I only lost one election ever and this isnt one of them. Would you agree that if the dol believes the violations were significant against the members and rule for a rerun, that me fighting for those rights is a worthy cause. ?WeAAsles said:
I'm still sticking with 83%. Not seeing too much negative chatter out there and what has been negative has mostly been explained. I also commend your District for putting it out without all the fancy colors and sellers. The vote will stand on the merit of the language contained.robbedagain said:
CLT voted overwhelmingly against you and your slate Tim. If there were not enough ballots sent to CLT that falls squarely on the DL Secretary Treasurer. Accountability is also shared by the Recording Secretary of the local. When it was apparent the CLT local did not have enough ballots sent; the Recording Secretary should have immediately notified the district. The said Recording Secretary (who was a candidate on U4C slate); for whatever reason, chose not to share this with the district. The members in CLT showed up to cast their votes. No one was denied the ability to vote. The process may have been disrupted... but in the end CLT voted overwhelmingly for the incumbents. BTW... how many ballots were affected? My understanding is approximately 50. I believe you got smoked by 300 or more in CLT. Don't be so confident the DOL will see this as an issue that had an adverse affect on the ultimate outcome. Your argument is a reach at best IMO.Tim Nelson said:
the case of the clt ballots doesnt make the top ten list of complaints. That said, the question is one of secrecy of the ballots.that was compromised and the district knows this. Thats why they held off on those 79 ballots until they counted all other ballots in the election. Only when it was objective that 3 u4C won, did they agree to count them and tell my observer to have me file with the dol if i dont like it. But other items were more blatant. Id ask you to withold your judgement and consider the outcome of the case prior to siding one way or the other on the moral permissiveness of filing the case.ograc said:
the question stands. Will you support a rerun election so all the members can be heard and apologize for your team for the error of their ways once the dol orders a rerun?mike33 said:
i just charge with facts brother. No lying needed.P. REZ said:
I'm an open minded person. I have learned to listen to both sides of a story before rendering an opinion. Your charges will be duly noted and reviewed by the DOL. The DOL will decide if your charges are valid or meritless. I would hope you are not basing your "enforcer" rhetoric on issues such as CLT. I await your "top ten" list of charges that have merit. In the meantime... the results have been declared official, the membership has spoken Tim. You may get a rerun election in 2016 as a result of your protest. Until the U4C Team figures out what went wrong this election they can expect the same results. Then again... maybe nothing went wrong; maybe the results were a true reflection of the engaged and educated members' choice. In the meantime... I expect you to file your charges for a rerun election but we, as a membership, are moving forward.Tim Nelson said:
