Originally Posted by
Carl Spackler
This TA is not all positive. It was some gain and some concession. Allowing members to vote is not "going through the motions."
What difference would that make? You only want MEMRAT when you personally disagree with something?
That's not true, but it's beside the point. See below.
Your logic is puzzling because you're really laying out a scenario where MEMRAT is never used. When something is perceived as a majority positive for pilots, MEMRAT is a waste of time, money, and just "going through the motions." When something is perceived as bad for pilots, people like you, shiznit and the others say not to worry because if it's bad, our reps will just vote no for us and thus not require MEMRAT. So in your world, exactly when is MEMRAT appropriate?
Carl
I personally do no think that this needs to go to MEMRAT but Carl makes some good points. Just because many think it is good seems like kind of an odd criteria for deciding on MEMRAT.
Then again the union has to be realistic about how and when to have a full blown vote. It would be nice to have some hard and fast guidelines - either something triggers a MEMRAT or not, but perceived popularity seems like an odd discriminator. Especially perceived popularity without recent polling.
Finally if something in the future is not going to MEMRAT it would be nice to have some standard procedures for MEC ratification. Perhaps final language published and e-mailed to all 12,000 of us for review followed by a minimum comment period of 2 weeks to a month seems reasonable for most situations. And I would really like to see the "PRO/CON" papers re-instituted.
Scoop