I don't think the NIC is a "given." More of a high probability as it's the only US Airways list. I think your logic is flawed in that you assume it will be a merger of three lists from scratch. I know the MOU says the status quo of three lists will be maintained during the SLI process but I don't think that means what you believe it to mean.

If you look at the exchange between Javits and Pauley again I think it's quite clear that Javits sees the need to present one Us Airways list to be merged into AA. The arbitrator pins Pauley down and eventually gets him to concede he will be making a proposal that does not conform to the NIC. Javits asks him if he is intending to make himself the new Nicalou?

Here is part of that exchange:
ARBITRATOR JAVITS: And whether it has got a dynamic jumping system or not, it would be --
THE WITNESS: True.
It would include all pilots.
ARBITRATOR JAVITS: It would include all
your pilots and the American pilots. So it would include everybody.
Is that right?
THE WITNESS: Yes.

The critical portion in my humble opinion is the statement that "It would include all your pilots and the American Pilots." Notice there is no mention of West Pilots because West Pilots are US Airways pilots. So the Arbitrator is saying that they are going to blend a US Airways list into the AA list. A merger of Two airlines (albeit one airline is mired in a seniority dispute). Which Us Airways list is used is the big question. The chances of the Arbitrators discarding a list reached through binding arbitration conducted by the premier Arbitrator at the time seems unlikely.

Now your statement that AA will not propose the NIC is irrelevant in my opinion and sets AA up for having their input discarded. It is not AA's position to determine the order of the US Airways list. Just like US Airways pilots will not advance a proposal on how Eagle pilots should be ordered in the AA list.

Go to page 625 on this document and read through the end of page 629. I think it's not too difficult to see how the arbitrators believe this will play out. Here is the link
http://nebula.wsimg.com/b9e507a4d328...&alloworigin=1

I don't know why AA is heavily invested in not having the NIC incorporated. All I can guess is they are worried about more relatively younger west pilots appearing higher on the final list. They don't want high numbers of East pilots retiring off the bottom and consequently not creating movement for AA. The number of Captain slots on the US Airways side will not change so it won't produce a windfall of extra CA jobs. Just to ease your fears the West is actually quite old and I believe the average age is well north of 50. There have been over 600 new hires on the east many of whom now hold widebody FO positions or senior narrowbody positions. I think it's more of a threat to AA to have those junior East new hires placed above their rightful position on the list with 30+ years to block AA pilots below them.

Due to years of separate ops we now have nearly 20 year FO's on the West and 30 year old 330 FO's on the East. Do you want that 30 year old 330 FO halfway up the seniority list with 5 years of service and the 20 year 320 FO sitting two thirds of the way down? What benefits AA? Be careful listening to the USAPA propaganda machine.

"APA denies that the designation of a West Pilot Merger Committee is unreasonable or somehow arbitrary. It notes that all Company Pilots – East Pilots, West Pilots, and legacy American Pilots – are on separate seniority lists and, thus, have disparate interests regarding the integration of those lists. "

Read pages 625-629 of day 3 and get back to me. Curious how you would interpret that exchange.

While I happen to agree with your 'muzzled' comment at least USAP had to argue FOR the America West pilots.

That impediment has now been removed.

Both parties ( APA and UsAirways ) are now free to throw the America West pilots, via the Nicolau, under the bus. When you factor in the subject matter experts on the Us Airways merger commitee are no longer constrained from cooperating with their legacy American counterparts to achieve this .....

The only glitch to your scenario is that there will be a team of Arbitrators who will determine if it's fair and equitable to 'throw the west pilots under the bus.' I think their disdain for USAPAs actions is quite clear. If you were an arbitrator would you want to set a precedent for discarding binding arbitration awards on the basis the majority doesn't like the outcome?

Now that the West has a seat at the table there is no way the East and AA can strike an agreement without West input. So it will go to arbitration. If I was an Eastie I would be lobbying hard for a new chairman.

In context of their findings, I disagree. This arbitration had two parts. One side Company, APA and US West, argued APA as sole CBA had a right to appoint a West rep if they deemed it fair. Opposing the East argued they had no right, only USAPA could do that. The arbitration found for APA per RLA. East behavior toward the West should play no role. The ruling only says APA is CBA and can appoint who they want with DFR responsibilities/guidelines. The interesting thing is why the board chose to review the East behavior and explore why the West would not be treated fairly by the East. Interesting, very interesting. As I said the hair on my neck would stand out if I was East. Again the smartest thing the bottom two thirds of the East list could do is organize and ask APA to allow a vote for MC replacement, getting rid of USAPA and any working with them. If they try DOH they will be CAL'ed.

If I were a West pilot I'd look up "downside risk" as your lawyer warned you about at Wye river almost a decade ago.

The Arbitratators are constrained by the authority granted them by the MOU. Read up on the nullity provisions.

West voice: " help meeeeee " - splat

I think you are reading what you want it to mean, not what is says.
" I think your logic is flawed in that you assume it will be a merger of three lists from scratch." What does "from scratch" mean and where does it start? There are three list. What happens after presentation to the Board is the question. No one knows (not even the Board at this point) how the Board will assemble the product.

" So the Arbitrator is saying that they are going to blend a US Airways list into the AA list. A merger of Two airlines (albeit one airline is mired in a seniority dispute)." That is a J. Pauly quote, not Javits. Interesting that Javits brought up the point, but context is everything. What purpose did the Board have to bring this onto the record?

"Notice there is no mention of West Pilots because West Pilots are US Airways pilots." This only makes the East point (that was rejected) that the West pilots belong to their group, not split off on their own. Again you miss context.

" The chances of the Arbitrators discarding a list reached through binding arbitration conducted by the premier Arbitrator at the time seems unlikely." No evidence this statement is true. No one knows. Strictly your opinion but no basis to prove it correct.

I could go on but I think you are looking only from you own desires and POV. You are not giving a view of the entire story. Then again perhaps you are right. No one can predict the future of human interactions.

Yes the East would have to "argue" for the West, but what would they have argued? Straight DOH on their "list". That was the problem. No one would trust the East to do anything different. So the decision was taken away from you. And the Impediment was not "removed", it was taken. Now the East is a much smaller minority group. That "strength" in numbers is perhaps just part of the price the East has/will have to pay for their stance.

I get what your "both parties are free" comment, but it is correct? Why would APA work to throw the West under the bus with your help? You will be under that bus, too. If any of the three make stupid CAL arguments, any could be under that bus. This is Federal Arbitration, these are very smart attorneys that have a lot of experience weeding BS. You have a say, but you don't get to decide, ie you are along for the ride. Argue for DOH and get CAL'ed (marginalized).

You cannot spell the word but you know what they can or cannot do? Right.