"Unbecoming Conduct": too vague a term to justify discipline?

[Guest Guest]

Hi everyone;

Thanks for letting me post here!

Our Association (fishing club) By-Laws provide for expulsion upon "Unsportsmanlike Conduct" and "Unbecoming Conduct". The By-Laws contain no definitions or explanations whatsoever for these two terms.

Does RONR specify that actions which result in discipline should be spelled out exactly....or does RONR say the vague terms in our By-Laws are okay?

Thanks again everyone.

[Josh Martin]

Our Association (fishing club) By-Laws provide for expulsion upon "Unsportsmanlike Conduct" and "Unbecoming Conduct". The By-Laws contain no definitions or explanations whatsoever for these two terms.

Does RONR specify that actions which result in discipline should be spelled out exactly....or does RONR say the vague terms in our By-Laws are okay?

Either is acceptable, and there are advantages and disadvantages to each. It is ultimately up to the society to determine how vague or specific to make its language for offenses warranting discipline.

[Steven Britton]

What Robert's states is when an ambiguity exists, its up to the assembly to decide on the interpretation of its own bylaws.

Familiarize yourself with chapter 20. pp. 643 - 669. (Discipline)

Best wishes.

[Guest Guest]

Okay guys. Thanks very much!

[Guest Guest]

Steven Britton;

I'll try to get the book.

How does membership decide? Do they sit down and write out what is and isn't unbecoming conduct? Or do they wait till the Executive Committee (EC) recommends expulsion of a member (as our bylaws provide) and then decide whether or not the accused is guilty of unbecoming conduct?

Our bylaws state that when one member files charges against another member...the Executive Committee (EC) will investigate those charges and may or may not recommend to the membership at large (via notice sent to all members) that a vote be held to expel/not expel the member that was complained against.

In such a case it seems the EC itself is deciding what is/isn't unbecoming conduct. Would you agree? Disagree with my contention here?

We now, almost, have such a case. Here it is. Member A brought copies of articles from accredited news sources (MSNBC, ABC, Seattle Times, and some internet news sites) detailing an unreported rise in horrific black-on-white crimes. The member shared these articles with his friends on club property.

Member Z then filed a written complaint with the Executive Committee against Member A, alleging that member A was racist. The Executive Committee - whom doesn't like Member A because Member A seems to have caught the EC redhanded making unauthorized payments of club funds - is now considering recommending to the membership at large that Member A be expelled.

At what point does the membership at large decide what is/isn't unbecoming conduct? Before someone is charged or after they're charged?

Seems to me that absent a definition of unbecoming conduct....anyone that the EC or membership simply doesn't like can be expelled for no real good reason.

[Guest Edgar]

Seems to me that absent a definition of unbecoming conduct....anyone that the EC or membership simply doesn't like can be expelled for no real good reason.

Seems that way to me too. But if enough members want a member expelled, why would the reason have to be a "real good" one in the first place?

Think of "unbecoming conduct" in the way that Justice Potter Stewart thought of hard-core pornography: "I'll know it when I see it".

[Steven Britton]

It would be a good to get the book. No, I would agree with what Edgar has said in his post, "I'll know it when I see it."

But, normally there is a component to a fair discipline process that includes some sort of hearing or trial. It may be a good idea for Mr. A to contact NAP or AIP for a referral to a credentialed parliamentarian.