Bylaw amendment proposal discussion

[MBusuttil]

Hello again Darren,

With respect to your proposition about FULL unobstructed access to all bank accounts, statements, forms and receipts; I don't know where to start on this. To be honest, I'm not really against this because otherwise, it would seem like I am hiding things. That's not really who I want to be. Nonetheless here are some issues I have with this proposition:

Bank accounts:
- We have 1 business account, 7 credit cards, 1 GIC and a partridge in a pear tree. If someone else besides myself and the trustees had access to the bank account... not much would probably happen! You would just have access to the account activity and statements. I use to save all of this stuff on paper and now just electronically on a cloud service. But someone could easily change the banking password on me and lock it out. Someone could also pose as me and potentially action something through our bank. So now 445 pilots get to do this anytime they ask? Would you give your bank account info away to 445 of your closest friends? Clearly you're not asking for this though, you're asking for:

Visa Statements:
- This is not in principle an unreasonable ask. Does it border on privacy issues... a little but what about the confidentiality of our individual members. Much of the issues we deal with are confidential and there is spending around that. If we are going to defend a person or plan strategically for our group, we actually need to eat too. What would you do with these statements? My guess is that you would question our judgement. And that's ok. You should! But now 445 people get to ask questions ceaselessly about what we were doing when we ate this meal on such and such a day: "Oh I was just defending Bob, he failed his PPC.", "Oh Larry was accused of harassment in Cancun." "Oh someone thought Angela was drinking past 12 hours". Do all the members of the UNION get to know about Bob, Larry and Angela's bad day? Well they do now with your proposition.

Forms and Original Receipts:
- I have all those. A quick summary of my drive today shows 342 folders with 2,111 files. And that's just since May 2019. The paper stuff from before that time is in my basement. If I give you access to the drive and everyone else access, how do I know you won't delete them or alter the files.... even by accident. If I send you all the paper in the mail and it gets lost, its gone for good. The whole history. If you lose it, even worse for you. If you lose even one receipt that will chap my ass. But maybe I could photocopy them for ya? Or take pictures and text you them? I do not have the time for that. That is unreasonably onerous. And if 445 people ask me to do that I will go postal. At the very least, I will use a PMTG day. And also, these forms are inextricably linked to confidentiality because they directly have peoples names on them to explain what the expenses were for. So now, everyone gets that info.

So I am not going to propose your amendment, but I know why you're suggesting it and although philosophically I agree with you, pragmatically I do not. It is the trustees who get this privilege. The trustees in my opinion have the most important job in the Union not just because they are a check and balance on the minutia of the spending but because we literally trust them to be eternally confidential on peoples issues and problems that arise from expenses they incur to the Union.

Thanks Darren for your pressing inquiry, I actually appreciate people that go against the grain and ask the hard questions. I believe in that! I hope this helps answer that specific problem which I know you have asked often.

Mike Busuttil

[dnicol]

Any member in good standing will be given full unobstructed access to all bank accounts, statements, forms and original receipts.

Complete madness. Imagine if everyone demanded full access to UNIIFOR National's accounts. I got a feeling they would not have been as polite as you were Mike. The trustees are elected by the group and can do their work in a time efficient manner.

Mac

[dacri]

Union=organized mob

Thanks for the clarification Mike.

Barret gets to hide behind a vale of BS with terms like “Expense Code of Conduct”

I’m sure he’ll also have issues with regulating how PMTG days are given out.

Merry Christmas

[dnicol]

Since the reckoning quite a few years ago:

PMTG days have been completely cleaned up and are straight time only.

Mileage claims are detailed and must be accompanied by Google Map details. (No claiming a set amount 12 months a year - or even 15 times in one year!).

As of Oct 1st, the Government of Canada per diem rate for Canada is $111 per day (including $17.50 for incidental expenses). So if a fellow was in a hotel for say 5 nights so long as they do not spend an average of more than $111 on breakfast, lunch, dinner, tips, tax + incidentals (hard not to do sometimes) I'd say that was just fine. If their average is less than or equal to $111 per day and they want dinner at the Keg, I personally have no issue with that.

Mac

[CNilsen]

Thanks for starting this topic Darren and giving the pilot group the chance to share their thoughts.

You always stand up for your right to participate and be critical of the representation - exactly as the Unifor Constitution says you have the right to do - and have no hesitation in sharing your concerns. No matter how vicious the attacks, you never attack back and always wish the attacker well.

That takes a pretty strong character.

but…

I am totally with Mac and THicking and Derrick Butcher. This is a ridiculous conversion. The MEC were elected to run the ship. If the members wanted something different they would have said so. Darren if you feel something needs to be different then you should have run for a position and been elected. This is nonsense. The mec runs the ship

@THicking
Duuuude that was like totally aaaaaawesome man! I mean like really, really totally aaaaaaaaawesome. I love how you just descended on the forum like a really, really AGGRESSIVE, ANGRY, DARK cloud and then zeroed in with an attack of lightning precision on your VICTIM.

maybe just a little bit of tact would really broaden your audience.

The ‘Polite’ way of calling someone an a-hole is to do it behind their backs… Doing it in front of 450 of a professionals colleagues for everyone to see… Kinda makes you look like the a-hole. The Professional a-hole of course though (OMG - I think I did a little funny punny… tee hee hee). LURKING behind the SHADOWS, SMOKE and MIRRORS of the iPhone WatsAp super double secret MEC exclusive inner circle chat group… maybe more appropriate…

Or start a new thread…

A MERRY THICKING FESTIVUS DACRI!

@BDUTCHER

WOW… the PASSIVE AGGRESSIVE responses to DAcri… DISMISSING, DEFERRING, DEFLECTING…

…with such brilliant subtlety that I don’t think anyone else caught it! BRAVO.

Oh… and double WOW… The way you lure people in and INVITE them to participate in open discussion… then ATTACK… and send the henchmen in to clean up…

Brilliant - we fall for it everytime.

“I promised I would listen to everyone so that everyone was represented. - BARRETT ARMANN”

never really a good idea to make your BOSS look bad.

@MBusutil
5 x 3000 word essays - sigh... I'm humbled.

[CNilsen]

Wow. I would say I’m astonished, but nothing surprises me with this MEC anymore.

95% of these proposals don’t belong in a not-for-profit organizations bylaws.

The MEC has taken every concern the membership has expressed about the abuse of power, and manipulation of the union system and legitimized it.

It’s amazing that as Sunwing pilots we are conditioned towards the empowerment of an effective oligarchy and dictatorship under an absolute ruler. Yet as Canadians, we have a democratic system of government founded on a grass roots system with power flowing from the ground up with public accountability, responsibility and transparency. And nobody would dare challenge that system.

I believe in the Canadian system and the decentralization of power. The greater the decentralization, the greater the representation, the more representative the voice of the people and the stronger the democracy.

That should be the evolution of our union government model. Elected LOCAL (LEC) reps who have a vote on every decision which affects our employment, systems of independent checks, balances and accountability. It’s the Canadian way and the industry standard set by ALPA, and ACPA.

The MEC doesn’t want that. Could you imagine if Mat Rogers was ‘elected’ as YYZ base Rep.

Instead what the MEC is doing is strengthening their stranglehold on unilateral decision making, empowering nepotism and cronyism, and silencing anyone who challenges them with ultimate authority to act as judge, jury and executioner.

BARRETT ARMANN and DERRICK BUTCHER have made it perfectly clear that their agenda has been to transition VOLUNTEER positions to PAID union positions and have slowly been making that transition, selling out members rights and assuming control of working conditions.

What BARRETT ARMANN and DERRICK BUTCHER are doing is using the union bylaws to write their own perks, benefits, wages and working conditions and empowering themselves to the ultimate decision making process.

These ByLaws are effectively their own personal CBA with blank cheque clauses.

Nothing in these bylaws requires any amendment ‘right here, right now’.

Yet BARRETT ARMANN and DERRICK BUTCHER are trying to RAM through these changes right before an Election, which effectively says,
“we are not going to volunteer unless we can write our own benefits, perks and working conditions and can make whatever decisions we want”.

That’s exactly what Donald Trump did.

Just reading MBUSUTIL’S responses - every one is what MBUSUTIL ‘thinks’, what MBUSUTIL ‘wants’ or what HE agrees with or doesn’t. MBUSUTIL is already speaking on the ASSUMPTION that MBUSUTIL will be elected as the next treasurer. We all appreciate the effort Mike, but isn't it more approrpiate to maybe wait until you are re-elected or pass that work on to the next guy- There’s an election weeks away.

You know what, why don’t we just leave the ByLaws the way they are until after the election, let’s see if people run because they genuinely want to make a positive contribution to our group and represent everyone fairly and equally or if they are only willing to volunteer if they are getting their pockets lined and are empowered to enforce their own personal agenda on our pilot group.

What if the next MEC wants to empower the membership, what if the next treasurer doesn’t mind transparently disclosing documentation, what if the next MEC wants to decentralize power, reduce cronyism or work towards an industry standard infrastructure. They can’t even campaign on that because the outgoing MEC has locked in their own agenda’s. Nobody can even bring up those issues in the campaign, because… the membership has already voted too legitimize them.

Effectively the MEC is using the ByLaws amendments as a defacto vote on the next MEC to secure their positions.

Holy Poop.

In 2018, Mat Rogers alleged Barrett Armann tried to have him fired to keep him from running in the election. In 2019 there were allegations (documented) the MEC manipulated the Negotiations committee vote to get people they wanted elected.

and now this… using the bylaws as a pre-vote to the MEC Elections.

The manipulation of our pilot group just keeps escalating.

They’re not even waiting until they have been re-elected - they’re just assuming they will be and securing their oligarchy. I would like to think we have a pretty humble and down to earth pilot group… how are we supporting such arrogance.

If there’s a different MEC, it’s very likely there will be a move away from, and a different structure than, the ‘Representation by Cronyism” model of the current MEC.

If nothing else, amendments of these caliber should be left to the next MEC, not made right before an election on their behalf…

I’ll call a spade a spade.

The MEC is using the bylaws to write their own CBA and lock in their personal agenda’s, and oligarchy.

DONALD TRUMP POLITICS

he was talking like he already won the election… it takes a really arrogant… and narcissistic personality to do that.

humbly… I leave you with this thought…

Why now? Why right before Christmas? Why right before an election?

(14,968 words... 32 less than MBusutil's 15,000 words)

[MBusuttil]

Another change;

We had a discussion for another change to one of the articles. Here is the article:

18.2.1 All expenses must be pre-approved by the Executive Council prior to being incurred through the Local approved expense/travel request form.

Here is the proposed change. And this one comes from myself.

18.2.1 All expenses must be pre-approved by the Executive Council prior to being incurred through the Local approved expense/travel request form or by an email to the Treasurer stating the name, project, dates, and expected itemized expenses. The email or form will be kept on file with the matching expense form and receipts.



Why? Basically the current form is burdensome in that it has to be downloaded, filled out, sent back. Some people don't have computers that can view the form well or they can't fill it out. Or they can't do it on their phone. So this simply allows the exact same thing to happen but through an email.

Thanks,

Mike Busuttil

[CNilsen]

I just re-read my own post and noticed DAcri's comment. huh... I'm trying to put the pieces of the puzzle together.

Holy poop!

Is this all about the optics of election politics?

This is not even a legitimate vote or proposal.

Looking at the timelines on what has to happen...

There has to be a vote on the bylaws - Is that going to happen over Christmas... That can't be allowed to happen... It's Christmas... If so then that is really manipulative.

Then there is the whole unifor process which takes months...

But there has to be an MEC Election in early January (should have happened in December really)

So even if these are voted in...

the NEXT MEC can change or amend them, change structures, then put them out to a re-vote by the pilot group.

So this vote is completely Moot.

But wait, if the bylaws are put to a vote in early January, then that might push back the MEC elections by weeks or a month... well you can't really have a bylaws vote at the same time as an MEC election.

Or are these guys effectively using the bylaws changes as their campaign platform for the election?

Remember right before the 2018 MEC elections how Derrick Butcher came up with an infrastructure committee and came up with an infrastrure plan within four weeks and released it right before the election - effectively he was able to use it as his campaign platform with a public service endorsement by the outgoing MEC....

Is this the same thing? Mike's been silent for two years, all of a sudden there is a big flurry of activity just before re-election on bylaws.

Is the MEC trying to delay the MEC election process?

The bylaws state '"10.4 The President shall be an ex-officio Member of all Committees except for the Election Committee and the Treasury Committee.". '... that includes the Negotiations Committee.

Well if BArmann loses, then the next President becomes the defacto member of the Negotiating Committee.

But wait, KCollins and LSexsmith were hand chosen by BArmann. What if Mat Rogers is elected... Then he's on the committee...

And if the elections are delayed then BArmann gets to stay in the negotiations process longer? and then there is the 'handover' time. That's usually a couple of weeks process.

And then the Fall AGM - Fall... not winter... a willful and deliberate violation of the constitution?

Delayed until right before the election...

Announced with only 5 days notice? on December 21 yet? 4 days before christmas?

Is it being used as an election platform as DAcri pointed out? with 450 members as a captive audience, able to put names to faces, for people to announce their candidacy and taught their own accomplishments, maybe have cronies like Jeff Binks as Treasurer make profound public support statements...

A broadcast, organised, public service campaign speech where only candidates who are participating gain a huge political advantage.

And the longer the transition to the next MEC takes, the better it works out for BArmann, he can claim responsibility for everything which would naturally transpire anyways like guys getting called back, government changes to CEWS, quarentine restrictions lifted oh and even for getting the vaccine approved...

Holy poop!

That's exactly what DONALD TRUMP was trying to do.

The optics of this whole situation wreak of political manipulation.

and that is probably just scratching the tip of the iceberg. Where there's smoke there is fire.

The brakes have to be put on all of this.

There is an election.

BArmann has a history of manipulating elections...

and that what this looks like. manipulation to put himself and his selected TEIM in as strong of a political position as possible and give them as much political advantage as possible.

We've seen this before... It ended really bad for our pilot group.

it has to stop.

[ngomes]

The bylaws state 'the president will be a defacto member of each committee'... that includes the Negotiations Committee.

Well if BArmann loses, then the next President becomes the defacto member of the Negotiating Committee.

I have a correction to make Chris. As per the bylaws:
"10.4 The President shall be an ex-officio Member of all Committees except for the Election Committee and the Treasury Committee.".

Also:
"15.13.3 All Executive Council Officers shall be elected for a term of two (2) years from
the date of their election and hold office until new Executive Council Officers are
installed. Such elections shall be held in January of an election year. The first
round of the election shall be completed prior to February 1st of an election year.
Subsequent run-off elections will commence within seven (7) days after the
completion of the first round"

From memory, bylaws are often discussed and amended during the AGM.

You raise great points as always, and I'm not disagreeing in general, but so far I don't see anything out of the ordinary or against the bylaws.

[CNilsen]

Thanks for validating that Nuno. Nothing but respect for ya. I was going from memory, couldn't be on the forum and in the bylaws at the same time. I've cut and pasted that bylaw you provided back in so it's correct. But please appreciate that it also took my post above MBusutil's 15,000 words. sigh.

Elections Committee and the Treasury Committee. President is an ex-Officio member of the Negotiations Committee. thanks for confirming.

Maybe I am wrong, I dunno, the optics on this are really bad. Someone could even throw in there banishing a potential Presidential Candidate from public participation on the forum for 30 days, a month before an election.

I don't think I mentioned any violation of the bylaws except the Fall vs Winter AGM. (always happy to correct myself). There was nothing stopping them being held in September, October, November.

Donald Trump didn't violate any laws either, but wow... there was a lot of people who sure thought he manipulated the politcal environment.

Generally in the month before an election, the outgoing MEC should only just be running the day to day operations of the union. Ramming through personal agenda items is really bad political ettiqutte - It's what Donald Trump does.

I don't agree or disagree with any of the proposals (although 95% doesn't belong in not for profit organizations bylaws) but...

Why not leave this discussion to the next MEC where they can hold an AGM and public group discussion? They are the ones that are going to have to implement it. Maybe they take the view 'There Has To Be A Better Way To Do It' (JBinks Hat Tip). Is there anything in these proposals that require immediate change before the election and a new MEC?

We need to have a clean and fair election free of even the slightest hint of manipulation.

Anyways, flak jacket on. bring on the henchmen.

[BPritchard]

Hey Chris,
At the very least I am happy that you will be performing your democratic rights and voting on these proposed by-law amendments and that you'll vote yes to 5% of them.

On a few of your points I will comment.

The MEC has no say on the timing of an election. That is tasked to the Elections Committee and they are to follow the By-Laws, which in this case state that there will be an election in January 2021. So no need to fret.

You are right that the majority of the proposed amendments really need not be theres. However, I'd have to say that the reason they are there is because the Unifor Constitution and its applicable supporting documentation, which is part of how we are to operated has not been followed. So, in attempt for future MEC's, the immediate directions will be right up front in our Local By-laws.

Can't quite see where this is not legitimate as you stated. You did not validate that statement, but went on to be upset about the time of the year at which this is being done. Yes, it is Christmas and if you so choose to sit down and cast your vote on Christmas Eve, that is your decision. Others may choose to do it on a different day.
However one works their time management and priorities.

Actually the "whole process" does not take months under our By-Laws. It can all be done electronically, which this forum is part of that compliance action. There is an either/or in the by-laws and to be quite honest, what with the current state of the world, not having face to face meetings with so many people is the better way to have it done.

Not sure where you get the Negotiations Committee being inclusive to the Trustee and Elections Committee exception for the President and ex-officio status. But that was taken from the Unifor Constitution. And btw, the proposed definition of Ex-Officio was put there to clear up any misunderstanding as to what was meant by 'ex-officio.' It was alway there and not a power play move by the current president or MEC members.

The beauty of what is transpiring here is: Everyone here, from Number 1 to Number 453(your number I believe as the post just disappeared) will have the ability to vote on said amendments. If they like what they see, they vote 'yes' and if they don't they vote 'no.' The beauty of this vote is that it is not all or nothing. You will be able to vote 'yes' on articles that you agree with and 'no' on the ones you don't.

And believe it or not, Darren has driven some of these changes because of his concern with respect to transparency.
Wouldn't you say that there are more checks and balances and requirement of the Secretary/Treasurer here?
If one feels that there has been abuse with this MEC or those of previous MEC's then this language moves us in the direction of mitigating it.

Merry Christmas to you
And to
Everyone who is reading this Post.
Let us all be safe and look forward to a safe, healthy and better 2021!

[thicking]

Chris, the reality that you live in never ceases to amaze me. It amazes the people in the big bad whatsapp chats that you think all of us "cronies" are a part of as well. You parade around like the Robin Hood of all things good for our pilot group yet publicly and personally belittle me on this forum by insulting me on the way you think I speak? I have disagreed with many people on this forum and often in a very blunt way, including this keg debate Darren keeps bringing up. I am happy for people to disagree with my views as well. But I did not attack him personally on the issue. Nor did I say anything on here I wouldn't say to his face while having a beer in CUN. The personal attacks actually seem pretty reserved for the rants that you make every few weeks/months on this forum. Those times when you feel you need to be the hero against our elected MEC. Just like Robin Hood I guess, only he was against the rich...... not elected members.

Are you perhaps just bitter that your endeavours with the union haven't really worked out so far? Even after flaunting that big legal brain of yours to anyone that will listen it just hasn't really worked out has it? If I remember correctly, you were not happy with CBA3 that you helped negotiate. You quit the last MEC when you didn't get your way. Then you ran again and the pilot group didn't vote for you. You are now one of the most outspoken critics against our elected MEC. You like to compare them to Donald Trump. Yet when Trump loses something or doesn't get his way, he goes on rants, claims fraud, rigging, manipulation, etc. Sounds awfully familiar when reading your posts. As the Robin Hood you seem to think you are, shouldn't you be happy that the the Pilot group did vote for an MEC democratically 2 years ago and there will be another democratic election next month? They have served their term and have done their jobs well in my opinion. But who cares what my opinions are. If the group isn't happy with how they have handled or are handling things currently they won't be voted in again. Maybe it will be your time to shine and to do all these things you keep ranting about about every now and then. But that'll be up to the pilot group, won't it? Just like these bylaws will. If you don't like them vote no. If you don't like our current MEC then vote for someone else next month. Pretty simple, and pretty democratic.

Keep your personal attacks and insinuations to yourself or contact me directly. If you feel like mocking the way I speak maybe try using the word "poop" less next time when in a public forum of adults.

[CNilsen]

Hi Blair,

Not sure if you read my post at all, if so, you’ve kinda gone and re-written it using your own narrative, i can’t fault you, between MBusutil’s 15000 words and my 15000 words... but here we go as always...

It’s amazing that I can’t just write something... After twelve years I know exactly who is going to say what and how they are going to respond... do you have any idea how hard it is to write thinking, ‘if I write this this way... Blair Pritchard is going to say xyz... but if I write it this way, THicking is going to attack... and if I write it this way DNicol is going to respond like this...

Sigh

I guess I made about 50 points in there, so i’m Glad you only only challenged five.

At the very least I am happy that you will be performing your democratic rights and voting on these proposed by-law amendments and that you'll vote yes to 5% of them.

Was pretty clear in saying I don’t agree or disagree with the proposals just that 95% of them don’t belong in not for profit organizations bylaws.

I may vote for 100% of them... but I do appreciate you transposing your personal assumptions on me in front of 450 of our colleagues... the polite way to call a guy an a-hole is...

On a few of your points I will comment.

The MEC has no say on the timing of an election. That is tasked to the Elections Committee and they are to follow the By-Laws, which in this case state that there will be an election in January 2021. So no need to fret.

Not fretting at all... you just created that narrative for 450 of our colleagues... I think that’s the way I roughly laid it out. Nuno already posted that. thanks for double validating though.

You are right that the majority of the proposed amendments really need not be theres. However, I'd have to say that the reason they are there is because the Unifor Constitution and its applicable supporting documentation, which is part of how we are to operated has not been followed.

So we are in agreement?

In these last three years i’ve Volunteered on two not for profit organizations board of directors. One needed pretty big bylaws changes because of a change to government guidelines, the other made minor changes as per the standard AGM/quorum (online).

Violations like we’ve seen would never have been allowed as a function of hundreds of members and other board members holding the directors accountable and responsible.

If there is even a hint of impropriety, it gets squashed fast. Our pilot group just allows the MEC to sweep concerns under the carpet... because the MEC runs the ship.

I mentioned the bylaws clause ‘the membership is the ultimate authority’ as the catch all protection. It might have gotten lost in those 15000 words. But anytime the members have requested an investigation, it has been denied. It blows my mind how that is possible.

So, in attempt for future MEC's, the immediate directions will be right up front in our Local By-laws.

So we are in agreement... again...? the next MEC is making the rules and infrastructure for the next MEC.

Donald Trumps supporters think he’s doing everything right as well.

Can't quite see where this is not legitimate as you stated. You did not validate that statement,

Sorry my writing style didn’t match your reading style, my bad, sorry, I should have seen that coming. Sigh... I guess a separated the sentences for ease of reading rather than a single paragraph.

You have read further down. The next MEC might review the bylaws and decide there needs to be different changes, maybe more restrictions, maybe a different structure. Then they have to taken back to the membership with a re-vote.

So this whole process is moot.

but went on to be upset about the time of the year at which this is being done.

Did I say I was upset? You just created that narrative and assigned me your own motivation in front 450 of our colleagues... the polite way to call a guy an a-hole is...

More smiley emoji’s?

Yes, it is Christmas and if you so choose to sit down and cast your vote on Christmas Eve, that is your decision. Others may choose to do it on a different day.
However one works their time management and priorities.

I’m amazed that somehow your justifying this over the holiday season.
It’s a time for family and peace and joy, But you’re interrupting that with union politics. Seems a bit inappropriate to me, but if that’s what the MEC has directed you to do...

We have different value systems.

Anytime there is a vote it puts people in conflict. It’s unfortunate that the MEC chooses to do that over a time of peace.

Actually the "whole process" does not take months under our By-Laws. It can all be done electronically, which this forum is part of that compliance action.

The process for this project will be:

Post amendments electronically for you to review (our website & the forum).

Discussion period.

Ratification process.

Send to UNIFOR national the ratified sections.

By-Law amendments voted in by the Membership will be forwarded to National for review. Upon acceptance by National the By-Law amendments will be in effect.

Publish the final version on our website.

Maybe I was mistaken, but I was lead to believe that the last bylaws changes took months to get approved by National.

As MBusutil mentioned, there is only one lawyer...

There is an either/or in the by-laws and to be quite honest, what with the current state of the world, not having face to face meetings with so many people is the better way to have it done.

Blame it on the covid...

Not sure where you get the Negotiations Committee being inclusive to the Trustee and Elections Committee exception for the President and ex-officio status.

Where did you get that from? Maybe there was a typing error in there on my part. I even confirmed that in my response to nuno.

I was on the negotiating committee, I do know the president is an ex-officio member...

But that was taken from the Unifor Constitution. And btw, the proposed definition of Ex-Officio was put there to clear up any misunderstanding as to what was meant by 'ex-officio.' It was alway there and not a power play move by the current president or MEC members.

Not sure where you get that from ... but Ok... did you think I missed that when I was on the MEC or Negotiating Committee?

The beauty of what is transpiring here is: Everyone here, from Number 1 to Number 453(your number I believe as the post just disappeared) will have the ability to vote on said amendments.

Ummm. Ok... as it should be... so we’re in agreement... again...

If they like what they see, they vote 'yes' and if they don't they vote 'no.' The beauty of this vote is that it is not all or nothing. You will be able to vote 'yes' on articles that you agree with and 'no' on the ones you don't.

Well that’s kind of neat.

I think you missed the open question for consideration.

Why right before the election? Why make these decisions on behalf of the next MEC? Why impose union politics over the holiday period? What if the next guys have a jbinks ‘better way’ of proposal to make.

And believe it or not, Darren has driven some of these changes because of his concern with respect to transparency.

So for all the abuse DArci has taken... now you give him credit for driving the changes... not once in two years could you have stood up for him and said... hey these are great suggestions your contributions are going to drive positive change...

Wouldn't you say that there are more checks and balances and requirement of the Secretary/Treasurer here?

Not sure if you are asking me, or a general open statement expressing your own views.

If for me... you missed my point...

It’s not up to me, or the existing treasurer. What if the next Secretary/Treasurer has a JBinks ‘better way’ six weeks from now. What if the next treasury committee feels there needs to be different checks/balances..

You might have forgotten. I co-founded the treasury committee. To make sure there was public accountability and to give the pilot group a committee to investigate members complaints.

If one feels that there has been abuse with this MEC or those of previous MEC's then this language moves us in the direction of mitigating it.

Conceptually we’re in agreement. But there are standard and best practices in not for profit organizations ways of doing things... why... because they work... regardless of the nature of the business.

What if the next guys have a better understanding than you or I or the current MEC.

Thanks for the Christmas wishes Blair.
Totally respect your professionalism
And I wish you a merry christmas and hopefully look forward to flying with you as a F/O in the new year

[CNilsen]

@THicking
whoooooaaaaaa.
Duuuuuuddde

oh wait, am I interrupting the monologue...

Hi is Trevor hicking there... Yes I can wait on Hold...

la di da di da...

Oh hi, Trevor is that you?

But Brah, I was totally agreeing with you. Yeah, let's hook up, then we can totally coordinate!

and I loved that post! Inspiring. Robinhood... big legal brain... Hero... Come on, there has to be a meme that you can post of that for me!

Incredible narrative... literary genius. A picture so clear... So vivid... Darn I wish I could write like that.

1432 words... of free speech love.

Oh Yeah, let's start a thread A MERRY THICKING FESTIVUS CNILSEN

As DAcri would say. Merry Christmas Trevor. I wish you all the best of happiness, health and exceptional fortune in the new year. Peace and love (Why is there no heart emoji on this thing?).

(hmmm.... So there really is a super double secret watsap chat group that you talk behind peoples backs on hey? - I heard a rumor about that but I always gave guys the professional courtesy of not believing it)

[jbinks]

It’s not up to me, or the existing treasurer. What if the next Secretary/Treasurer has a JBinks ‘better way’ six weeks from now. What if the next treasury committee feels there needs to be different checks/balances..

The simple answer to this is that they can then propose their own bylaw amendments that reflect their views. Both our existing bylaws and the revised bylaws permit any member to propose amendments and provides them a clear pathway to do so. To my knowledge no member has done that during the term of this MEC. Bylaws are meant to be a living document and will continue to evolve. Nothing is locked in forever. Not sure why these amendments are being treated that way.

In terms of timing, these bylaw amendments are being put forward at the end of the current MEC's two year term. The amendments reflect their lessons learned from two years of experiences. If I had to chose between amendments being put forward by an MEC with 2 years of experiences to shape them or amendments being put forward with 2 days on the job I'll take the ones written by people with 2 years of experiences. The good thing is I don't actually have to make that choice because the reality is we can have both. There is nothing stopping the next MEC or even a person on their first day at Sunwing from proposing new amendments and evolving the document once again.