Originally Posted by
johnso29
I simply felt it was too close to Sec 6 for changing our negotiating committee, much like many anti DPA folk felt we are too close to Sec 6 to change unions. That is why I wrote my Reps and let them know my feelings. They clearly supported maintaining the current NC, & I'm happy with the results.
It was never about conspiracy for me. I just didn't want to change something that I felt wasn't broke. I suppose if there wasn't an election, others would have been up in arms over that.
The policy manual directs 6 months before Section 6, so either the policy manual needs to be changed or we should get used to this. It seems the MEC went with the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" mentality too. What if there was widespread criticism of some future committee and the MEC wanted to fix it? You might be happy there was an election. The policy manual should be about the process absent any valuation on the current individuals. The process was followed, we had a democratic election, there were no conspiracies, everyone should be happy. That is transparency, publish what you are going to do and then do it.