Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums
jstackpo

Chapter XX vs. Discipline Rules in Bylaws

Recommended Posts

If  bylaws contain some (probably inadequate, but what can you do) discipline procedure rules, do those rules...

 

Completely Replace RONR Chapter XX?  (i.e., just ignore Chapter XX)

 

or

 

Replace (supersede) only those Chapter XX rules that are directly in conflict with the specific bylaw rules?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If  bylaws contain some (probably inadequate, but what can you do) discipline procedure rules, do those rules...

 

Completely Replace RONR Chapter XX?  (i.e., just ignore Chapter XX)

 

or

 

Replace (supersede) only those Chapter XX rules that are directly in conflict with the specific bylaw rules?

 

Haven't we discussed this before?

 

I still like the answer I gave in Post #2 of that thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, I think that the conduct of disciplinary action is a rule in the nature of a rule of order.  As such, it is governed by the parliamentary authority.

 

A bylaw or special rule (usually, and in this case) can modify those rules in the nature of a rule of order found in the parliamentary authority.  For example, a special rule saying "No main motion shall be supressed for the duration of the session except by a two-thirds vote," would not prohibit the motion Postpone Indefinitely from being made.  It would change the vote required to a two-thirds vote to adopt a motion postponing a motion indefinitely (and a motion to postpone it to the next session, or to refer it a committee after final adjournment), but not the method.

 

A rule that stated, for example, "A member may be expelled from membership by a majority vote," and no attitional rules, other than the rule establishing RONR  as the parliamentary authority, would remove the 2/3 vote requirement for expulsion.  It would not remove the need for a trial or for notice, nor would it change the requirement the vote be taken by ballot.

 

Likewise a rule that said, "A member may be suspended from membership without previous notice by the assembly," would not change the voting requirement, nor would it preclude a trial.

 

A rule that said, "A member may be disciplined upon motion by the assembly," would remove the need to hold a trial, but not remove the need for actual charges to be required, nor notice of those charges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My answer is "Replace (supersede) only those Chapter XX rules that are directly in conflict with the specific bylaw rules?"  RONR (11th ed.), p. 16, ll. 21-27.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...