Thank you for posting these links. I was actually going to start this thread on the majors board.
The process does not sound that unreasonable. The company and the union negotiate normally. If they can't reach an agreement, the NMB helps to mediate the talks. If they can't mediate the talks, they are offered binding arbitration. Either side could reject the binding arbitration. This seems like a no brainer for pilots to reject. Wasn't this how Alaska's contract was gutted?? After that, there is a 30 day cooling off period in which the NMB will try its final mediation. At the end of that 30 day cooling off period, you are allowed to strike! If the NMB and president belive there will be a severe disruption of commerce to any state/region, they may order an investigation into negotiations. They have 30 days to investigate, followed by another 30 day cooling off period (I think this is what happened to American 97). After the second 30 day cooling off period, you are allowed to strike again!!
The very last statement from the IPA website is what is wrong, and needs to be fixed.
Is there any circumstance in which the parties are constrained from engaging in self-help (striking) after rejecting a PEB's proposal?
Yes. It is possible for Congress to intervene and legislatively mandate a settlement. If this is done, Congress most typically would simply take the recommendations of the PEB and write them into law. This would mean that a contract would be legislated by Congress and no strike or no membership ratification would be allowed.
Congress can legislate your contract and prevent you from striking. Both are BS. A strike should be allowed once all necessary options have been exhausted.
I am calling my congressman on Monday morning to tell him what's wrong. If you agree this is also total BS, ask yourself, what else can you do to help??