Originally Posted by Sink r8

It's only a nice post if it highlights a consensus between all participants around the idea of good governance. If this is a political game designed to bring back any relics from the past in the Chairman's position, it's an abject failure.

I'm trying to develop a position on this, because I want my reps to take this one very, very seriously. We're on the threshold of some very, very poor performance by our union OR a very nice cleanup, centered ONLY around the concept of good governance.

Whatever King didn't do to cripple himself, others have done for him. The purpose cannot be a coup. In other words, I think Kingmight be done, but now the MEC will have a responsibility to really get the next step right. O'Malley walking back out of this meeting Chairman, is just as bad as Roberts walking in to fight for his job.

This is part of my first draft letter to my reps, no time to format or proof-read:

I don’t really care who is in, and who isn’t, but I’m very concerned that our house divided is going to mean less contract to all of our houses in C2015. So I don’t find it very important how you got to call a recall meeting, but now that we’re here, these must always be the priorities:
1) Pulling together without attention to political issues is the ideal.
2) Resolving your political differences in private is best.
3) Going through a recall is not good, but it’s not fatal.
4) Coming out of a recall without a person with a clear mandate, and sending that poor bastard up against Anderson is not just fatal, but criminal.
There are two constituencies that benefit from this: the Company, and the DPA. When either benefits, we lose. I’m just a guy, floating around and asking questions, so I don’t know if I understand the group as well as you do. You probably know better. The people I fly with are anxious about their ability to drive the union. Every rep I’ve ever heard discuss the issue publicly, has proven that the union is a bottom-up organization by pointing out that a recall is always an option for the person voting. I think you’re going to be watched very, very closely here. You’re going to be making a statement about your values, and your willingness to stand firmly in control of the MEC. There are pro-DPA guys making the case that this didn’t happen for C2012. I really don’t know if they’re right, but I think I detect in the pro-DPA guys a weariness for what they think is a top-down union run amuck. Please don’t prove them right.
Whatever you do Thursday, please do NOT come back with an administration that is crippled by marginal support. I don’t have a particular preference for a particular person, or contempt for Kingsley. I think he could have stepped up better, and the “scourge” letter, when followed by no other message, was a big misstep. Whoever you pick, pick well, and come out with unequivocal support. Even if it takes a couple of days, or longer, please produce something coherent. Let everyone breathe a sign of relief when they see what you’ve accomplished.