This will help people make informed decisions at Wednesday's meeting.
As far as I am concerned, the changes are ridiculous because they are
totally unrealistic. Calling a general meeting EVERY time an amount of
over $150,000 is involved is just plain STUPID. Freezing cafeteria prices
for three years is even sillier. Etc, etc, etc.
Remember back to '93... the SA opposed the Gym at Sydney Boys, and they
were outvoted by at least 5:1. Yet, there they were with megaphones, acting
the part of the noisy minority. The Union requires a petition of only
15 signatories before a General Meeting must be called (the sheet I saw
only contained 12 signatures...) - I wonder why the SA hasn't suggested
that this is changed so that you only need five!?!?!
I'm not trying to defend the Union. Nor am I suggesting that changes should
not be made. Rather, the proposed changes should be of a realistic nature.
When we show up on Wednesday, we will vote "Yes" or "No" on the proposed
amendments AS THEY STAND - we will not be negotiating the changes. Thus,
if there is even only ONE WORD which modifies ONE aspect of the amended
clause that is objectionable (with the rest of the clause being perfectly
reasonable), then that entire clause would need to be rejected. More effort
needs to be put into the construction of the amendments.
Enough said for now.
Peter
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Meric pmeric@nospam.socs.uts.edu.au
pmeric@nospam.progsoc.uts.edu.au
pmeric@nospam.acs.itd.uts.edu.au
"Stupidity cannot be cured with money, or through education, or by
legislation. Stupidity is not a sin, the victim can't help being
stupid. But stupidity is the only universal capital crime; the sentence
is death, there is no appeal, and execution is carried out
automatically and without pity."
Robert Heinlein