There is a distinction between doing nothing and actively doing something to subvert, obstruct or impede the lawful CBA.
Of course, the only attempt to prove that anyone has done anything to subvert, obstruct, or impede the CBA was tossed out of court.
That's a problem.
And, even if there existed actions to "subvert" the CBA, they are not relevant to the question of USAPA's failure to execute it's DFR. They'd only be ripe in a different action.
I'd simply note the west certainly better hope that not even so much as a whiff of their actual behaviors comes to the jury's nostrils...lest their noses explode
Let's say that Wake loses his mind, and that Team Seeham actually gets to introduce, say, the earlier federal suit into evidence. You see where it's going on cross, correct?
"So, (insert the witness here), was the lawsuit in question promptly dismissed with prejudice by the Court?"
Yeah, that'll make a real impression with the jury.
You guys really don't get it--the question is about the DFR. The rest is just noise.
USAPA and anyone who really believed the seniority land-grab it represents really needs to get legal advice from someone who is not Seeham. The most likely outcome is exactly where things were under ALPA and the choice will then be LOA 93
forever or Nicolau.
But nobody said the mob was smart.