Who is authorized to call a meeting of a committee?

[Guest Kallie Jurgens]

Can a member of a committee call a meeting of a committee or does it have to be the chairman?

[jstackpo]

The chairman, by him/herself, can call a meeting.

If this is the first meeting of a (new) committee and the chair doesn't call a meeting (for whatever reason), then two members may call the meeting. p. 499.

The book isn't explicit is saying this "two members can call" rule applies to later meetings (that the reluctant chair doesn't call), but it would seem reasonable to say it does. Or the society should adopt a Special Rule of Order stating that rule.

However, to be sure, a committee should, before adjourning, always set up the next meeting, or at least make it clear who and how it is to be called. p. 501

[George Mervosh]

If the chairman is willfully not calling meetings, his actions should be reported to the body that appointed the committee.

[jstackpo]

How?

Since the committee isn't meeting it cannot formulate a complaint and report it to the superior body. p. 501.

(Obviously back-channel "reporting" would probably get the job done, but that isn't detailed in RONR.)

[George Mervosh]

How?

Since the committee isn't meeting it cannot formulate a complaint and report it to the superior body. p. 501.

(Obviously back-channel "reporting" would probably get the job done, but that isn't detailed in RONR.)

Assuming they want to put forth a formal report, you had a suggestion for that yourself in post #2.

What's wrong with back-channel again?

[jstackpo]

Back-channel is not in RONR, so we can't talk about it, right?

[George Mervosh]

Back-channel is not in RONR, so we can't talk about it, right?

In all seriousness there's no reason an unofficial report can't be sent to the appointing power in the form of correspondence with a statement of the relevant facts.

[jstackpo]

Of course; that is the very definition of "back channel".

And at the next meeting of the parent (of the committee) body, anybody is free to propose a standing rule to authorize two (or another number) of members to call a non-initial meeting.

But my point was that the committee itself cannot (via a member of the committee speaking on behalf of the committee) propose such a motion since the committee has not been able to meet to get that ball rolling.

It would help no end if RONR '12 formally extended the "two members may call" rule to apply to any meeting, not just the first one, that the chairman was declining to call (for his own reasons).

[Dan Honemann]

Of course; that is the very definition of "back channel".

And at the next meeting of the parent (of the committee) body, anybody is free to propose a standing rule to authorize two (or another number) of members to call a non-initial meeting.

But my point was that the committee itself cannot (via a member of the committee speaking on behalf of the committee) propose such a motion since the committee has not been able to meet to get that ball rolling.

It would help no end if RONR '12 formally extended the "two members may call" rule to apply to any meeting, not just the first one, that the chairman was declining to call (for his own reasons).

I think that what is said on page 499, lines 21-25, must be read in conjunction with what is said on page 501, lines 29-34.

[jstackpo]

Well, maybe. But the context of the "two-member" rule on p. 499, judging from the topic (first) sentence of the paragraph, looks to me to be dealing with the first meeting of the committee.

But I am happy to leave it there.