Co Officer resigns -

[Guest Maureen J]

Hello - If a Co-Officer (such a Co-Treasurer or Co-President) resigns mid-term, can the remaining officer continue on as the sole officer or does the Board need to hold an election?  Our Bylaws allow for Co-positions, however we haven't stated what would happen if one resigned.  This situation hasn't actually happened for us.  Could we add an amendment to our Bylaws to state the remaining officer could remain in position solo?  Thank you

[Joshua Katz]

The first part will depend on what exactly your bylaws say about this, and about vacancies. We may be able to help if you post the exact language, but ultimately, only your organization can interpret your bylaws.

As to the second, sure, you could amend the bylaws to do almost anything.

[Richard Brown]

Guest Maureen, RONR and just about all of us who post regularly on this forum advise strongly against having co-anythings. RONR does not provide any guidance whatsoever on the use of co-anythings, other than to recommend against it, and does not provide any solutions to problems that arise from doing it anyway.

An organization that chooses  to have co-presidents, co-chairs, or co-anythings  despite such an admonition is pretty much on its own in solving the problems that arise from it.

As Mr. Katz said, if you provide us with the exact wording in your bylaws about those shared positions, it is possible we can provide you with some guidance, but it will probably be limited because only your organization can interpret its bylaws. We cannot do that for you. it is outside the scope of this forum. 

Here is the sum total of what The 12th edition of RONR has to say about this subject in section 13:17:  “If the committee’s task is heavy and will require some time to complete, it often is advisable to appoint a vice-chairman. The anomalous title “co-chairman” should be avoided, as it causes impossible dilemmas in attempts to share the functions of a single position.”

A few years ago one of our members wrote an excellent article about the problems with Co-anythings. I will try to find and post a link to that article.  

[Guest Maureen J]

Our Bylaws just states that there can be a Co-to any position.  No additional statements had been made within the Bylaws in terms of how responsibilities would be split between the Co-Officers or what would happen if one left the Board for whatever reason.  From what I understand, the ability for there to be Co- Board members was established as a means to recruit those who were hesistant to take on a position alone.   Thank you for your assistance!  

[Weldon Merritt]

16 minutes ago, Richard Brown said:

A few years ago one of our members wrote an excellent article about the problems with Co-anythings. I will try to find and post a link to that article.  

I have a PDF copy of the article by Dr. John Stackpole from the July 2009 Parliamentary Journal, but when I tried to copy and paste it, all I got was gibbersih. 

 

[Joshua Katz]

7 minutes ago, Guest Maureen J said:

Our Bylaws just states that there can be a Co-to any position.  No additional statements had been made within the Bylaws in terms of how responsibilities would be split between the Co-Officers or what would happen if one left the Board for whatever reason.  From what I understand, the ability for there to be Co- Board members was established as a means to recruit those who were hesistant to take on a position alone.   Thank you for your assistance!  

We will need the exact language, though, not a paraphrase. And of the provisions for filling board vacancies, as well.

[Richard Brown]

Here is a dropbox link to the article about the problem with co-anythings by John Stackpole.  If this link doesn't work, let me know.  I have a different link somewhere.  @J. J., if this link doesn't work, do you have one that does?

https://www.dropbox.com/s/jbcnnjcq5l9eaux/Problems With co-anything.docx?dl=0

 

 

[Weldon Merritt]

2 hours ago, Richard Brown said:

if this link doesn't work, do you have one that does?

It worked for me.

[Gary Novosielski]

13 hours ago, Guest Maureen J said:

Hello - If a Co-Officer (such a Co-Treasurer or Co-President) resigns mid-term, can the remaining officer continue on as the sole officer or does the Board need to hold an election?  Our Bylaws allow for Co-positions, however we haven't stated what would happen if one resigned.  This situation hasn't actually happened for us.  Could we add an amendment to our Bylaws to state the remaining officer could remain in position solo?  Thank you

My strongly held belief is that you would be far better off deleting all reference to Co-<anything> in your bylaws.  It is nothing but trouble, as you're beginning to find out.

[Weldon Merritt]

9 hours ago, Gary Novosielski said:

My strongly held belief is that you would be far better off deleting all reference to Co-<anything> in your bylaws.  It is nothing but trouble, as you're beginning to find out.

A belief in which I wholeheartedly concur. I haven't dealt with many groups that have co-officers or co-chairmen, so I can't speak from extensive experience; but I suspect that in most instances, one of the co-whatevers assumes the primary role and the other acts more live a vice whatever. So it is much better to set it up that way in the first place.

[Gary Novosielski]

3 hours ago, Weldon Merritt said:

A belief in which I wholeheartedly concur. I haven't dealt with many groups that have co-officers or co-chairmen, so I can't speak from extensive experience; but I suspect that in most instances, one of the co-whatevers assumes the primary role and the other acts more live a vice whatever. So it is much better to set it up that way in the first place.

Yes, and then when things go wrong, the finger pointing starts.  Responsibility shared is responsibility diluted.