Ethics code question...

[Guest Jenny]

At a recent meeting, an explanation of the breaking of an item in the code of ethics by a certain board member came up in discussion. When the person asserting that the code had been violated tried to pull out the document explaining the ethics code, another person balked at him, saying 'we don't need that' as he attempted to reference the item in violation, talked over him as he tried to argue the point, and nobody did anything to defend either the idea that the code had, in fact, been violated, nor that the person trying to assert this should read it in a public manner so that it would be made clear that it was violated.

The discussion was cut short by way of the balking board member basically telling the other board member that the discussion was finished, and they were "moving on".

The majority of the board members, even though they had been given the code of ethics agreement, had not signed it, or refused to sign it, and some of them did not even know what was being referenced because they had not thoroughly explored the information when it was given to them.

Do the board members have to sign such an agreement into being in effect or?

What if they refuse to sign it? Does it have to be revamped until they are satisfied with it?

What happens in the meantime while no ethics code is in effect?

[Guest Nancy N.]

You have (at least) two distinct issues going on here:  the role of your ethics code in your organization, and what happened at the meeting.

 

As far as the meeting is concerned:  Assuming that the person who asserted the code violation properly had the floor, he had the right, within limits, to speak without interruption; by the same token, the interrupter was completely out of line.  The chairman should have brought the interrupter up short, and if he didn't, any or every (but not all at once, except sometimes) other member should have raised a point of order about the interrupter's violation of the rules of debate and decorum.  Details might change this reply.

 

As to the other matter:  RONR does say, "certain types of associations may have particular codes of ethics to enforce [p. 643]," but doesn't say more about it (unless I'm overlooking it -- I stopped reading most recently at p. 706).  My own opinion is that an organization can draft whatever ethics code it wants, but unless it is adopted, it has no weight; and unless it is adopted with the statement that members are required to comply with it, it has no teeth.  If, then, it is adopted with the requirement that members abide by its tenets, then the members are required to, and any signing is immaterial.

 

When no ethics code is in effect, "every man does what is right in his own eyes [Henry M. Robert, RONR 11th Ed, p. v (Roman numeral "5"), possibly paraphrasing from the Bible]," as will be observed from the way my biker gang usually adjourns its meetings with a bar fight.

[Josh Martin]

Do the board members have to sign such an agreement into being in effect or?

What if they refuse to sign it? Does it have to be revamped until they are satisfied with it?

What happens in the meantime while no ethics code is in effect?

 

This "Code of Ethics" is in effect if it has been properly adopted. What exactly this entails depends on what consequences there are for violating the Code of Ethics. It is not clear to me whether the Code of Ethics has been properly adopted. If it has not, the Code of Ethics may indeed need to be revamped until enough people are willing to vote for it. Whether individual board members sign it is irrelevant.

 

In the absence of any Code of Ethics or any disciplinary rules, the society would follow the disciplinary procedures in Ch. XX of RONR, which focuses more on the process for discipline than the reasons to discipline a member.

 

"If there is an article on discipline in the bylaws (p. 583, ll. 6–11), it may specify a number of offenses outside meetings for which these penalties can be imposed on a member of the organization. Frequently, such an article provides for their imposition on any member found guilty of conduct described, for example, as "tending to injure the good name of the organization, disturb its well-being, or hamper it in its work." In any society, behavior of this nature is a serious offense properly subject to disciplinary action, whether the bylaws make mention of it or not." (RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 643-644)

 

Now, with all that said, it seems to me that the member making the accusations and the person interrupting him may have been out of order, regardless of whether this Code of Ethics has been properly adopted. It is not proper to simply begin discussing whether a member has violated the Code of Ethics. Depending on the severity of the accusation, the member might be able to make a motion to censure, or he might need to initiate formal disciplinary procedures and keep the details rather vague until an investigative committee can make its report. Of course, it's also not proper to simply start talking while another member has the floor. If another member believed the person making the accusations was out of order, the appropriate course of action was to raise a Point of Order.