Originally Posted by Purple Drank
(Post 1528447)
I asked what happened to "white papers," and that's your response? A dozen questions?
Classic political obfuscation, misdirection...with a dose of plain ol' nonsense. Answer the question. He soon will be recycled as the others were before him. Anyway, what he did not answer in his ramblings was that at one time pro/cons, or white papers, were in the policy manual. MEC had it removed. They claimed that if they approved, let's say a TA, why should they publish and disseminate a contrary position? There was a really good one out for C2K. After that, it was stricken from the manual. |
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1528159)
But you were in the position to decide outcomes of the recall vote acl. And you did the easy, weak-kneed politically expedient thing. You caved in to pressure from your council to be a team player. You were the swing vote. You voted to continue the Moak/Special Committee philosophy of a top-down autocracy. We had a chance. Many junior pilots voted for you thinking they were voting for change. You chose to go along and get along. It didn't surprise me one bit.
Carl Couple of objective facts:
|
Originally Posted by TheManager
(Post 1528455)
Anyway, what he did not answer in his ramblings was that at one time pro/cons, or white papers, were in the policy manual. MEC had it removed. They claimed that if they approved, let's say a TA, why should they publish and disseminate a contrary position? There was a really good one out for C2K. After that, it was stricken from the manual. |
Originally Posted by TheManager
(Post 1528455)
There was a really good one out for C2K. After that, it was stricken from the manual.
Generally, you want your Negotiating Committee to reach an agreement which is acceptable to the group. You want management to know the NC speaks for the group and if they say "no" it means "no" and if they say "yes, if you give us XX" then it means "yes" if management complies. A NC with authority and confidence gets more done. So, I completely understand why the MEC would not want to be in the business of "con" papers. After all, if the "con" list is significant, why did the negotiating committee and MEC send it to the pilots? Unity ... all Delta pilots, one bargaining position. (that having been said, I'd certainly read a con piece and consider it ... but in today's age anyone can write it) |
Who needs a white paper with MEMRAT? Make up your own mind, based on your own circumstances after reading the TA yourself. I don't need anyone to read it to me.
Anything else is a sell job, one way or the other. The fawning nostalgia for KR by the Donut crowd is troubling. It simply didn't exist until October 17th. |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1528467)
... but in today's age anyone can write it)
APC is your answer to a "con" paper? YGBSM. If the MEC won't condone a "con" paper, how exactly will the non-APC population (a vast majority of the group) get an alternate take? But that's the point, isn't it. |
Originally Posted by crewdawg52
(Post 1526174)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Good post gloopy, but I refuse to lift one finger or volunteer ANY of my free time to an agency I have total disdain for (ALPA). |
Originally Posted by Purple Drank
(Post 1528479)
But that's the point, isn't it. But, if you want it changed, write a resolution. Lobby for it. If it appears controversial get it on the agenda and have your buddies bring proxies. Either that, or fin a sympathetic Rep that will make it "his" issue and get it pushed up the ladder. If the majority believe it to be a good idea ... it will be so. |
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 1528173)
Carl;
Has any Rep stated clearly to the rest of the MEC that they want the special committee pulled down? Have your Reps communicated that to you? To your council?
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1528159)
You caved in to pressure from your council to be a team player. You were the swing vote. You voted to continue the Moak/Special Committee philosophy of a top-down autocracy.
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 1528173)
I have never had issue making a decision based upon how I see the issue and if you want to categorize how any Rep voted in to some sub-group, on any issue, far be it for me to stop you. I would also state your beliefs are flat out wrong, but everyone is entitled to their opinion and I respect that.
Carl |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1528495)
But, if you want it changed, write a resolution. Lobby for it. If it appears controversial get it on the agenda and have your buddies bring proxies.
Either that, or fin a sympathetic Rep that will make it "his" issue and get it pushed up the ladder. If the majority believe it to be a good idea ... it will be so. |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:46 PM. |
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands