Village Idiots Run the Retired Agents Assn.

Let me see if I understand you correctly. The FAA Board said, let's get a free trip to Hawaii BUT the only way we can afford this trip is raise dues. Pretty sure you were one hell of an investigator using that kind of logic. Take a look a the Assoc balance sheet for the previous few years.

The Assoc was running in the red, or close to it, while the Foundation is financially strong. As for the extra cost to fly from Hawaii vs KC or Memphis is somewhat more expensive it's not that much more. And please keep in mind that the members of the FAA voted to pay for the Board's expenses.

You mention that members are leaving in droves, is factually correct, however you should check and see how many of those who did not renew were first year members, who got the their first year free.

Maybe the By laws were technically violated, but maybe it was so that the FAA representatives could personally call those members and ask if they didn't want to re-up OR MAYBE they just forgot. Guessing that the majority of those regular members called said, they forgot and the check would be in the mail. I'm sure some, are just plain unhappy which is fine, as the vast majority, I would suspect are HAPPY and there are just a few who wouldn't be happy if they had $50 million dollars and a new corvette and pantoon boat.

Now of you mentioned that maybe the other FA associations do more for their members. Again you might be correct but giving out over 150 +/- scholarships in the last 3 years, not to mention over $200,000 +/- for a member who is paralyzed, and thousands of dollars, on a yearly basis, for members or their family who have sufferred from serious illnesses to help with medical and travel expenses and helping to pay for some of their funerals isn't doing enough, then you guys DON'T GET IT.

BUT, then again maybe you do get it.

WHICH BEGS THE QUESTION: What would you suggest that the SS/FAA do more for their members? I'm sure the FAA Board would be open to suggestions if so made.

Will you make such a suggestion, probably not, as it's easier to complain that to make take the bull by the horns and try to make your organization better.

As the old saying goes, you are either part of the problem of part of the solution. Which one are you?

Now one of you said, the FAA Board's position is "indefensible" so go on the offense. Again YOU DON'T GET IT. If you and your band of un-merry men are THAT upset with what you Board if doing, then you can:

1. Petition for a recall
2. Run for the Board

Of course running for the Board would open you criticim and you might find out that it ain't that easy. If that is running on Offense than so be it. By might count you have 5 un-merry men in your band of men. That's a start to replace the entire Board, so stop *****ing and start organizing and run and get elected to the Board and then you can make it BETTER.

That's not OFFENSE that's just the way things are done in America. If you don't what's going on CHANGE IT. If think these type of message boards are the way to get you message out without taking responsibity for what you say....... some might construe your position as taking the coward's way out. Buster1

[worfusa2008]

Truer words were never spoken ....by a Boss.

Truer words were never spoken ....by a Boss.

Was that sarcasm? :snicker:

You didn't even bother to mention the illogical statements in the post. Maybe that's because you are used to such drivel from bosses.

There were so many confusing statements that they aren't worth listing, but the confusing of the financial condition and the running of the association and the finances and running of the foundation (which is where the benevolent money is coming from) are right up there with the admitted fact that the by-laws were violated. And still are being violated all the time.

Sounds like the boss has a thin skin. ops:

WOW!!! Now who is on the defensive? As mentioned in my previous post you must have been one hell of an investigator to ass-u-me that I was a boss from my posts. How you connect those dots is a mystery to me.

Oh, by the way, Mr & Mrs Sherlock Holmes sorry to disappoint you boys but I was never a "boss" never got past a 13/7.

What I find strange is that neither of you challanged by last post but rather made personal attacks on me for being a "boss". As for the personal attacks, I thought that what you guys were - about on the FAA site, BUT now, you turn to attacking the messenger instead of trying to make your case.

Which brings me to another topic. What is wrong with being a "boss"? Are you PO'd because you never were one? I know I'm not, I liked being a hump doing advances and being a shift leader on foreign digs, it was the best of both worlds. Did I ever work for some real morons? YES. But the vast majority of my bosses were up-front & stand-up guys who would cover your back if you had "issues".

From reading your posting, I'm guessing had you guys been bosses, you would have thrown your agents under the bus in a heartbeat, BUT THAT'S JUST MY TAKE AFTER READING YOUR POSTS.

The reason I say the above, is I met soooooo many SAs while sitting in various Command Posts around the world who - and moaned about EVERYTHING. Never having anything good to say about the Serivce, the 8th floor, their supervisors, etc. Those were the guys that after you got off shift you'd go the other way. Again, MY TAKE AFTER READING YOUR POSTS, is that you are that guy in the Command Post.

I will ask you again: If you had the magic pen, WHAT WOULD YOU DO TO MAKE THE FAA A BETTER PLACE FOR ALL.

Look forward to your response. Buster1

I was never a "boss"

Let's see............ shift leader on protective details

. ............. position of authority in FAA

(but "not a boss.")

AND ... actually upset about (allegedly) being personally attacked instead of having the issues discussed === now that's true irony!!!

:devil:

JUST PUT YOUR MOUTH WHERE YOUR KEYBOARD IS, if you've got -. Give me specifics: How would you make the FAA a better place. By refusing to answer my last challange, it would indicate to me, that you DON'T HAVE ANY BULLETS IN YOUR GUN, which I'm guessing is right next to you on your desk, JUST IN CASE. Buster1
PS -- So in your opinion being a SL of digs is "really" a supervisor? You must have been one hell of an agent if you were never a SL on a foreign dig?
PSS- Since you're so down on the FAA, if you haven't already done so, why don't you leave. Maybe you don't have a life. Why don't you trying doing something good with the rest of your life, instead of just sitting behind a keyboard and playing God. You might actually have some good ideas, but the way you act on this board and the FAA board, you sound like just a bitter old man.

Seems as though the malcontents want to be critical of anyone like Buster1 who simply is stating his case of being supportive of a retirement association and board members who voluntarily serve.
I can see why some of you would NOT want to serve on a board knowing it is a thankless job. Buster1 has presented a challenge....my guess is you are not up to it and prefer to take cover with occassional snipper fire. With regard to your comments about the increase in dues. Maybe you will feel better if you consider the fact that your association dues went from you paying aproximately .14 cents a day for the past 13 years....to .20 cents a day currently. I suspect you guys or gals probably were the one's in the good ol days who asked the waiter the price of a coke and then ordered water with your food order. Hopefully the few of you will join the majority and take the advice of those like Buster1. Your in a league of your own......find another hobby!!!
Yippie Kai Yeah____

Bluster1

Tell us how many of the 495 members who did not renew were first year members. The BOD is not going to tell us so; how do we check as you requested us to do? There is no such thing as a technical violation of the by-laws. You either violated them or you didn't violate them. The present BOD constantly violates the by-laws as has been documented a number of times on the Oldstar forum - no need to restate those violations here again. 20% of the membership did not renew - that cannot be considered "a few" under any circumstances. The present FAA BOD are not open to suggestions other than those from their associates or cohorts. I have personally made six suggestions over the past 12 to 18 months, not only were they not considered there was not even acknowledgement of their receipt by the BOD. These suggestions were made through the proper channels and procedures. Trust me Bluster1 there are many more than "5 un-merry" men in the FAA. Note that you have no knowledge or background information of the posters on this forum as well as your lack of knowledge of named posters on the Oldstar forum; so how are you able to be so critical of other's investigative abilities of whom you have no knowledge. Many are your statements are confusing containing many misspellings "pantoon" should be "pontoon" and poor grammar which perhaps accounts for the fact per your information you never made it past a 13/7. Please try to make some common sense in your future postings.

To Mr. Bluster, Tucson Tony, The Wizard of Oz (behind the scenes), and The Duke of Earl (who created the mess):

Stop trying to ferret out the moles.
Stop trying to marginalize those who speak out against the continuing egregious non-compliance with the By-Laws.
Stop trying to force someone to put all of the legitimate beefs already listed in this thread into 1st grade language, that you might then be able to understand.

Start responding to messages posted HERE on LEO.AFFAIRS, from the first message in this thread to the last.

Put your responses both here and on Oldstar.

If you stop trying to play "whack a mole", you might start gaining respect by giving true answers.

Start by giving credit to the Uniformed Division member who you still only refer to as "other support personnel", as if we're lower than whale dung. Look at your www.Oldstar.org website and you will see those words there. If you don't want U/D as members, say so.

Huff and puff, but you can't shoot all the good people who are trying to get you to do your jobs. There are at least 100 different people who have posted messages against the Board. YOU are the problem. NOt those who are showing your flaws. If they did not care, they would not post any messages. Look in a mirror. Right now, it is ugly. ops:

Boys, Boys, Boys..................OK I missed spelled some words and didn't use proper grammer, so take me out back to the woodshed.................*.

As a trained investigator it's pretty easy to figure out who a couple of you are. Let's see, who uses icons at the end of every post -. Who's handle is -. Guessing one of the others is - from -. Try to figure out what - stands for. Have no idea who Yippie is but, using your train of thought, he must have been a "boss".

I will contact my sources on the FAA BOD and try to ascertain how many of those 492 were first time members and how many (non) first time members just forgot and have now sent their money to IA.

As for allowing these members and extension, I'd hate to have you as a banker or a supervisor (which pretty sure you weren't) as it appears everything is black & white with you. So what if FAA gave them an extension. What does that have to do with the price of tea in China.....NOTHING. Gee, if a good number of those SAs were on the campaign trail the last few months, doesn't it make sense to give them a little more time? You say NO, I say YES, and apparently the BOD has some compassion in granting this extension.

Yippie hit the nail on the head. The - are snipers. You say you've offered up 6+/- suggestions to the BOD and the BOD didn't impliment them. So that means that the BOD is wrong? Or does that mean that the BOD just disagreed with your suggestion and having all the facts before them, made a different decision? Since it was YOUR suggestion, you obviously think it was a Home Run, but don't we all. The BOD went another way, and now all you can do is snipe.

If - have such a following again:

1. Petition for a recall
2. Run for the BOD (since it sounds like you guys would get elected in a heart beat - with all those other members who are unhappy).

Yippie again hit the nail on the head. Do I agree with everything this BOD does, NO. But since they are not getting paid, and probably have other things to do with their time, then DON'T -.

***

So vitriolic that editing left it incoherent.

Again, I beg of you, to list what you think the FAA BOD can do to make the ENTIRE ORGANIZATION better. -, use one of you BB's instead of yourself, if you afraid 'ol buster1 might be able to ID the mole, who gives a rats arse who you are. If you ain't got -, then it's understandable, then just keep on taking shots at the guys who have voluterred their time (not your time) to help others. buster1