To me, it's more.

At least with the SLI conversations there were two distinctive sides who wanted what were clearly opposite things. (More credit for seniority for their pilot group.)

With the DPA vs. DALPA stuff, while it seems that there are two different sides, both sides want the same thing. (The best representation for our pilot group.) Both sides have valid points, but which side is right is blurry and will never be answered -- you see, we don't have an arbitrator.

Because if this, the discussion seems to be based on who is saying something, instead of what is being said.

It reminds me of Washington D.C.