Guest Jay Posted December 7, 2017 at 04:33 PM Report Share Posted December 7, 2017 at 04:33 PM A board member got into a fist fight with another member. The regular member is up on charges from the board. Is the board member allowed to participate in the discussion and allowed to vote on the penalty? It seems like if the board member was allowed to be at the meeting and allowed vote, it would intimidate others on how they vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Katz Posted December 7, 2017 at 05:00 PM Report Share Posted December 7, 2017 at 05:00 PM If the board member isn't disciplined, they haven't lost their rights to full participation in the assembly (assuming the board member is also a member). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted December 7, 2017 at 07:48 PM Report Share Posted December 7, 2017 at 07:48 PM (edited) 22 hours ago, Guest Jay said: A board member got into a fist fight with another member. The regular member is up on charges from the board. Is the board member allowed to participate in the discussion and allowed to vote on the penalty? It seems like if the board member was allowed to be at the meeting and allowed vote, it would intimidate others on how they vote. If the disciplinary proceedings in question are following the full, formal disciplinary procedures in Section 63 of RONR, which are required if the bylaws provide that officers shall serve for a fixed term, or shall serve “and until their successors are elected,” the board member is permitted to be present during the trial itself, as he has a right to present his defense, but he must leave after the trial is concluded and may not be present for the discussion and vote on the question of guilt or the penalty. On the other hand, if the less formal disciplinary proceedings which involve a simple motion to remove the member, which are permitted if the bylaws provide that officers shall serve “or until their successors are elected,” then the accused has a right to be present throughout the entire proceedings. The accused should not vote, since he has an interest not in common with other members but he retains the right to do so. If the organization has customized disciplinary procedures in its bylaws, then this will be a question of bylaws interpretation, but it would generally be understood that the member has a right to attend unless the bylaws provide otherwise. The accused should not vote, since he has an interest not in common with other members but he retains the right to do so. See FAQ #20 for more information. Another important question - does the board elect its own members? If they are not, then the electing body (the general membership?) would be the body with the power to charge and try the member, unless the bylaws grant the board this authority. EDIT: Ignore all of this. I thought the board member was the one being disciplined. See my post below. Edited December 8, 2017 at 03:05 PM by Josh Martin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Katz Posted December 8, 2017 at 12:07 AM Report Share Posted December 8, 2017 at 12:07 AM 4 hours ago, Josh Martin said: If the disciplinary proceedings in question are following the full, formal disciplinary procedures in Section 63 of RONR, which are required if the bylaws provide that officers shall serve for a fixed term, or shall serve “and until their successors are elected,” the board member is permitted to be present during the trial itself, as he has a right to present his defense, but he must leave after the trial is concluded and may not be present for the discussion and vote on the question of guilt or the penalty. It seems to me that the board member is not being brought up on charges: 7 hours ago, Guest Jay said: The regular member is up on charges from the board. Although that raises another question for me: what is this "charges from the board" business? Do your bylaws permit the board to handle discipline? If not, discipline is handled by the membership, not the board. I also question why the board member isn't being brought up on charges, since there's at least some circumstantial evidence here that he's not some innocent victim. Of course, propensity cannot be used to infer action in accordance in a particular instance, but it does strike me as odd that the other member is the only one being accused of anything, yet everyone is intimidated by the board member. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted December 8, 2017 at 03:02 PM Report Share Posted December 8, 2017 at 03:02 PM (edited) 14 hours ago, Joshua Katz said: It seems to me that the board member is not being brought up on charges: Although that raises another question for me: what is this "charges from the board" business? Do your bylaws permit the board to handle discipline? If not, discipline is handled by the membership, not the board. I also question why the board member isn't being brought up on charges, since there's at least some circumstantial evidence here that he's not some innocent victim. Of course, propensity cannot be used to infer action in accordance in a particular instance, but it does strike me as odd that the other member is the only one being accused of anything, yet everyone is intimidated by the board member. I see. I misunderstood. In this event, formal disciplinary procedures will certainly be required, and those procedures must be conducted by the membership, unless the bylaws provide otherwise on these points. Since the question is about the board member’s participation, not the accused, no rule prevents him from attending the meeting or voting. Edited December 8, 2017 at 03:06 PM by Josh Martin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts