Guest Lindsey Posted April 13, 2015 at 04:11 PM Report Share Posted April 13, 2015 at 04:11 PM Good morning, We have our state annual conference coming up next month and I have a question pertaining to delegates and non-delegates. At our nominations and elections night, we nominate six people to attend annual conference; three are delegates and three are non-delegates. The non-delegates would sit in if something happened to one of the delegates and we have had instances where delegates got sick the night before or were late attending conference where we have had to seat an alternate. It is announced on election night that anyone accepting the nomination would attend conference, but our standing rules state that only delegates will be reimbursed; alternates would be reimbursed if they had to be seated. It does not state anywhere in the bylaws or standing rules that delegates and alternate delegates MUST attend conference, even though that is announced at the time of nominations. So now, our Governor has told the alternate delegates that they don't have to attend conference ... this is the first time this has happened ever or for at least as long as I've been a member which is over 15 years. Is there is anything in Roberts Rules that says delegates and alternates MUST attend conference? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks so much! Lindsey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgar Guest Posted April 13, 2015 at 04:19 PM Report Share Posted April 13, 2015 at 04:19 PM Is there is anything in Roberts Rules that says delegates and alternates MUST attend conference? Well, I think it's understood that delegates should attend the conference. Otherwise they shouldn't have accepted the position. Whether the "on call" alternates should attend would depend on how far away the conference is (and, perhaps, how long it lasts). If it's in the same town I suppose they can stay at home and wait by the phone. If it's across the country they'll have to decide whether the trip is worth taking on the outside chance that a delegate will get sick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted April 13, 2015 at 04:46 PM Report Share Posted April 13, 2015 at 04:46 PM Good morning, We have our state annual conference coming up next month and I have a question pertaining to delegates and non-delegates. At our nominations and elections night, we nominate six people to attend annual conference; three are delegates and three are non-delegates. The non-delegates would sit in if something happened to one of the delegates and we have had instances where delegates got sick the night before or were late attending conference where we have had to seat an alternate. It is announced on election night that anyone accepting the nomination would attend conference, but our standing rules state that only delegates will be reimbursed; alternates would be reimbursed if they had to be seated. It does not state anywhere in the bylaws or standing rules that delegates and alternate delegates MUST attend conference, even though that is announced at the time of nominations. So now, our Governor has told the alternate delegates that they don't have to attend conference ... this is the first time this has happened ever or for at least as long as I've been a member which is over 15 years. Is there is anything in Roberts Rules that says delegates and alternates MUST attend conference? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks so much! Lindsey "When a member of a constituent unit has accepted election as a delegate, he has the obligation to attend the convention, with such expense allowance as the unit may provide; he should not leave it to an alternate to serve in his place except for serious reason. At the convention, the delegate has the duty to be present at the business meetings, and to be prepared on returning from the convention to present to his unit an information report of what transpired. A delegate is free to vote as he sees fit on questions at the convention, except as his constituent unit may have instructed him in regard to particular matters scheduled for consideration." RONR (11th ed.), p. 605 The society may also give specific instructions to its delegates or alternates. One person alone has no powers in this regard under the rules in RONR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lindsey Posted April 13, 2015 at 05:44 PM Report Share Posted April 13, 2015 at 05:44 PM George .. thanks for your reply. My question has to do more with the alternate delegates. We know that the delegates have to go, but do the alternate delegates need to abide by the same passage you quoted above? Thanks. Lindsey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted April 13, 2015 at 06:07 PM Report Share Posted April 13, 2015 at 06:07 PM George .. thanks for your reply. My question has to do more with the alternate delegates. We know that the delegates have to go, but do the alternate delegates need to abide by the same passage you quoted above? Thanks. Lindsey Yes, I think so. which is why I quoted it. Alternates are elected under the same rules, must meet the same requirements as a delegate to hold the position, and I think it can fairly be stated that the expectations for attendance are the same. Their whole purpose is to be there just in case. Even if there is disagreement on that point, one person (your Governor) cannot tell them not to attend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted April 13, 2015 at 06:25 PM Report Share Posted April 13, 2015 at 06:25 PM Yes, I think so. which is why I quoted it. Alternates are elected under the same rules, must meet the same requirements as a delegate to hold the position, and I think it can fairly be stated that the expectations for attendance are the same. Their whole purpose is to be there just in case. Even if there is disagreement on that point, one person (your Governor) cannot tell them not to attend.I'm not sure I agree that the above passage necessarily requires alternates to attend the convention. I certainly have seen organizations where the alternates are always expected to attend the convention, but I have also seen organizations where the alternates are only expected to attend if a delegate drops out prior to the convention.With that said, the information provided by the original poster seems to suggest that, in this organization, the alternates have been expected to attend the convention, and I think this should continue unless and until the assembly adopts a motion providing otherwise. I certainly agree that the Governor has no authority to make that decision on his own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted April 13, 2015 at 06:46 PM Report Share Posted April 13, 2015 at 06:46 PM I'm not sure I agree that the above passage necessarily requires alternates to attend the convention. I certainly have seen organizations where the alternates are always expected to attend the convention, but I have also seen organizations where the alternates are only expected to attend if a delegate drops out prior to the convention.With that said, the information provided by the original poster seems to suggest that, in this organization, the alternates have been expected to attend the convention, and I think this should continue unless and until the assembly adopts a motion providing otherwise. I certainly agree that the Governor has no authority to make that decision on his own. Ok, well said, and yes, she advises it's always announced at nominations and the expectations are the same for both delegates and alternates in her organization at this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Lages Posted April 13, 2015 at 07:56 PM Report Share Posted April 13, 2015 at 07:56 PM I certainly hope that the election ballot specifies which positions are for delegate and which are for alternate delegate (I'm sure it's not intentional, but please don't call them non-delegates). I suppose that if someone accepts election as an alternate delegate, the possible financial obligations are understood, but it seems rather harsh for the society to demand that the alternate delegates pay their own way, with no guarantee that they will even be able to carry out the alternate delegate duties. I guess this doesn't quite fit the RONR proscription against assessing members anything beyond dues unless it is specified in the bylaws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shmuel Gerber Posted April 14, 2015 at 03:05 PM Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 at 03:05 PM It does not state anywhere in the bylaws or standing rules that delegates and alternate delegates MUST attend conference, even though that is announced at the time of nominations. So now, our Governor has told the alternate delegates that they don't have to attend conference ... this is the first time this has happened ever or for at least as long as I've been a member which is over 15 years. Is there is anything in Roberts Rules that says delegates and alternates MUST attend conference? I'm not sure I agree that the above passage necessarily requires alternates to attend the convention. I certainly have seen organizations where the alternates are always expected to attend the convention, but I have also seen organizations where the alternates are only expected to attend if a delegate drops out prior to the convention.With that said, the information provided by the original poster seems to suggest that, in this organization, the alternates have been expected to attend the convention, and I think this should continue unless and until the assembly adopts a motion providing otherwise. I certainly agree that the Governor has no authority to make that decision on his own. Who said that the governor made any decision? It would appear that he or she simply informed the alternates that there is no rule compelling them to attend unless they will be needed to take the place of a delegate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted April 14, 2015 at 05:39 PM Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 at 05:39 PM Who said that the governor made any decision? It would appear that he or she simply informed the alternates that there is no rule compelling them to attend unless they will be needed to take the place of a delegate.So the assembly's previous expectations in this regard and the announcement at the time of the election (which was not objected to) are of no consequence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shmuel Gerber Posted April 15, 2015 at 01:23 AM Report Share Posted April 15, 2015 at 01:23 AM So the assembly's previous expectations in this regard and the announcement at the time of the election (which was not objected to) are of no consequence? All sorts of announcements are made at meetings, but unless this condition was stated as part of the actual motion to elect, I don't think it creates a rule or an obligation. I'm not saying that the members don't have an expectation that alternates will attend the conference, but if there is no actual rule requiring them to (and the rule regarding reimbursements seems to carry a different expectation), I don't see a problem with an officer telling them that fact. As far as RONR is concerned, I don't think that all the alternates have the same obligation as the delegates to attend, especially if the alternates are not paired with particular delegates (and if the alternates have no other duties to perform at the conference aside from being voting members of the assembly). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.