Originally Posted by Mea25000

The new policy states that the factors that must be considered in constructing a fair and equitable integrated seniority list, in no particular order and with no particular weight, now include but are not limited to career expectations, longevity, and status and category.
The new merger policy mandates that merger representa- tives, mediators, and arbitrators must consider these factors when constructing a seniority list; however, they are also free to consider other factors as they deem appropriate.

Do you guys realize how ambiguous this language is. How much elasticity exists in this language for an arbiter. Your insistence and utter fixation on one “must” and total obfuscation of another “must”, displays your lack of understanding. The arbiters are not novices. They understand our company’s, our industry, our careers as a whole inside and out. They know what a legacy, and start up are. They know what is a financially strong company and what is a week. They knew UAL and CAL, DAL and NWA were equals, just like you and I. They also know the difference between AS and VX as much as you may pretend not too. That’s why an arbiter asks, “what did your company bring to this merger?” Well sir 65 plus air buses, and a really hip vibe.... Ok but you brought a tone of debt, no real assets, a company just starting to creat black balance sheets, low yield, bottom of the industry compensation package.
You guys can act surprised, tell us how great Virgin was, but deep down each of you knew before the ink was dry how the SLI would work out. The truth is in the end you got huge raises and almost the exact same base position.... pretty darn fair if you ask me.