Originally Posted by
Swedish Blender
Trust me, it doesn’t have to be public.
If you point out blatant issues/inconsistencies privately, you’ll be blacklisted. It’s not counterproductive, it’s holding them to what a union is supposed to do. You know, protect seniority (issue before you got to UPS)
OK, but the remedy is to let anyone who wants to volunteer, volunteer. I think we all agree they should have some discretion. If the allegation is they squash dissent and criticism, you can go on the B&G and see plenty of examples of committee chairs and Gen volunteers NOT cheerleading for the board and openly, albeit gently/discreetly/diplomatically disagreeing with things they say and do. BV has been hashed out enough over there so let’s not introduce that example and cause another 10page debate.
Another point is: how much of a problem is this? Most people who want to volunteer and show some persistence find themselves a place. I feel we are talking about the rare exceptions but portraying it as a systemic problem.