I'm letting the arbitrators make their decision and moving on.... Funny when people stand up to arrogance they always turn out to be the bad guys.....

You are tech. right however, it's comes out "looking" like a Neg. list!! If it were not Neg./Arbitrated they would pick one over the other. I think they will take pieces from both proposals and make a list. Whether that is in the "so called middle" is in the eye of the beholder!! I never thought a Contract was ever in the middle either. I always thought whoever had more leverage had a little more go in there direction!! That could also mean pilots within a like group!! ie- if all your Neg/Arbit. committee members are 777 Capts the contract/seniority list would look much different than if they were all 737 FO's!! Just food for thought!!

OK so you have two children that want something. One yells screams and throws a temper tantrum attempting to suade your decision. The other comes to you with the same request but makes some cognitive fact based arguments with some possible restrictions you could impose to make your decision easier.

Which do you chose?

Neither!! I tell them both to go ask their Mom!! :D But, to SERIOUSLY answer your question only 1 CHILD has talked to me so far!! So I can't tell you the answer you're looking for. I'm making an educated guess as the ADULT in this scenario that it's more likely the 2nd child will also "Yell and Scream"! Therefore, maybe neither one gets what they want!!

The difference is that what we want really doesn't matter. What matters is getting a fair resolution that respects ALPA merger policy <gasp>. Wait, the final resolution has to respect ALPA merger policy? Funny how the CAL proposal completely ignored ALPA merger policy. In fact, it kind of s$%t in the face of ALPA merger policy. I wonder how that is going to work out. I fully expect the UAL side to adequately address ALPA merger policy. Let the cards fall where they may, but my guess is no where near the CAL proposal. I could be wrong.

Scott

Neither the list suggested by the CAL Merger Committee nor the one to be submitted by the UAL Merger Committee will be the one ultimately adopted. As the venerable old arbitrator, George Nicolau, wrote in the Federal Express-Flying Tigers pilot arbitration findings back in 1990:

Quote:

---

"There are four basic lessons to be learned . . . ; that each case turns on its own facts; that the objective is to make each case fair and equitable; that the proposals advanced by those in contest rarely meet that standard; and that the end result, no matter how crafted, never commands universal acceptance."

---

I suggest that nobody get wrapped around the axle about the "unreasonableness" of the other team's proposal. Of course each will be slanted. The CAL Committee has a constituency to satisfy, and an obligation to avoid questions regarding duty of fair representation (or in this case, a perceived duty for aggressive advocacy.) Don't let it tee you off. When the UAL Committee presents its proposed list during its direct testimony on May 18-23, the majority of CAL pilots will probably consider it equally preposterous.

Then, some time in the late summer, three arbitrators with more than half a century of combined experience will issue the product of their wisdom. As Arbitrator Nicolau said, it will not "command universal acceptance." We'll have no choice but to live with it, and how we do will define us as a pilot group for the decades that follow.

Next Round of ISL Arbitration Hearings Scheduled for May 11-15

The next ISL Arbitration Hearings will be held May 11-15 at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel, 1330 Maryland Ave., SW, Washington, D.C. This hotel is located just a short walk from L'Enfant Plaza (which is also a hub for the Metro trains). Hearings are scheduled to extend for nine hours each day and will likely begin each day at 9 a.m. and end by 6 p.m., with up to a 90-minute break for lunch. Signage will be posted in the hotel entry and/or lobby to direct members to the hearing room for that day.

LeeMat is correct. The next arbitration hearings start one week earlier than I posted above, beginning on Saturday, May 11. The United Pilot Merger Committee will present its direct testimony, Mothers Day be damned! (Arbitrators have tight schedules.);)

Furthermore:

Good Post Dave!!

And then there was the NWA/DAL decision of 2008, where the arbitrators (including Eischen) rejected the NWA/Katz proposal and went with the more reasonable DAL/Freund proposal.....

I'm looking for a repeat...actually a three-peat (see Us Airways) of Freund over Katz. :cool:

Sled