en bloc Postponing the adoption of resolutions en bloc

[VolleKeepo]

TL;DR

The basis of the adoption of certain resolutions is a committee report but the entire committee was absent during the session. Is it possible to postpone the adoption of resolutions en bloc?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Facts and Background

(1) This is a student organisation (org) adopting the RONR

(2) The org adopting the RONR is The House of Senate (Senate), which is a legislative body of a student council and is a small assembly.

(3) The President (of said council) appoints major executive officers of the council

(4) According to the charter of the Council, the Senate must approve or reject the appointments of the President by a simple majority vote before they (the appointees) can act in office

(5) Then, through a resolution, the Senate will then officially approve or reject the appointee

(6) Before the session, members of Senate were divided into committees and then each committee interviewed each appointee

(7) The committees gave a committee report during the session and narrate what happened during the interview. This gives background to the character of the appointee. This is, among other factors, the basis for the approval or rejection of the appointee by the Senate
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The Issue

The entire committee who interviewed five appointees (out of 12) was absent during the session and cannot give a report.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The Action

As the designated parliamentarian (although I have much to learn), I suggested moving the adoption of multiple resolutions of appointments at once. After it was seconded and thereafter stated by the chair, I recommended a motion to postpone the motion to adopt the resolutions to a session when the committee was present.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The Rationale Behind the Action

I recognize that this is against the principle of dealing with one business at a time. However, I wanted to save time because, after all, parliamentary procedures were supposed to aid in the flow of the meeting and not impede it.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The Questions

(1) Was what I recommended correct?

(2) Could it have been done through a Suspension of Rules?

[Joshua Katz]

Without sorting through the details, it is in order to include more than one thing in a motion.  However, most of the time, it is subject to a motion to divide the question, which might require a majority vote or might require only the demand of a single member, depending on the nature of the things to be divided.  It is not debatable but is amendable.  

However, you might have rules requiring the appointments to be handled individually, in which case a motion to suspend the rules would be required.

Postponement is in order, so long as it is not postponed past the next regular meeting or more than a quarterly time period.  To delay action longer than that, it should be referred to a committee.

Don't be surprised if this is moved to the basic forum.  (Although I guess if you're looking for it, this note won't be of much help, since you can only read the note by finding the post.)

[VolleKeepo]

5 hours ago, Joshua Katz said:

Without sorting through the details, it is in order to include more than one thing in a motion.  However, most of the time, it is subject to a motion to divide the question, which might require a majority vote or might require only the demand of a single member, depending on the nature of the things to be divided.  It is not debatable but is amendable.  

I've gotten a similar response (see bold text) when I asked someone else. To be perfectly clear, does that mean that the en bloc motion can be divided (but necessarily must be divided)? There might be something I'm missing.

[Guest Who's Coming to Dinner]

RONR tells us that the motion for Division of a Question "Can be applied to main motions and their amendments." (11th ed, p. 271, l. 25) It does not say that it can be applied to subsidiary motions such as to Postpone Definitely.

[Josh Martin]

13 hours ago, VolleKeepo said:

The Questions

(1) Was what I recommended correct?

(2) Could it have been done through a Suspension of Rules?

(1) No, only one motion may be pending at a time, and only one motion may be postponed at a time.

(2) Yes.

11 hours ago, Joshua Katz said:

Without sorting through the details, it is in order to include more than one thing in a motion.  However, most of the time, it is subject to a motion to divide the question, which might require a majority vote or might require only the demand of a single member, depending on the nature of the things to be divided.  It is not debatable but is amendable.  

However, you might have rules requiring the appointments to be handled individually, in which case a motion to suspend the rules would be required.

As I understand the facts, there were multiple motions. It was not desired to combine them into one motion, merely to postpone them all with a single vote. This certainly requires a motion to Suspend the Rules.

5 hours ago, VolleKeepo said:

I've gotten a similar response (see bold text) when I asked someone else. To be perfectly clear, does that mean that the en bloc motion can be divided (but necessarily must be divided)? There might be something I'm missing.

As I understand the facts, the desire was not to combine the motions, merely to postpone all of them. Such a motion cannot be divided.

If you did indeed make a motion to approve all of the appointments en bloc, that motion certainly could be divided (and still can be divided at the next meeting). If the appointments are considered “independent subjects,” then it must be divided on the demand of a single member. Otherwise, dividing the question requires a majority vote.

Edited April 22, 2018 at 03:24 PM by Josh Martin

[VolleKeepo]

10 hours ago, Josh Martin said:

As I understand the facts, there were multiple motions.

To be exact, I suggested one motion to adopt multiple resolutions and then had it postponed.

 

[Josh Martin]

12 hours ago, VolleKeepo said:

To be exact, I suggested one motion to adopt multiple resolutions and then had it postponed.

In this event...

• The motion to adopt multiple resolutions was in order.
• The motion to postpone the main motion was in order.
• A member could not have moved to divide the question at the time, because Postpone to a Certain Time takes precedence.
• When the motion becomes pending at the next meeting, a member may move to divide the question. If the resolutions contained in the motion relate to independent subjects, the motion must be divided on the demand of a single member. Otherwise, a majority vote is required for division.