Recall of DAL MEC Officers
10-14-2013, 07:31 PM
#172
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 377
Originally Posted by Sink r8
By that standard, you'd have to whack a 1/3 of participants. Seems obvious to me he's on the inside, but some of the guys on the inside reveal new info that's available nowhere else. He's merely joining various proxies from other councils putting out a different sort of stuff, and we're left to filter through. We're smart enough to filter, aren't we? We've had enough experiments with guided forums for a bit. Let's see if they get 2.0 dialed in; meanwhile, I think you should separate your valid editorials and perspective, from implied censorship.
Have a good night.
Have a good night.
For what its worth.
And I agree about the censorship issue.
10-14-2013, 08:27 PM
#173
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,503
Sharpest tool = (redacted)
Can't be Lumberg. I have been out of the loop for quite along while. What is the Cliff Note version of Bill's story?
Can't be Lumberg. I have been out of the loop for quite along while. What is the Cliff Note version of Bill's story?
Last edited by 80ktsClamp; 10-14-2013 at 08:44 PM. Reason: no outing allowed
10-14-2013, 08:41 PM
#174
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: Kickin’ Back
Posts: 6,971
Originally Posted by TheManager
Sharpest tool =....
Can't be Lumberg. I have been out of the loop for quite along while. What is the Cliff Note version of Bill's story?
Can't be Lumberg. I have been out of the loop for quite along while. What is the Cliff Note version of Bill's story?
Denny
10-14-2013, 08:48 PM
#176
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,503
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
I modified Manager's post.
Now, what is the campfire story on dear Mr. Lumberg?
10-14-2013, 10:10 PM
#177
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
Originally Posted by Sink r8
Reading back through the couple of pages, here is what stands out to me:
1) People that are not "connected" (which would be mostly... the pilots)have no appetite for political infighting. It is repulsive, counter-productive, and costly, as described by Check. N, S, E or W, we gain NOTHING from it.
2) An ineffective MEC costs us real money, and, and a divided MEC, unless they can rally around a credible an effective administration (and keep the infighting private), is an ineffective MEC (my editorial).
3) There are pretty obvious attempts to label these issues, i.e. C20 is labeling them as cloaked Moak, and new proxies seem to suggest a NvS. Not everything either party says is fully valid, but mostly an attempt to take a position. One example, which Scambo caught, is the deferral of the "scourge" letter from the guy who signed it, to someone else.
4) There is a bunch of junk mixed in here, and cross-rep sniping, which is above most of our understanding, which is Bar's cross to bear, as he tries to guide us through the policy manual, and the Real Reps of Atlanta (and other parts).
Trying to cut through the fog, and find an upside to this. The only theme I find pertinent to any of these discussions is good governance. We're in great need of it, along with effective communications. Instead, we're getting politics. We shouldn't feel too bad: it's really a nationwide phenomenon.
1) People that are not "connected" (which would be mostly... the pilots)have no appetite for political infighting. It is repulsive, counter-productive, and costly, as described by Check. N, S, E or W, we gain NOTHING from it.
2) An ineffective MEC costs us real money, and, and a divided MEC, unless they can rally around a credible an effective administration (and keep the infighting private), is an ineffective MEC (my editorial).
3) There are pretty obvious attempts to label these issues, i.e. C20 is labeling them as cloaked Moak, and new proxies seem to suggest a NvS. Not everything either party says is fully valid, but mostly an attempt to take a position. One example, which Scambo caught, is the deferral of the "scourge" letter from the guy who signed it, to someone else.
4) There is a bunch of junk mixed in here, and cross-rep sniping, which is above most of our understanding, which is Bar's cross to bear, as he tries to guide us through the policy manual, and the Real Reps of Atlanta (and other parts).
Trying to cut through the fog, and find an upside to this. The only theme I find pertinent to any of these discussions is good governance. We're in great need of it, along with effective communications. Instead, we're getting politics. We shouldn't feel too bad: it's really a nationwide phenomenon.
10-14-2013, 10:15 PM
#178
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
Originally Posted by Sink r8
By that standard, you'd have to whack a 1/3 of participants. Seems obvious to me he's on the inside, but some of the guys on the inside reveal new info that's available nowhere else. He's merely joining various proxies from other councils putting out a different sort of stuff, and we're left to filter through. We're smart enough to filter, aren't we? We've had enough experiments with guided forums for a bit. Let's see if they get 2.0 dialed in; meanwhile, I think you should separate your valid editorials and perspective, from implied censorship.
Have a good night.
Have a good night.
10-15-2013, 02:32 AM
#179
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Originally Posted by slowplay
Very nice post.
I'm trying to develop a position on this, because I want my reps to take this one very, very seriously. We're on the threshold of some very, very poor performance by our union OR a very nice cleanup, centered ONLY around the concept of good governance.
Whatever King didn't do to cripple himself, others have done for him. The purpose cannot be a coup. In other words, I think Kingmight be done, but now the MEC will have a responsibility to really get the next step right. O'Malley walking back out of this meeting Chairman, is just as bad as Roberts walking in to fight for his job.
This is part of my first draft letter to my reps, no time to format or proof-read:
I don’t really care who is in, and who isn’t, but I’m very concerned that our house divided is going to mean less contract to all of our houses in C2015. So I don’t find it very important how you got to call a recall meeting, but now that we’re here, these must always be the priorities:
1) Pulling together without attention to political issues is the ideal.
2) Resolving your political differences in private is best.
3) Going through a recall is not good, but it’s not fatal.
4) Coming out of a recall without a person with a clear mandate, and sending that poor bastard up against Anderson is not just fatal, but criminal.
There are two constituencies that benefit from this: the Company, and the DPA. When either benefits, we lose. I’m just a guy, floating around and asking questions, so I don’t know if I understand the group as well as you do. You probably know better. The people I fly with are anxious about their ability to drive the union. Every rep I’ve ever heard discuss the issue publicly, has proven that the union is a bottom-up organization by pointing out that a recall is always an option for the person voting. I think you’re going to be watched very, very closely here. You’re going to be making a statement about your values, and your willingness to stand firmly in control of the MEC. There are pro-DPA guys making the case that this didn’t happen for C2012. I really don’t know if they’re right, but I think I detect in the pro-DPA guys a weariness for what they think is a top-down union run amuck. Please don’t prove them right.
Whatever you do Thursday, please do NOT come back with an administration that is crippled by marginal support. I don’t have a particular preference for a particular person, or contempt for Kingsley. I think he could have stepped up better, and the “scourge” letter, when followed by no other message, was a big misstep. Whoever you pick, pick well, and come out with unequivocal support. Even if it takes a couple of days, or longer, please produce something coherent. Let everyone breathe a sign of relief when they see what you’ve accomplished.
10-15-2013, 03:59 AM
#180
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: Captain
Posts: 826
Originally Posted by zoomiezombie
I don't know much about roll call and when it's used or isn't. Are you saying that the north guys do want the chairman gone and they are using south guys as a proxy?
So looking at the names on the letters, I don't see 2/3 on either one, but with a extra vote or two, either one can have the 10 needed to call for a roll call and "win."
Talking with reps who are on both sides of this issue, roll call apparently was used quite a bit on on the NWA side and almost never on the south side with the Chairman, reps and officers arguing against it.
So, I would not expect it to be pushed or called for by those who were adamantly against it in the past. That would only add to the cynicism that is already present.
Ideally, cooler heads prevail and the MEC starts acting like mature adults instead of a chapter of Mutiny on the Bounty, but the way this was handled by those that started the process have done serious damage to our unity.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
