has a mandatory grievance arbitration procedure and the strike is triggered by issues subject to this mandatory arbitration procedure. A debtor must propose only "those necessary modifications in the employees' benefits and protections that are necessary to permit the reorganization of the debtor ..." §1113(b)(1)(A). The legislative history of §1113 strongly suggests that "necessary" should not be equated with "essential" or bare minimum. See Truck Drivers Local 807 IBT v. Carey Transp. Inc. 816 F.2d 82, 88–90 (2nd Cir. 1987). Finally, where the debtor's collective bargaining agreement contains a successorship clause and a buyer may be waiting in the wings, the debtor may