The #NFLPA finally responded to @E_Reid35's letter.
Oddly the NFLPA, nor De Smith, nor Atallah have tweeted it as they normally tweet responses. Could it be that they're embarrassed? https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6823793-CBA-Truth-About.html

Oddly. the document is entitled "CBA Truth About," that sort of reminds me when they tried to pull the wool over the eyes of Congress with their 2008 "Truth Squad" and White Paper.

Let's deconstruct this:
They say the claim of "a substantive and significant change" is false.
There are a few hundred disabled players that feel they are substantive and significant despite the PA's insult.

"NFLPA fixed a cross-reference in the final version of the new CBA; no, that cross-reference reflects no substantive difference whatsoever."
The difference is 20-30% of disabled players' income. I call that substantive.

"from what players were told about the proposed CBA and what the players
voted to approve." Oral agreements generally aren't binding.

Whatever meaning the CBA drafter had in mind. He referenced "Article 3" players and did not reference "Article 4" players. This is fact. Did he intend to? Perhaps.
Did Sam intend to make his car payments? Perhaps, but if he fails to do so the lender will repossess his car"

It's all here for the reading. But I think @E_Reid35's summary says it best. https://twitter.com/E_Reid35/status/1245519642203914246