Escargot

Cliffnotes version:

ALPA offers [CRJ2]; 1.13x[CRJ2]; 1.13x[1.13x[CRJ2]]

Company offers triple-qualified [CRJ2] with 5% override for any -7 or -9 flying.

Arbitrator discusses what the definition of "is" is.
Case law examples.

My personal favorite moment: "ALPA... is a dog that simply won't hunt in the evidentiary record. "

MESA & SKYWEST are considered comparable.
GOJETS & REPUBLIC & ENDEAVOR are excluded because they have (mixed -7 & -9 rates).

Arbitrary (pun intended) math determines that MESA rates increase 3.5% when comparing -7 vs. -9. Skywest comes in at a whopping 0.88%. Average equals 2.2%.

So, somehow MESA is the 'saving grace'.

Why didn't the arbiter compare apples to apples and compare percentages of -200 to the -7 and -9, respectively, you ask? Well, I couldn't tell you. Hey, you ask a guy to pull a magic number out of his @$$, I think he showed great showmanship. Still smells like...

Why did the union introduce numbers and call them 'averages excluding MESA outlier'. (aka We didn't feel like this number should count, but we still want the indisputable evidence and reason of an 'average rate'.) Who's to say? Sounds weak to me, but maybe I'm heartless.

Long story short, ALPA got outgunned on this one. One lawyer versus a megafirm whose motto is, "Employers and lawyers, working together." Gives me warm fuzzies all over. [Skin crawling]

In closing, the arbiter told the company not to whine about pilot yearly pay increase, since they've been in an accord with the pilots about that for twenty years now, so clearly it's working. Then he suggested the pilots will probably have to take a pay cut when the next round of negotiations comes out or there won't be a company left.

Personally, I think we could've settled on 9% blend (5+13)/2. Oh well, at least we know we won't be undercutting Skywest anytime soon.