HERR DOKTOR

The grievance committee isn't set forth in the bylaws; it exists pursuant to a policy, which provides that it shall be chaired by the vice-president and two members appointed by the President. Nobody really questions that the President can un-appoint these two or appoint two others; the question is whether the new members take over consideration of the pending grievances or whether they only hear the grievances submitted after their appointment while the previously constituted committee continues with the resolution of grievances pending at the time the new members were appointed. It doesn't seem right that a tribunal, once constituted, can be changed in the middle of the process with intent to affect the outcome.

Assume that our bylaws are silent on the issue. If there is a grievance pending in front of the grievance committee, and the president (in what is assumed to be an attempt to affect the outcome of the grievance) removes all of the grievance committee members and replaces them with others, it doesn't seem right that the new members should take over the adjudication of the pending grievance; they should begin with the first grievance filed AFTER their appointment, but the old grievance committee shouldn't lose their jurisdiction, so to speak, to consider the grievance before them. Yet, I can't find anything in RONR addressing the question. All I have at the moment is the gut feeling that this just feels wrong. Is anyone aware of a rule that I am overlooking here?