Quote:
"The following shall be complied with ... Each meeting having
more than one session shall discuss the same items on the published agenda ..."
Actually, no. Your C&BL quote is incomplete. What it leaves off is the phrase "where applicable". If the C&BL's required what the DFW guys are asking for, divided session, we wouldn't be having this conversation. They are not required except "where applicable. I think Andy B's position is that he would always consider it "applicable" for SPA77 due to the distance separating LAS and DFW. Originally Posted by NedsKid
Andy told you he'd do what's required by the ALPA by-laws, huh?"The following shall be complied with ... Each meeting having
more than one session shall discuss the same items on the published agenda ..."
Quite obviously the current LEC didn't consider it applicable for this meeting. Which is a loss for all of us, because it gives the appearance that the LAS based LEC members are taking advantage of circumstance to give themselves a political advantage. In their defense, I spoke to my Capt Rep yesterday and he claims to be making max effort to gain ALPA's permission to set up a divided session which would allow a DFW based pilot to vote in base.
Quote:
I'm not saying that I support the current LEC 77's decision to hold the vote in LAS only, and schedule it after final awards (an issue not unique to LEC 77, by the way), but a guy saying he'll follow the rules he's required to follow is hardly revolutionary.
I don't think that Andy is saying that he'll follow the rules , they all "follow the rules", I think that he's saying that he'll follow the intent of the association and afford the opportunity for participation to all of the Local members by using the rules to that end. I'm not saying that I support the current LEC 77's decision to hold the vote in LAS only, and schedule it after final awards (an issue not unique to LEC 77, by the way), but a guy saying he'll follow the rules he's required to follow is hardly revolutionary.
Quote:
This is your cue to point out that publishing the budget is required by the bylaws too.
Is someone going to actually campaign for these positions, or is everyone going to say nothing, except CB? The website is so generic - I'll listen, I'll communicate, I'll be the voice of my pilots - hard hitting stuff, right there. How about you take a look at Heide Oberndor's website and take some stands on something, guys?
The campaigning is taking place on a person to person basis, or at least I hope that to be the case. It is also worth pointing out, as A320 did, that the campaign actually starts after the nomination process. This is your cue to point out that publishing the budget is required by the bylaws too.
Is someone going to actually campaign for these positions, or is everyone going to say nothing, except CB? The website is so generic - I'll listen, I'll communicate, I'll be the voice of my pilots - hard hitting stuff, right there. How about you take a look at Heide Oberndor's website and take some stands on something, guys?
Quote:
As far as I can tell, a couple guys who are not running for anything are working a smear campaign against the current LEC 77 Chair and Vice, plus the MEC leadership, none of whom are running for a currently contested position, and implying that a link exists between the candidates actually running simply because these pilots running are currently volunteering for Spirit ALPA. Meanwhile, another guy is single-handedly carrying on an attack (to put it mildly) against a fellow Spirit pilot.
Publishing the LEC 77 budget is not something worth getting excited about (anyone seen the budget for any other LEC, including 109's?). Running for your first office at Spirit, or ever, is hardly a great reason to vote someone in to office either. Are any of the candidates (other than CB) actually going to show us what they stand for, rather than have others tell us all why the current LEC and MEC reps (who, again, aren't running) are NOT good at publishing budgets, or why the grievance committee (also not running for LEC 77 electable positions) doesn't communicate?
After reading 10 pages of 'the current LEC Chair and the current MEC don't publish budgets, and ... well, they're clearly up to something no good, though I have no proof, so, yeah, vote for my guy' - I just can't take any more of it. What do any of the candidates (the guys actually running) stand for (other than publishing the LEC budget)?
I don't think we'll see much candidate participation on these internet bbs's. Except by proxy, of which we're all guilty.As far as I can tell, a couple guys who are not running for anything are working a smear campaign against the current LEC 77 Chair and Vice, plus the MEC leadership, none of whom are running for a currently contested position, and implying that a link exists between the candidates actually running simply because these pilots running are currently volunteering for Spirit ALPA. Meanwhile, another guy is single-handedly carrying on an attack (to put it mildly) against a fellow Spirit pilot.
Publishing the LEC 77 budget is not something worth getting excited about (anyone seen the budget for any other LEC, including 109's?). Running for your first office at Spirit, or ever, is hardly a great reason to vote someone in to office either. Are any of the candidates (other than CB) actually going to show us what they stand for, rather than have others tell us all why the current LEC and MEC reps (who, again, aren't running) are NOT good at publishing budgets, or why the grievance committee (also not running for LEC 77 electable positions) doesn't communicate?
After reading 10 pages of 'the current LEC Chair and the current MEC don't publish budgets, and ... well, they're clearly up to something no good, though I have no proof, so, yeah, vote for my guy' - I just can't take any more of it. What do any of the candidates (the guys actually running) stand for (other than publishing the LEC budget)?