Ford v. ALPA and Cooksey v. ALPA were both settled Oct. 23, 2007, no? The settlement included adding new language to ALPA policy, including:
- scope review between mainline and regional negotiating committees
- required discussion of goals by both mainline and regional prior to bargaining
- review by the national committee of scope goals
ALPA would have to violate their own rules for this line of reasoning to have merit. ASA ALPA has been, and continues, to review its scope goals between themselves and mainline groups. UAL and CAL ALPA have been, and continue to, review their scope goals with regional groups. Currently, ALPA's Collective Bargaining Committee and ALPA's Fee For Departure Committee preform some of this work. I know
you know this, just reviewing it for everyone on the forum who isn't familiar.
I suspected the "I'm a Supreme Court Justice" line, or "I'm the Solicitor General" (Funny, I even put it in my response, at first, to beat you to it, but didn't think you'd take it that far - should have known, huh?). Alas, even armchair attorneys such as myself know that no sitting justice is an active pilot for ASA (one of many other claims you've made).
So, first it was 'status quo wins in court'. Then it was 'everyone is an armchair lawyer'. Now it's 'repeat the RJDC strategy'.
Good luck with your litigation.