Stinsat7

When is the recall meeting?

tennisguru

July 19.

filler

ODB2

No, not specific enough. You are making assertions with no support. What is your source document that says you don't need to have a resolution or what the deadline is to add items to the agenda? Just because you assert it on the internet does not make it so. I guess you didn't get the C44 update that addressed these issues. You can find it on your ipad since you aren't getting the emails.

What ALPA Admin guy? So you are saying we can expect some kind of censure from ALPA for DA for all these lies you assert? I'll be waiting.

What do you mean by sandbagging? This is a forum to discuss the C44 recall. I am a member in good standing of said council. Can't handle honest discussion? I like this forum because there are ideas from many different angles. But those ideas need to be challenged and supported so we can get the best information to improve QOL, whether that's money, time-off, or whatever floats your boat. The current contract is a rising tide lifting many boats, not ready to go Brutus on the guys who brought it.

DWC CAP10 USAF

ALPA Constitution and By Laws, Article III, Section 3, Paragraph D states:

"Any Active member in good standing may submit agenda items to the Local Council Chair for inclusion in the published agenda in the meeting notice. Such items shall be in writing. Any agenda item may be introduced by a member at a regular Council meeting."

Just has to be in writing (doens't specify resolution, nor does it require it to be pen/ink and snail mailed so email should count) and there is no timeline since member in good standing could introduce the recall agenda item at the meeting if need be.

Stinsat7

To be fair ODB2, you did ask for it.

ODB2

That is a good response, appreciated. Admittedly a gray area. The newsletter stated that C44 follows the Delta MEC Policy Manual, which states agenda items “should include background information and a proposed resolution,” Also, ALPA Constitution & By-Laws (C&BLs) governs the recall process. In order for the consideration for a recall to be voted on at a Local Council meeting, the agenda item must be placed on the published agenda and made available to the council “as far in advance as practicable.”

So should we conduct business by throwing a resolution together at the meeting, or lay it out before the meeting so the membership can review it and come prepared to address? Should we have this documentation far enough in advance that people who care enough to show up can bid off, or just announce it a week prior so only the insiders can show up? The rules don't explicitly say (maybe they should), and it is a "should" not must/shall, but the way this was handled seems appropriate to me. I didn't hear the exact conversation between DA and the complainant, but sounds more like a reasonable application of the rules as they stand rather than a "lie." Welcome to the bureaucracy, there are normally several layers of rules that apply to any given situation (ALPA -> DALPA -> C44).

I did indeed ask for that response and happy to engage in the conversation.

DWC CAP10 USAF

I'm not in C44, but I do like to try to stay up with the process of things, which when I heard about the "you need a resolution" posting on FB, I went and looked at the CBL and policy manual myself.

I agree that "should" is different than "shall" and maybe the OP didn't want to share his reason with the people he is recall...totally his/her perogative.

Agreed it would be nice for all C44 pilots to know what issue the recalling originator had so they too could ask questions, do their own research etc. I see the option to bring it up at the meeting itself as necessary in case someting very drastic arises...the lack of defined timeline (like Short call not being defined as two hours) allows any issue to be disucssed at the very next LEC meeting if needed.

And from my understanding when the email is question was sent to all ATL LEC officers to inform them of the recall, it was weeks in advance so I feel the "as far in advance as possible" was met no questions asked. I do admit I don't know the exact timline of events so I could very well be mistaken there.

So it was DA's interpretation of "in writing" that was the heartburn from my understanding....it came across as him making stuff up in order to prevent the agenda item from being added becuase he did't consider the email as "in writing"

ODB2

You did cut off your quote above from Art.III, Sec3, paraD, Sub (1) about submitting agenda items. The sentence immediately preceding your paste has a caveat, referenced to Sub (2) which addresses recall and other high level meetings. In fact you could not introduce a recall resolution at a meeting, sub (2) requires notice at least fifteen days prior to a meeting considering a recall. We clearly have that in this case, but perhaps that is because DA explained this section to the complainant. I am not going to paste it here because maybe everyone interested should go read the source for themselves, just google ALPA Bylaws, easy.

As I understand it, C44 follows MEC policy for their meetings. The Bylaws in Art IV, Sec3C(1) states deadline dates for submission of agenda items and provisions for inclusion of late agenda items on an agenda shall be determined by MEC policy. So it appears ALPA explicitly allows for individual MECs to set a more restrictive time line for agenda item submission.

I am not a rep, but I asked them what constitutes an agenda item. As I understand it (perhaps defined by Roberts Rules? I do not know) an Agenda Item includes a complete document, not just a title like "I want to recall the reps because...reasons..." . To be an actual agenda item it needs a title, background and proposed resolution. This is what DA helped the complainant put together. If you have a source to define what an agenda item is, let us know. I did not see it in the ByLaws but have heard it is in the policy manual. Again, bureaucracy, but it keeps everything somewhat consistent.

From asking the reps, the "in writing" was never questioned or part of any issue. The email/digital document approach is fine, they weren't asking anyone to get out a quill and ink well. They were requiring that a full "agenda item" be submitted, not just a title. I don't do Facebook so can't talk to anything on there. Who asserted that was the issue? What proof did they offer? Lots of accusations out there with nothing to back them up.

StoneQOLdCrazy

tldr

there is no requirement for a resolution in order to add a recall to the lec meeting agenda and never has been. DA knows that, having previously been recalled.

So stop with the quibbling.

Buck Rogers

Can you explain how you can accuse him of quibbling when you didn't even bother to read what he wrote?