Understood and agreed. You seem to have a greater than average understanding of the process and information.
Can you advise:

• Are the pilots IFALPA, or affiliated some way to our association?
• Is ALPA a party to this investigation?
• What dog do we have in this?

It would seem, unless ALPA has an affirmative duty, that they would avoid creating hostilities with the Board. Further, as ALPA battles the influx of cheap foreign carriers which may not be operating on the same standard as US Carriers, why wouldn't we let them sit in the proverbial hole they dug?

If you review the Board's work on the Gulfstream G650 accident, the Board went beyond the actions of the crew to the complete lack of a safety culture at Gulfstream. The Board was unusually critical of program management at the senior levels of the organization ... the Board, on the basis of objective data went beyond the "what" of the accident to the "why."

This Board, more so than in the past, is a friend of pilots. If the pilots were some how deficient, we should want to understand why, identify the patterns and seek corrective actions applied also.

Many industry insiders have opined the culture at these carriers undermines safety. Cheap, unqualified, pilots are promoted. Those who seek a higher standard are fired. Seems like ALPA would be all for shining a flashlight in this corner.