In the arbitration the ALPA attorneys argued that the agreement with RAH was a subcontract and should have been treated per C 1. See C 1 c. (no furlough/disp.)

The company attorneys argued, and arbitrator Bloch agreed, that the RAH agreement fell under C 3. ( no restrictions)

I guess we can thank the ALPA legal team assisting our MEC neg. com. for including this language, our neg. com. for allowing it, and the pilot group who failed to vote no when presented with the contract.

A special word of thanks to NWA/ texas pacific group TPG and Seabury consultants LLC for beginning the teardown and lets not forget our friend timothy hoeksema for years of poor decisions which ultimately led to the loss of control and the death of a great airline.

I have to laugh at those who simplify the current MEH pilots plight into one of accepting a "pay cut" to keep their jobs. You have to ask yourselves if you were say in your late 40s or early 50s with kids entering or in college would you want to accept what turns out to be a 50 to 70% cut in rates and also give up the farm in work rules so as to match that of the RAH contract? All that for doing the SAME JOB.

If its a take it or leave it proposition then most I feel will leave it.

I know I will.