Guest Richard Posted July 20, 2011 at 01:14 AM Report Share Posted July 20, 2011 at 01:14 AM We are confronting a disciplinary action and our Bylaws are only marginally helpful. They are not well written, and therefore it is difficult for me to determine how RONR should be used, if at all. First, the Bylaws state “The rules contained in Robert's Rules of Order, latest revised edition, shall govern this club in all cases in which they are applicable, and in which they are not inconsistent with these Bylaws, Articles of Incorporation, of any other adopted rules of the SRC.” There are no adopted rules affecting disciplinary matters, and the Articles of Incorporation are also mute. Second, The first sentence of Article IV states “The Board of Trustees shall have the authority as prescribed by these Bylaws, to conduct all SRC business, including but not limited to the following: financial business, range operation, official meetings, establish standing rules, disciplinary actions, i.e., suspension and/or revocations of membership.” The Sections of this Article that follow this text cover the mentioned items – financial business, operations, meetings, standing rules – including a Section on revoking membership for unbecoming conduct and a Section on removing Trustees for cause. There is no other text in the Bylaws relating to discipline of any kind. Third, the clause “The Board of Trustees shall have the authority AS PRESCRIBED BY THESE BYLAWS…” (emphasis added)seems critical here. I believe the most correct reading of this clause means that the Board has ONLY the authorities specified in the Bylaws, and has no disciplinary authority other than the authority specifically given to it in the sections on membership revocation and Trustee removal. In other words, the Board can choose to expel a member or not, but can not discipline such member in any other way. Fourth, do you agree with my interpretation of the above clause? If yes, then is it also correct that RONR is trumped by the Bylaws and therefore RONR does not give the Board any additional disciplinary authority? Fifth, if you do NOT agree with my interpretation (in other words you believe that the Board is authorized to take disciplinary actions other than expulsion and not specifically mentioned in the Bylaws), then do all of RONR’s sections on discipline apply for such other actions? Thanks so much for your help. Rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted July 20, 2011 at 01:22 AM Report Share Posted July 20, 2011 at 01:22 AM We are confronting a disciplinary action and our Bylaws are only marginally helpful. They are not well written, and therefore it is difficult for me to determine how RONR should be used, if at all. First, the Bylaws state “The rules contained in Robert's Rules of Order, latest revised edition, shall govern this club in all cases in which they are applicable, and in which they are not inconsistent with these Bylaws, Articles of Incorporation, of any other adopted rules of the SRC.” There are no adopted rules affecting disciplinary matters, and the Articles of Incorporation are also mute. Second, The first sentence of Article IV states “The Board of Trustees shall have the authority as prescribed by these Bylaws, to conduct all SRC business, including but not limited to the following: financial business, range operation, official meetings, establish standing rules, disciplinary actions, i.e., suspension and/or revocations of membership.” The Sections of this Article that follow this text cover the mentioned items – financial business, operations, meetings, standing rules – including a Section on revoking membership for unbecoming conduct and a Section on removing Trustees for cause. There is no other text in the Bylaws relating to discipline of any kind. Third, the clause “The Board of Trustees shall have the authority AS PRESCRIBED BY THESE BYLAWS…” (emphasis added)seems critical here. I believe the most correct reading of this clause means that the Board has ONLY the authorities specified in the Bylaws, and has no disciplinary authority other than the authority specifically given to it in the sections on membership revocation and Trustee removal. In other words, the Board can choose to expel a member or not, but can not discipline such member in any other way. Fourth, do you agree with my interpretation of the above clause? If yes, then is it also correct that RONR is trumped by the Bylaws and therefore RONR does not give the Board any additional disciplinary authority? Fifth, if you do NOT agree with my interpretation (in other words you believe that the Board is authorized to take disciplinary actions other than expulsion and not specifically mentioned in the Bylaws), then do all of RONR’s sections on discipline apply for such other actions? Thanks so much for your help. RichMy guess is that your post falls outside the scope of this forum, since the answers to the questions you raise depend mostly on the meaning of this society's bylaws rather than anything in RONR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Richard Posted July 20, 2011 at 01:31 AM Report Share Posted July 20, 2011 at 01:31 AM I thought it might be a bit outside of your scope. However, I really need some help from some good critical thinkers and will appreciate any thoughts you can give me. Thanks again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted July 20, 2011 at 01:34 AM Report Share Posted July 20, 2011 at 01:34 AM Fourth, do you agree with my interpretation of the above clause? If yes, then is it also correct that RONR is trumped by the Bylaws and therefore RONR does not give the Board any additional disciplinary authority? Fifth, if you do NOT agree with my interpretation (in other words you believe that the Board is authorized to take disciplinary actions other than expulsion and not specifically mentioned in the Bylaws), then do all of RONR’s sections on discipline apply for such other actions? Thanks so much for your help. RichIt is beyond the scope of this forum to interpret your organization's Bylaws. It will be up to your organization to interpret its own Bylaws. See RONR, 10th ed., pgs. 570-573 for some Principles of Interpretation.For what it's worth, yes, the Bylaws trump RONR and RONR does not grant any disciplinary authority to the board. By default, authority for disciplinary action rests with the general membership, and any exceptions must be in the Bylaws. That's all I can say without venturing into Bylaws interpretation.However, I really need some help from some good critical thinkers and will appreciate any thoughts you can give me.Well, we can't give you our thoughts on Bylaws interpretation here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted July 20, 2011 at 01:40 AM Report Share Posted July 20, 2011 at 01:40 AM It is beyond the scope of this forum to interpret your organization's Bylaws. It will be up to your organization to interpret its own Bylaws. See RONR, 10th ed., pgs. 570-573 for some Principles of Interpretation.For what it's worth, yes, the Bylaws trump RONR and RONR does not grant any disciplinary authority to the board. By default, authority for disciplinary action rests with the general membership, and any exceptions must be in the Bylaws. That's all I can say without venturing into Bylaws interpretation.Well, we can't give you our thoughts on Bylaws interpretation here....and RONR does not grant any disciplinary authority to the board.I do not agree with this overly-expansive statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted July 20, 2011 at 01:45 AM Report Share Posted July 20, 2011 at 01:45 AM I do not agree with this overly-expansive statement.Take a look at Mr. Honemann's remarks here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted July 20, 2011 at 01:47 AM Report Share Posted July 20, 2011 at 01:47 AM ... “The Board of Trustees shall have the authority as prescribed by these Bylaws, to conduct all SRC business, including but not limited to the following: financial business, range operation, official meetings, establish standing rules, disciplinary actions, i.e., suspension and/or revocations of membership.”I don't know how you're going to make the jump to remove "suspension" from the bylaws. Are you insinuating that the bylaws section that you quoted here is not prescribed by the bylaws?In other words, the Board can choose to expel OR SUSPEND a member or not, but can not discipline such member in any other way.Let's pretend that the suspension provision is reinserted into the picture for this question. What other disciplinary action did you have in mind? Kicking the legs out from under a member? Fines would have to be authorized in the bylaws.... is it also correct that RONR is trumped by the Bylaws...Absolutely.... and therefore RONR does not give the Board any additional disciplinary authority?In regards to acting on behalf of the society, the board will have only the authority given to it by the bylaws. Fifth, if you do NOT agree with my interpretation (in other words you believe that the Board is authorized to take disciplinary actions other than expulsion and not specifically mentioned in the Bylaws), then do all of RONR’s sections on discipline apply for such other actions?No one can form any substantial opinion on your bylaws without reading them in their entirety, which is beyond the scope of this forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Richard Posted July 20, 2011 at 04:29 AM Report Share Posted July 20, 2011 at 04:29 AM Mr. Wynn:I did not mean to exclude "suspension" from the equation - I find the difference between suspension and revocation of membership to be similar to the question of which flavor of Vanilla does my daughter prefer. The other disciplinary measures I was thinking of would include fines, required voluntary services to the club or outside organizations, charitable volunteerism, or similar sanctions that I haven't thought of yet, rather than losing any rights of membership. Do I understand from your comment regarding fines that, in your opinion, any of these or similar options are only possible if specifically authorized by the Bylaws? Or was your comment specifically limited to fines only? Thanks so much to all of you for your comments. Richard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted July 20, 2011 at 12:15 PM Report Share Posted July 20, 2011 at 12:15 PM Do I understand from your comment regarding fines that, in your opinion, any of these or similar options are only possible if specifically authorized by the Bylaws? Or was your comment specifically limited to fines only? I believe the latter."Punishments that a society can impose generally fall under the headings of reprimand, find (if authorized in the bylaws), suspension, or expulsion." (RONR 10th Ed., p 624 l. 20ff)Such things not mentioned, such as charitable volunteerism, may also require mention in the bylaws to permit or authorize them as punishments as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted July 20, 2011 at 01:07 PM Report Share Posted July 20, 2011 at 01:07 PM Mr. Wynn:I did not mean to exclude "suspension" from the equation - I find the difference between suspension and revocation of membership to be similar to the question of which flavor of Vanilla does my daughter prefer.I disagree. A suspension could be for one day, one week, one month, et cetera; revocation of membership (expulsion) is absolute, and the only option for return is to go through the process for becoming a member. The other disciplinary measures I was thinking of would include fines, required voluntary services to the club or outside organizations, charitable volunteerism, or similar sanctions that I haven't thought of yet, rather than losing any rights of membership. Do I understand from your comment regarding fines that, in your opinion, any of these or similar options are only possible if specifically authorized by the Bylaws? Or was your comment specifically limited to fines only?Fines must be authorized in the bylaws, and I would tend to think that punishments that closely resemble fines would have to follow the same rule (e.g. a shoemaker orderer to make $100 worth of shoes, or an accountant ordered to prepare $200 worth of taxes). However, I don't see that there is anything to prevent you from striking a mutually acceptable arrangement with the disciplinary power. RONR speaks of apologies and retractions of objectionable words as a basis for settling these matters. Certainly, a voluntary vow to mend the situation through acts of charity could be seen as a similar gesture of reconciliation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted July 21, 2011 at 12:12 AM Report Share Posted July 21, 2011 at 12:12 AM I do not agree with this overly-expansive statement.Take a look at Mr. Honemann's remarks here.Thanks for the catch. I concur with Mr. Honemann's statement on the matter, and the poster should follow that in place of my hasty and overly-expansive statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.