Tattletale Tuesday
01-25-2017 | 07:33 AM
#51
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,877
Likes: 194
So is the following inaccurate?
November 5, 2010 Johnson donated to DPA $50
August 4, 2011 Johnson donated to DPA $100
March 8, 2013 Johnson donated to DPA $102
At a certain point after 2013, DPA stopped reporting financial information so we don't know what other contributions were made.
Johnson has a testimonial on the DPA website supporting their organizing effort.
Johnson’s DPA # is 823251. His financial contributions and testimonial are available to anyone with DPA website access.
November 5, 2010 Johnson donated to DPA $50
August 4, 2011 Johnson donated to DPA $100
March 8, 2013 Johnson donated to DPA $102
At a certain point after 2013, DPA stopped reporting financial information so we don't know what other contributions were made.
Johnson has a testimonial on the DPA website supporting their organizing effort.
Johnson’s DPA # is 823251. His financial contributions and testimonial are available to anyone with DPA website access.
01-25-2017 | 08:15 AM
#52
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
So is the following inaccurate?
November 5, 2010 Johnson donated to DPA $50
August 4, 2011 Johnson donated to DPA $100
March 8, 2013 Johnson donated to DPA $102
At a certain point after 2013, DPA stopped reporting financial information so we don't know what other contributions were made.
Johnson has a testimonial on the DPA website supporting their organizing effort.
Johnson’s DPA # is 823251. His financial contributions and testimonial are available to anyone with DPA website access.
November 5, 2010 Johnson donated to DPA $50
August 4, 2011 Johnson donated to DPA $100
March 8, 2013 Johnson donated to DPA $102
At a certain point after 2013, DPA stopped reporting financial information so we don't know what other contributions were made.
Johnson has a testimonial on the DPA website supporting their organizing effort.
Johnson’s DPA # is 823251. His financial contributions and testimonial are available to anyone with DPA website access.
01-25-2017 | 09:05 AM
#54
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,108
Likes: 0
Moakies? First, I think the odds of anybody getting elected on the Moak platform is near zero. Although there were some former Moak supporters at the meeting, there were also many former reps (several former North) and vounteers that were as far away from the Moak doctrine as you can get. I bring up the fact they were reps because until you have actually walked a mile in their shoes, it is hard to know what the job really entails.
Line pilots generally only judge a rep on how they may vote or what position they appear to take on a subject. The job is much more than that. The MEC isn't Congress, (how is their approval rating?) it is a board and behavior, process etc matter.
When you have former "anti Moak" North Reps that have ZERO political ambition supporting their recall, that should be enough to know that the recall has nothing to do with Moakism. If the shoe were on the other foot and these two were perceived as Moakies and based on their actions, social media would be in support of their recall just like it was last year for the previous reps.
It seems like anytime the perceived social media majority is in the minority on a position, it immediately labels the opposing side as Moakies (it certainly is not in this case), that the room is stacked with people from the Admin (again false as the Admin would be their supporters), that the average line pilot didn't know as "every guy I fly with says...." (Again BS, many, many communications have been put out to the pilots of 44.)
So maybe it just happens that line pilots who have a different opinion than the social media majority, actually took the time to bid off, go to a meeting and let their voices be heard without their being some conspiracy or personal agenda other than they don't feel like THEY are being represented? Naaaa it was all just a bunch of Moakies who want to be in power again... SMDH...
Please excuse typos and grammar as I am in a hurry.
Line pilots generally only judge a rep on how they may vote or what position they appear to take on a subject. The job is much more than that. The MEC isn't Congress, (how is their approval rating?) it is a board and behavior, process etc matter.
When you have former "anti Moak" North Reps that have ZERO political ambition supporting their recall, that should be enough to know that the recall has nothing to do with Moakism. If the shoe were on the other foot and these two were perceived as Moakies and based on their actions, social media would be in support of their recall just like it was last year for the previous reps.
It seems like anytime the perceived social media majority is in the minority on a position, it immediately labels the opposing side as Moakies (it certainly is not in this case), that the room is stacked with people from the Admin (again false as the Admin would be their supporters), that the average line pilot didn't know as "every guy I fly with says...." (Again BS, many, many communications have been put out to the pilots of 44.)
So maybe it just happens that line pilots who have a different opinion than the social media majority, actually took the time to bid off, go to a meeting and let their voices be heard without their being some conspiracy or personal agenda other than they don't feel like THEY are being represented? Naaaa it was all just a bunch of Moakies who want to be in power again... SMDH...
Please excuse typos and grammar as I am in a hurry.
Get real.
01-25-2017 | 09:22 AM
#56
Line Holder
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 833
Likes: 5
From: Captain
01-25-2017 | 09:41 AM
#57
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Hey, you got a problem with Clowns talk to poster #34 Elliott. He started it.
That particular phrase is just to illustrate that there are different ways of viewing the same picture. When the previous C44 reps were recalled for not voting the way their constituents voted, some in C44 couldn't find a rope and tree fast enough. Now it's the exact opposite from these folks.
Where are you on the "opposite"? One time it's ok, the next not? It makes anyone look foolish to have a double standard. Why not just illustrate why these two gentlemen did such a great job. Were they leaders at the recent BOD last October, have they represented their council with open and intelligent opinions, do they help their pilots out with conflicts with the Chief Pilot Office? If so, word will get out and they have no concern with being recalled by their pilots.
Oh, and by the way... it's almost 100% unanimous on ChitChat that these guys have done a great job.
01-25-2017 | 10:26 AM
#58
Line Holder
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,688
Likes: 66
01-25-2017 | 10:58 AM
#59
Line Holder
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 244
Likes: 7
It looks like the Moakies threw all their haymakers yesterday. They were out in full force, unfortunately they are going to need much more than ~170 to get the job done. This will fizzle out with the council-wide vote and all that will be left will be the sweet, sweet, salty, Moakie tears...
01-25-2017 | 12:29 PM
#60
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,108
Likes: 0
Those in favor of recall is a list of who's who that were screaming and crying on their knees that we had to vote yes for TA1 and that we would never get one penny more.
We couldn't have better reps than Jimmy and Chris. The voting against their recall begins tomorrow and runs for only 14 days. That was efficient or convenient.
We couldn't have better reps than Jimmy and Chris. The voting against their recall begins tomorrow and runs for only 14 days. That was efficient or convenient.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
sinkrate3278
Flight Schools and Training
7
03-22-2011 07:40 PM
