Nominating committee member in ethics violation

[Guest Bob V]

A member of our Nominating Committee, John Doe, who is also a nominee for Trustee position talked to a nominee of the same position, John Smith, who is not a member of the Nominating Committee. John Smith then changed his candidacy from Trustee to 1st Vice President leaving only one candidate for trustee, John Doe. 

I have brought this to the attention of the governing board as a Conflict of Interest.

Do you agree this is a Conflict of Interest and if so what would the penalty be for such a ethics violation?

[George Mervosh]

A member of our Nominating Committee, John Doe, who is also a nominee for Trustee position talked to a nominee of the same position, John Smith, who is not a member of the Nominating Committee. John Smith then changed his candidacy from Trustee to 1st Vice President leaving only one candidate for trustee, John Doe. 

I have brought this to the attention of the governing board as a Conflict of Interest.

Do you agree this is a Conflict of Interest and if so what would the penalty be for such a ethics violation?

 

This violates no rule in Robert's Rules.  If it bothers you, nominate someone from the floor to run against Mr. Doe, or get a write-in campaign together to elect someone else.

[Guest Bob V]

I understand. As a professional outside of Robert's Rules would you call it unethical?

[Edgar Guest]

 . .  what would the penalty be for such a ethics violation?

 

The penalty, if any, is whatever your organization chooses to impose. What do you think the penalty should be?

[Richard Brown]

A member of our Nominating Committee, John Doe, who is also a nominee for Trustee position talked to a nominee of the same position, John Smith, who is not a member of the Nominating Committee. John Smith then changed his candidacy from Trustee to 1st Vice President leaving only one candidate for trustee, John Doe. 

I have brought this to the attention of the governing board as a Conflict of Interest.

Do you agree this is a Conflict of Interest and if so what would the penalty be for such a ethics violation?

I suggest you get a copy of RONR (The Right Book) and read very carefully all of chapter XX re disciplinary matters.  It's 26 pages.  http://www.robertsrules.com/book.html

 

You have several options, ranging from doing nothing to censure to removal from office to suspension and even expulsion.  But, it can be a tricky process and I suggest proceeding very cautiously and first making sure that a significant number of other members share your concern.  If you seem to be the only one upset about it, it is probably best to just drop it, as it probably won't go anywhere, but will cause discord within the organization.

 

Edited to add:  As Mr Mervosh and possibly others have pointed out, it violates no rule in RONR.

[Weldon Merritt]

I understand. As a professional outside of Robert's Rules would you call it unethical?

 

I wouldn't. But it is not really up to an individual member to "change his candidacy." The Nominating Committee remains free to nominate him for whichever position (if any) they wish. Then if he wants to run for a different position, he can be nominated from the floor for that position. Note also that even if "John Doe" is the only candidate listed on the ballot for a particular position, that does not preclude members from voting for someone else by write-in.

[Guest Bob V]

Mr. Merritt, I understand but John Doe, as a nominating committee member went on his own outside of the committee and "conspired" to "fix" the election in his favor. When the committee did convene a few days later they picked John Doe to be their nominee for trustee. This shows a lack of impartiality. I want to thank you all for your comments - Bob

[Edgar Guest]

John Doe, as a nominating committee member went on his own outside of the committee and "conspired" to "fix" the election in his favor. When the committee did convene a few days later they picked John Doe to be their nominee for trustee. 

 

He didn't "fix" the election. He persuaded one person to seek a different office. That's hardly a conspiracy.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

A member of our Nominating Committee, John Doe, who is also a nominee for Trustee position talked to a nominee of the same position, John Smith, who is not a member of the Nominating Committee. 

John Smith then changed his candidacy from Trustee to 1st Vice President leaving only one candidate for trustee, John Doe. 

I have brought this to the attention of the governing board as a Conflict of Interest.

Do you agree this is a Conflict of Interest and if so what would the penalty be for such a ethics violation?

Review.

* Doe sits on the Nom.Com.

* Smith does not sit on the Nom.Com.

* Doe and Smith are both nominees for the same position ("trustee").

(Q. How did both parties become nominees for the same position? Did the Nom.Com. nominate TWO people?)

* Smith changes his own nomination status. Smith is no longer a candidate for "trustee" and is now a candidate for "1st VP".

(Q. How did an individual, after the Nom.Com. has finished its job, change his nomination's status?)

 

Do you agree this is a Conflict of Interest?

And if so,

What would the penalty be for such a ethics violation?

 

No. There is no conflict of interest.

Where do you see a conflict of interest?

Who or what conflicts with who/what?

What rule do you think was violated?

 

I want to know how Smith got to independently change the office for which he was nominated, on his own, without being nominated by the Nom.Com.

[Guest Bob V]

During a general meeting on Wednesday all were asked by the nominating committee who wanted to run for which positions. Both Doe and Smith said they wanted to run for trustee. An interview was setup for that weekend to determine which one the nominating committee would recommend for trustee. The impromptu meeting between Doe and Smith happened the next day on Thursday. It was not any kind of official meeting. That was the next day on Thursday. After that impromptu meeting it was announced that Smith was changing his candidacy. All that means is he changed the position he was submitting to the committee. So, all this happened before the committee convened. Sunday the nominating committee convened officially for interviews.

[Richard Brown]

I don't see a problem.

[Edgar Guest]

The impromptu meeting between Doe and Smith happened the next day on Thursday. It was not any kind of official meeting. 

 

No, it wasn't. It was just two guys getting together and reaching an agreement. Get over it.

 

And while it's okay for the nominating committee to ask for suggestions, it's free to ignore them.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

REVIEW

 

Wednesday:
1.) Nom.Com. asks for volunteer candidates for open offices.
2.) Doe and Smith volunteer, targeting the same office.

Thursday:
1.) Doe and Smith meet for lunch.

Sunday:
1.) Nom.Com. holds interviews.
2.) Doe arrives, and interviews for the position of “trustee”.
3.) Smith arrives, and interviews for the position of “1st VP”.

 

The fact that Mr. Doe sits on the Nom.Com., and Mr. Smith does not sit on the Nom.Com., is not relevant.

I see no conflict of interest.
I see no unprofessional behavior.
I see no parliamentary question, or even a parliamentary issue.
 

[Gary Novosielski]

I fail to see why someone being in favor of his own candidacy can in any way be considered a conflict of interest.  What is it in conflict with?

[J. J.]

I understand. As a professional outside of Robert's Rules would you call it unethical?

 

 

I would note, as the others have, that it violates no rule in RONR. 

 

I would also not consider it unethical.