I agree. The DALPA guys like to make the argument that we are represented solely by our MEC and that it cannot be influenced by ALPA National. Well, what about the advice and general legal work we get from ALPA National's attorneys? When those attorneys are responsible for providing legal work and advice to other pilot groups with competing interests to ours, can we really afford to rely on their advice? How's that working out for us so far?

Here's some interesting food for thought that I found along these lines:

Conflicts of interest related to the practice of law

In the legal profession, the duty of loyalty owed to a client prohibits an attorney (or a law firm) from representing any other party with interests adverse to those of a current client. The few exceptions to this rule require informed written consent from all affected clients. In some circumstances, a conflict of interest can never be waived by a client. In perhaps the most common example encountered by the general public, the same firm should not represent both parties in a divorce or child custody case.

A prohibited or undisclosed representation involving a conflict of interest can subject an attorney to disciplinary hearings, the denial or disgorgement of legal fees, or in some cases (such as the failure to make mandatory disclosure), criminal proceedings. In the United States, a law firm usually cannot represent a client if its interests conflict with those of another client, even if they have separate lawyers within the firm, unless (in some jurisdictions) the lawyer is segregated from the rest of the firm for the duration of the conflict. Law firms often employ software in conjunction with their case management and accounting systems in order to meet their duties to monitor their conflict of interest exposure and to assist in obtaining waivers.