Thread: Nic ...
View Single Post
Old 09-21-2014 | 11:53 AM
  #496  
cactiboss
Banned
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by eaglefly
But the arbitrators (remember, there are MULTIPLE arbitrators) also said this regarding the construction of their "hybrid model" (remember that term) in THIS SLI, ......."We inquired as to where the respective groups have been and we have made reasonable judgments as to where they were going. We attempted to recognize reasonable expectations of both premerger groups, but rejected proposals that could not be reconciled with governing merger policy or resulted in untenable windfalls. As in all such seniority integration exercises, the fairness and equity assessment is focused necessarily on the respective groups, not on each or any individual pilot."

It would seem that the arbitrators looked at each groups pre-merger reality (where they had been, where they were going, expectations) and the elimination of windfalls.

Where was the West GROUPS pre-merger reality ?

Was realization of the Nic an imminent expectation at merger contemplation or completion with AA ?

Later they said in regard to George Nicolau's "four basic varieties of ISL arbitration", that "each case turns on its own facts". I think even old George himself would agree that the "facts" of the Nic (for right or wrong) have changed as a result of its lack of consummation coupled with a subsequent merger and SLI with American Airlines.

Again, the complexities and facts of THIS SLI make the assumption that the Nic will prevail very questionable. It will be one of the major questions for the arbitration provided first, the West even gets recognition as a party to the SLI.
Anything is possible obviously including the west not getting a seat. It all comes back to when the arbitrators believe the east and west merged or didn't merge doesn't it? So what is your educated opinion on what a reasonable person would say.when or was Usairways ever a single airline?
Reply