Baseball style has nothing to do with the number of arbitrators... it forces each MEC to essentially make "their best offer" and then someone (1-100 arbitrators) picks just one side in it's entirety without changes.

DAL/NWA was absolutely not baseball style arbitration. Both sides made typical case for why they deserved top spots (generalization) and then the arbitrator did an SLI based on arguments, taking some from DAL and some from NWA.

Baseball style would force each MEC to realize an equitable/plausible solution to it's own members, as not to risk outright losing with over demands. This would create much less hostility between the groups as grownups running the merger committees on each side would explain realities to their own constituencies vice promising the moon and blaming the other side/arbitrator when it didn't come to fruition.

As Pack said before, the threat is that mgmt would want to use the same process in negotiating contracts.