Originally Posted by alfaromeo

That's a lot questions. I think that the career expectations of US Airways and America West were fixed in relation to each other with the Nicolau award. You mention a lot of scenarios, none of which came true since 2005 so they are not germane to the discussion. The separation of the two groups operationally had nothing to do with the fact that the company had a single revenue base. If a passenger flies from CLT to PHX is that an America West passenger or a US Airways passenger? How would you tell?

I read Rich Bloch's award. As I said before, too much emphasis is placed on the financial pictures at each carrier. However, you cannot and I cannot say with any certainty what would have happened at US Airways or America West without the merger. If you think things worked out better for you, it was hopelessly tainted by the economic aspects of the merger and are not a reflection of a stand alone carrier. Sorry, but any economist will tell you the same answer. It doesn't matter whether one single management transferred flying from one base to another. That's what they do. It has nothing to do with a standalone America West.

I know you disagree with Nicolau's decision. The reason you go to arbitration is because you can't agree. It's too bad you can't come to grips with the consequences of that arbitration, but that is your problem to deal with.

The West has to assert their rights alone. It is clear that not only does USAPA have no interest in representing the West, they are intent on attacking them at every step along the way. USAPA was the antithesis of a union and it's a boon to the profession that they are gone now. Their behavior was reprehensible.

I am not involved in this arbitration in any way, other than interested spectator.

I am not looking for any payback only justice. ALPA policy changed to prevent the type of bullying of the minority by the majority that occurred in your integration. I know you guys think you are on a righteous path, but very few people agree with that. You threw away money for almost a decade and stomped all over the West with no attempt of fairness.

Windfalls were defined by you to suit your own needs. Therefore, you claim there were windfalls when most others don't see it. You all had the rules of the game and then you didn't like the end results. Then you claim that rules were rigged and you needed a do-over. That's not how it works.

History has shown that arbitrators fix your career expectations at the time the merger closes. For East/West that was 2005. Maybe this case will break the mold. My guess is not. I can tell you with high confidence that if your merger committee pretends that everything that has happened in the last 9 years has been solely due to the standalone US Airways, they will be looked at as unreliable sources. Most experts saw an airline that was in its second Chapter 11, out of cash, with no reorganization plan and no investors. All that changed when the merger was anticipated. To say the merger didn't change the vector of US Airways is not credible. You have already seen the consequences of throwing away your credibility in an arbitration. Your mileage may vary. It is not important what anyone thinks would have happened standalone for each airline; they didn't standalone and there is no way to tell what would have happened.

As for me, I am pretty much done with this argument, so blast away, just don't expect a response.