I just finished reading Linda Fisher's comments and want to say I agree wholeheartedly with her reasoning. I was appalled to think that not only would I still have to pay $40 to use the BPW name, but I still, in my opinion, don't get much back. Now, if they had said, $40 per state or local, I might be willing to vote in favor. But ever since I heard that not only would we still need to pay $40 per person, but my voting rights were going to be taken away.
National tells us the biggest problem facing BPW/USA today is member retention; what makes them think this "alternative" is going to retain members? Or even more important, grow our membership at the local level.
In today's economic times, when people have to choose between a roof over their heads, clothes on their back or food in their stomach, this proposal is unrealistic.
Carolyn Gilg, Michigan
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment