Changing the Composition of a Grievance Committee mid-grievance

[HERR DOKTOR]

Assume that our bylaws are silent on the issue. If there is a grievance pending in front of the grievance committee, and the president (in what is assumed to be an attempt to affect the outcome of the grievance) removes all of the grievance committee members and replaces them with others, it doesn't seem right that the new members should take over the adjudication of the pending grievance; they should begin with the first grievance filed AFTER their appointment, but the old grievance committee shouldn't lose their jurisdiction, so to speak, to consider the grievance before them. Yet, I can't find anything in RONR addressing the question. All I have at the moment is the gut feeling that this just feels wrong. Is anyone aware of a rule that I am overlooking here?

[Guest Zev]

At some point in time one or more or the experts on this forum is going to request from you a direct quote as to (1) what do the bylaws say about the duties and privileges of the "grievance committee," (2) who appoints the "grievance committee," and (3) who can, and under what circumstances, replace the "grievance committee" members. Please include this information and you will receive a better response.

[Gary Novosielski]

26 minutes ago, Guest Zev said:

At some point in time one or more or the experts on this forum is going to request from you a direct quote as to (1) what do the bylaws say about the duties and privileges of the "grievance committee," (2) who appoints the "grievance committee," and (3) who can, and under what circumstances, replace the "grievance committee" members. Please include this information and you will receive a better response.

What he said.

[HERR DOKTOR]

The grievance committee isn't set forth in the bylaws; it exists pursuant to a policy, which provides that it shall be chaired by the vice-president and two members appointed by the President. Nobody really questions that the President can un-appoint these two or appoint two others; the question is whether the new members take over consideration of the pending grievances or whether they only hear the grievances submitted after their appointment while the previously constituted committee continues with the resolution of grievances pending at the time the new members were appointed. It doesn't seem right that a tribunal, once constituted, can be changed in the middle of the process with intent to affect the outcome.

[Josh Martin]

2 hours ago, HERR DOKTOR said:

Assume that our bylaws are silent on the issue. If there is a grievance pending in front of the grievance committee, and the president (in what is assumed to be an attempt to affect the outcome of the grievance) removes all of the grievance committee members and replaces them with others, it doesn't seem right that the new members should take over the adjudication of the pending grievance; they should begin with the first grievance filed AFTER their appointment, but the old grievance committee shouldn't lose their jurisdiction, so to speak, to consider the grievance before them. Yet, I can't find anything in RONR addressing the question. All I have at the moment is the gut feeling that this just feels wrong. Is anyone aware of a rule that I am overlooking here?

 

2 minutes ago, HERR DOKTOR said:

The grievance committee isn't set forth in the bylaws; it exists pursuant to a policy, which provides that it shall be chaired by the vice-president and two members appointed by the President. Nobody really questions that the President can un-appoint these two or appoint two others; the question is whether the new members take over consideration of the pending grievances or whether they only hear the grievances submitted after their appointment while the previously constituted committee continues with the resolution of grievances pending at the time the new members were appointed. It doesn't seem right that a tribunal, once constituted, can be changed in the middle of the process with intent to affect the outcome.

There is no "old" or "new" grievance committee. There is only one grievance committee and the current members of that committee would consider all matters before the committee, including any matters which were pending at the time the new members were appointed.

If members feel that the President's actions in this matter were inappropriate, then perhaps disciplinary action should be taken against the President.