Originally Posted by
cactiboss
I thought binding arbitration by a neutral was a compromise? I guess the west must compromise on the compromise? If the west gets a voice there is no doubt the Nic will be presented by our side. Us/Awa merged in 2005 and the Nic reflects the equities in place in 2005. Do you think for one minute the arbitrators will take an east/west snap shot of December 9th 2013? I doubt that very much.
As you should know, binding arbitration is a wildcard. The West will likely indeed have some voice (if only to APA), but even if the Nic is included for the arbitrators consideration, that doesn't mean THEY will use it. I don't think APA is required to accept it as that would be taking a specific position on its validity and in fact, deciding it to some degree. Instead, it will be they that punts thus placing any backlash from the West on the NMB should it not be used.
Tough to sue the NMB for DFR and the best path forward for APA in avoiding it from either East or West is to toss the hot potato to them. I don't think either side will ever win this conflict, but simply end accepting a detente decided by those who are insulated from any consequences.