Originally Posted by crzipilot

There is also this quote....

The Board notes that there are three such groups of pilots within the newly merged Company - East
Pilots, West Pilots, and legacy American Pilots. Each pilot group is on a
separate seniority list and, therefore, has a distinct interest regarding the
integration of those seniority lists.

and this....

APA denies that the designation of a West Pilot Merger Committee is
unreasonable or somehow arbitrary. It notes that all Company Pilots – East
Pilots, West Pilots, and legacy American Pilots – are on separate seniority lists
and, thus, have disparate interests regarding the integration of those lists.
Appointing a West Pilot Merger Committee will ensure that the interests of all
pilots will be properly represented during the SLI negotiations, APA contends


and this...

The Company insists that the appointment of a West Pilots Merger
Committee would allow competing opinions to be heard during the seniority
integration arbitration. APA, as the sole bargaining representative for all
Company pilots, can and should designate a separate merger committee to
represent the distinct minority interests of West Pilots, the Company asserts.
Doing so would ensure the pilots on each of the three (3) separate seniority lists
are fully and fairly represented throughout the integration process, the Company
maintains. Adopting this approach would also expedite achieving an integrated
seniority list and avoid further litigation between the respective parties.


Anyone see a common theme here?