Actually, you DID NOT agree to binding arbitration. If you did, you'd have accepted the very fundemental foundation of the concept and the risk it may not turn out to your expectations. Thus, I believe the 'bull in the china shop' reference to be descriptively accurate.

As for the AA/TWA deal, I wasn't on the AA property then. What I do understand was that it was the acquisition of the assets of a TRULY bankrupt carrier (actually not its first) with approximately 2-3 months operating cash at its then current burn rate. As part of the acquisition, the acquiring carrier agreed to offer employment to the employees of the acquiree. The F/A's all got stapled, but although the AA contract efectively stipulated the same for pilots, the TWA pilots got a better deal with only about half being stapled (and many of them already on extended furlough).

That's an old and long squabble that will live on until all of us are taking a dirt nap. Many of those TWA pilots who were subsequently furloughed were given special consideration for American Eagle captains jobs at their TWA longevity scale (15-18 years). The Eagle pilots who paid for that with their captain seats at risk, subsequently lost their flow-thru rights (they took all the risk, but got none of the reward). A lot of pain to go around on that one. I see your mixing and matching of past conflict to stir the pot further, but the more you're arguing here, the worse you and the east look.

For pete's sake man, stop digging !