or some sort of arbitrary, political, nosebreaking, threatmaking third world scheme.
Actually that is not the process. What you describe is what the East pilots are making of it because of their
perceived unfair treatment and what they THINK they are entitled to.
The process is a fair one, and it involves the 2 parties negotiating a reasonable solution. It is only when the sides reach an impasse (as is the case when one side remains rigid and uncompromising with their expectations) that the process moves along to a mutually agreed upon arbitrator with 2 chosen "Neutrals," one from each side. At this point both sides agree to present their case to the arbitrator and live with the final decision. Sometimes the arbitrator will come up with his version of what is fair. Often he will weigh which side's proposal is more fair and reasonable and award something very similar to that. This is the motivation to come to the arbitration with your most reasonable proposition. If you come with an all or nothing stance, you tend to lose any leverage you have.
DOH integration may seem most fair to the casual outside observer. And in some cases like the flight attendants it is often the best solution. (You see, flight attendants are trained on all equipment and paid the same no matter what airplane they fly) But pilots are trained specifically on one type, and pay is directly proportional to equipment and position. For this and many other reasons, DOH is not a fair integration method.
Relative seniority based on what you currently bid (ie: slotting) or percentile based position regardless of years of service is a much better gauge. If you are in the bottom 25% of your old airline, you end up in the bottom 25% of the new airline and you keep the same relative position as before. Same for the 50th percentile, the 90th, etc. This way you still bid in the same place you did before, relatively speaking. It doesn't matter if the 25th percentile in one company is a 4 year guy and in the other is a 19 year guy. You are still a 25th percentile person regardless. Hence the whole premise of career expectation. It is helpful for people to move away from raw numbers and look at relative position.
Of course once a relative position is established then adjustments and fences can be constructed to account for variables such as attrition or international/widebody flying that one group had and the other didn't. Additionally future equipment needs to be specified as "replacement" or growth to keep things fair. It is in these areas that perhaps the US East pilots could have seen an improvement had they negotiated in good faith rather than tied their hope to DOH.
As for furloughs, it is unfortunate that any company gets in a position that it needs to put people with 20 years of service on the street. But this is not caused by the other half of the collective group, and they (west) should not have to pay to correct it. These people were furloughed before the merger and continue in that percentile (shall we say the minus -0 percentile).