Originally Posted by
FlyyGuyy
To add to this, we should consider recalling our mec and other reps if they do not stop trying to get **** accomplished that we aren't in favor of. For instance, why the hell has the ssp not been fully addressed? IF the company is really interested in staffing then they need to realize people need an incentive to go here, or anywhere else, growth isn't enough in this day and age.
Who the hell decided it was smart to elect an MEC Chair that was planning on leaving next week? Holy crap, how short sighted was that? We should be looking for a chair that plans on staying for at least a year or two longer.
1. I agree that the MEC should be judged based on tangible accomplishments. So far, there have been delays in reaching those milestones, in the shape of postponements and dragging, but if desirable outcomes are reached in the near future - all will be forgotten in my opinion (at-least as far as I am concerned). I am more interested in examining the results, than the process.
2. It was not known that the chair would be leaving when he was appointed as far as I know.
3. I believe in transparency, but I know that the MEC can't always show all their cards at any given time - that would effectively hurt the collective interest more than the group having access to every single detail known to the MEC (within reason).