Salary

[Guest Joan Bettencourt]

Can a janitor of a non-profit organization who gets salary, be able to be an official in the organization such as President, Vice President, Secretary or Tresurer?

[Edgar Guest]

Nothing in RONR prohibits it. The voters will decide.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

Can a janitor of a non-profit organization who gets salary,

be able to be an official in the organization ... ?

 

There is no parliamentary rule to prevent a salaried employee from

(a.) joining an organization;

(b.) running for office.

(c.) being elected.

(d.) serving out a term of office.

 

It is common myth that "employees cannot sit on a board of directors."

 

It happens to be a bad management practice. (Due to unending conflicts of interest between management's goals and labor's goals.)

 

But there is no parliamentary rule to forbid members from voting for a candidate who happens to be an employee.

[Timothy]

There is no parliamentary rule to prevent a salaried employee from

(a.) joining an organization;

(b.) running for office.

(c.) being elected.

(d.) serving out a term of office.

 

It is common myth that "employees cannot sit on a board of directors."

 

It happens to be a bad management practice. (Due to unending conflicts of interest between management's goals and labor's goals.)

 

But there is no parliamentary rule to forbid members from voting for a candidate who happens to be an employee.

Where do you get that it is bad management practice? In many businesses, the CEO is both the highest paid employee and the chairman of the board.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

Where do you get that it is bad management practice?

In many businesses, the CEO is both the highest paid employee and the chairman of the board.

 

(The Chief Executive Officer is "management.")

 

"Where?"

After all these years, I do not remember the sources. (Perhaps Peter F. Drucker?)

 

But there were multiple sources of books and articles I have read over the years which agreed that their goals run counter to each other.

* One party wants to keep all costs low.

* The other party wants more money spent (on salaries and benefits).

 

Where their interests are common would be a very tiny overlap, if graphically illustrated on a Venn diagram.

 

A board would represent management. -- A body who is responsible for strategy and tactics.

If you were to have half the board members working for "lower costs" and half the board members working for "higher wages", then the conflicts of interest will be 24/7.

 

RONR says that a body whose job is to execute a task of fulfillment is better served when having like-minded parties sit on the committee.

 

● When a special committee is appointed to implement an order of the assembly, it should be small and should consist only of those in favor of the action to be carried out.  If anyone not in sympathy with the action is appointed, he should ask to be excused.

[RONR page 498]

 

 

[Timothy]

Considering that employees often own a significant portion of many companies, it isn't as simple as saying that management wants to keep costs down while others want increased benefits.

[Josh Martin]

Where do you get that it is bad management practice? In many businesses, the CEO is both the highest paid employee and the chairman of the board.

 

Yes, it is a common practice in businesses for the CEO to serve as the chairman of the board. This is not a common practice in other organizations. Indeed, we frequently advise posters that it is a bad idea to have the Executive Director as an ex-officio member of the board.

 

Considering that employees often own a significant portion of many companies, it isn't as simple as saying that management wants to keep costs down while others want increased benefits.

 

This reasoning has no application in other organizations.

 

Of course, so far as RONR is concerned, the OP's question was answered in Post #2. Anything beyond that will be for the society to decide.

[Edgar Guest]

 . . . the OP's question was answered in Post #2.

 

Would that it were ever thus.

[Timothy]

Yes, it is a common practice in businesses for the CEO to serve as the chairman of the board. This is not a common practice in other organizations. Indeed, we frequently advise posters that it is a bad idea to have the Executive Director as an ex-officio member of the board.

 

 

This reasoning has no application in other organizations.

 

Don't you think that begs the question? If we choose to ignore businesses such as this we are ignoring the organizations that exemplify successful management practices.

[Josh Martin]

Don't you think that begs the question? If we choose to ignore businesses such as this we are ignoring the organizations that exemplify successful management practices.

 

I don't think it begs the question at all. I see no reason to assume that for-profit business are similar to other organizations or that what is a successful management practice for a for-profit business would be successful for another type of organization.

 

Indeed, there are some respects within parliamentary law where businesses are treated as very different animals from other types of organizations. Specifically, the balance of power between the membership and the board and proxy voting in meetings of the membership.

 

"Similarly, in a stock corporation, although the board of directors is elected by stockholders who hold an annual meeting, it constitutes the highest authority in the management of the corporation." (RONR, 11th ed., pg. 9)

 

"In a stock corporation, on the other hand, where the ownership is transferable, the voice and vote of the member also is transferable, by use of a proxy." (RONR, 11th ed., pg. 429)

[Gary Novosielski]

Would that it were ever thus.

 

It often is--more often that it would seem by simply measuring the length of threads.