FDX-Interim Elections in blocks 1 & 4
#21
Line Holder
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Posts: 30
2 shots 2 hits
Unless your name is really aerisarmis I didn't miss on you hiding behind a false name. And since I am not now nor have I ever been a DW crony I didn't miss on the false accusation shot either. Nice try.
He shoots, he misses! Henchmen? You were talking about false accusations I believe? I'm just a dues paying member watching the union political intrigue with interest (from the outside). If your post is an example of the demeanor you will bring to the table, heaven help us.
#22
Line Holder
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Posts: 30
Runners
EI is a good guy. He has experience too. If I wasn't running, I'd vote for him. JN has never held any position. He needs to volunteer on some committee and gain some experience before taking a leadership role. If you look at any functional organization like Rotary INTL or even the PTSA, none of them put folks into leadership roles until they have trained at a lower level first. We have to stop doing that because management is too good at what they do to allow newbies to run things. I don't mean anything bad to JN I'm sure he's a great guy, its just an expereince thing. A squadron never takes an ensign and makes him the ops officer. I look forward to him volunteering somewhere like communications or negotiations and learning the ropes.
Capt Tony Hauserman
Capt Tony Hauserman
#23
Finally something Tony and I can agree on. Vote for Tony for PTSA!
#26
But back to my original post, the one where I agreed with the previous poster and you took umbrage. IMO, there are two camps in our MEC. One is SS and his group. The second are folks associated with, or like thinkers of the previous MEC chairman (You are the only person to used the word "crony"). The second group tried to stage a late palace coup to gain the MEC officer positions. They failed, but it was very, very close. Too make up for this short coming, they, the second group, are running folks in the current block rep elections that would be helpful in their attempt to wrestle back control of the MEC. I said it was a good tactic and I'd do it myself if I was them.
That's my opinion. You don't like it? I don't care. I'm quite sure yours differs and you are entitled to it. Throw your opinion out, minus the vitriol, and see if a healthy discussion ensues.
AA, aka "The Henchman"
Last edited by AerisArmis; 07-05-2011 at 06:57 PM.
#27
Scott,
The 105 credit hours is, as you know, from taking the 98 and then adding in the override. The override is paid via the company and converted into credit hours for pay purposes. The effect is about 105 hours give or take. But you know that right? Why can't you guys just run an honest campaign? Let me guess, you did all that research below to dig out policy manual information because you are just a line pilot who is curious to know? By the way, the officer pay of 103-105 credit hours (depending on if you are sec/treas, vice or chair) is plenty. It is not a trifling thing and work ethic should go along with it.
The 105 credit hours is, as you know, from taking the 98 and then adding in the override. The override is paid via the company and converted into credit hours for pay purposes. The effect is about 105 hours give or take. But you know that right? Why can't you guys just run an honest campaign? Let me guess, you did all that research below to dig out policy manual information because you are just a line pilot who is curious to know? By the way, the officer pay of 103-105 credit hours (depending on if you are sec/treas, vice or chair) is plenty. It is not a trifling thing and work ethic should go along with it.
I did not even call you out on your duty officer jam or your "commuter" claim. Policy manual seems pretty clear Tony, if you think they are violating policy then I suspect you have already conducted and investigation with the FOC? Or will that occur after you are elected.
One last thing, Scott is not running for Office, you are and you appear to be running on the platform of what is wrong with the Joneses not what is right about the FPA era lackeys. Bring on the change Tony, right back to 1998.
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,224
Can't say I was a fan of the DW era at all. However, Tony was very correct when he spoke of the lack of transparency. While I thought the coup attempt was absurd, it wouldn't hurt my feelings to see SS get the boot either...
#30
The fact that Tony thinks you have to have "ALPA Experience" to be a block rep speaks volumes. I'm not in a block to vote for or against....but to see him come here and vomit all over the board certainly doesn't impress me.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post