[EyeBrock]

Curtman Curtman:

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Freedom of Speech is a charter right. Let them fly a banner with a political message. As long as they stick to the rules of the airways and obey air traffic, what's the problem? In this case they flew into restricted airspace. Naughty and dangerous.

The article says he did not fly in restricted airspace.

I'm going off the same article where the RCMP say he appeared to be flying into restricted airspace. The RCAF bill aircraft owners for fuel if a CF18 gets scrambled.

[Smacle]

$1:

carrying a French-language banner on Saturday that translates into “Stephen Harper hates us.”

I kind of hate them too. I don't blame him.

[fifeboy]

2Cdo 2Cdo:

fifeboy fifeboy:

2Cdo 2Cdo:

Another good use of union dues.

And who determines if it is good use of union dues? You? The Union members? Who?

The union members SHOULD, but we know that sometimes union heads do things without any feedback from their members.

As do the leaders of any organization. That's what leaders do. I suspect that it was paid for from a fund set up with members approval. If the members don't like it they get to vote against those in charge, at least that was how it was in every union I ever belonged to.

[Wada]

It's a sure fire way do deal with employment....er, umm, UN...employment.

[2Cdo]

fifeboy fifeboy:

2Cdo 2Cdo:

The union members SHOULD, but we know that sometimes union heads do things without any feedback from their members.

As do the leaders of any organization. That's what leaders do. I suspect that it was paid for from a fund set up with members approval. If the members don't like it they get to vote against those in charge, at least that was how it was in every union I ever belonged to.

I agree that's how it's supposed to be, but we've seen union bosses in the past that have made political statements that haven't been given members approval.

[fifeboy]

2Cdo 2Cdo:

fifeboy fifeboy:

2Cdo 2Cdo:

The union members SHOULD, but we know that sometimes union heads do things without any feedback from their members.

As do the leaders of any organization. That's what leaders do. I suspect that it was paid for from a fund set up with members approval. If the members don't like it they get to vote against those in charge, at least that was how it was in every union I ever belonged to.

I agree that's how it's supposed to be, but we've seen union bosses in the past that have made political statements that haven't been given members approval.

Which the members, if they don't agree, get to vote on. The Ex. however, has the right to make day to day decisions, especially approving expenditures within a budget. Ah, democracy.

[BeaverFever]

When it come to Unions and/or criticising Harper, democracy doesn't apply. I think they penciled it in to the Charter after the last election

[EyeBrock]

I think they made their point. The RCMP and NavCan are just trying to protect us. I can see the headline now if this aircraft would have managed to get in restricted airspace over Ottawa; "Mounties asleep as demo plane flies over parliament. Security a joke. "

[redhatmamma]

Yeah - imagine it flying over the White House - In fact, I seem to remember fighter jets scrambling after a pilot accidentally flew his single-engine Cessna into restricted airspace over Washington back when Bush was Pres.

Only in Canada can workers be forced to join a union as a condition of employment, and even if they are not forced to join, they still have to pay full union dues. Even opting out due to religious reasons does not entitle workers to keep their money, it goes instead to a charity of the union's choice See the Rand Formula.

Labour laws need to be changed to protect workers from the voracious appetite of unscrupulous and virtually unaccountable union bosses. Why should their union dues go to political causes they might not agree with ?