Council 44 Recall
#211
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 11,989
Surprised the extra drama wasn't being reported on.
After the recall vote failed, members of the "recall committee" went to the microphone and tried to make a motion to limit discussion to one minute. The Chairman wasn't sure where this was going and stated that there were three other resolutions going forward on enhanced PCS bidding options (real good idea to have block hour limits and other specifics in wild card PCS requests), one on Sabbath-keeping (days off for religious observers) and the company requiring vaccination. Then the recall committee interrupted their own motion maker with a motion to reconsider the recall resolutions.
The to reconsider the vote after many people left was intended to be a dirty trick and the motion to limit discussion was an attempt to keep anyone from complaining about it. The motions were clearly improper (and against the democratic notion of local council meetings). The Council Chairman bounced the decision to ALPA Legal and ultimately to Capt. Bill Couette, Vice President–Administration/Secretary at National who read this question from the perspective of ALPA's Constitution, which does not allow reconsideration of a recall motion after a vote. If the "recall committee" wants a new recall vote they need to get another new set of recalls on some subsequent agenda.
Another newsworthy item is that the chairman of the recall committee, Capt. B B, stated that he has filed a Department of Labor complaint against ALPA because the C44 Chairman blocked him on Facebook. (technically, since the Chairman of the recall committee uses his wife's name on Facebook, the C44 Chair blocked his wife...)
After the recall vote failed, members of the "recall committee" went to the microphone and tried to make a motion to limit discussion to one minute. The Chairman wasn't sure where this was going and stated that there were three other resolutions going forward on enhanced PCS bidding options (real good idea to have block hour limits and other specifics in wild card PCS requests), one on Sabbath-keeping (days off for religious observers) and the company requiring vaccination. Then the recall committee interrupted their own motion maker with a motion to reconsider the recall resolutions.
The to reconsider the vote after many people left was intended to be a dirty trick and the motion to limit discussion was an attempt to keep anyone from complaining about it. The motions were clearly improper (and against the democratic notion of local council meetings). The Council Chairman bounced the decision to ALPA Legal and ultimately to Capt. Bill Couette, Vice President–Administration/Secretary at National who read this question from the perspective of ALPA's Constitution, which does not allow reconsideration of a recall motion after a vote. If the "recall committee" wants a new recall vote they need to get another new set of recalls on some subsequent agenda.
Another newsworthy item is that the chairman of the recall committee, Capt. B B, stated that he has filed a Department of Labor complaint against ALPA because the C44 Chairman blocked him on Facebook. (technically, since the Chairman of the recall committee uses his wife's name on Facebook, the C44 Chair blocked his wife...)
#212
Surprised the extra drama wasn't being reported on.
After the recall vote failed, members of the "recall committee" went to the microphone and tried to make a motion to limit discussion to one minute. The Chairman wasn't sure where this was going and stated that there were three other resolutions going forward on enhanced PCS bidding options (real good idea to have block hour limits and other specifics in wild card PCS requests), one on Sabbath-keeping (days off for religious observers) and the company requiring vaccination. Then the recall committee interrupted their own motion maker with a motion to reconsider the recall resolutions.
The to reconsider the vote after many people left was intended to be a dirty trick and the motion to limit discussion was an attempt to keep anyone from complaining about it. The motions were clearly improper (and against the democratic notion of local council meetings). The Council Chairman bounced the decision to ALPA Legal and ultimately to Capt. Bill Couette, Vice President–Administration/Secretary at National who read this question from the perspective of ALPA's Constitution, which does not allow reconsideration of a recall motion after a vote. If the "recall committee" wants a new recall vote they need to get another new set of recalls on some subsequent agenda.
Another newsworthy item is that the chairman of the recall committee, Capt. B B, stated that he has filed a Department of Labor complaint against ALPA because the C44 Chairman blocked him on Facebook. (technically, since the Chairman of the recall committee uses his wife's name on Facebook, the C44 Chair blocked his wife...)
After the recall vote failed, members of the "recall committee" went to the microphone and tried to make a motion to limit discussion to one minute. The Chairman wasn't sure where this was going and stated that there were three other resolutions going forward on enhanced PCS bidding options (real good idea to have block hour limits and other specifics in wild card PCS requests), one on Sabbath-keeping (days off for religious observers) and the company requiring vaccination. Then the recall committee interrupted their own motion maker with a motion to reconsider the recall resolutions.
The to reconsider the vote after many people left was intended to be a dirty trick and the motion to limit discussion was an attempt to keep anyone from complaining about it. The motions were clearly improper (and against the democratic notion of local council meetings). The Council Chairman bounced the decision to ALPA Legal and ultimately to Capt. Bill Couette, Vice President–Administration/Secretary at National who read this question from the perspective of ALPA's Constitution, which does not allow reconsideration of a recall motion after a vote. If the "recall committee" wants a new recall vote they need to get another new set of recalls on some subsequent agenda.
Another newsworthy item is that the chairman of the recall committee, Capt. B B, stated that he has filed a Department of Labor complaint against ALPA because the C44 Chairman blocked him on Facebook. (technically, since the Chairman of the recall committee uses his wife's name on Facebook, the C44 Chair blocked his wife...)
#213
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2014
Position: E170 CA/LCA
Posts: 621
#214
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2012
Posts: 1,418
Surprised the extra drama wasn't being reported on.
After the recall vote failed, members of the "recall committee" went to the microphone and tried to make a motion to limit discussion to one minute. The Chairman wasn't sure where this was going and stated that there were three other resolutions going forward on enhanced PCS bidding options (real good idea to have block hour limits and other specifics in wild card PCS requests), one on Sabbath-keeping (days off for religious observers) and the company requiring vaccination. Then the recall committee interrupted their own motion maker with a motion to reconsider the recall resolutions.
The to reconsider the vote after many people left was intended to be a dirty trick and the motion to limit discussion was an attempt to keep anyone from complaining about it. The motions were clearly improper (and against the democratic notion of local council meetings). The Council Chairman bounced the decision to ALPA Legal and ultimately to Capt. Bill Couette, Vice President–Administration/Secretary at National who read this question from the perspective of ALPA's Constitution, which does not allow reconsideration of a recall motion after a vote. If the "recall committee" wants a new recall vote they need to get another new set of recalls on some subsequent agenda.
Another newsworthy item is that the chairman of the recall committee, Capt. B B, stated that he has filed a Department of Labor complaint against ALPA because the C44 Chairman blocked him on Facebook. (technically, since the Chairman of the recall committee uses his wife's name on Facebook, the C44 Chair blocked his wife...)
After the recall vote failed, members of the "recall committee" went to the microphone and tried to make a motion to limit discussion to one minute. The Chairman wasn't sure where this was going and stated that there were three other resolutions going forward on enhanced PCS bidding options (real good idea to have block hour limits and other specifics in wild card PCS requests), one on Sabbath-keeping (days off for religious observers) and the company requiring vaccination. Then the recall committee interrupted their own motion maker with a motion to reconsider the recall resolutions.
The to reconsider the vote after many people left was intended to be a dirty trick and the motion to limit discussion was an attempt to keep anyone from complaining about it. The motions were clearly improper (and against the democratic notion of local council meetings). The Council Chairman bounced the decision to ALPA Legal and ultimately to Capt. Bill Couette, Vice President–Administration/Secretary at National who read this question from the perspective of ALPA's Constitution, which does not allow reconsideration of a recall motion after a vote. If the "recall committee" wants a new recall vote they need to get another new set of recalls on some subsequent agenda.
Another newsworthy item is that the chairman of the recall committee, Capt. B B, stated that he has filed a Department of Labor complaint against ALPA because the C44 Chairman blocked him on Facebook. (technically, since the Chairman of the recall committee uses his wife's name on Facebook, the C44 Chair blocked his wife...)
#215
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Capt
Posts: 2,023
Surprised the extra drama wasn't being reported on.
After the recall vote failed, members of the "recall committee" went to the microphone and tried to make a motion to limit discussion to one minute. The Chairman wasn't sure where this was going and stated that there were three other resolutions going forward on enhanced PCS bidding options (real good idea to have block hour limits and other specifics in wild card PCS requests), one on Sabbath-keeping (days off for religious observers) and the company requiring vaccination. Then the recall committee interrupted their own motion maker with a motion to reconsider the recall resolutions.
The to reconsider the vote after many people left was intended to be a dirty trick and the motion to limit discussion was an attempt to keep anyone from complaining about it. The motions were clearly improper (and against the democratic notion of local council meetings). The Council Chairman bounced the decision to ALPA Legal and ultimately to Capt. Bill Couette, Vice President–Administration/Secretary at National who read this question from the perspective of ALPA's Constitution, which does not allow reconsideration of a recall motion after a vote. If the "recall committee" wants a new recall vote they need to get another new set of recalls on some subsequent agenda.
Another newsworthy item is that the chairman of the recall committee, Capt. B B, stated that he has filed a Department of Labor complaint against ALPA because the C44 Chairman blocked him on Facebook. (technically, since the Chairman of the recall committee uses his wife's name on Facebook, the C44 Chair blocked his wife...)
After the recall vote failed, members of the "recall committee" went to the microphone and tried to make a motion to limit discussion to one minute. The Chairman wasn't sure where this was going and stated that there were three other resolutions going forward on enhanced PCS bidding options (real good idea to have block hour limits and other specifics in wild card PCS requests), one on Sabbath-keeping (days off for religious observers) and the company requiring vaccination. Then the recall committee interrupted their own motion maker with a motion to reconsider the recall resolutions.
The to reconsider the vote after many people left was intended to be a dirty trick and the motion to limit discussion was an attempt to keep anyone from complaining about it. The motions were clearly improper (and against the democratic notion of local council meetings). The Council Chairman bounced the decision to ALPA Legal and ultimately to Capt. Bill Couette, Vice President–Administration/Secretary at National who read this question from the perspective of ALPA's Constitution, which does not allow reconsideration of a recall motion after a vote. If the "recall committee" wants a new recall vote they need to get another new set of recalls on some subsequent agenda.
Another newsworthy item is that the chairman of the recall committee, Capt. B B, stated that he has filed a Department of Labor complaint against ALPA because the C44 Chairman blocked him on Facebook. (technically, since the Chairman of the recall committee uses his wife's name on Facebook, the C44 Chair blocked his wife...)
#216
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2013
Posts: 10,067
You know this is the C44 recall thread. If you don't want to know about what happened in the C44 recall, maybe don't read the thread?
#219
There will be another meeting most likely in August. We need to recall the recall committee now so we can have a successful recall of C44 reps so we can get a group in that will sell everything to get our min balance!
Satire of course.......
#220
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Position: Wind checker
Posts: 763
This right here. Understand there's a lot of insider kabuki going on but is there any chance all of this can just be dealt with in August? A recall may have been meaningful sometime last year but now it just seems a little late.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post