So if AWA ALPS or the company witheld pertinent information regarding the financial condition of AWA, wouldn't that be grounds to overturn the Award?
First, what "pertinent information about the financial condition of AWA" are you talking about? What smoking-gun type of document are you envisioning? The financial condition of being profitable and hiring? Or the speculation that some day, maybe, AWA would lose money without a merger and would be more successful long-term with a merger? The East and the arbitrators could speculate on that just as much as the West.
Second, it was not the West's obligation to point out weaknesses in its position. In an arbitration, each side has the obligation to point out its own strengths and the weaknesses in the other side's position. So any "pertinent information" you are referring to that would have helped the East's cause would have been the East's responsibility to bring up, not the West's, and certainly not the company's, as the company was not involved in this process at all.
I realize that this is murky waters but if AWA ALPA knowingly witheld relevent information could this not be a criminal matter as well?
Please. Under what criminal statute? Why are you putting the onus on the West to bring it up? What information do you think West's ALPA had that East's didn't?
What type od Discovery is allowed during an arbitration case?
That depends on what the parties agreed to as spelled out in the agreement to arbitrate. Generally it is some sort of limited or expedited discovery that is considerably less extensive than in traditional litigation. In any case, here you seem to be talking about some sort of internal HP financial data that, if it even existed at all, West ALPA probably didn't have.
Conversely if US ALPA failed to perform proper due diligence doesn't that expose US ALPA to a Breech of Fiduciary Responsibility action by the pilots themselves? Assuming they can prove they were damaged.
Now you're getting it! I'm not sure it rises quite to the level of a FD breach, but it amazes me people here are anxious to blame the West for what would have been, if anything, a duty and ommission on the East's part.
My guess, however, is that the East negotiators did indeed bring "it" up, and "it" was considered along with all the other factors. The fact that at some point in the speculative future it would have been in HP's best interests to merge would have been balanced with the fact that on the eve of the merger HP was profitable and hiring while U was most likely on the verge of an imminent shutdown and had hundreds if not thousands on furlough. The arbitrators looked at the data and concluded that, relative to the HP pilots, the U pilots didn't have much of a future without the merger.
I will now pause so 700UW can post that years-old Washington Post article he always posts whenever someone points out that U's prosepcts were less-than-dim on the eve of the merger. I don't think it has yet been posted in this thread, and he likes to make sure every thread has it.