Reply – Re: CC4D
Your Name
or Cancel
In Reply To
Re: CC4D
— by RichardDorrough RichardDorrough
"Let me ask you this, if the NYC members themselves feel that their locals have devolved to a condition which makes them worthless"

 If that was the case I suppose I would not be here saying anything But that is not the case.It is the agenda of a small group who claim to represent 560 members when they do not even do that. Prove to me that the MAJORITY of NYC members want their locals dissolved and turned over to a corrupt Council controlled by McCarron. Until you do I will make sure the members are clear that is the agenda of Pat Nee and his followers and let the voters decide at election time. Is that not the democratic way??

Cbox 9JUne 2011 "Richard Dorrough: As one of thier supporters stated "The kary kane and the CC4D has been a total scam and all those guys need to disassociate from that mess. How could it be possible that not one single email was ever send to those who signed that paper? pathetic" Now it turns out they are a continuation of the CC4D and if they did not notify the 560 members before submitting this are still at the same game"

Bill Lebo 9 JUne 2011"Bill Lebo: I agree Rich the members that they claim to have were not notified. I know I wasn't and I signed, although I left the core group for reasons I have stated in the past.

9 Jun 11, 21:45
Richard Dorrough: If you were not notified of the content of this and not asked if they could submit it on your behalf how does that sit legally. How does that affect the credibility of those who submitted it??

Bill Lebo: Your right, it's fraud.

9 Jun 11, 21:51
Richard Dorrough: The document claims that if we give all the locals over to the councils then ""members meaningfully participate in their union affairs" But not the rank and file. They will participate through delegates. Paid UBC shills with clear conflicts of interest

Bill Lebo: I said there were issues i didn't agree with