Q = freund, west alpa attorney A = Kelly Ison, East pilot wittness.
"Q. Okay. Are you familiar with the decision
3 that Arbitrator Nicolau issued in connection with
4 the list that he created?
5 A. Somewhat.
6 Q. Right. You would agree with me, would you
7 not, that he took into account in that decision and
8 he articulated in the decision that he was taking
9 into account the different attrition rates, the
10 different equipment -- and the different equipment
11 that folks brought to the merger of US Airways and
12 America West, and constructed the list taking that
13 into account?
14 A. Yeah. I heard that said, but I don't know
15 how he did it.
16 Q. But you don't quarrel with the proposition
17 that he says he -- that he said that he heard that
18 evidence and took it into account; correct?
19 A. Sure.
20 MR. WILDER: Arbitrator Jaffe, if I may,
21 this is really getting into the realm of legal
22 argument.
Page 947
1 And respectfully, I'm not a potted plant.
2 I mean, counsel gets to argue what awards mean or
3 don't mean. If he wants to elicit the question
4 that -- I would leave that to the Panel and to you.
5 I just don't want to be prejudiced in
6 making my legal arguments by trying to elicit a
7 legal opinion from a lay witness.
8 That's my only point.
9 MR. FREUND: I don't think I was asking
10 for a legal opinion.
11 I was simply asking whether he read the
12 opinion and whether the opinion recites that he took
13 it into account.
14 MR. WILDER: Well, and, again, my point is
15 interpreting the opinion, arguing from the opinion
16 is what lawyers do, not witnesses.
17 MR. FREUND: That was my last question on
18 that subject, so I don't think we need to really
19 spend much time on it."