Candidate Bryan Zilonis -President

Bryan Zilonis has responded to a question.

Question- Do you intend to publish the information on PAC donations? How are you proposing to publish PAC donation information? (Quarterly Report or something of that nature?

Answer- Fiscal transparency is a major issue for our Union. Yes, monthly written reports with justification of PAC expenditures will be provided to the National Executive Board. How that information is published will require discussions with our National Legislative Committee and other experts. Since the information on PAC spending is readily available on the internet, the only question would be how to best protect our personal privacy as an organization.
This should also cross over into fiscal transparency of dues spending. The National Executive Board will be provided with full balance sheets monthly, with individual spending reviewable, rather than the current practice of only sharing General Spending Ledgers. Transparency is extremely difficult when you have to wait for LM forms to be filed each year, and try to track specific spending. Some of this information is over a year old when the forms are published on the Web.
#yourvoiceyourchoice

https://www.zilonis2018.com/questions-for-bryan
 
So, Mr. Rinaldi was already in talks before our constitution allowed that? Also, striking the word from our constitution was not only after the fact talks had taken place, but just allowed it to be more open because it was sold to us as we must get "ahead," when in reality we were just catching up to what was already being done without knowledge? Also this is all for something manufactured with NATCA help, but again against our constitution until it was altered?

Just trying to get the main points of deception that Mr. Zilonis is trying to put across.

My question for all the deception if what I said above was what we should get out of this is, why was this happening in the first place?
 
Snow said:
My question for all the deception if what I said above was what we should get out of this is, why was this happening in the first place?
Click to expand...

Good question, one that would definitely be better served being asked right to the incumbents. We can speculate from here to the moon but these talks alone, were in my opinion, in direct violation of the constitution at the time. If this was violated, what else has been violated? Remember they have the best “interests” of the membership at heart...
 
For those that weren't at the Convention, NONE of the privatization language was debated on the floor. Given the current leadership, it doesn't surprise me. However, in the spirit of FULL disclosure, as FacRep, I am 100% undecided on who I should recommend to my members. I feel Paul and Trish deserve a tremendous amount of credit for the direction they have brought this union in.They have turned us into one of the most repected aviation organizations in the world and I don't believe anyone should ever try to take that away from them. However, I had the opportunity to speak with both Ham and Bryan at Convention and they are saying all the right things. I am not sure if Ham has accepted his nomination but I spoke with Bryan for about an hour and a half on Thursday night and I am very impressed with his stance. It is my personal opinion that we have had the same people in office for 9 years and it might just be time for some new leadership. But again, as of right now, I want to hear what everyone has to say before I make a decision and a recommendation.
 
Last edited:
The only person in that room that is for privatization at the time of that video is Poole. I am boarding right now and don't have much time, but I will give exact times and quotes shortly. It's worth pointing out immediately that Paul says we would like to be in the discussion for funding reform, not that we support privatization. Later, Lee even clarifies that this is about trying to discuss an ideal system, not about privatization. Poole is constantly pushing his narrative throughout the panel, and everyone in there clarifies that being attached to the government has inherent advantages.

It seems the lines between the privatization thread and this one are inherently blurred, so in the effort of not getting my post switched to the other one, I just want to say there is some discourse from this panel that was conveniently left out.

Again, I will have a more specific post ASAP.
 
Maintainvfr said:
It seems the lines between the privatization thread and this one are inherently blurred, so in the effort of not getting my post switched to the other one, I just want to say there is some discourse from this panel that was conveniently left out.

Again, I will have a more specific post ASAP.
Click to expand...



That is what I am afraid of. Though at the moment I feel Bryan is better suited to address our needs, I feel the video is selectively edited. Now, to be completely honest, I have not followed the link to the full video so maybe it's not. But if you're trying to make a point, it would seem you would want to lay all corroborating evidence on the table. Otherwise, it simply becomes an agenda.
 
Nothing was conveniently left out. Bryan specifically says watch the entire ALPA video, make your own decision. During the convention Paul used the phrase “fake natca news”, and Robert Poole was called a liar, yet one month after Poole says natca approached the business roundtable to discuss atc reform, here he is invited by natca to discuss atc reform. That’s convenient.
So Poole’s a liar, anti natca enemy, but let’s invite him to a panel?
I would also encourage you to research the information Poole said about the FAA MAC and recommendations made in 2013 and 2014.
 
If someone can’t spend a break or a few breaks doing due diligence on whom to vote for, they shouldn’t bitch and whine about NATCA issues when someone gets elected that doesn’t think exactly as they do.
 
Stinger said:
If it was me, I wouldn't recommend anyone. Let them decide for themselves.
Click to expand...
Robertb said:
If someone can’t spend a break or a few breaks doing due diligence on whom to vote for, they shouldn’t bitch and whine about NATCA issues when someone gets elected that doesn’t think exactly as they do.
Click to expand...
print out the threads, tape them end to end, and wall paper the natca office with them.

or I guess a link would work too...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GulfCharlie
Justin Dailey for NATCA President
24 25 26
Replies
519
Views
43K
HurryUpandWait
H
GulfCharlie
Serious Slate Book Exploratory Team
Replies
8
Views
1K
LennyA21
L
GulfCharlie
Slate Book Exploratory Team
Replies
1
Views
359
32andBelow
3
T
RVP need to get voted out!!
2
Replies
26
Views
5K
FightingIrish2012
F
E
Email: Polling for Upcoming 2024 (NATCA) Election
Replies
4
Views
1K
Raise when?
Raise when?
Back
Top Bottom