DavidDelMonte Posted October 14, 2011 at 01:42 PM Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 at 01:42 PM What is the best way to deal with an member who constantly monopolizes the discussion during meetings, is contrary and acts as an obstructionist? Very few members want to challenge him because he is intimiating and limited RR knowledge exists? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted October 14, 2011 at 02:08 PM Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 at 02:08 PM What is the best way to deal with an member who constantly monopolizes the discussion during meetings,Well members are limited to two speeches (10 minutes each) per question per day and the member cannot speak in debate again until everyone else who wishes to speak has had a chance to do so (RONR pp. 387-390). So if he has already spoken on the question and seeks recognition the Chair should give him limited recognition by saying "For what purpose does the member rise?" (RONR p. 377). If the member wants to speak again the Chair can remind him that others haven't had a chance to speak yet and he must wait. is contrary What you call "contrary" could be viewed by others as having a differing opinion.and acts as an obstructionist?in what way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Hunt Posted October 14, 2011 at 02:24 PM Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 at 02:24 PM What is the best way to deal with an member who constantly monopolizes the discussion during meetings, is contrary and acts as an obstructionist? Very few members want to challenge him because he is intimiating and limited RR knowledge exists?Fix the problem that is a limited knowledge of RONR. Your presiding office should acquire a copy of RONR In Brief and read it posthaste, and probably also get a copy of the full RONR as well to keep handy.In particular, absent any organization-specific rules to the contrary, every member is allowed two speeches of at most ten minutes on each matter. A member has the right to speak without interruption except where interruption is necessary. The chair should be firm about this but not rude, and should definitely remain calm. If the member refuses to respect the rules of order and the assembly, then the assembly has the power to reject him from the meeting or impose harsher penalties (RONR (11th ed.), pp. 645-648). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted October 14, 2011 at 02:43 PM Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 at 02:43 PM Your presiding office should acquire a copy of RONR In Brief and read it posthaste, and probably also get a copy of the full RONR as well to keep handy.And it wouldn't hurt for the members to get copies either. I'd say the reference on p. 15 ll. 1-3 (RONR 11) applies to RONR as well. Don't leave it up the chair to be the only one who knows the rules, and to call for their enforcement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trina Posted October 14, 2011 at 05:53 PM Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 at 05:53 PM What is the best way to deal with an member who constantly monopolizes the discussion during meetings, is contrary and acts as an obstructionist? Very few members want to challenge him because he is intimiating and limited RR knowledge exists?Well members are limited to two speeches (10 minutes each) per question per day and the member cannot speak in debate again until everyone else who wishes to speak has had a chance to do so (RONR pp. 387-390). So if he has already spoken on the question and seeks recognition the Chair should give him limited recognition by saying "For what purpose does the member rise?" (RONR p. 377). If the member wants to speak again the Chair can remind him that others haven't had a chance to speak yet and he must wait....I sort of suspect that Mr. DelMonte's organization may be conducting fairly informal meetings -- the use of the term 'discussion' often suggests that members are not engaging in organized debate (germane to a motion on the floor) in the formal sense described in RONR. Chris H.'s advice is certainly correct, but more difficult to apply if the members are not already in the habit of taking turns during debate. Especially in an informal group, it honestly does come down to the distasteful task of (politely) confronting the offending member, and telling him to talk less, and to wait his turn. Other members (not just the chair) need to make it clear that they don't want to put up with this behavior, no matter how intimidating the offender is.If it comes down to it, the assembly does have the power to take action and rid itself of the annoyance (see the pages cited by scshunt).Having the members educate themselves by reading RONRIB is certainly a good idea. One ploy that might work (if the meetings are currently very informal) is to suggest running a few meetings more strictly according to the formal rules of debate, perhaps as an educational exercise. Under that format it becomes much clearer how people should request permission to speak, how long they are allowed to talk, and when they should sit down and be quiet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted October 14, 2011 at 06:07 PM Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 at 06:07 PM What is the best way to deal with an member who constantly monopolizes the discussion during meetings, is contrary and acts as an obstructionist? Very few members want to challenge him because he is intimiating and limited RR knowledge exists?The presiding officer should take control. If he keeps the meeting on track, it will be clear to all that there is no benefit in trying to monopolize and no need to "challenge" a member. I suspect in your assembly the loudest person rules. The chair should put this to an end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.