Quote:
Originally Posted by slowplay
Now I'm the one with the short time to reply.
So we're going to quibble on the definition of "is", Mr. Clinton? Fine. You don't understand the governance structure on which ALPA works. The MEC (collected local council reps) are the governing body. We have 19 of those reps at Delta. There are various policy methodologies (some senatorial, some roll call based) by which they exercise that power. They elect the MEC Chair - he works to execute their collective will. You elect the Reps, they elect their Chair. To recall the Chair, you must get a 2/3 majority of reps or a majority of reps and a roll call majority.
Understood.
Quote:
Originally Posted by slowplay
So you use an example of a Rep whose point of view was in the minority. The TA ratified 14-5 on the MEC. 94% of the pilots voted and ratified the TA by 62%-38%. Every single base voted in favor of the agreement.
I can't argue with that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by slowplay
What I'm reading is that you have a problem with majority rule.
I'm for a balance of majority rule and individual rights.
Go back to the APA situation you mentioned as a reason not to have direct MEC Chairman elections. Say a candidate panders in the worst way possible to the members and wins, is that wrong? No, it's not wrong, it just sucks. But I would have to accept the results even though I don't agree with it. Same with the TA, we passed it, I don't agree with it, but it is the contract we operate under and there is no undoing that. So I am in favor of majority rules.
The problem is, what if the majority is ethically wrong on a subject? That's where I believe in mechanisms that protect the rights of the minority to force compromises and be heard. Hence the balance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by slowplay
But if you're serious, you'd find pilots in local bases who would recall reps that you believe "are the problem." You only need 10 reps and a majority of the roll call votes to make that happen. I have provided examples of it being done at least twice on our property.
You also have the option of starting a change to the policy manual and ALPA C&BL. If you're serious about change, start the process. We'll get a lot more debate (good) and you'll see if your opinion is in the majority.
btw, do you still support DPA?
Maybe in time I will. For now I like talking about it. But my premise is still this, what if it doesn't work the way it's supposed to and the MEC Chairman reigns supreme? What if those who don't go with the MEC Chairman are ostracized or brow beaten to vote a certain way? What if newly elected LEC reps find themselves forced into submission?
That to me is the dangers of a one vote for your local rep system. If you want to make a change, it's a slow process. I prefer the opportunity to make decisive changes at the top if so inclined, or keeping status quo, if so inclined.
But think about this, would you only want one vote for your House Rep or do you like having the ability to vote for the President and Senator?
fwiw, I'm indifferent to the DPA. I joined when the RAH debacle happened. It'd take another hard look to send another card in.
and fwiw part deux, if I came across as a ahole in earlier posts, I apologize. Didn't mean to. Thanks for continuing the discussion.