You're splitting hairs here because you just have to "be right". And what matters isn't whether it's "boilerplate" or not, what matters is that it's poorly written and has now screwed us!
And I find it laughable that the "clown" you're lecturing has more time in negotiations, arbitrations, and contract enforcement than your entire MEC added together. Face it junior, you're out of your league.
This coming from the guy that still insit that Acey is one syllable.
Anyway, it was you who was only complaining that we had boiler plate language that required arbitration for new aircraft. Never did you mention anything about complaining that that language didnt exclude bankrupt airlines until you found the same arbitration clause in your own contract.
The only point I was trying to make to bozo is that that language is the same language negotiated by ALPA attorneys into new contracts. As ALPA "learns" of better language, they negotiate that new language in new contracts. It's pattern bargaining and that is what I meant by boiler plate language. If you don't like my choice of words in my explanation, fine. But arguing semantics distracts from the point itself.
Like I said earlier, we wouldn't be in this predicament if your MEC hadn't given their flight line or no merger ultimatum.