Written presentations at membership meeting

[Singing in harmony]

We are having a membership meeting to deal with the board action of voting unanimously, in camera, not to renew a contract. The board then presented a contract, with no signature from the board, designed to force the employee to quit. The chair has sent each b/d an email directing them to have a written copy of their presentation for submission at the meeting.

Do we have to comply? I don't know what my presentation will be until I hear the snow job presented by the rest of the board.

[Singing in harmony]

Can the chair start the meeting with his own presentation of the events leading up to the meeting?

[jstackpo]

Singer asked "Do we have to comply?"

 

Of course not.

 

Just be sure to have enough of your friends with you (board members, all) to sustain your appeal when the chair rules your extemporaneous speech out of order.

 

Good luck.

[jstackpo]

Can the chair start the meeting with his own presentation of the events leading up to the meeting?

He can try.  But see p. 34, lines 7-9 and 32-33.  

 

What is the motion that the meeting has been called to "discuss".  I don't mean the defeat of the "renew contract" motion  --  that has already happened, but what new motion (presumably on the same topic or similar one) will be made at the meeting?

[Guest Nancy N]

...

 

Just be sure to have enough of your friends with you (board members, all) to sustain your appeal when the chair rules your extemporaneous speech out of order.

 

Good luck.

 

It's a membership meeting; why specify only the Original Poster's ("Singer"?) friends who are board members?

 

ANd where does the chair of the board get off ordering the board members around?

 

And what are board members doing all of them giving presentations at a membership meeting?

[Edgar Guest]

And where does the chair of the board get off ordering the board members around?

  

It's the chair of the upcoming membership meeting that's directing the board members to make presentations.

 

And what are board members doing all of them giving presentations at a membership meeting?

 

The chair has directed them to.

 

This meeting has been mentioned in at least two previous threads (e.g. this one).

[jstackpo]

I misread the question.  If this is a general membership meeting, then the Singing OP should be sure all his general member friends are on board with him to support his (presumed) appeal when the chair tries to shut him up by (improperly) ruling that he, the OP, has to have a written "presentation".

 

Note that a written motion is a proper thing for the Chairman to require - p. 40.

[Singing in harmony]

Note: there was NO motion to renew the contract. They just presented him with one.

The meeting is to determine if the board's action not to renew the contract is,

1. Supported by membership, if not,

2. To do whatever is necessary, under Robert's rules, to reinstate the employee with a properly presented contract with signatures from both parties ( Board and employee).

[jstackpo]

It is fair to say that since no one formally objected at the time about the lack of a formal motion, when "they" decided to present the person with a contract, a motion to present the contract was assumed and agreed to without objection, including the terms of the contract.

 

What you need to do in the general membership meeting is move to rescind the board's motion to present a contract.  That is step one.

 

Then, step two depends on how much power the bylaws vest in the Board to do the business of the association. Depending...  you could move to instruct the board to draw up a decent contract for the employee, or a motion to request the board to draw up a decent contract for the employee.

 

See p. 577-578 for important details about the relative powers of the Board and the general membership.  What those details are (and therefore what or how much you can do about the board's actions) will depend entirely on your bylaws.

[Edgar Guest]

Since this is a continuation of an existing topic, it's best to continue that topic rather than start a new one.

 

[Moderator note: The topics have been merged now. --SG]

[Guest Nancy N.]

  

It's the chair of the upcoming membership meeting that's directing the board members to make presentations.

 

 

The chair has directed them to.

 

This meeting has been mentioned in at least two previous threads (e.g. this one).

 

Thank you, especially for the clarifying first point.  I do remember the name of the OP, and in fact remember replying at least once myself; but I have trouble keeping track, and simply don't recall its being posted that the chair is directing anyone to do anything: I would hope I'd remember so remarkably egregious.

 

But the inevitable follow-up question is, what is the chair of any kind of meeting doing ordering anyone around?

[Guest Nancy N.]

Since this is a continuation of an existing topic, it's best to continue that topic rather than start a new one.

 

Singing in harmony, and other semi-regular posters of questions on this, the world's premiere Internet parliamentary forum, might take note that this is the reverse of the much more common procedural request, which is that follow-up questions be made a new topic.  It is the fact that this topic thread, is, indeed, purely continuing an existing discussion that makes the distinction.

 

It's kinda a new one on me.  It's not the first time an OP started a new thread when it would have been better to follow up on the first one (sometimes it's because people new to this website forum don't even know that they actually can follow up, that they can "reply" to their own questions, and to the people who have replied to them) -- maybe it's just Mr. Guest's pithy way of putting it that struck me this way.

 

[Moderator note: The topics have been merged now. --SG]