Can Exec Bd levy discipline that's not listed in By-Laws?

[Guest Harrold]

Looked through FAQ and browsed the forums but found no answer to my question so far. Our By-Laws list only one form of disciplinary action which can be taken against members, which is expulsion. A procedure is provided in the By-Laws by which expulsion may be levied against a member.

However, on two occassions within the past year, the Exec Bd has temporarily banned two members from coming onto the property. The member's weren't expelled from the club, their privileges were temporarily suspended and they were told they couldn't come onto club property.

Since our By-Laws don't provide for either temporary suspension of membership priveleges or temporary banning members from coming onto club property, did the Exec Bd act improperly in levying both a tempory suspension and a temporary ban from club property?

If the Exec Bd did not act improperly, where in Robert's Rules is Exec Bds granted authority to levy discipline that's not part of By-Laws or Constitution?

Thank you.

[Gary c Tesser]

First be sure that the board has any authority at all to impose discipline on members: it's NOT automatically so (p. 482 - 3).

Yes, it CAN be argued that if the bylaws list one form of punishment, then others are prohibited (one of the principles of interpretation in RONR, p. 580 or so, and incidentally a basic logical principle). But whether that is what your bylaws actually mean is for your organization, not advisors on the Internet, not even on the world's premier Internet parliamentary forum, to determine.

If, then, the board acted beyond its authority, then ... the board acted beyond its authority. Eh?

(

Guest Harrold's) concluding question: it's not in Robert's Rules. It would be there in your bylaws.

[Tim Wynn]

Looked through FAQ and browsed the forums but found no answer to my question so far. Our By-Laws list only one form of disciplinary action which can be taken against members, which is expulsion. A procedure is provided in the By-Laws by which expulsion may be levied against a member.

However, on two occassions within the past year, the Exec Bd has temporarily banned two members from coming onto the property. The member's weren't expelled from the club, their privileges were temporarily suspended and they were told they couldn't come onto club property.

Since our By-Laws don't provide for either temporary suspension of membership priveleges or temporary banning members from coming onto club property, did the Exec Bd act improperly in levying both a tempory suspension and a temporary ban from club property?

Probably. The problem is that without reviewing your governing documents and the details of the specific situation, it's impossible to say for sure.

According to RONR, a board does not have such authority.

If the Exec Bd did not act improperly, where in Robert's Rules is Exec Bds granted authority to levy discipline that's not part of By-Laws or Constitution?

The answer is p. 486, ll. 19-25, and if you follow the incorporated reference to pp. 645-649, you'll see clearly that RONR doesn't give the board the authority to do what you say it's doing.

[Josh Martin]

The answer is p. 486, ll. 19-25, and if you follow the incorporated reference to pp. 645-649, you'll see clearly that RONR doesn't give the board the authority to do what you say it's doing.

For the benefit of the original poster, pg. 486 grants the board limited authority to discipline its members for offenses occurring during a board meeting, and it is not applicable to the current situation.

[Guest Justin]

Gary;

Thank you for your reply.

Tim;

Thank you very much for the page listing in RONR and the synopsis of same. I'm going to buy the 11th edition and I can't wait to read what you've directed me to. Our club is 86 years old. It's bylaws were adopted 1952. I'm sure the older members would know what the original intent was of our bylaws provision for 'expulsion by 2/3 majority vote'. The current board members have an average membership duration of less than 10 years, are of a different mindset than the older members, and seem eager to turn the club into their own private feifdom. Sadly, older members never took time to familiarize themselves with the bylaws and for the most part lack the confidence and knowledge necessary to stop and reverse the current direction the club is taking under the current Exec Bd.

Josh;

Thank you very much also for explaining pg. 486. This is another thing I can't wait to see in print in the 11th edition. With a copy of the book in my hands, and with the advice from you, Tim, and Gary I hope I can open members' eyes during the next meeting as to the contemptuous arrogance which our board has displayed towards the bylaws and by extension, to each and every club member.