Majorities and supermajorities

[Guest Carmen]

Looking for explanations on two sentences 

Faculty Manual sets forth the policies and procedures of the University regarding the faculty and its rights and responsibilities. Changes to the Faculty Manual, with the exception of changes to the chapter on promotion and tenure, may be made by the Faculty Senate or the general faculty by majority vote of those faculty members present and voting at the Faculty Senate or General Faculty meeting. ...(missing sentence lists chain of approval after the vote)

does it take more than a majority to pass measures under the exception highlighted in red? If so how do I figure out how much 

Changes to University promotion and tenure criteria require a vote of two-thirds of the tenured and tenure- track faculty present and voting at a General Faculty meeting.

Is the 2/3s majority and the restricted voters corequisite?  Is there a section of RRO that speaks to these circumstances? Thank you! 

[Joshua Katz]

I don't understand the question. You ask:

33 minutes ago, Guest Carmen said:

does it take more than a majority to pass measures under the exception highlighted in red? If so how do I figure out how much 

 

But then you say, apparently quoting:

33 minutes ago, Guest Carmen said:

Changes to University promotion and tenure criteria require a vote of two-thirds of the tenured and tenure- track faculty present and voting at a General Faculty meeting.

 

Which seems to be the answer. So what are you asking, exactly?

34 minutes ago, Guest Carmen said:

Is the 2/3s majority and the restricted voters corequisite?  Is there a section of RRO that speaks to these circumstances? Thank you! 

No, these are your organization's rules, so they are not discussed in RONR. I don't know what you mean by corequisite. It would appear rather straightforward that changes here require a vote of the tenured and TT faculty who are present at the meeting, and the voting threshold is 2/3. No one else, so far as I can tell, gets a say.

[Guest Reply]

this is the debate. I interpreted it as you do. But there I dispute. Regarding co-requisite it means both things go together I all circumstances.

Does RRO. have a chapter on bylaws or manuals? 

thank you!
 

 

[Atul Kapur]

Yes, Chapter XVIII. Within it is §56 Content and Composition of Bylaws. You will likely want to pay particular attention to 56:8, titled "Some Principles of Interpretation"

[Joshua Katz]

9 hours ago, Guest Reply said:

this is the debate. I interpreted it as you do. But there I dispute.

Okay. What's the opposing argument?

9 hours ago, Guest Reply said:

Regarding co-requisite it means both things go together I all circumstances.

I know what the word means (although I'm not sure I agree with that definition) but my question was what it had to do with your case.

[Guest Carmen]

Atul Kapur, Thank you!

[Guest Carmen]

Joshua Katz, 

The ballot (prepared by the chair) stated that the vote was being restricted because it dealt with the promotion and tenure process. But then when the question of whether it passed, the final vote was 68 to 44. The chair ruled that the 2/3s wasn't necessary because it wasn't on promotion and tenure criteria. My argument was that there was only one situation in which the vote was restricted and when it was so limited, that the 2/3s majority must be reached. That's what I meant by co-requisite one can not be without the other. 

Thanks. 

[Joshua Katz]

Well, with this new information, the question gets into bylaw interpretation (or special rules of order), which only your organization can do. You previously asked about vote thresholds for these matters, but it turns out the issue really is what types of matters these are in the first place. In my personal opinion, though, so far as I can see, the line is not process vs. criteria; it's which chapter is being amended. That's much more objective. But, in any case, I would agree that none of the excerpts we've seen (but there could be others!) allow for a majority vote of tenured and TT faculty. But it's not the limit on who can vote that requires a 2/3 vote (not a 2/3 majority). Rather, both are required by a third factor.

But, as I said, it's really a matter of bylaw interpretation at this point. We can't really help with that because, among other reasons, we don't study your bylaws in depth, or in the context of the organization using them. 

You might consider the canon of expressio unius, though - permitting one thing excludes other things of the same sort. If the bylaws establish 5 standing committees, that doesn't logically mean there can't be 6. But this canon says that, when interpreting bylaws, it does mean that. Here, we're told what can be done by a majority vote, and all those things apply to the general faculty.

[Gary Novosielski]

18 hours ago, Joshua Katz said:

It would appear rather straightforward that changes here require a vote of the tenured and TT faculty who are present at the meeting....

Not merely present, but present and voting.

[Joshua Katz]

Yes, I can see how my wording wasn't perfect. I was trying to emphasize that it need not include those who are not present - i.e. it is not a 2/3 vote of the entire T/TT faculty. 

[Guest Carmen]

Thank you Gary 

[Guest Carmen]

Thanks for the clarification Joshua

[Guest Carmen]

Joshua one of  my colleagues used that phrase expressio unis. It didn't make a different. The chair made a ruling and because the election occurred after a meeting in a virtual environment it has been difficult to raise points of order even though they were raised immediately when the results were announced. 

[Joshua Katz]

6 minutes ago, Guest Carmen said:

The chair made a ruling and because the election occurred after a meeting in a virtual environment it has been difficult to raise points of order even though they were raised immediately when the results were announced. 

An organization should be careful, when adopting rules for the conduct of business outside of the typical deliberative assembly, not to make it impossible or difficult to enforce the rules, and not to empower a runaway chair.