Point of Order question

[Guest regrets]

I have read that a board member is obligated to call a Point Of Order motion if a rule has been broken.

Has a rule been broken when a board member does not call Point of Order?

 

Let's say during debate someone keeps doing something like addressing someone directly, commenting on something that has nothing to do with the motion pending, or begins discussing the motives of the person who made the motion, or making personal attacks towards another members, or interrupting them, speaking over them...

[George Mervosh]

I have read that a board member is obligated to call a Point Of Order motion if a rule has been broken.

Has a rule been broken when a board member does not call Point of Order?

 

Let's say during debate someone keeps doing something like addressing someone directly, commenting on something that has nothing to do with the motion pending, or begins discussing the motives of the person who made the motion, or making personal attacks towards another members, or interrupting them, speaking over them...

 

There's no requirement for a member to raise a point of order, but it's the duty of the presiding officer to protect the assembly from these things.  Why isn't he taking action?

[Guest regrets]

There's no requirement for a member to raise a point of order, but it's the duty of the presiding officer to protect the assembly from these things.  Why isn't he taking action?

The thing is this...

He is the only one at the moment who really knows Robert's Rules. No one has ever taught the others and they are not motivated to do so for themselves. He has expressed that people will get angry if rules are thrust upon them that they do not understand, and that they should not be required to learn Robert's Rules because they are volunteers and that is asking too much.

I am learning them now, and intend to use what I have learned, but still trying to figure out how to do so in a room full of people who might be either confused or angry when that happens.

[jstackpo]

Get a few copies (or have the board get (and pay) for them) of RONRIB:

"Roberts Rules of Order Newly Revised In Brief", Updated Second Edition (Da Capo Press, Perseus Books Group, 2011). It is a splendid summary of all the rules you will really need in all but the most exceptional situations. And only $7.50! You can read it in an evening. Get both RONRIB and RONR (scroll down) at this link. Or in your local bookstore.

 

Then give one to the Chairman for a "post-Easter" (or any other good reason) gift.

[Edgar Guest]

He has expressed that people will get angry if rules are thrust upon them that they do not understand, and that they should not be required to learn Robert's Rules because they are volunteers and that is asking too much.

 

Parliamentary procedure isn't rocket science. Nor is it brain surgery.

 

You've probably learned (or should have learned) most of what you need to know about parliamentary procedure in kindergarten. Take turns. Play fair. Don't let the big kid (i.e. the majority) pick on the little kid (i.e. the minority).

 

And if something stinks, it's probably rotten. So say something.

[Guest regrets]

Get a few copies (or have the board get (and pay) for them) of RONRIB:

"Roberts Rules of Order Newly Revised In Brief", Updated Second Edition (Da Capo Press, Perseus Books Group, 2011). It is a splendid summary of all the rules you will really need in all but the most exceptional situations. And only $7.50! You can read it in an evening. Get both RONRIB and RONR (scroll down) at this link. Or in your local bookstore.

 

Then give one to the Chairman for a "post-Easter" (or any other good reason) gift.

Everyone has been given the book, but no one seems to care to do anything different than they have always done it, which is "kind of" using Robert's Rules.

[jstackpo]

I suppose "kind of" is better than total anarchy. 

 

If everybody is  getting on just fine with no (or few) arguments, you don't need the fine points of procedure.  But hold the rules in reserve for when a real fight breaks out.

 

And hold an "I told you so!" or two in reserve....

[Guest regrets]

I suppose "kind of" is better than total anarchy. 

 

If everybody is  getting on just fine with no (or few) arguments, you don't need the fine points of procedure.  But hold the rules in reserve for when a real fight breaks out.

 

And hold an "I told you so!" or two in reserve....

When I say "kind of" I mean people know what a "second" is and how to say "Aye" when voting.

In five months time I have only heard one person call point of order to the president at the time, and the person who called it  had to explain to her what a point of order was.

When someone tried to amend a monition the person who made the original one shouted out "You can't do that!! That was MY motion!! You can't amend it!"

[Edgar Guest]

When someone tried to amend a monition the person who made the original one shouted out "You can't do that!! That was MY motion!! You can't amend it!"

 

As Mr. Mervosh asked, what is the presiding officer doing when this happens?

 

Perhaps you need a new president. Or perhaps you need to stop wasting your time attending meetings. Life's too short.

[Guest regrets]

As Mr. Mervosh asked, what is the presiding officer doing when this happens?

 

Perhaps you need a new president. Or perhaps you need to stop wasting your time attending meetings. Life's too short.

The person who made the point of order at that meeting a few months ago is now the president.

The person who is now vice president asked the president at the last meeting: "Are you the parlimarian?" I didn't know what she meant until I realized she meant "Parlimentarian". 

The person who is now vice president says out loud "Robert's Rules!" while another person is speaking whenever she thinks something is happening that might be against a rule she cannot reference.

Honestly there are no other people on this board that are qualified to be President. It's very discouraging.

This group gets highly offended whenever anyone attempts to suggest they might not know what they are talking about.

They have all been board members for several years but have never followed RR in any consistent way. 

There is also a regular bully/dominator/sadist on the board who interrupts anyone, or speaks over them..even does this with the president.

 

I think one of the issues is that they are all "nice" people who do not want to offend each other. They do not want to call a point of order in case it is seen as someone being nit-pickity. I would say it's a bit of a depressing situation.

And yeah I could stop attending meetings, but I am on the board now too… and am very discouraged by what I've seen so far.

[George Mervosh]

I concur with Dr. Stackpole's advice about everyone on your board getting the current edition of RONR In Brief.  At $7. a piece or so it's a game changer for an assembly that really is clueless about the rules in RONR.  If you don't learn anything more than what's in RONRIB you'll still be miles ahead of where you are now.

[Gary Novosielski]

I have read that a board member is obligated to call a Point Of Order motion if a rule has been broken.

Has a rule been broken when a board member does not call Point of Order?

 

Let's say during debate someone keeps doing something like addressing someone directly, commenting on something that has nothing to do with the motion pending, or begins discussing the motives of the person who made the motion, or making personal attacks towards another members, or interrupting them, speaking over them...

 

No--in the sense that you could not raise a point of order that Mr. jones, who should have raised a point of order, failed to do so.  If he should have, so should you.  Everyone shares in the responsibility to see that the rules are adhered to, but the primary responsibility is the chair's.

 

I'd like to think that if some members raised points of order regarding those breaches of decorum, the chair would wake up and start enforcing them without prompting.  This is usually a sign that the chair is ignorant of the rules, and while that may be excusable for some, it's the chair's duty to preside according to the rules, which sorta requires knowing what they are.

 

RONRIB is a bargain.

[Guest Regrets]

I've seen advice that one who knows more about RR than that next person should not flaunt their knowledge, or use it as a weapon.

Does anyone have advice about how to use it more closely without making people be unhappy about what they will surely see as 'new' rules being imposed?

[Shmuel Gerber]

I've seen advice that one who knows more about RR than that next person should not flaunt their knowledge, or use it as a weapon.

Does anyone have advice about how to use it more closely without making people be unhappy about what they will surely see as 'new' rules being imposed?

 

Speak to the president before the next meeting and ask him to take two minutes at the meeting to remind members that there are rules for decorum in debate, to summarize the most important ones, to say that he has received complaints that the board members have been frequently violating those rules and that the chair will from this point on be reminding the board members to stick to those rules -- interrupting a speech, if necessary -- whenever they fail to do so, and that he welcomes any board member to raise a point of order if the chair forgets to enforce these rules.

 

Edited to add: I am assuming that these are board meetings we are talking about. If they are membership meetings, then of course any member, not just board members, can raise a point of order,

[Guest Regrets]

Speak to the president before the next meeting and ask him to take two minutes at the meeting to remind members that there are rules for decorum in debate, to summarize the most important ones, to say that he has received complaints that the board members have been frequently violating those rules and that the chair will from this point on be reminding the board members to stick to those rules -- interrupting a speech, if necessary -- whenever they fail to do so, and that he welcomes any board member to raise a point of order if the chair forgets to enforce these rules.

Edited to add: I am assuming that these are board meetings we are talking about. If they are membership meetings, then of course any member, not just board members, can raise a point of order,

They are board meetings.

[Transpower]

You could move to bring in a parliamentarian to train the members of the board in proper procedure!

[Guest Regrets]

You could move to bring in a parliamentarian to train the members of the board in proper procedure!

I like this idea.

[Gary Novosielski]

I like this idea.

 

And without fear of contradiction I suggest that the parliamentarians like it too.

[Dan Honemann]

And without fear of contradiction I suggest that the parliamentarians like it too.

 

Even the parliamentarians who aren't parliamentarians.