Guest bigkahuna88 Posted August 31, 2012 at 01:23 PM Report Share Posted August 31, 2012 at 01:23 PM A board member went to register to their child for school and was told they had to sign a contract agreeing to pay registration fees. The board member did not want to sign the contract. They felt they were being bullied into signing something on the spot without talking to their spouse. The board member (who registers their child as a parent mind you - not in their capacity as a board member) did lose their temper but was quickly calmed down by another member.Some members of the board now want to make an example of him by discussing at a public meeting - his behavior. While I feel everyone should hold themself to a high standard, I feel the board is on a slippery slope if they bring up a PARENT'S behavior and publicly chastise them for it.Does this violate ROR or privacy laws...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted August 31, 2012 at 01:29 PM Report Share Posted August 31, 2012 at 01:29 PM As far as RONR is concerned if the Board is considering a motion to censure the Board member or implement disciplinary procedures against him his actions would be fair game (but it wouldn't be proper to just discuss it without proposing the taking of some action). As for privacy laws, you will need to ask a lawyer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trina Posted August 31, 2012 at 01:40 PM Report Share Posted August 31, 2012 at 01:40 PM To elaborate a bit on what Chris H. said, the proper process under rules of parliamentary procedure is to make a motion first, before there is any 'discussion'. If this rule is followed, there is no opportunity "to make an example of him by discussing at a public meeting - his behavior" unless an actual motion to do something is made first. There is really no parliamentary place for idle chat with the (possible) goal of embarrassing the member in question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bigkahuna88 Posted August 31, 2012 at 01:40 PM Report Share Posted August 31, 2012 at 01:40 PM The board is not considering a motion to censure because he didn't violate any policy. Remember, when you register your child, you are a parent. If another parent acted the same way - and they have - can we bring that up in public? Slippery slope no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trina Posted August 31, 2012 at 01:43 PM Report Share Posted August 31, 2012 at 01:43 PM The board is not considering a motion to censure because he didn't violate any policy. Remember, when you register your child, you are a parent. If another parent acted the same way - and they have - can we bring that up in public? Slippery slope no?If no one has the conviction to actually make a motion relevant to what happened, they should keep their griping outside the meeting room.When you say 'in public', what sort of organization is this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted August 31, 2012 at 01:48 PM Report Share Posted August 31, 2012 at 01:48 PM When you say 'in public', what sort of organization is this?If we're not talking about a school board here I'll eat my hat.In any event, all this has little, if anything, to do with RONR. At least not yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trina Posted August 31, 2012 at 01:54 PM Report Share Posted August 31, 2012 at 01:54 PM If we're not talking about a school board here I'll eat my hat.In any event, all this has little, if anything, to do with RONR. At least not yet.I was guessing PTO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bigkahuna88 Posted August 31, 2012 at 01:56 PM Report Share Posted August 31, 2012 at 01:56 PM We are talking about a school board here. By bringing it up in public I do mean at a board meeting. There is a line item on the agenda for discussion of board members behavior toward staff.The problem I have is that the board member was not acting in any official capacity when he registered his child. He is only a parent at that time. Just like if he went in for his child's conferences or had concerns about bullying or programs........At what point does a board members privacy as a parent come in to play? Do we publicly chastize other parents who advocate for their child in a manner that is less than appealing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted August 31, 2012 at 02:11 PM Report Share Posted August 31, 2012 at 02:11 PM At what point does a board members privacy as a parent come in to play? Do we publicly chastise other parents who advocate for their child in a manner that is less than appealing?Those are valid questions but I'm afraid they lie beyond the scope of this humble forum.The parliamentary solution for "boards behaving badly" is to elect new board members. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trina Posted August 31, 2012 at 02:13 PM Report Share Posted August 31, 2012 at 02:13 PM We are talking about a school board here. By bringing it up in public I do mean at a board meeting. There is a line item on the agenda for discussion of board members behavior toward staff.The problem I have is that the board member was not acting in any official capacity when he registered his child. He is only a parent at that time. Just like if he went in for his child's conferences or had concerns about bullying or programs........At what point does a board members privacy as a parent come in to play? Do we publicly chastize other parents who advocate for their child in a manner that is less than appealing?Presumably the school board has no status to 'publicly chastize' non-board-member parents. At least I would hope they don't.If the body has authority to discipline one of its own member for outside-of-meeting behavior, then it has that authority. Whether it's a good idea to exercise such authority in this situation is a decision that really has nothing to do with rules of parliamentary procedure (the focus of this forum).In any case, if the rule of starting with a motion (and this is a rule of parliamentary procedure) is followed, there is much less chance of wandering off into discussion for the sake of discussion.You do say that there is "a line item on the agenda for discussion of board members behavior toward staff." That's different than "a line item to discuss reprimanding Jane Doe for her inappropriate tirade in the main office on August 24." But still, I have to wonder what motion might frame the discussion about board members' behavior toward staff. Thinking in terms of motions really does help clarify things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted August 31, 2012 at 02:16 PM Report Share Posted August 31, 2012 at 02:16 PM We are talking about a school board here. By bringing it up in public I do mean at a board meeting. There is a line item on the agenda for discussion of board members behavior toward staff.The problem I have is that the board member was not acting in any official capacity when he registered his child. He is only a parent at that time. Just like if he went in for his child's conferences or had concerns about bullying or programs........At what point does a board members privacy as a parent come in to play? Do we publicly chastize other parents who advocate for their child in a manner that is less than appealing?RONR has nothing to say about the point at which a board member's privacy as a parent comes into play, nor whether or not we (whoever "we" are) publicly chastise other parents who advocate for their child in a manner that is less than appealing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted August 31, 2012 at 02:27 PM Report Share Posted August 31, 2012 at 02:27 PM In any case, if the rule of starting with a motion (and this is a rule of parliamentary procedure) is followed, there is much less chance of wandering off into discussion for the sake of discussion.Though, of course, that rule is relaxed at meetings of "small" boards where "informal discussion of a subject is permitted while no motion is pending" (p.488). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trina Posted August 31, 2012 at 02:31 PM Report Share Posted August 31, 2012 at 02:31 PM Though, of course, that rule is relaxed at meetings of "small" boards where "informal discussion of a subject is permitted while no motion is pending" (p.488).Yes, you're right of course. My thought, though, is that 'motion first' is still a useful guideline, if the group finds itself drifting about in aimless discussion, or, worse yet, actually scheduling meeting time to be devoted to aimless discussion -- as Guest_Kahuna seems to describe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sMargaret Posted August 31, 2012 at 02:36 PM Report Share Posted August 31, 2012 at 02:36 PM Some members of the board now want to make an example of him by discussing at a public meeting - his behavior. While I feel everyone should hold themself to a high standard, I feel the board is on a slippery slope if they bring up a PARENT'S behavior and publicly chastise them for it.Assuming that this is a school board, and that the school that the child is registered at is a school that the school board is in charge of, what you have here is not the conduct of a parent so much as the conduct of a board member. A board member should not be throwing hissy fits in front of school board employees when told about a policy for all parents. What I would suggest, in keeping with RONR, is having the board put into place a code of conduct for board members. This code of conflict would have procedures for what happens if the code is breached.(sheesh, this is showing me 7 new replies! and now it's hidden them!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trina Posted August 31, 2012 at 02:41 PM Report Share Posted August 31, 2012 at 02:41 PM Assuming that this is a school board, and that the school that the child is registered at is a school that the school board is in charge of, what you have here is not the conduct of a parent so much as the conduct of a board member. A board member should not be throwing hissy fits in front of school board employees when told about a policy for all parents.What I would suggest, in keeping with RONR, is having the board put into place a code of conduct for board members. This code of conflict would have procedures for what happens if the code is breached.(sheesh, this is showing me 7 new replies! and now it's hidden them!)See -- a motion to do something! And it isn't a motion to censure the hypothetical Jane Doe (actually, John Doe, now that I've re-read Kahuna's posts).I like the 'code of conflict' by the way -- sounds like rules of chivalry, for hissy fits . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted August 31, 2012 at 05:42 PM Report Share Posted August 31, 2012 at 05:42 PM Assuming that this is a school board, and that the school that the child is registered at is a school that the school board is in charge of, what you have here is not the conduct of a parent so much as the conduct of a board member.But --- much as a board cannot act as a board except at a Board meeting, and Board members present at a general membership meeting are there not as Board officers but as general members (assuming they are, that is) --- so is everything this man does subject to Board discipline because he's a board member? If he yells at a mechanic who tried to overcharge him on car repairs, or a cashier who gives him incorrect change, or a restaurant server who brings his eggs runny and his toast burnt? When is he just John Doe, parent of little Billy Doe, and feeling like he's being taken advantage of by "the system" without fear of running afoul of The Board? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sMargaret Posted August 31, 2012 at 05:59 PM Report Share Posted August 31, 2012 at 05:59 PM But --- much as a board cannot act as a board except at a Board meeting, and Board members present at a general membership meeting are there not as Board officers but as general members (assuming they are, that is) --- so is everything this man does subject to Board discipline because he's a board member? I think that is up to the board to decide upon, but will note that there is a very big difference between yelling at a mechanic who is unaffiliated with the school system, and yelling at an employee of your very own board. I have no idea if the person who caused this issue identified themselves as a school board member or not, while throwing this fit, which should also make a difference.My local school board has a policy on rights and responsibilities of trustees, and I'll quote a bit of it here:3.5 Not use the schools or any part of the school program for their own personal advantage or for the advantage of their friends. They will do everything possible to maintain the integrity, confidence and dignity of the office of school trustee, and they will resist every temptation and outside pressure to use their positions as trustees to benefit either themselves or any other individual or agency.3.6 Remember at all times that as individuals they have no legal authority outside the meetings of the Board, unless the Board has so delegated. Theirrelationships with school staff, the local citizenry and the media will be conducted on the basis of this fact.As a RONR reference, page 647, "an organization or assembly has the ultimate right to make and enforce its own rules, and to require that its members refrain from conduct injurious to the organization or its purposes". Also, "code of conflict" - what a Freudian typo! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted August 31, 2012 at 06:07 PM Report Share Posted August 31, 2012 at 06:07 PM I think that is up to the board to decide upon, but will note that there is a very big difference between yelling at a mechanic who is unaffiliated with the school system, and yelling at an employee of your very own board. I have no idea if the person who caused this issue identified themselves as a school board member or not, while throwing this fit, which should also make a difference.My local school board has a policy on rights and responsibilities of trustees, and I'll quote a bit of it here:Okay, but all of this irrelevant chat will need to end here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.