Seham is citing the United case because he thinks it might be viewed by a judge as comparable precedent in the case of USAPA. It seems his strategy is to conflate United and USAPA because neither one involved an arbitrated SLI that had been accepted by management and BOTH AIRLINE'S OPERATIONS COMBINED. This of course wouldn't apply to Delta Air Lines because our operations are combined.

Because we are now combined, ALPA, DPA or any other entity that tried to use the United precedent to "re-order" our seniority list would have no legal foundation in the subsequent lawsuits that would follow. If this was all you had to do, it would have been done many times before. The larger pilot group could just accept anything from a mediator or arbitrator, then staple the smaller pilot group to the bottom through "negotiations" afterwards because they would have the majority votes. Why has this never happened after an arbitrated SLI alfaromeo? Is it because nobody has ever thought of it before?

Carl