Society RONR Expelling Member

[ladyinred]

<deleted by moderator>

Edited August 12, 2020 at 12:35 AM by Shmuel Gerber

[ladyinred]

17 hours ago, Josh Martin said:

 

If your bylaws have their own rules regarding discipline (which seems to be the case), those rules take precedence over the disciplinary rules in RONR, and your society will need to refer to those rules to answer these questions. I have no idea what your bylaws say, and I therefore cannot even begin to provide answers to questions about what the rules in your bylaws mean.

I concur with my colleagues that it would be advisable to consult a professional parliamentarian on this matter who can review your rules and the details of the situation in their entirety.

We really do not have a bylaw in place for when a member is expelled. In our Constitution, we do have we revert to RONR when a bylaw does not cover something. In this case, we do not have a bylaw in place for disciplinary  action when a member is expelled and they appeal it, also. We have a bylaw only if the member is fined, which is not the case in this matter.  So, we were steered towards #75 in the RONR. The committee being formed, and actions a committee is to take during the investigation  process of the member. I am just not sure when it speaks about "society" if this means the report the committee makes is given to the actual Board members? I know, in part, if a trial does proceed members present will be able to view the report given. And, for the actual trial does this, also, mean all members may attend this too? Can the accused be asked not to be at one or both of the meeting/meetings? So many have their own interpretations so I am trying to figure this process out according to Robert's  Rules Of Order. (Which we are going by) It gets tricky with some wording for sure.......

[George Mervosh]

10 minutes ago, ladyinred said:

We really do not have a bylaw in place for when a member is expelled. In our Constitution, we do have we revert to RONR when a bylaw does not cover something. In this case, we do not have a bylaw in place for disciplinary  action when a member is expelled and they appeal it, also. We have a bylaw only if the member is fined, which is not the case in this matter.  So, we were steered towards #75 in the RONR. The committee being formed, and actions a committee is to take during the investigation  process of the member. I am just not sure when it speaks about "society" if this means the report the committee makes is given to the actual Board members? I know, in part, if a trial does proceed members present will be able to view the report given. And, for the actual trial does this, also, mean all members may attend this too? Can the accused be asked not to be at one or both of the meeting/meetings? So many have their own interpretations so I am trying to figure this process out according to Robert's  Rules Of Order. (Which we are going by) It gets tricky with some wording for sure.......

I don't really want to add much more to what I suggested earlier, but if you are going to use RONR, it's best to use the 11th Edition, beginning on p. 654 §63. INVESTIGATION AND TRIAL rather than what you are looking at, which is the 4th Edition which was published in 1915.

 

[Josh Martin]

2 hours ago, ladyinred said:

Thank you, and I understand. Can I ask one more question? 

75. In the RORN, when it says reports to the society, is this the members of the society itself?

 

1 hour ago, ladyinred said:

We really do not have a bylaw in place for when a member is expelled. In our Constitution, we do have we revert to RONR when a bylaw does not cover something. In this case, we do not have a bylaw in place for disciplinary  action when a member is expelled and they appeal it, also. We have a bylaw only if the member is fined, which is not the case in this matter.

If the bylaws are silent on discipline, then the procedure used so far was certainly improper and the removal would be null and void. Removing a member from the society would certainly require disciplinary procedures. Removing a member from the board may or may not require formal disciplinary procedures (see FAQ #20), but in either event, if the society's membership elects the board members, only the society's membership may remove them unless the bylaws provide otherwise. Additionally, these procedures occur prior to voting to remove the member, not after. So it seems to me that, if the bylaws truly are silent on this matter, the person is still a member of the board and of the society and the member was absolutely correct that the board exceeded its authority by voting to remove her. The society could start over and try to remove her properly.

I also concur with Mr. Mervosh that picking up a copy of the current edition would be advisable.

To answer your question, however, yes, the investigating committee discussed in RONR is appointed by the membership of the society itself and reports to the membership of the society itself.

2 hours ago, ladyinred said:

Or, the actual  Board members?

No. The board lacks the authority to discipline members unless the bylaws grant it this authority.

2 hours ago, ladyinred said:

Some have said the Board can be the committee?

I don't think it is correct that "the Board can be the committee," although the society certainly could appoint an investigating committee which consists of some or all of the same persons who serve on the board.

2 hours ago, ladyinred said:

If a committee was formed for this purpose, then they are the ones who sends a report to the "society".

Correct.

2 hours ago, ladyinred said:

I am just making sure it means other members, and not just the Board alone?

It refers to the society's membership, not the board alone.

1 hour ago, ladyinred said:

I am just not sure when it speaks about "society" if this means the report the committee makes is given to the actual Board members?

It does not mean that. The report is presented at a meeting of the society's membership.

1 hour ago, ladyinred said:

I know, in part, if a trial does proceed members present will be able to view the report given. And, for the actual trial does this, also, mean all members may attend this too?

In the event that the society's membership chooses, after receiving the report of the investigating committee, to proceed with a trial, the society's membership may choose to either 1) have the society itself serve as the trial body (in which event all members have a right to attend the trial), or 2) appoint a trial committee to conduct the trial, in which event only members of the trial committee will have a right to attend the trial (although the trial committee may choose to permit other persons to attend if it wishes, or the society may instruct the trial committee on this matter). In the latter case, however, the trial committee makes a recommendation to the society rather than making the final decisions itself.

This really is a very lengthy and complex process, however, and it should not be undertaken without reading the relevant pages in the current edition of RONR in their entirety (pgs. 654-669). It probably still would be advisable to consult a professional parliamentarian to guide the society through this process, even if it turns out that there is nothing pertinent in the bylaws on this matter.

Edited July 21, 2020 at 05:35 PM by Josh Martin

[Josh Martin]

14 minutes ago, ladyinred said:

If an appeal was not made for the resignation sent in by the member itself, and a month has since passed where no appeal was made on part of or due to the decision made, can that decision be formally adopted?

Absolutely not. If the rules in RONR are controlling and formal disciplinary procedures are required, a violation of a member's due process rights in this regard is a continuing breach. A Point of Order (and Appeal, if necessary) regarding such a violation can be raised at any time during the continuance of the breach. A violation of a member's due process rights is a very serious error.

16 minutes ago, ladyinred said:

Since, no appeals were raised during the weeks prior to a trial of character?

Same answer as above. A Point of Order and Appeal may still be raised now.

18 minutes ago, ladyinred said:

The member in question did not appeal the Boards decision concerning her removal off the Board.

Nonetheless, the member remains free to do so now.

18 minutes ago, ladyinred said:

The conduct unbecoming a member came into this... etc...

The information regarding the alleged conduct is irrelevant. Whether the member should be removed is a question for the society to make. In any event, however, the proper process needs to be followed in order to do so.

19 minutes ago, ladyinred said:

The member was removed as a member due to the email sent to ALL members.

Removed by who?

20 minutes ago, ladyinred said:

Rather now a Trial committee was formed and it will only be regarding this matter of the email sent. We are a small organization. Much if this has come out this week, and when I question things many do not have answers on how to proceed or what to do because it has never been done before. Well, not to proceed because a Trail Committee is in place now, but as to regarding the actions of the member in question. Robert's Rules Of Order. I have read the Disciplinary 11th ed. So, just needing a different point of view on  what to reference to according to the actions needed to be taken. And, if it has to go to a general assembly etc.

Have the steps leading up to appointing a trial committee been followed? That is, an investigative committee was appointed, the committee made its recommendations, and a resolution preferring charges, setting the trial, and appointing the trial committee was set?

In any event, if a trial committee holds the trial, the trial committee makes a recommendation to the society. The society then ultimately determines the question of guilt and the penalty.

"If the trial has been held before a trial committee instead of the assembly of the society, this committee reports to the assembly in executive session (9) the results of its trial of the case, with resolutions—in cases where its finding is one of guilty—covering the penalty it recommends that the society impose. The report is prepared in writing and includes, to the extent possible without disclosing confidential information which should be kept within the committee, a summary of the basis for the committee's finding.

Unless the report exonerates the accused, he is then permitted—personally, through counsel, or both, as he prefers—to make a statement of the case, after which the committee is given the opportunity to present a statement in rebuttal. The accused—and defense counsel if not member(s)—then leave the room, and the assembly acts upon the resolutions submitted by the committee. The members of the committee remain and vote on the case the same as other members of the society.

Under this procedure, the assembly can decline to impose any penalty, notwithstanding the trial committee's recommendation; or it can reduce the recommended penalty; but it cannot increase the penalty. The assembly cannot impose a penalty if the trial committee has found the accused not guilty." (RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 668-669)

24 minutes ago, ladyinred said:

Also, can the Trial Committee consist of Board members too?

The society is free to appoint whoever it wishes to the trial committee. Board members are not prohibited from serving on the committee.

25 minutes ago, ladyinred said:

A question was raised whether they were allowed to serve on the committee which members signed up to be on instead of the Board appointing to make it fair for all who wanted to be on it.

The society appoints the committee, not the board. Board members may, however, serve on the committee if the society appoints them to serve on it.

26 minutes ago, ladyinred said:

A few Board members did sign up for it, but now are not sure if they actually can be on the Trial Committee too since they were apart of the removal of the member 

Well, first, it needs to be understood that the board didn't actually remove the member because it lacks the authority to do so.

Nonetheless, the fact that the board erroneously claimed to have removed the member and exceeded its authority by purporting to remove the member does not prohibit board members from serving on the trial committee, although the society is certainly free to take these factors into account when determining who to appoint to the committee.

[Josh Martin]

37 minutes ago, ladyinred said:

The member was removed by the executive board itself

As has been explained several times, the board lacks the authority to do this unless the bylaws grant it this authority.

37 minutes ago, ladyinred said:

Also, her using a board document that contained members private emails that was put in the sent part of the email. The member did email that she wishes to appeal this decision, thus the trial committee is now in place. She was notified by certified mail of a date ahead for this to happen.

The trial is the last step in the process, after an investigative committee meets and presents its recommendation that a trial be held.

37 minutes ago, ladyinred said:

And, now the committee is being told they must have a manger? According to a member, the manager chosen will be the only one to speak for the committee itself, and ask questions to the accused.

Yes, both of these things are largely correct. The only quibble I have with this summary is that RONR says "managers," suggesting that more than one person may be appointed to this role if the society desires.

During the trial itself, the only persons who are permitted to speak are the managers, who represent the society, the defense counsel, who represent the accused, the presiding officer, and witnesses. The accused can serve as their own defense counsel if desired. The managers are supposed to be appointed in the resolution calling the trial. Other members may deliver questions in writing to the presiding officer.

After the trial has concluded and the trial committee proceeds to consideration of the question of guilt and the penalty, then any member of the committee may speak.

"The "managers" at the trial—referred to in the fourth resolution of the complete set shown above—have the task of presenting the evidence against the accused, and must be members of the society. Their duty, however, is not to act as prosecutors—in the sense of making every effort to secure conviction—but rather to strive that the trial will get at the truth and that, in the light of all facts brought out, the outcome will be just." (RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 662-663)

"If a member of the assembly who is not a manager or with the defense wishes a question to be put to a witness, a manager, or the defense, the question must be
delivered in writing to the presiding officer, who at an appropriate point puts it, unless he rules it out of order of his own accord or upon an objection by the managers or the defense, which ruling, like any other in the trial, is subject to an undebatable appeal." (RONR, 11th ed., pg. 666)

37 minutes ago, ladyinred said:

Then, a recommendation will be given to a chosen manager of the executive  board. We are told we all will vote and 2/3 vote is required for any action to be adopted and passed. Then, the chosen manager of the excutive board will decide according to the vote outcome what happens after that, of course, by the recommendations for either/or the trial committee gave to her.

None of this is correct. What occurs is as follows:

1) First, the trial is conducted, with the managers representing the society and the defense counsel representing the accused. This process is described in more detail on pgs. 663-667.

2) After the closing arguments have been presented by both sides (the final step in the trial), the accused leaves the room. Motions and debate pertaining to the following questions are then decided upon by the committee, in the following order: 1) Is the accused guilty of the charge(s) and specification(s)? These may be amended if needed. 2) If the accused is found guilty of at least one charge and one specification, then what penalty, if any, should be applied?

A majority vote is sufficient for all of these motions with one exception. If the proposed penalty is expulsion from the society, a 2/3 vote is required. It should also be noted that any member may demand a ballot vote on any of these motions. This process is described in more detail on pgs. 667-668.

3) The trial committee makes its recommendation to the general membership of the society. The general membership determines whether to 1) adopt the recommended finding of guilt and penalty proposed by the trial committee, 2) adopt the finding of guilt but impose a lesser penalty, or 3) find the accused not guilty despite the recommendation of the trial committee. This process is described in more detail on pgs. 668-669.

Edited August 7, 2020 at 07:19 PM by Josh Martin

[ladyinred]

Thank you very much for all your help!

Do you happen to know where online or point me to a link, where the pdf version of the 11th edition in full can be downloaded possibly?

[Josh Martin]

6 minutes ago, ladyinred said:

Thank you very much for all your help!

Do you happen to know where online or point me to a link, where the pdf version of the 11th edition in full can be downloaded possibly?

No such link exists. The only electronic version of the 11th edition is on CD-ROM.

Get the Physical Book: https://robertsrules.com/book.html

Get the CD-ROM: https://robertsrules.com/pdfs/Am-Legal-Robert-Rules-Order-Form-RRA-2019.pdf

Edited August 8, 2020 at 08:06 PM by Josh Martin