Actually, some in the west would consider that as good news. I've advocated to our MEC to not be blinded to compromise that benefits both sides, just to be vindictive or prove a point. However, compromise cuts both ways and I have seen little evidence of that from the east or your postings. Specifically, the east must rejoin constructive JNC discussions (as opposed to obstructive) and National must forward the list to Parker before "what if" speculations can actually progress to fruitful agreement.
Then what items are actually negotiable or subject to compromise must be decided. I've always supported the idea of some type of fence that allows a certain percentage (10% to 25%) of pilots during each bid to "transfer" to the other side, thereby guaranteeing that the majority of the open slots go to the pilots of that system.
Since the east apparently puts so much importance or "value" on the subject of fences and they will be the primary beneficiary, I have to ask, what does the east have to trade in return for fences? We must also consider that regarding the offer that was recently advanced by the company, ALPA National determined that 90% of the $122 million was going to the east group. And I also know that the west MEC is concerned about DFR lawsuits brought against them by the west pilots if they simply "give" anything to the east. So with all of that in mind, what do you have to offer that we would be interested in? Rather that having the east reap the vast majority of the gains from a joint contract caused by bringing them up to pay parity with the west, shouldn't the disparity be reduced by bring the west up to retirement parity with the east? If the pay increase experienced by the east versus the increase experienced by the west (differential) was calculated and an equivelant amount dedicated to the west pilot retirements, the 90% vs. 10% disparity would be greatly reduced and the west MEC would be able to show that they got something for the west pilots by trading fences for retirement, thereby decreasing the likelihood of DFR lawsuits. Of course, everyone would probably have to take a small hit in payrates to pay for the increased retirement for the west pilots, but it wouldn't have to be for any longer timespan than the timespan of the fences. When the fences end, the increased retirement for the west pilots also ends.
As far as furlough and future merger protections are concerned, I would think the the Nic award would determine this. But I'm sure the west JNC members would be more than happy to discuss them; after the east has rejoined JNC discussions and ALPA National has forwarded the list.
Lastly, your final statement, "Furthermore, the Rice Committee has indicated it will move forward if one MEC does not want to participate in a "realistic solution", according to Paul Rice." It would appear that the east's decision to withdraw from JNC discussions in violation of the Transition Agreement that was signed by LCC, east, west and National would put the ball in your court!
