Guest Feed Up Posted February 20, 2012 at 04:52 PM Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 at 04:52 PM Is there anything in Robert's Rules of order that would prevent an organization from adopting a by law amendment that would limit the membership qualifications. For example, if the Giants little league football club wants to amend the by laws to explicity exclude any members that belong to any other football club, is that allowed? Is it ethical? Is it not a form of discrimination? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted February 20, 2012 at 04:58 PM Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 at 04:58 PM Your bylaws can say just about anything they want as long as they don't conflict with higher authority (parent organization, for example) or applicable law. Ethical? You tell us. Discrimination? Ask a lawyer. But Robert's won't stand in your way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trina Posted February 20, 2012 at 05:21 PM Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 at 05:21 PM Is there anything in Robert's Rules of order that would prevent an organization from adopting a by law amendment that would limit the membership qualifications. For example, if the Giants little league football club wants to amend the by laws to explicity exclude any members that belong to any other football club, is that allowed? Is it ethical? Is it not a form of discrimination?I don't actually know of anything in RONR that would prevent much more obviously offensive (by today's standards) limitations on membership -- including explicit exclusion of members of a specified gender, ethnic group, skin color, religious persuasion, etc. An organization which puts such exclusions in its bylaws could certainly run afoul of other rules and statutes, but I don't think the rules in RONR would be triggered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted February 20, 2012 at 06:00 PM Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 at 06:00 PM Is there anything in Robert's Rules of order that would prevent an organization from adopting a by law amendment that would limit the membership qualifications. For example, if the Giants little league football club wants to amend the by laws to explicity exclude any members that belong to any other football club, is that allowed? Is it ethical? Is it not a form of discrimination?Allowed: see RONR (11th ed.), p. 10, ll. 21-30, which indicates that an organization "is free to adopt any rules it may wish," except those that are prohibited by a parent body or applicable law. Ethical: RONR doesn't do ethics, in general. That's left to the organization to decide... which seems like a pretty ethical stance for a parliamentary authority to take. Discrimination: Of course it's discrimination. Life is filled with discrimination. It's what allows a person to drive on the right side of the road instead of the left and to eat the food off a fork and not the fork. It's what allows the mailman to deliver your letters to you, instead of to your neighbor. If you're asking if this is an unethical or illegal form of discrimination, you will have to look elsewhere for those answers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted February 20, 2012 at 06:13 PM Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 at 06:13 PM Life is filled with discrimination. It's what allows a person to drive on the right side of the road instead of the left and to eat the food off a fork and not the fork. It's what allows the mailman to deliver your letters to you, instead of to your neighbor.I have to say I'd have a hard time coming up with poorer examples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted February 20, 2012 at 06:22 PM Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 at 06:22 PM I have to say I'd have a hard time coming up with poorer examples.Well then... how about some better ones? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted February 20, 2012 at 06:42 PM Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 at 06:42 PM I don't even think it is discrimination but merely the assembly not wanting their members to be members of another football club (if the potential member is so jazzed about joining the exclusive club they have the option of resigning from the other club). An example of discrimination is saying that members cannot be visually impaired, mobility impaired, less than five feet tall, over 65 years old, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted February 20, 2012 at 08:52 PM Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 at 08:52 PM Well then... how about some better ones?An example of discrimination is saying that members cannot be visually impaired, mobility impaired, less than five feet tall, over 65 years old, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted February 20, 2012 at 11:05 PM Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 at 11:05 PM I have to say I'd have a hard time coming up with poorer examples.I don't even think it is discrimination but merely the assembly not wanting their members to be members of another football club (if the potential member is so jazzed about joining the exclusive club they have the option of resigning from the other club). An example of discrimination is saying that members cannot be visually impaired, mobility impaired, less than five feet tall, over 65 years old, etc.Okay, I'll just accept that my point, so far, has been missed. Since it has nothing specifically to do with parliamentary procedure, I'll let it drift away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted February 21, 2012 at 12:23 AM Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 at 12:23 AM Discrimination: Of course it's discrimination. Life is filled with discrimination. It's what allows a person to drive on the right side of the road instead of the left and to eat the food off a fork and not the fork. It's what allows the mailman to deliver your letters to you, instead of to your neighbor. If you're asking if this is an unethical or illegal form of discrimination, you will have to look elsewhere for those answers.I don't even think it is discrimination but merely the assembly not wanting their members to be members of another football club (if the potential member is so jazzed about joining the exclusive club they have the option of resigning from the other club). An example of discrimination is saying that members cannot be visually impaired, mobility impaired, less than five feet tall, over 65 years old, etc.Well, you're ultimately both right, although one meaning seems closer to what was implied by the context of the original post. In any event, I suspect the original poster is primarily concerned with whether the club is prohibited from doing this (whether we call it "discrimination" or not). As noted, nothing in RONR prohibits it, but the rules of the parent organization or applicable law might (although I find the latter unlikely). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Feed_UP Posted February 21, 2012 at 12:36 AM Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 at 12:36 AM I find it interesting that there would be nothing to prohibit something like this from occurring. It would be like saying in a Presidential election that Republicans can only vote for Republicans, Democrats for Democrats and Independents(well who knows who they're voting for). I would think you should at least have to entertain the application to join the club and then deny it for a specific reason. And yes, when they're creating rules like this, it's just the powers to be exercising their authority to have their way. Of course one would then ask, why even be bothered with an organization plagued with problems.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trina Posted February 21, 2012 at 12:45 AM Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 at 12:45 AM I find it interesting that there would be nothing to prohibit something like this from occurring. It would be like saying in a Presidential election that Republicans can only vote for Republicans, Democrats for Democrats and Independents(well who knows who they're voting for). I would think you should at least have to entertain the application to join the club and then deny it for a specific reason. And yes, when they're creating rules like this, it's just the powers to be exercising their authority to have their way. Of course one would then ask, why even be bothered with an organization plagued with problems....Nonsense. Of course there is something to prohibit the addition of such a restriction to the bylaws -- the members of the organization in question can vote against the proposed bylaws amendment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted February 21, 2012 at 12:48 AM Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 at 12:48 AM I find it interesting that there would be nothing to prohibit something like this from occurring.There may be, just not in RONR. Nor will you find any recipes in RONR. And it's dreadfully short on maps and other illustrations. It's not that kind of book.It would be like saying in a Presidential election that Republicans can only vote for Republicans, Democrats for Democrats . . .Well, if anything, it would be like saying that only Republicans can vote in a Republican primary, etc., (which, oddly enough, is not always the case). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted February 21, 2012 at 12:51 AM Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 at 12:51 AM I find it interesting that there would be nothing to prohibit something like this from occurring. It would be like saying in a Presidential election that Republicans can only vote for Republicans, Democrats for Democrats and Independents(well who knows who they're voting for). I would think you should at least have to entertain the application to join the club and then deny it for a specific reason. And yes, when they're creating rules like this, it's just the powers to be exercising their authority to have their way. Of course one would then ask, why even be bothered with an organization plagued with problems....There certainly isn't anything in RONR to prevent an organization from defining in its bylaws what makes an individual eligible for membership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted February 21, 2012 at 12:53 AM Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 at 12:53 AM It would be like saying in a Presidential election that Republicans can only vote for Republicans, Democrats for Democrats and Independents(well who knows who they're voting for).Not really. A public election is a poor analogy for membership in a private organization. Political parties often do prohibit active members of other parties from being members of the party, however, which is a much better analogy.I would think you should at least have to entertain the application to join the club and then deny it for a specific reason. And yes, when they're creating rules like this, it's just the powers to be exercising their authority to have their way. Of course one would then ask, why even be bothered with an organization plagued with problems....Well, if you feel that way, argue your case when the supporters of this rule propose the amendment to the Bylaws. It's generally a fairly high bar to amend the Bylaws (typically it requires at least a 2/3 vote and previous notice), so if there is even a sizable minority that feels the same way you do, you can defeat the proposal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.