Sections

[Basildepalmer]

So if someone was a member of a section and they only had a vote in that section everyone would be happy?

If there are 500 female ffs in the service and all wanted to be a member of the womens section their EC member would have a vote equal to the LFB member.

If only 100 women wanted to be in the female section their EC would have their vote. Still happy??

I am

[Tickle the Pickle]

The politics of fear

The resolutions included in this year’s agenda for Annual Conference were not about the abolition of the equality sections but a genuine attempt by the membership in these respective brigades to address the issue of voting rights and to redress the disparity that does exist.

This was not about attempting to fire the first salvo in a strategy to abolish the sections

Let us be absolutely clear, the membership in these brigades genuinely believe that the sections have an absolutely vital and important role to play within the FBU.

As a union, we should not be afraid to put ourselves under the microscope and examine our policies, rules and internal workings and ask ourselves, what are sometimes, difficult and uncomfortable questions.

I believe that the majority of the membership will agree with what these resolutions were attempting to achieve, namely the principle of one person, one vote but the very real fear of falsely being labeled as a racist, chauvinistic, homophobe prevents many from voicing their support.

In truth, the real issue is being lost, drowned out in a poisonous atmosphere where the politics of fear, so often employed by Tony Blair and New Labour, are used to stifle the debate.

If we are being honest, this is an issue that simply will not go away while ever this fear exists. To bury our heads in the sand is not an option.

I believe the first issue that must be addressed is why the membership feels unable to have an open and honest debate, free from prejudice, where real concerns can be voiced without the fear of being labeled and stigmatized. Ironically, this key principle was one of the very reasons why the sections were created in the first place?

Unless we address this crucial aspect, how can we ever have this important debate that does need to be had?

Only when the membership has the courage to speak will their voice be heard.

[Pinkpony2]

The resolutions included in this year’s agenda for Annual Conference were not about the abolition of the equality sections but a genuine attempt by the membership in these respective brigades to address the issue of voting rights and to redress the disparity that does exist.

This was not about attempting to fire the first salvo in a strategy to abolish the sections

Let us be absolutely clear, the membership in these brigades genuinely believe that the sections have an absolutely vital and important role to play within the FBU.

As a union, we should not be afraid to put ourselves under the microscope and examine our policies, rules and internal workings and ask ourselves, what are sometimes, difficult and uncomfortable questions.

I believe that the majority of the membership will agree with what these resolutions were attempting to achieve, namely the principle of one person, one vote but the very real fear of falsely being labeled as a racist, chauvinistic, homophobe prevents many from voicing their support.

In truth, the real issue is being lost, drowned out in a poisonous atmosphere where the politics of fear, so often employed by Tony Blair and New Labour, are used to stifle the debate.

If we are being honest, this is an issue that simply will not go away while ever this fear exists. To bury our heads in the sand is not an option.

I believe the first issue that must be addressed is why the membership feels unable to have an open and honest debate, free from prejudice, where real concerns can be voiced without the fear of being labeled and stigmatized. Ironically, this key principle was one of the very reasons why the sections were created in the first place?

Unless we address this crucial aspect, how can we ever have this important debate that does need to be had?

Only when the membership has the courage to speak will their voice be heard.

so why were both resolutions withdrawn?

[houd]

so why were both resolutions withdrawn?

Ultimately because of bullying and harrassment from old guard cronies, desperate to defend the sectional voting which still serves them well.

The sort of pressure which in the period immediately following the J03 fiasco led to more than a few very capable union officials throwing in the towel and walking away - fed up to the back teeth with fighting employers only to be stabbed in the back by members of secret societies such as the Left Group, and worse.

The sort of two-faced unionistas who launch diatribes against recently elected officials who do not sing their song, and try to tell us that they are not doing so.

Don't piss on my back and tell me it's raining - comrade.

[seefour]

pinhred
the officer do not have a section, are these people really fbu members? to know so little about the organisation they are in.

[Basildepalmer]

The resolutions included in this year’s agenda for Annual Conference were not about the abolition of the equality sections but a genuine attempt by the membership in these respective brigades to address the issue of voting rights and to redress the disparity that does exist.

This was not about attempting to fire the first salvo in a strategy to abolish the sections

Let us be absolutely clear, the membership in these brigades genuinely believe that the sections have an absolutely vital and important role to play within the FBU.

As a union, we should not be afraid to put ourselves under the microscope and examine our policies, rules and internal workings and ask ourselves, what are sometimes, difficult and uncomfortable questions.

I believe that the majority of the membership will agree with what these resolutions were attempting to achieve, namely the principle of one person, one vote but the very real fear of falsely being labeled as a racist, chauvinistic, homophobe prevents many from voicing their support.

In truth, the real issue is being lost, drowned out in a poisonous atmosphere where the politics of fear, so often employed by Tony Blair and New Labour, are used to stifle the debate.

If we are being honest, this is an issue that simply will not go away while ever this fear exists. To bury our heads in the sand is not an option.

I believe the first issue that must be addressed is why the membership feels unable to have an open and honest debate, free from prejudice, where real concerns can be voiced without the fear of being labeled and stigmatized. Ironically, this key principle was one of the very reasons why the sections were created in the first place?

Unless we address this crucial aspect, how can we ever have this important debate that does need to be had?

Only when the membership has the courage to speak will their voice be heard.

Dear Sir
BOLLOCKS

Bas

[strontium dog]

Bit late now, but our Brigade committee never even arranged a Brigade or Branch meeting prior to conference with the local members.

How did they vote on any of the issues.... who knows.

[Yowler]

The resolutions included in this year’s agenda for Annual Conference were not about the abolition of the equality sections but a genuine attempt by the membership in these respective brigades to address the issue of voting rights and to redress the disparity that does exist.

This was not about attempting to fire the first salvo in a strategy to abolish the sections

Let us be absolutely clear, the membership in these brigades genuinely believe that the sections have an absolutely vital and important role to play within the FBU.

As a union, we should not be afraid to put ourselves under the microscope and examine our policies, rules and internal workings and ask ourselves, what are sometimes, difficult and uncomfortable questions.

I believe that the majority of the membership will agree with what these resolutions were attempting to achieve, namely the principle of one person, one vote but the very real fear of falsely being labeled as a racist, chauvinistic, homophobe prevents many from voicing their support.

In truth, the real issue is being lost, drowned out in a poisonous atmosphere where the politics of fear, so often employed by Tony Blair and New Labour, are used to stifle the debate.

If we are being honest, this is an issue that simply will not go away while ever this fear exists. To bury our heads in the sand is not an option.

I believe the first issue that must be addressed is why the membership feels unable to have an open and honest debate, free from prejudice, where real concerns can be voiced without the fear of being labeled and stigmatized. Ironically, this key principle was one of the very reasons why the sections were created in the first place?

Unless we address this crucial aspect, how can we ever have this important debate that does need to be had?

Only when the membership has the courage to speak will their voice be heard.

Well presented Pickle - and your last two lines are very poignant.

Bas - far too many garden parties.

Pink Pony - rhetorical question again?

[haideemay]

So if someone was a member of a section and they only had a vote in that section everyone would be happy?

If there are 500 female ffs in the service and all wanted to be a member of the womens section their EC member would have a vote equal to the LFB member.

If only 100 women wanted to be in the female section their EC would have their vote. Still happy??

I am

What bothers me Bas your happy most of the time. Unlike most of us.

[Pinkpony2]

Ultimately because of bullying and harrassment from old guard cronies, desperate to defend the sectional voting which still serves them well.

The sort of pressure which in the period immediately following the J03 fiasco led to more than a few very capable union officials throwing in the towel and walking away - fed up to the back teeth with fighting employers only to be stabbed in the back by members of secret societies such as the Left Group, and worse.

The sort of two-faced unionistas who launch diatribes against recently elected officials who do not sing their song, and try to tell us that they are not doing so.

Don't piss on my back and tell me it's raining - comrade.

And your evidence to substantiate your first sentence is?