Guest Michael Posted July 12, 2012 at 05:40 PM Report Share Posted July 12, 2012 at 05:40 PM My original question was...It is my understanding that the removal of a member from the organization requires 2/3rd of the voting body. Therefore putting the decision with the majority rule. (Majority rule means voting body of Society.)Tim Wynn's response was...It requires a two-thirds vote, and it also requires a trial, if the offense occurred elsewhere than in a meeting.clarification question...it requires two-thirds vote of what body of people? The trial committee or the Society or both? The way i read Art. VIII section 75 is the Trial Committee votes on punishment (expel member for example) by 2/3rd vote and then reads punishment to Society who then votes (requiring 2/3rd's) to enforce punishment or not.This section is miss-leading and implies the Trial committee has the last say in deciding by 2/3rd vote to enforce punishment (expel member) and Society has no voting rights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted July 12, 2012 at 05:49 PM Report Share Posted July 12, 2012 at 05:49 PM My original question was...It is my understanding that the removal of a member from the organization requires 2/3rd of the voting body. Therefore putting the decision with the majority rule. (Majority rule means voting body of Society.)Tim Wynn's response was...It requires a two-thirds vote, and it also requires a trial, if the offense occurred elsewhere than in a meeting.clarification question...it requires two-thirds vote of what body of people? The trial committee or the Society or both? The way i read Art. VIII section 75 is the Trial Committee votes on punishment (expel member for example) by 2/3rd vote and then reads punishment to Society who then votes (requiring 2/3rd's) to enforce punishment or not.This section is miss-leading and implies the Trial committee has the last say in deciding by 2/3rd vote to enforce punishment (expel member) and Society has no voting rights.First, it should be understood that a two-thirds vote is different than a vote of two thirds of the membership of a particular body, the primary difference being that abstentions have no effect on a two-thirds vote, which is to say that if the body has 100 members, a vote of 2-1, with 97 members choosing not to vote, is sufficient to adopt a motion requiring a two-thirds vote, though it falls well short of two thirds of the membership. Second, since your bylaws outline a disciplinary procedure, that procedure supersedes RONR and governs the process. So, the answer will be found in your bylaws, not in RONR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted July 12, 2012 at 06:13 PM Report Share Posted July 12, 2012 at 06:13 PM The way i read Art. VIII section 75 . . .Third, you are apparently referring to Article XIII (not VIII) of the 1919 (4th edition). This forum focuses its attention on the current (11th) edition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Michael Posted July 12, 2012 at 07:18 PM Report Share Posted July 12, 2012 at 07:18 PM Tim,Thank you for the response. I understand the 2/3rd's difference.Assuming we do not have anything defined in our bylaws. Help me understand how to interperit what is outlined in Article XIII (corrected my typo) section 75 as to what body has the final decision to decide (by 2/3rd vote) punishment...the trial committe or the society? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trina Posted July 12, 2012 at 07:34 PM Report Share Posted July 12, 2012 at 07:34 PM Tim,Thank you for the response. I understand the 2/3rd's difference.Assuming we do not have anything defined in our bylaws. Help me understand how to interperit what is outlined in Article XIII (corrected my typo) section 75 as to what body has the final decision to decide (by 2/3rd vote) punishment...the trial committe or the society?Do your bylaws explicitly adopt the 1919 edition (see Edgar's post above) as your parliamentary authority? You're not likely to get a rousing discussion going on this RONR forum, regarding proper interpretation of the almost-100-year-old edition of the rules (especially if your organization, as is likely, is really supposed to be using the current edition). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted July 12, 2012 at 07:53 PM Report Share Posted July 12, 2012 at 07:53 PM Tim,Thank you for the response. I understand the 2/3rd's difference.Assuming we do not have anything defined in our bylaws. Help me understand how to interperit what is outlined in Article XIII (corrected my typo) section 75 as to what body has the final decision to decide (by 2/3rd vote) punishment...the trial committe or the society?If you are referring to the fourth edition of RONR, as Inspector Edgar says, it carries no weight if you have adopted the current edition as you parliamentary authority. Being less of a detective, I assumed you were referring to your bylaws.The authority of a society is vested in its assembly, unless otherwise delegated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted July 12, 2012 at 10:28 PM Report Share Posted July 12, 2012 at 10:28 PM Tim,Thank you for the response. I understand the 2/3rd's difference.Assuming we do not have anything defined in our bylaws. Help me understand how to interperit what is outlined in Article XIII (corrected my typo) section 75 as to what body has the final decision to decide (by 2/3rd vote) punishment...the trial committe or the society?First off, as has been noted several times, you are looking at a very old edition of RONR, which may explain why the text is unclear. In the current (11th) edition, information on disciplinary procedures can be found in Section 63.Secondly, it is not a given that the society will use a trial committee. Some societies (especially larger ones) use a trial committee to conduct the trial and make a recommendation to the society. In other societies, the society itself conducts the trial. So the answer to your question depends on whether the society uses a trial committee. Assuming the society has no rule on the subject, the society shall decide such details in the resolution establishing the trial based on the recommendation from the investigative committee. (RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 658-661)If the society uses a trial committee, then the trial committee shall conduct the trial and determine whether the member is to be found guilty of the charges and specifications and, if he is found guilty of at least one charge and specification, what penalty should be imposed. A 2/3 vote is required to impose the penalty of expulsion. The trial committee puts all of this into its recommendation to the society, and at this point a majority is sufficient for the assembly's decisions. The society may choose to lessen the penalty recommended by the trial committee, but it may not increase the penalty. Therefore, expulsion is not an option unless the trial committee recommends it.If the society does not use a trial committee, then the assembly shall conduct the trial and determine whether the member is to be found guilty of the charges and specifications and, if he is found guilty of at least one charge and specification, what penalty should be imposed. A 2/3 vote is required to impose the penalty of expulsion.If your society really is contemplating disciplinary actions under RONR it is crucial that you get a current copy of the book and it may be advisable to consult a professional parliamentarian off-forum for more detailed discussion, as the procedures involved are lengthy, complex, and quite likely to get the society in trouble if it screws up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.