Report Pariamentarian Response to Point of Order was Incorrect in General Discussion Posted March 25, 2016 Thanks for your responses Richard Brown and Thomas Ralph, During this month's meeting the president was trying to decide if he could allow someone (one of the people in his caucus) to both amend their motion and motivate it. (I know that's not allowed but I wasn't going to say anything after what happened last month.) He looked at me and said, "Mary might call a point of order." I responded with, "Why bother?" Then he asked the parliamentarian who told him he couldn't do that. After the meeting I spoke with the president and again expressed my disappointment that they were unwilling to try to work out a solution that wouldn't shut down members who want to bring a motion before the assembly. I actually discussed limiting debate to 2 minutes and maybe even extending the time for new motions to 15 minutes. He said it's not limited to 10 minutes but I think he's mistaken because there are people watching the clock and it's always shut down when 10 minutes are up. Also, there's a standing rule with the time to adjourn set at 6pm, so there's no way the meeting would go to 10pm and Mr. Barr's argument was just for dramatic effect. Anyway, I said I still don't agree with the way things are being done but I give up. He said he appreciated it when I challenged him and we both agreed that this night's meeting was actually quite boring.. Anyway, he said he'd talk to a friend of his who is a parliamentarian and see what they can come up with. But he says a lot of things that he doesn't actually follow through on so I won't hold my breath. In the meantime I decided to join the opposing caucus and try to get the whole slate voted out. They've been in complete control of the union for 56 years. I'd been contemplating joining the other caucus for a while but held onto the hope that I could somehow make some inroads with the current leadership. It's obvious after what happened last month that it's not going to happen. So, time to work towards a change in other ways. We don't have a very high probability of winning because the election is pretty much rigged too. Last year only 17% of active members voted and it was the retirees who decided the election (over 50% retiree vote) when most unions don't even allow retirees to vote at all. But it's worth a try. Thank you for your help anyway.