Originally Posted by Lerxst

Now, on to your further characterizations of the Zeus db. I'm sure the UA side would also have severe issues with anything presented that had a company managing director caveat on it stating:

"This data was taken from now a obsolete database that was maintained at Continental over many years and by many different individuals. By spot-checking certain individuals for whom we know the correct dates, we know that there are errors in the data represented in the attached spreadsheet.

"However, we have no way of knowing how prevalent those errors are or the extent to which the dates may be incorrect.
"As we have stated before, this information has no bearing on the operation of the airline or the employment entitlements of the pilots it represents, and as such has never had cause nor reason to be challenged or verified. These are merely data fields pulled from a long-forgotten database."

The arbitrators noted that they are mindful of this caveat when parsing the information:

ARBITRATOR EISCHEN: The Panel, as I have indicated to you last evening, gentlemen, took under careful consideration the objection -- the objection and the response, which were previously articulated and have just now been expanded.
And on careful reflection, we are going to deny the objection as to admissibility of the document without prejudice to and while continuing to consider in due course the standing objection to the weight to be accorded to the documents or any position concerning their probative value.

Seems fair.