What was the date of the PID, and implementation of Merger Policy?
Don't be cute.
You know both MEC's worked a deal (Called a Process LOA) that was "consistent" with Polcy, but not driven by, or conducted under it.
Don't post drunk.
Occam you excessively ossified occiput...you obliquitous, obfuscating and obviously omissive oaf!....not "driven by" nor "conducted under", but "consistent with"? "Conducted under" is exactly what it is.."under" ALPA merger policy, we are allowed to modify #s of arbitrators, timelines and other "administrative" functions. We are not allowed to disregard or modify the concepts or principles by which the two lists will be balanced, then
actually merged together. IOW, the three wise men are to decide our case
consistent with those concepts and principles that are the heart and spirit of ALPA merger "policy".
CONSISTENT: -in agreement or harmony, in accord, compatible,
holding always to the same principles or practice.... Occam, my obscurantist, oscillating friend.... live up to the namesake of your famous ancestor, "William of": the simplest interpretation is most likely correct. As an example, my obdurate, obstructionist opponent, if we were to pose the simple question to our three wise men: "Gentlemen, by what criteria have we directed you to merge these lists?"----1)...anything "under the sun"... (including wildly irrelevant ideas like eye color and DOH

,) or..2) ALPA merger policy... (status and category according to premerger payrates

)...you may ignore all sentence fragments in parenthesis ending with

and now answer as you believe William of Occam would answer.