OK, seriously. I can't speak for all CAL guys, but as for myself, I'm most afraid of a USAIR-type scenario where ineffectual, paralyzing lawsuits drag on for the duration of my career. I think having realistic expectations of the process on both sides will help minimize the potential for this scenario, but I keep hearing a lot of misinformation - particularly in regards to the "new" merger policy that was changed "because of" the NWA/DAL decision. That's simply not the case. ALPA formed the Merger Policy Review Committee (MPRC) in Oct 2007 and charged it "to review, evaluate, and make recommendations" regarding existing ALPA merger policy. One of the members of the MPRC will be present at our ISL arbitration. Most of the changes recommended by the MPRC actually refer to the processthe MEC's and MC's follow to arrive at arbitration and actually implement some of the positive developments of the NWA/DAL decision. We're seeing the effects of a lot of these decisions now, i.e. the JCBA. The sole change to actual integration considerations (the addition of "longevity" to the factors that may be considered) wasn't made as a knee-jerk reaction to some perceived ground swell of dissatisfaction with the NWA/DAL decision. It was just made as a step to give some further clarification to the extremely nebulous guidance on seniority integration. We would all do well to keep in mind that it is still exceptionally vague and remains that way intentionally to give the arbitrator(s) a great deal of latitude in reaching his/ their conclusions (not coincidentally minimizing ALPA's liability). The minor "changes" in the actual integration guidance don't do anything in particular to reinforce NWA/DAL but it certainly doesn't do anything to minimize it as a precedent either.