Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Eva S

Members
  • Posts

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Eva S's Achievements

  1. A member of the Club submitted a complaint against one of the members of the BoD's. So there are a few issues that are called into question here. 1. Shouldn't the officer in question be removed from duty until the investigation is completed? 2. The VP is part of the membership committee and supposed to help members submit complaints. When this member approached the VP with this complaint, she was very clear that the way she understood it that the way she was harassed met all the classic legal definitions for sexual harassments and that she wanted to put in a complaint. She made this request in front of another member. Instead of helping the member fill out a form and move forward to stop this behavior from happening in the future; the VP turned around and made false statements to the BoD's stating that the member was making threats to sue. She was even corrected by the other member that was present at the time that the original request was made, she was told she was incorrect that that no such statement about suing was made. Shortly after this incident the member was once again sexually harassed by the Board Member, no complaint was filled out by the VP. One week later this member filled one out with the Officer - Member Liason. Is this Neglect of Duty by the VP? 3. During the last Membership meeting the member came to the meeting to hear about an update. While at the meeting she was grilled about the complaint by the Treasurer, asking if there was money offered in exchange (yes, The officer said member would never have to work again). This seemed highly inappropriate to ask openly during a meeting. The President said he would like to be part of the investigation. HERE is the biggest and most important question. When I chaired this board, I never participated in any membership boards because the President is supposed to be seen as impartial. I had taken complaints, but then handed them off to others. When the President made this request, the member turned and said 'And how many times did YOU ASK ME OUT?'. The answer was 5! Should this President be considered unbiased and allowed to sit on the membership committee to hear the complaint by this member? The whole thing seemed like further harassment of the this member - Completely out of line. The front door to this meeting was locked, so that only members that had keys could attend if not right on time. I requested copies of the agenda and was told too bad, we only made 2 extras. I was basically told too bad and the VP barked at me while I was made to share copies with her. As a member I was told by the Treasurer I could not speak on the same subject, at the same time as previous members. When I stopped to wait for the Chair to rule on this, he was too busy reading other material and not paying attention to the meeting. The President allowed voting via email even though it is not in the bylaws. So they had a Secretary that is now not really a Secretary (?). This club is one for supporting people in Recovery, it is vital to the community. It should not be allowed to be run anyhow they see fit. Thanks for any help you can provide!
  2. I have read through many postings and it still seems a little muddy. But the way I see it, unless an organization specifically states in their bylaws that the presiding officer may vote, then only in certain cases as stated in 44:12 may the presiding officer vote. This would be by ballot, and whenever the vote affects the outcome (either to create or break a tie). If the presiding votes and then there's a tie, what happens??? He can't vote twice. The whole point is defeated, right? So,, in fact, he cannot vote at all except in matters where there is a vote by ballot or the vote would be affected by this vote. Correct? With the exception being if the bylaws state specifically that the presiding officer may vote. We have bylaws that say ... "Each member shall be entitled to one vote on each matter." Does this include officers, I guess so. Presiding Officer...? I thought the Chairman was a unique position, almost someone that was supposed to be neutral. This is how it was explained to me when I chaired meetings and I refrained from all but one vote, breaking a tie. 1. Can the Presiding Officer vote on all matters with the above bylaw statement? (this seems it would negate any use of the vote that would affect an outcome, since NO ONE is allowed 2 votes) or 2. Can the Presiding Officer vote only on matters as state in 44:12 of RR? The bylaws would need to state the Presiding Officer specifically for this to be be superseded. I would say #2. Thank you
  3. Dan - thanks for the quick input. That was my understanding too. So even though there is a provision for filling open seats on the Board, the bylaws would have to specifically call action for the replacement of the President? Otherwise it follows Roberts Rules of Order and the VP takes the position and the VP role becomes vacant, correct?
  4. Here is our dilemma. The President recently resigned, the 2nd Vice President was removed for not showing, and I am currently the vice President. It was my understanding that the position of the President is different from the rest of the roles and that it is filled immediately upon resignation, unless specified otherwise in the bylaws. Below is the only mention of open seats being filled, except during the General Election. So is the below too general to apply to role of President? Or does 'Any' suffice? (b) Any resignation of an Officer submitted to the membership shall directly and forthwith be accepted. A successor shall be elected by a majority of the Board members. Such successor shall remain in office for the balance of the unexpired term.
×
×
  • Create New...