AOA funding of UK retirement age appeal
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: HK
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AOA funding of UK retirement age appeal
I have flown with a number of people of recent, who are unhappy that the AOA have not only agreed to fund an appeal in the UK to a case which concerned retirement age, but tacitly accept this may not have many members approval.
Admittedly, the guys I have listened too are generally younger and more remote from the situation that the "close to 55's" are in, however, many of their points do have merit.
1) Was such an expenditure commitment allowed to be authorised by the Committee without approval from the members?
2) Even if authorised, should such a contentious and possibly divisive issue be voted upon by the membership?
3) Will this issue have a less than desireable outcome for some members, where if the appeal is won, aspects such as bypass pay may be harder to justify depending on this weeks interpretation of CoS by the company?
4) Does this appeal funding pass the basic commonsense test of benefitting most members?
5) If not, why are the silent majority still being quiet and not letting the AOA know they are not acting in the interests of the majority?
I hear that a member has asked the committee to call an EGM or even have an online poll to see whether this is what the membership really wants.
(AL1 - ##15Jan09 - last week, AOA have asked that if you support the issue being voted on, then 10% of the membership need to advise the AOA that they too wish the issue to be voted on democratically. Currently the 10% needed is 144 members - the e-mail address is below if you wish to advise the AOA that this issue should be voted on. ##)
However, his views had previously fallen on deaf ears, and the committee has remained on its autocratic unmandated course of funding an action that will cost all, but may only benefit a few, and possibly disadvantage many.
If you think the appeal should be privately funded, then let the AOA know at [email protected]
If you are unhappy with this funding, you are obviously not alone, but so far the negative comment has only generated an AOA update where they acknowledge it is divisive. To force their hand, more members need to voice their lack of approval or press for a democratic vote.
I believe time is short if the AOA are to reverse their decision, so you need to let the AOA know what you think, why, and what you want your committee to do. Don't put it off until tomorow, do it today.
Remember, they are your representatives who are meant to do what you the membership want.
Admittedly, the guys I have listened too are generally younger and more remote from the situation that the "close to 55's" are in, however, many of their points do have merit.
1) Was such an expenditure commitment allowed to be authorised by the Committee without approval from the members?
2) Even if authorised, should such a contentious and possibly divisive issue be voted upon by the membership?
3) Will this issue have a less than desireable outcome for some members, where if the appeal is won, aspects such as bypass pay may be harder to justify depending on this weeks interpretation of CoS by the company?
4) Does this appeal funding pass the basic commonsense test of benefitting most members?
5) If not, why are the silent majority still being quiet and not letting the AOA know they are not acting in the interests of the majority?
I hear that a member has asked the committee to call an EGM or even have an online poll to see whether this is what the membership really wants.
(AL1 - ##15Jan09 - last week, AOA have asked that if you support the issue being voted on, then 10% of the membership need to advise the AOA that they too wish the issue to be voted on democratically. Currently the 10% needed is 144 members - the e-mail address is below if you wish to advise the AOA that this issue should be voted on. ##)
However, his views had previously fallen on deaf ears, and the committee has remained on its autocratic unmandated course of funding an action that will cost all, but may only benefit a few, and possibly disadvantage many.
If you think the appeal should be privately funded, then let the AOA know at [email protected]
If you are unhappy with this funding, you are obviously not alone, but so far the negative comment has only generated an AOA update where they acknowledge it is divisive. To force their hand, more members need to voice their lack of approval or press for a democratic vote.
I believe time is short if the AOA are to reverse their decision, so you need to let the AOA know what you think, why, and what you want your committee to do. Don't put it off until tomorow, do it today.
Remember, they are your representatives who are meant to do what you the membership want.
Last edited by mephisto88; 16th Jan 2009 at 03:17. Reason: Updated information ref 10% support needed
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you for real!!!
Is the AOA representative of the entire body of aircrew, or just the non Captains?
Are you saying that long time, 20 year members, should not get support, and be tossed out into unemployment? But someone who joined yesterday, or last year, or two years ago should get full AOA support.
If so, then maybe the AOA should splinter? Once promoted to Captain, one should quit and join a seperate Captains union. Is that what you're advocating?
Bypass pay for First Officer's who fail their command, or bypass pay for first oficers on a base WHO TURN DOWN THEIR COMMAND. Yeah, those are causes the AOA should fund and support.
Getting bypass pay for those pilots judged ready, wanting, and waiting for a course, who have not previously failed the course, deserves support.
As does continued employment for those members nearing 55, who have had more than their fair share of B scale, paycuts, deminished conditions, and delayed commands because of ASL, etc,etc,etc.
I've been a member for a very long time. If the AOA no longer represents me or my colleauges, please let us know. We can then explore our options.
And by the way: Age 65 benefits all members. That's why every other pilot union in the world supports it. But strangely, it appears, not ours.
Is the AOA representative of the entire body of aircrew, or just the non Captains?
Are you saying that long time, 20 year members, should not get support, and be tossed out into unemployment? But someone who joined yesterday, or last year, or two years ago should get full AOA support.
If so, then maybe the AOA should splinter? Once promoted to Captain, one should quit and join a seperate Captains union. Is that what you're advocating?
Bypass pay for First Officer's who fail their command, or bypass pay for first oficers on a base WHO TURN DOWN THEIR COMMAND. Yeah, those are causes the AOA should fund and support.
Getting bypass pay for those pilots judged ready, wanting, and waiting for a course, who have not previously failed the course, deserves support.
As does continued employment for those members nearing 55, who have had more than their fair share of B scale, paycuts, deminished conditions, and delayed commands because of ASL, etc,etc,etc.
I've been a member for a very long time. If the AOA no longer represents me or my colleauges, please let us know. We can then explore our options.
And by the way: Age 65 benefits all members. That's why every other pilot union in the world supports it. But strangely, it appears, not ours.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: HKG
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think there is a slight difference between defending clear violations of the contract - ie SO Bypass, and defending individuals who are reaching retirement age on their contracts - where it is very hard and costly to prove any sort of violation.
I have sympathy with guys reaching 55 and wanting to continue working
BUT
What should much rather be a priority is negotiating a deal on age 65 that works for everybody. If this appeal is won in England it WILL be detrimental to the efforts of the AOA to negotiate a new deal on age 65 with the company. It may force the company to extend all from then on because a precedent would have been set - and this will seriouly compromise junior officers attempts to negotiate some fair compensation. This is a lose lose situation.
I have sympathy with guys reaching 55 and wanting to continue working
BUT
What should much rather be a priority is negotiating a deal on age 65 that works for everybody. If this appeal is won in England it WILL be detrimental to the efforts of the AOA to negotiate a new deal on age 65 with the company. It may force the company to extend all from then on because a precedent would have been set - and this will seriouly compromise junior officers attempts to negotiate some fair compensation. This is a lose lose situation.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What about clear viloations of employment law? Human rights?
So the AOA should use the courts to protect the rights of some (bypass pay), but not the rights of others (the right to work beyond the rediculously young age of 55)?
The law is the law. It does not just favour the "majority".
There is a bigger picture here. The option to work beyond 55 is a huge benefit for the entire pilot community. That's why the support for this among Captains is so strong, and amoung those over 50, unanimous!
So the AOA should use the courts to protect the rights of some (bypass pay), but not the rights of others (the right to work beyond the rediculously young age of 55)?
The law is the law. It does not just favour the "majority".
There is a bigger picture here. The option to work beyond 55 is a huge benefit for the entire pilot community. That's why the support for this among Captains is so strong, and amoung those over 50, unanimous!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Age 65 benefits all members. That's why every other pilot union in the world supports it. But strangely, it appears, not ours.
The new committee have stated a number of times that they are actually IN FAVOUR of NEGOTIATING a raise in the contractual retirement age, whilst not disadvantaging younger pilots. But, surprise, surprise, the company are not interested in negotiating a fair/equitable/balanced compensation clause or clauses, rather they want to do it their way that gives them all the advantages.
In fact, it appears that NR and his team seem to just want to instantaneously raise the retirement age, without the burden of by-pass pay. Personally, I would consider that a degradation of my contract, which needs my approval (ie a vote by the AOA membership).
Not likely to pass me thinks.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The new committee have stated a number of times that they are actually IN FAVOUR of NEGOTIATING a raise in the contractual retirement age, whilst not disadvantaging younger pilots."
Hey Broadband,
That's great!
Isn't that what I said I support in my responce to Mephisto?
Hey Broadband,
That's great!
Isn't that what I said I support in my responce to Mephisto?
Tha AOA caused this problem in the UK by bringing up the 'foreign registered aircraft' issue to the extreme disadvantage of many very senior members. They are now representing the very people that THEY screwed.
How bloody ridiculous. Never miss an opportunity to SHUT UP AOA!
There is a lot of (contracted I admit) nonsense about bypass pay. IE Stay on your base as an FO and get paid as a Captain rather than do the course in HKG. Why would you ever want to put yourself through the rigours of a Command course??
We need to catch up with the normal world. I'm past 55 and don't feel like retiring. BY pass pay for those affected by people staying after 65 not 55.
End of story.
How bloody ridiculous. Never miss an opportunity to SHUT UP AOA!
There is a lot of (contracted I admit) nonsense about bypass pay. IE Stay on your base as an FO and get paid as a Captain rather than do the course in HKG. Why would you ever want to put yourself through the rigours of a Command course??
We need to catch up with the normal world. I'm past 55 and don't feel like retiring. BY pass pay for those affected by people staying after 65 not 55.
End of story.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: HK
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's why the support for this among Captains is so strong, and amoung those over 50, unanimous!
For UK based skippers it may well be something they wish for, personally I think the wishes of the majority of the members should be taken into account to see if this should be funded, and if not they could always fund it privately. Remember this case may only have a bearing on employment contracts in one part of the world. We should be striving towards a common goal, not more fragmented CoS.
I believe a lot of the younger lads have raised some valid points over the last couple of weeks about the funding not being approved by the membership.
Age 65 benefits all members. That's why every other pilot union in the world supports it. But strangely, it appears, not ours.
Secondly, the AOA does support age 55+, its just that they too, like me, would like to see those who become disadvantaged remain compensated to a degree by the Bypass Pay provisions. Clearly the company does not wish to part with more than a cent than it has too. So if they are able to ride on the back of a court judgement and say "well the courts said 55+ is in, thats now NRA, so we dont need to pay bypass pay". Is that really fair on those who then have their cmds delayed, that there is not even a semblence of compensation?
For the record, I do believe individuals should have the option of working beyond 55, it may not be for me personally, however I still believe that it should be negotiated AOA to company, and not derived or interpreted from a UK court where such a ruling will in the short term only benefit a small minority.
So, why not put it to a vote?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: HK
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
answers for raven#2
Are you for real!!!
Is the AOA representative of the entire body of aircrew, or just the non Captains?
Are you saying that long time, 20 year members, should not get support, and be tossed out into unemployment? But someone who joined yesterday, or last year, or two years ago should get full AOA support.
Remember mate, as one of our long departed skippers on his line check once said to Noel " If you don't ask, you're never gona learn"
But back to the main question, does anyone know of valid reasons why the proposed funding should not be put to the membership for their approval if this is by the AOAs own admission a contentious subject?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: crewbag
Age: 51
Posts: 318
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fully support the AOA's stance on this issue when it comes to age discrimination; that is to say the company's current practice of extending guys at a lower pay scale.
I'll gladly let my AOA fees cover such a court battle, because any reduction in T&C as a result of age is, clearly, age discrimination. If you're going to extend anybody at all, it shall be at the same payscale as before. That would serve every CXpilots interest, especially those who want extenders gone altogether.
All in all, I don't want the company to extent anybody until we get the issue solved, including bypass bay for all CoS99 and before. But before we get to that, I certainly don't want anybody extending on worse terms.....because that makes it appealing to CX management. Make it expensive as hell to extend anybody.... which is exactly what the AOA is backing in this case.
Supporting the AOA in this issue is definitively not the same as supporting extending guys beyond 55. So please don't confuse the two.
I'll gladly let my AOA fees cover such a court battle, because any reduction in T&C as a result of age is, clearly, age discrimination. If you're going to extend anybody at all, it shall be at the same payscale as before. That would serve every CXpilots interest, especially those who want extenders gone altogether.
All in all, I don't want the company to extent anybody until we get the issue solved, including bypass bay for all CoS99 and before. But before we get to that, I certainly don't want anybody extending on worse terms.....because that makes it appealing to CX management. Make it expensive as hell to extend anybody.... which is exactly what the AOA is backing in this case.
Supporting the AOA in this issue is definitively not the same as supporting extending guys beyond 55. So please don't confuse the two.
Last edited by quadspeed; 24th Dec 2008 at 05:46.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jagman1 quote : Tha AOA caused this problem in the UK by bringing up the 'foreign registered aircraft' issue to the extreme disadvantage of many very senior members. They are now representing the very people that THEY screwed."
The AOA pointed out to the company what the LAW stated. The LAW dictated which path the negotiations took. The devious AOA must have an insider in the House of Lords because they passed the LAW.
Perhaps you should take some of your own advice and not miss the opportunity to hide your ignorance from all and sundry.
mephisto88, the members views have not fallen on deaf ears. You (assuming you are a member) will be in receipt of a missive in the next few days re the call for a EGM. The rest of your post is unabashed scare mongering.
The AOA pointed out to the company what the LAW stated. The LAW dictated which path the negotiations took. The devious AOA must have an insider in the House of Lords because they passed the LAW.
Perhaps you should take some of your own advice and not miss the opportunity to hide your ignorance from all and sundry.
mephisto88, the members views have not fallen on deaf ears. You (assuming you are a member) will be in receipt of a missive in the next few days re the call for a EGM. The rest of your post is unabashed scare mongering.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: HK
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Firewall - Yup, been a member continuously since joining in the 80's. Can't say I've always agreed with the way things have gone, but when aspects have been voted on, have abided by the decision of the majority.
Thread wasn't intended to be scaremongering, merely relating the depth of feeling I've recently encountered amongst those who feel this is a battle to benefit only a few. If most people are happy, a vote to pass funding would pass with ease - problem solved. However it may be that the silent majority are not happy, in which case the correct process would make that aspect evident in a vote.
Glad to hear your insider info indicates that perhaps a more democratic process may ensue, but it may be somewhat presumptious to assume an egm/vote will be held. Guess we'll wait and see.
Quadspeed, a couple of very good points and cannot agree more that extensions should not be accepted on worse terms.
Well at least it seems like most people are in agreement of the desired outcome, just a lack of consensus on what route to take to achieve it.
Thread wasn't intended to be scaremongering, merely relating the depth of feeling I've recently encountered amongst those who feel this is a battle to benefit only a few. If most people are happy, a vote to pass funding would pass with ease - problem solved. However it may be that the silent majority are not happy, in which case the correct process would make that aspect evident in a vote.
Glad to hear your insider info indicates that perhaps a more democratic process may ensue, but it may be somewhat presumptious to assume an egm/vote will be held. Guess we'll wait and see.
Quadspeed, a couple of very good points and cannot agree more that extensions should not be accepted on worse terms.
Well at least it seems like most people are in agreement of the desired outcome, just a lack of consensus on what route to take to achieve it.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mephisto88, it is the AOA's remit to support ALL of it's members, not just the majority. If the battle were to benefit only 1 pilot then it would still be fought.
That this ethos is lost on some of you is troubling.
That this ethos is lost on some of you is troubling.
So let's get this straight. A long standing AOA member gets involved, through no fault of his own, in a battle with the Company who have enormous reserves and war chests with which to oppose said member in Court.
Member tries and fails to go it alone (no surprise here) and is now faced with defeat. The only alternative is to accept this or face an expensive appeals procedure because you may as well not bother if you don't employ properly qualified professionals.
Member approaches AOA to ask for help. AOA initially agrees but a majority of members disagree with this case as it ' doesn't affect them' or 'only benefits a few'. A vote is taken and the majority wins, forcing the AOA to abandon the help it was going to give to the member.
Be careful what you wish for.
Member tries and fails to go it alone (no surprise here) and is now faced with defeat. The only alternative is to accept this or face an expensive appeals procedure because you may as well not bother if you don't employ properly qualified professionals.
Member approaches AOA to ask for help. AOA initially agrees but a majority of members disagree with this case as it ' doesn't affect them' or 'only benefits a few'. A vote is taken and the majority wins, forcing the AOA to abandon the help it was going to give to the member.
Be careful what you wish for.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mephisto
A I sift through your sarcasm, you repeat "the depth of feeling" you've observed amongst the younger pilots. I acknowledge that, and sympathize. They indeed deserve bypass pay.
We older pilots, however, do not deserve their contempt. And our concerns should not be rejected out of hand, in some perversion of democracy or Union ethics, as our colleagues are cast to the winds of unemployment. Where's the balance in that?
What's more, you don't mention or acknowledge the "depth of feeling" amongst the older pilots, members of your own age and seniority. It would seem that you haven't canvassed them?
Ergo, I can't help but wonder why?
Nicely summarized Jagman and Firewall....I completely agree.
A I sift through your sarcasm, you repeat "the depth of feeling" you've observed amongst the younger pilots. I acknowledge that, and sympathize. They indeed deserve bypass pay.
We older pilots, however, do not deserve their contempt. And our concerns should not be rejected out of hand, in some perversion of democracy or Union ethics, as our colleagues are cast to the winds of unemployment. Where's the balance in that?
What's more, you don't mention or acknowledge the "depth of feeling" amongst the older pilots, members of your own age and seniority. It would seem that you haven't canvassed them?
Ergo, I can't help but wonder why?
Nicely summarized Jagman and Firewall....I completely agree.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
eerrr.....
None of you have mentioned the not insignificant matter of the legal merits of an appeal. If the arguments failed once in Court; unless you can come up with something new.... it will probably fail again.... and you will probably be left with 2 fairly hefty sets of legal bills....
None of you have mentioned the not insignificant matter of the legal merits of an appeal. If the arguments failed once in Court; unless you can come up with something new.... it will probably fail again.... and you will probably be left with 2 fairly hefty sets of legal bills....
Liam - Don't forget that the case will now be put by a fully qualified and professional Barrister. The appeal would not be allowed if it were simply a re-trial. There are, I believe, many areas where the original judge could be found wanting.
The point is not to decide whether the appeal has merits but whether the AOA will ballot the membership before it helps a fellow member. If 'they' don't agree somehow that the case has merits (how on earth that happens I'm not sure) then you're on your own and may as well not be a member at all.
Is that what you younger guys want?
The point is not to decide whether the appeal has merits but whether the AOA will ballot the membership before it helps a fellow member. If 'they' don't agree somehow that the case has merits (how on earth that happens I'm not sure) then you're on your own and may as well not be a member at all.
Is that what you younger guys want?
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: hong kong
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The company has done a pretty good job of splitting the pilot group along A Scale B Scale lines and now it appears it has been able to fracture the younger crew members against the older crew members. I understand the frustration of the younger members however it is the company’s fault that it has created a situation whereby they are not honoring their own contracts By Pass Pay Provisions. They are employing outside Direct Entry Captains who have COS to age 65 whilst some of those that train them have COS until 55.
Imagine if CX did have a surplus of pilots and needed to retrench 100 pilots….who would that be? The junior SO?, The more junior DEFO?, the even more Junior Freighter Direct Entry Capt? The senior extended C &T? The senior extended Freighter Capt? Management does not have a clue how to deal with that minefield which they alone have created and would probably act accordingly.
Fortunately the leadership of the AOA and the GC who were elected by the membership are taking a responsible approach to our issues and take a more universal overview of representing their members. I am aware that several of our younger members have written to the AOA demanding that a vote be taken in order to approve funding of the UK age discrimination appeal. No doubt time to command is the driver of the thought process of the younger members however in calling for a vote to support or deny funding they are unwittingly giving support to blatant age discrimination in the same way our employer does.
For any member of our association to refuse another member legal assistance for a case that has legal relevance and merit would be immoral in so many ways and should be thought thru before you put your name to such a shameful proposition.
If one group starts denying another group legal justice then for example, you might find that an EGM be called to stop payment of BPP to those receiving command pay whom have no intention of doing a command course, You could even find a group of senior members petition to get rid of BPP altogether and we spiral down a course of negative in fighting and self destruct. I do however have faith that the leadership of the AOA will guide us through the best course of action and no destructive vote need to be taken
The AOA has stated that the plaintiff has a good case to appeal and rightly so has not elaborated in order to challenge in the court. The fact of the matter is that there are strong anti age discrimination laws in the UK and for CX related companies to have an age 55 retirement age may be illegal despite the tail registration, not withstanding what contract you signed 15-25 years ago when you joined.
Let the AOA leadership deal with the matters at hand, they have decided that an appeal is warranted, affordable and ultimately in the overall career interests of all members. Over the next few months several court cases/Labour Tribunal cases will be heard and pressure will be on the company to sort out the COS mess that they are in as a result of failing to negotiating in good faith over many years.
Imagine if CX did have a surplus of pilots and needed to retrench 100 pilots….who would that be? The junior SO?, The more junior DEFO?, the even more Junior Freighter Direct Entry Capt? The senior extended C &T? The senior extended Freighter Capt? Management does not have a clue how to deal with that minefield which they alone have created and would probably act accordingly.
Fortunately the leadership of the AOA and the GC who were elected by the membership are taking a responsible approach to our issues and take a more universal overview of representing their members. I am aware that several of our younger members have written to the AOA demanding that a vote be taken in order to approve funding of the UK age discrimination appeal. No doubt time to command is the driver of the thought process of the younger members however in calling for a vote to support or deny funding they are unwittingly giving support to blatant age discrimination in the same way our employer does.
For any member of our association to refuse another member legal assistance for a case that has legal relevance and merit would be immoral in so many ways and should be thought thru before you put your name to such a shameful proposition.
If one group starts denying another group legal justice then for example, you might find that an EGM be called to stop payment of BPP to those receiving command pay whom have no intention of doing a command course, You could even find a group of senior members petition to get rid of BPP altogether and we spiral down a course of negative in fighting and self destruct. I do however have faith that the leadership of the AOA will guide us through the best course of action and no destructive vote need to be taken
The AOA has stated that the plaintiff has a good case to appeal and rightly so has not elaborated in order to challenge in the court. The fact of the matter is that there are strong anti age discrimination laws in the UK and for CX related companies to have an age 55 retirement age may be illegal despite the tail registration, not withstanding what contract you signed 15-25 years ago when you joined.
Let the AOA leadership deal with the matters at hand, they have decided that an appeal is warranted, affordable and ultimately in the overall career interests of all members. Over the next few months several court cases/Labour Tribunal cases will be heard and pressure will be on the company to sort out the COS mess that they are in as a result of failing to negotiating in good faith over many years.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: crewbag
Age: 51
Posts: 318
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We elected a GC and we elected a president. They serve their term echoing the political views they represented when voted upon, as in any democracy. No governing body can function if every decisions they are trusted to make is put to a referendum.
Let the GC and its president do their job, and if you're not satisified with the current direction then either stand for a GC position or vote differently next time. In the words of a man wiser than me.. "...it is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried."
I want to repeat the words of CyrilJGrove above:
Let the AOA leadership deal with the matters at hand, they have decided that an appeal is warranted, affordable and ultimately in the overall career interests of all members.
Let the GC and its president do their job, and if you're not satisified with the current direction then either stand for a GC position or vote differently next time. In the words of a man wiser than me.. "...it is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried."
I want to repeat the words of CyrilJGrove above:
Let the AOA leadership deal with the matters at hand, they have decided that an appeal is warranted, affordable and ultimately in the overall career interests of all members.