top of page

the May 1 meeting

I was disappointed in the format of the meeting. For such an important meeting–which included an election of officers, and an in-depth,and only, discussion of the MOU, there should have been a printed agenda, and a focused question and answer discussion. There was and still is quite a bit of concern about the possibilities of not ratifying this contract, and that complete information was not properly offered. It seems that t only one forseeable possibility was described, which nullifies the whole purpose of a vote. If the choice is vote yes or else, why have a vote at all?I also wonder about the voting process and counting. I understand from what i heard that if 12 people vote in the ratification process out of a membership 400+, and 9 of those 12 people vote a particular way, that is the vote that stands for the entire membership? How can this be possible?Isn't it crucial to get a certain percentage of the membership's vote in order for it to pass as a representation of the membership? If it is not,then it is incumbent upon the Union officers to make sure each and every member is contacted about this vote. Not just by email. How about a friendly phone call to let them know they are going to receive a ballot?A lot of questions remain unanswered.


Recent Posts

See All

A letter of support and solidarity from a Union member

Our colleague Jim Costanzo has asked me to circulate his comments… ______ Kye, I appreciate all that you, the negotiating team and other officers have done to negotiate and ratify the contract. Pratt


bottom of page