Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

new bylaw


gregory

Recommended Posts

I"m writing bylaw amendments and hoping to get some input on this one,

I know bylaws supersede RONR but is this even practical?

I move to vote by secret ballot to amend bylaw Article V to add a new section.

"Main motions that are written and seconded and then legally notarized

may be submitted by another member at a membership meeting.

The member making the motion or the person seconding it, need not be present"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I"m writing bylaw amendments and hoping to get some input on this one,

I know bylaws supersede RONR but is this even practical?

I move to vote by secret ballot to amend bylaw Article V to add a new section.

"Main motions that are written and seconded and then legally notarized

may be submitted by another member at a membership meeting.

The member making the motion or the person seconding it, need not be present"

Why? What are you trying to accomplish? By having special motion rules (in the bylaws), you may cause the need for a lot more special type considerations.

If a member can not make a motion because of absence, then why not just request another member to make the motion? MUCH simpler and, it seems anyway, would accomplish the same result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why? What are you trying to accomplish? By having special motion rules (in the bylaws), you may cause the need for a lot more special type considerations.

If a member can not make a motion because of absence, then why not just request another member to make the motion? MUCH simpler and, it seems anyway, would accomplish the same result.

Gerry,

The purpose of the "notarized motion" is to have the required second signed

sealed and notarized, Just in case no one at the meeting wants to second it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The purpose of the "notarized motion" is to have the required second signed

sealed and notarized, Just in case no one at the meeting wants to second it.

If no one at the meeting wants to second the motion, the odds of the motion being adopted are vanishingly slim. I think the members would be better off doing more legwork before the meeting to drum up support than to come up with elaborate rules for seconding motions outside of meetings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I"m writing bylaw amendments and hoping to get some input on this one,

I know bylaws supersede RONR but is this even practical?

I move to vote by secret ballot to amend bylaw Article V to add a new section.

"Main motions that are written and seconded and then legally notarized

may be submitted by another member at a membership meeting.

The member making the motion or the person seconding it, need not be present"

I'd have to vote no. It smacks of absentee moving and absentee seconding, both by proxy, and it just begs for trouble as absentee stuff can.

Also, this essentially forces the chair to state the question, putting it before the assembly, when in fact they may not wish it at all. Thus, it must be disposed of, and could be somewhat quickly (no debate, leading to immediate vote, negative has it, or possibly Object to Consideration even), but why bother. Also, the (possibly strongest) two proponents of the motion may not even be present to vote for it anyway. Not a strong show of support.

The motion-conceiving member (and seconder) thinks it of such importance that it must be moved even in his absence? If it's so important, and the majority of members would support it (i.e. vote for it) then any other members could move and second it. And if the membership would be against it, then it's unfortunate to bring it to the floor in this way, wasting time.

Can you offer an explanation, based on practical example perhaps, for why this bylaw would be a good idea?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe that the process suggested creates any harm, but I question if it does any good.

No one at the meeting wants to make or second the motion, even though doing either does not commit the maker or seconder to vote for the motion. What are the chances then of anyone wanting to adopt it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I"m writing bylaw amendments and hoping to get some input on this one.

I know bylaws supersede RONR but

is this even practical?

No. It isn't practical.

Since it isn't practical, don't push this issue further.

It is a brain-dead idea.

It introduces an incredible level of complexity and extra cost and extra verification, with no justification.

The same end could be accomplished with a single letter, without any third party involvement.

I move to vote by secret ballot to amend bylaw Article V to add a new section.

"Main motions that are written and seconded and then legally notarized may be submitted by another member at a membership meeting.

The member making the motion or the person seconding it, need not be present."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd have to vote no. It smacks of absentee moving and absentee seconding, both by proxy, and it just begs for trouble as absentee stuff can.

Also, this essentially forces the chair to state the question, putting it before the assembly, when in fact they may not wish it at all. Thus, it must be disposed of, and could be somewhat quickly (no debate, leading to immediate vote, negative has it, or possibly Object to Consideration even), but why bother. Also, the (possibly strongest) two proponents of the motion may not even be present to vote for it anyway. Not a strong show of support.

The motion-conceiving member (and seconder) thinks it of such importance that it must be moved even in his absence? If it's so important, and the majority of members would support it (i.e. vote for it) then any other members could move and second it. And if the membership would be against it, then it's unfortunate to bring it to the floor in this way, wasting time.

Can you offer an explanation, based on practical example perhaps, for why this bylaw would be a good idea?

David, all good points no doubt about it. It does smack of "proxy" and we do have a bylaw against proxy voting...BUT would you not agree this bylaw amendment does not address "proxy voting", members must still appear in person to vote. Hence, no bylaw violation. The practical reason for this bylaw amendment is we have less than one half of one percent of our members attend membership meetings because they are AT WORK working. They want to go to meetings but can't because their very job description defeats their ability to attend. I thought this process would give them a voice AND I'm banking on the members who can attend to recognize that and vote accordingly. A good idea is a good idea regardless if the person with the good idea is in the room or not, YES?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BUT would you not agree this bylaw amendment does not address "proxy voting", members must still appear in person to vote.

I agree that the bylaw is not "proxy voting."

The practical reason for this bylaw amendment is we have less than one half of one percent of our members attend membership meetings because they are AT WORK working.

If over 99.5% of the membership is working, it might be wise to consider holding the meetings at a different time.

A good idea is a good idea regardless if the person with the good idea is in the room or not, YES?

Yes it is, but if the motion is such a good idea, the member should be able to get two members who will attend the meeting to make and second the motion. I don't see the need for the amendment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BUT would you not agree this bylaw amendment does not address "proxy voting"

Oh sure, I was just making the analogy.

The practical reason for this bylaw amendment is we have less than one half of one percent of our members attend membership meetings because they are AT WORK working.

So, curiosity begs.... how many members, where are they located, and is there no way to hold a meeting at some point during our solar transit when 99.5% of them aren't working?

I thought this process would give them a voice ...

Well, not so much. The two (mover and seconder) involved still can't speak in debate, respond to amendments offered by present members, or even vote down the motion should it get amended into some less desirable form.

A good idea is a good idea regardless if the person with the good idea is in the room or not, YES?

I have that quote on the left wall of my work station cube, right above last week's productivity performance analysis report.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So your quorum requirement is less than 0.5% of the membership?

How about scheduling the meetings when fewer members are working?

H,

To give you an idea how dysfunctional our Union is, we have a bylaw

that states "the membership meeting quorum will be those members in

attendance" which as you may note is really no quorum at all. Also

we can't schedule a meeting when few members are working because we

are a Union of Flight Attendants, our job description defeats the

ability of many members to attend membership meetings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To give you an idea how dysfunctional our Union is, we have a bylaw

that states "the membership meeting quorum will be those members in

attendance" which as you may note is really no quorum at all. Also

we can't schedule a meeting when few members are working because we

are a Union of Flight Attendants, our job description defeats the

ability of many members to attend membership meetings.

Well, the fact that it is a union (of flight attendants, no less) certainly explains the attendance difficulties. Nevertheless, it seems easier for a member to contact members who will be able to attend to make and second the motion than to establish a Bylaw permitting absentee members to make and second motions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also

we can't schedule a meeting when few members are working because we

are a Union of Flight Attendants, our job description defeats the

ability of many members to attend membership meetings.

It just so happens we have an Air Traffic Controller on call so stay tuned. You might also want to read about shift meetings in an article someone may post a link to before I can.

You could also delegate a lot of authority to a board that can meet more frequently.

In short, there are dozens of solutions better than the one you propose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...