Nope, there's really only one ultimate solution - USAPA concedes the Nic.
Why do you suppose the merger policy didn't have ALPA pick the integration methodology, but left it up to an impartial 3rd party? If ALPA had picked sides AND had ultimate authority to issue it's decision, it would be in the very same position USAPA placed themselves in.
The whole fabrication of "separate votes with veto power" is not part of the transition agreement. That would give each side the ability to tie things up indefinitely and is precisely why no such provision exists. So under ALPA, the majority votes for a combined contract would rule the day, just as now. The only difference is that the Nic methodology would not be in doubt, and no false hopes of a second bite at the apple would be raised.
So all the money wasted and earth salted between the pilot groups has gained nothing over what was available under ALPA. Yes you can still vote NO. But USAPA will quickly find that they cannot choose to indefinitely delay any vote and thereby advantage the east over the west in terms of capturing attrition or furlough protection.
The judge will likely force USAPA to negotiate in good faith inclusive of the NIC and allow a vote to take place in a timely manner. The courts should protect the process if they can't or won't protect the participants.
