RONR Adoption Question

[BabbsJohnson]

I was looking for clarification.

When we talk about “Adopting”  RONR...

if the By-laws names RONR, then that society has already adopted RONR

If the By-laws are silent, or give an option besides RONR, then it would be the board adopting RONR, if it chose to?

[jstackpo]

Not clear, to me anyway, exactly what you are asking.

[Chris Harrison]

If the Bylaws name RONR as the parliamentary authority then RONR is the organization's parliamentary authority.  If the Bylaws name something else as the parliamentary authority then that text is the organization's parliamentary authority. If the Bylaws don't name a parliamentary authority then the general parliamentary law applies which RONR (for the  most part) is a codification of (RONR p. xxix).

[BabbsJohnson]

That’s interesting.

I had no idea there was a “general” category.

[jstackpo]

"General [parliamentary] law" is also called the "common law".  Check Google, &c. for definitions.

[Joshua Katz]

21 minutes ago, jstackpo said:

"General [parliamentary] law" is also called the "common law".  Check Google, &c. for definitions.

Well, careful there. It's the common parliamentary law, right? It certainly isn't the whole body of the common law, and I doubt it's even part of what the legal profession refers to as the common law.

[Joshua Katz]

2 hours ago, Nosey said:

 If the By-laws are silent, or give an option besides RONR, then it would be the board adopting RONR, if it chose to?

If the bylaws adopt a different parliamentary authority, then the board may not adopt RONR. It has to follow the bylaws.

[jstackpo]

9 minutes ago, Joshua Katz said:

Well, careful there. It's the common parliamentary law, right? It certainly isn't the whole body of the common law, and I doubt it's even part of what the legal profession refers to as the common law.

Yes, the admonition that parliamentarians should not attempt to dip their toes into "the law" is one to most definitely acceed to.     

[Dan Honemann]

1 hour ago, jstackpo said:

"General [parliamentary] law" is also called the "common law".  Check Google, &c. for definitions.

Frankly, this advice is so bad it ought to be deleted. 

[Josh Martin]

3 hours ago, Nosey said:

I was looking for clarification.

When we talk about “Adopting”  RONR...

if the By-laws names RONR, then that society has already adopted RONR

If the By-laws are silent, or give an option besides RONR, then it would be the board adopting RONR, if it chose to?

RONR suggests including the following language in the bylaws to adopt it: “The rules contained in the current edition of Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised shall govern the Society in all cases to which they are applicable and in which they are not inconsistent with these bylaws and any special rules of order the Society may adopt.” If the bylaws contain this language, or substantially similar language, then the society has adopted RONR as its parliamentary authority.

If the bylaws are silent, then the society has no parliamentary authority. RONR has the following to say about this:

”Parliamentary law originally was the name given to the rules and customs for carrying on business in the English Parliament that were developed through a continuing process of decisions and precedents somewhat like the growth of the common law. These rules and customs, as brought to America with the settling of the New World, became the basic substance from which the practice of legislative bodies in the United States evolved. Out of early American legislative procedure and paralleling it in further development has come the general parliamentary law, or common parliamentary law, of today, which is adapted to the needs of organizations and assemblies of widely differing purposes and conditions.” (RONR, 11th ed., pg. xxix)

“A deliberative assembly that has not adopted any rules is commonly understood to hold itself bound by the rules and customs of the general parliamentary law—or common parliamentary law (as discussed in the Introduction)—to the extent that there is agreement in the meeting body as to what these rules and practices are.” (RONR 11th ed., pg. 3)

”Although it is unwise for an assembly or a society to attempt to function without formally adopted rules of order, a recognized parliamentary manual may be cited under such conditions as persuasive. Or, by being followed through long established custom in an organization, a particular manual may acquire a status within the body similar to that of an adopted parliamentary authority.” (RONR, 11th ed., pg. 17)

Such an organization may adopt a parliamentary authority (such as RONR) by amending its bylaws or by the same vote as a special rule of order. I am inclined to think that in a society with a general membership, only the membership (not a subordinate board) may do this for the society as a whole. A subordinate board could, I suppose, adopt RONR for its own use (and for the use of any bodies subordinate to it, such as committees or an executive committee), unless and until the membership adopts it for the society as a whole.

I am not sure what is meant by “or give an option besides RONR.” Bylaws generally provide a single parliamentary authority and do not provide “options.” If the bylaws specify some authority other than RONR, that is the society’s parliamentary authority, and it may only be changed by amending the bylaws.

Edited April 4, 2019 at 01:37 PM by Josh Martin

[BabbsJohnson]

9 minutes ago, Josh Martin said:

I am not sure what is meant by “or give an option besides RONR.” Bylaws generally provide a single parliamentary authority and do not provide “options.” If the bylaws specify some authority other than RONR, that is the society’s parliamentary authority, and it may only be changed by amending the bylaws.

I am unfamiliar with the possible variables among by-laws and how parliamentary Law/rules are named or not named, so I guess I was just creating a hypothetical in case it applied in the real world.

[BabbsJohnson]

Thank you, gentlemen