That's another DPA problem. List an ALPA issue and then list the DPA fix when really the complaint is with DALPA and not ALPA or ALPA and not DALPA depending on the issue. The process to change the constitution at the DPA is much more convoluted especially if driven by a resolution.

If it's policy manual then you'd be looking at simple majority at the LEC level and then 2/3 at the MEC and your done. That's it. We don't have a DPA policy manual to look at so that's moot right now.

I'll go to the DALPA site and look through all the resolutions to see how many have have been ignored and get back to you but to answer you second question it looks like yes.

The recent NYC election spawned at least 2 resolutions from LEC members on changing interim election procedures. They passed by simple majority and went to the MEC where they passed and now it's on it's way to Herndon. I don't understand the executive council/board timeline in Herndon so I don't know when it get's placed on their agenda but it made it through the LEC and MEC pretty quickly.

The 25% of a block threshold just to get any resolution on the table is pretty high and is much higher than today. 125 pilots for 500block and 250 pilots for 1000block and "Issues are to be limited to those, which are consistent with the objectives of the Association."

I don't think there's a limit on resolutions today? If the resolution didn't meet the DPA's "objectives of the association" would it be "received, tabled or flat out ignored if the" DPA "doesn't like where your resolution is aimed." How does the DPA plan on dealing with a constitutional line item that says that only resolutions "which are consistent with the objectives of the Association." if someone brings an item that isn't?