i dont think anyone is asking them to concede anything...ograc said:
im kind of leaning that way too...mike33 said:
Robbed, U4C is up at this point but barely. There are challenged ballots to be counted in July. Nobody will know who wins until the challenged ballots are counted. It's that close. The district doesn't give us the total numbers so there are a few stations we are guessing on that we gave benefit of doubt to rising. I gave an update that it was close, last week. That update remains unchanged.robbedagain said:
The violations of the membership by 141 rising can not be tolerated. Instead of you blaming me for filing protest, how about blaming the leadership who can't get an election straight without violating its members? A vast majority of the membership was not allowed to have their voices heard. I have no problem with how the US AIRWAYS members voted, it was actually rewarding for all of us to see them turn out in CLT. But violating the vast majority of members rights, and violating myself as a candidate simply will not be tolerated by me or any decent union member. I'm considering just stepping aside and creating and pushing a opposition slate like I did in 2008, if U4C loses. I'm working with Robyn Eulo and I'm also hopeful that she will win her EEOC case. The way I look at it, I gave it two tries, and maybe it's time to step aside and let someone else jump in if I lose this time. Even if the DOL case is successful.ograc said:
McDonald's wouldn't allow him to purchase the happy meal for himself.PHXConx said:
Although most of the blatant violations were due to the District's refusal to follow the union bylaws and also the LMRDA rights of members, individual candidates also have rights. For instance, I asked for the District to send out my campaign material and asked them the cost of having them do so. They emailed back that they would refuse to do that because they 'simply don't have the staffing'. I also asked to have the same access as any other candidate using addresses, email list, etc that current leadership may use. It refused that as well. Both are blatant violations.PHXConx said:
im not sure how you can say you are up if you dont have an exact count... but at least this answer explains why you didnt post an exact count, while i question your ability to say you are up i do appreciate the answer to the question thank youTim Nelson said:
I dont remember getting any mailings from the other candidates are you saying the district sent out their mailings but not yours?Tim Nelson said:
I'm saying that they were required to, whether other candidates did so or not. All candidates have the right to request to have the union do the mailings with the candidates paying for them. I requested and exercised this right, and the Atkinson refused through email. Further, there were some candidates who chose to violate the law themselves, including one from CLT. He used the normal and customary grievance committee email address to send out a blast email briefing to the entire membership in charlotte 'hammering' the opposition. The use of union email list is prohibited under law as using union resources or list obtained through union resources. I then asked Atkinson to the same access for him to send my email to the same members. He refused through confirmed email. Anytime a incumbent uses a email list or addresses for political gain, opposing candidates must be given the same access to insure a fair election.PHXConx said:
