Why change Quorum Bylaw and not in force other Bylaw

[wmyounce755]

I'm trying to understand how everything works. I want to help make this local strong and not have any errors in it Leadership. I found some things in the Bylaws that make me wonder how and why things are done.

1. Article X section F "All Representatives of Local 755, elected and appointed, shall be required to attend membership meetings. Should any Representatives absent themselves from any three (3) consecutive membership meetings and fail to present a valid excuse, charges maybe filed pursuant to this constitution, seeking the removal from said position."

2. and in 2009 Article X section C "A quorum of twenty-five (25) members must be present at regular and special membership meetings for the transaction of business. A meeting called for the nomination of election of officers shall not be subject to any quorum requirements."

3.Then we couldn't get 25 members to show up for meetings and I was told in 2010 the E-Board Voted to change Article X section C quorum from 25 to 5. So now it reads Article X section C "A quorum of five (5) members must be present at regular and special membership meetings for the transaction of business. A meeting called for the nomination of election of officers shall not be subject to any quorum requirements."

4.and did nothing to Article X section F which reads the same. I'm confused as to Why change the quorum and not make the Representatives ( elected and appointed ) go to the meetings..

My question is: What should I do to in force the Right things is Done? Should I make the Leadership in force Article X section F and change the quorum back to 25 or Higher. We have a Min of 60 elected members in Our Local and not sure on how many appointed. even with a quorum of 5 not all of the elected and appointed go to meeting

[J. J.]

This is beyond the scope of this board in general. The questions should relate RONR, not your specific bylaws.

[Trina]

I'm trying to understand how everything works. I want to help make this local strong and not have any errors in it Leadership. I found some things in the Bylaws that make me wonder how and why things are done.

1. Article X section F "All Representatives of Local 755, elected and appointed, shall be required to attend membership meetings. Should any Representatives absent themselves from any three (3) consecutive membership meetings and fail to present a valid excuse, charges maybe filed pursuant to this constitution, seeking the removal from said position."

2. and in 2009 Article X section C "A quorum of twenty-five (25) members must be present at regular and special membership meetings for the transaction of business. A meeting called for the nomination of election of officers shall not be subject to any quorum requirements."

3.Then we couldn't get 25 members to show up for meetings and I was told in 2010 the E-Board Voted to change Article X section C quorum from 25 to 5. So now it reads Article X section C "A quorum of five (5) members must be present at regular and special membership meetings for the transaction of business. A meeting called for the nomination of election of officers shall not be subject to any quorum requirements."

4.and did nothing to Article X section F which reads the same. I'm confused as to Why change the quorum and not make the Representatives ( elected and appointed ) go to the meetings..

My question is: What should I do to in force the Right things is Done? Should I make the Leadership in force Article X section F and change the quorum back to 25 or Higher. We have a Min of 60 elected members in Our Local and not sure on how many appointed. even with a quorum of 5 not all of the elected and appointed go to meeting

Does the executive board have the authority to amend the bylaws? The bylaws would have to clearly state that the board has amendment authority. Authority to amend the bylaws rests (by default) in the hands of the general membership.

I realize this doesn't address most of your concerns; as J.J. pointed out, many of your questions seem to be beyond the purview of RONR.

[wmyounce755]

Thanks J.J. and Trina for letting me know. I'm new to all of this. We use to have a Leadership that would give updates on any little thing that was done. Now it's the members Fought for not caring enough to go to meetings. I'm tried of members running for a position and not following though on what they say they will do. My Leadership seems to do things in the E-board meetings and then at the membership meeting take vote to accept it. My Leadership seems to not care that only 10 to 25 members out of 2200, speak for all 2200 members. Then no one knows about anything till it comes up in talks at lunch or break weeks after.

[J. J.]

Thanks J.J. and Trina for letting me know. I'm new to all of this. We use to have a Leadership that would give updates on any little thing that was done. Now it's the members Fought for not caring enough to go to meetings. I'm tried of members running for a position and not following though on what they say they will do. My Leadership seems to do things in the E-board meetings and then at the membership meeting take vote to accept it. My Leadership seems to not care that only 10 to 25 members out of 2200, speak for all 2200 members. Then no one knows about anything till it comes up in talks at lunch or break weeks after.

There is an ancient parliamententary maxim that exists in isiZulu as "Wa sala. Wa lala." Translated, it means, "You snooze. You lose."

Tell the members tio start showing up at meetings.

[David A Foulkes]

There is an ancient parliamententary maxim that exists in isiZulu as "Wa sala. Wa lala." Translated, it means, "You snooze. You lose."

Parliamententary? You get paid by the syllable, huh?

[J. J.]

Parliamententary? You get paid by the syllable, huh?

No, but my spell check won't work on this site.

[Trina]

Thanks J.J. and Trina for letting me know. I'm new to all of this. We use to have a Leadership that would give updates on any little thing that was done. Now it's the members Fought for not caring enough to go to meetings. I'm tried of members running for a position and not following though on what they say they will do. My Leadership seems to do things in the E-board meetings and then at the membership meeting take vote to accept it. My Leadership seems to not care that only 10 to 25 members out of 2200, speak for all 2200 members. Then no one knows about anything till it comes up in talks at lunch or break weeks after.

The point I was trying to suggest in my earlier post was that if the board did not have specific authority to amend the bylaws (changing the quorum requirements as you described), then the bylaws were not actually amended.

However, for any of this to matter in practice, members of the organization must care enough about the rules to enforce the rules. If hardly anyone shows up at meetings, that won't be easy. On the other hand, with 2200 members, you don't have to get a high percentage of the membership involved to make a difference (given the very low quorum requirement).

[by 'very low' I meant either of the options you mentioned (5 or 25) -- either one is clearly a very small fraction of 2200.]