24-07-2015, 02:37 AM
Jim,
With all due respect, The fine detail is vital in order to clarify the whole document.
The job descriptions should be there if only to avoid any demarcation disputes, especially the role of the President. To be fair to the CWP, Job descriptions have not been available for some years now, but the new constitution is to be an improvement on the old one. I feel that it is falling into the same position as the previous constitution.
I do not think it is right to ask the membership to ratify a document that leaves so many questions unanswered, not just on the remits of office bearers, but also in respect to the questions about that have been asked in this forum.
With all due respect, The fine detail is vital in order to clarify the whole document.
The job descriptions should be there if only to avoid any demarcation disputes, especially the role of the President. To be fair to the CWP, Job descriptions have not been available for some years now, but the new constitution is to be an improvement on the old one. I feel that it is falling into the same position as the previous constitution.
I do not think it is right to ask the membership to ratify a document that leaves so many questions unanswered, not just on the remits of office bearers, but also in respect to the questions about that have been asked in this forum.