gregory Posted May 18, 2022 at 03:56 PM Report Share Posted May 18, 2022 at 03:56 PM Hi Everyone, We had quite a few motions ruled out of order at a recent meeting and the Chair seemed to claim that motions are not allowed that include debate, (not sure why she said that) or are negative or include facts or statements that support the motion. For instance, here's one motion ruled out of order. Can you show me in RONR 12 edition where it allows the meeting Chair to not allow motions due to the content of the motion? ---------------------------------------------- I move Local 556 will post a complete screenshot (not a link) of the Local 556 LM-2 Schedule 11 and Schedule 12 on the Local 556 website known as [link deleted]. The screenshot post will be posted within 3 business days after the LM-2 is signed by the Local 556 President and Treasurer. Each new years LM-2 screenshot will be posted above the previous years LM-2. not to exceed three years of to total LM-2 reports. The screenshot posting will be visible on the HOME PAGE of the Local 556 website, aka the first page. Schedule 11 and 12 displays the salaries as paid by Local 556 Members to Local 556 Executive Board Officers, the Negotiating Team, the Flight Attendants on full time and part time pulls working at the Union office. It also shows any salaries as paid to actual employees working at the Local 556 office. These LM-2 reports are NOT confidential as this income is legally public information because it is paid from dues collected from Local 556 Members and the Department of Labor has determined those paying their dues are legally allowed to see who is receiving their dues. . It does not include any income paid from Southwest for the 401k match, any sick calls or any vacation pay as this income is considered legally confidentially. This motion is designed to inform and keep current all dues paying Union Members of the financial incomes of their elected and appointed Union leaders as paid by their dues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted May 18, 2022 at 08:45 PM Report Share Posted May 18, 2022 at 08:45 PM On 5/18/2022 at 10:56 AM, gregory said: We had quite a few motions ruled out of order at a recent meeting and the Chair seemed to claim that motions are not allowed that include debate, (not sure why she said that) or are negative or include facts or statements that support the motion. This is not correct. RONR does suggest that it generally is not a good idea for a motion to "include debate" or to "include facts or statements that support the motion," but that does not mean such motions are out of order. "It is usually inadvisable to attempt to include reasons for a motion’s adoption within the motion itself. To do so may encumber the motion and may weigh against its adoption—since some members who approve of the action it proposes may dislike voting for it if it states reasons with which they disagree. When special circumstances make it desirable to include a brief statement of background, the motion should be cast in the form of a resolution, with the background or reasons incorporated in a preamble that is placed before the resolving clauses. A preamble consists of one or more clauses beginning “Whereas,.…” It should be emphasized that neither rule nor custom requires a resolution to have a preamble, and one should not be used merely for the sake of form. In general, the use of a preamble should be limited to cases where it provides little-known information without which the point or the merits of a resolution are likely to be poorly understood, where unusual importance is attached to making certain reasons for an action a matter of record, or the like." RONR (12th ed.) 10:16 I don't know what is meant in this context by a motion being "negative" so I am not sure how to respond to that. RONR (12th ed.) 10:11-12 may be relevant. On 5/18/2022 at 10:56 AM, gregory said: Can you show me in RONR 12 edition where it allows the meeting Chair to not allow motions due to the content of the motion? The chair can rule a motion out of order on the grounds that it violates some rule, either in RONR or the assembly's rules. This may well involve the content of motions in certain cases, such as if the content of the motion conflicts with a higher-level rule of the assembly. But the fact that a motion "includes debate" or "includes facts or statements that support the motion" does not violate any rule in RONR, although RONR does say that this is generally inadvisable. See RONR (12th ed.) 10:26 for a discussion of Main Motions That Are Not in Order. On 5/18/2022 at 10:56 AM, gregory said: I move that Local 556 will post a complete screenshot (not a link) of the Local 556 LM-2 Schedule 11 and Schedule 12 on the Local 556 website known as [link deleted]. The screenshot post will be posted within 3 business days after the LM-2 is signed by the Local 556 President and Treasurer. Each new year's LM-2 screenshot will be posted above the previous years LM-2. not to exceed three years of to total LM-2 reports. The screenshot posting will be visible on the HOME PAGE of the Local 556 website, aka the first page. Schedule 11 and 12 displays the salaries as paid by Local 556 Members to Local 556 Executive Board Officers, the Negotiating Team, the Flight Attendants on full time and part time pulls working at the Union office. It also shows any salaries as paid to actual employees working at the Local 556 office. These LM-2 reports are NOT confidential as this income is legally public information because it is paid from dues collected from Local 556 Members and the Department of Labor has determined those paying their dues are legally allowed to see who is receiving their dues. . It does not include any income paid from Southwest for the 401k match, any sick calls or any vacation pay as this income is considered legally confidentially. This motion is designed to inform and keep current all dues paying Union Members of the financial incomes of their elected and appointed Union leaders as paid by their dues. I would advise removing the information in the motion which amounts to explanation and instead give that information in debate. Nonetheless, I see no reason the motion would be out of order - at least not due to any rule in RONR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregory Posted May 20, 2022 at 06:47 PM Author Report Share Posted May 20, 2022 at 06:47 PM (edited) Thank you Josh, That makes perfect sense. I'm curious if you would like to join a online group of Flight Attendants to assist them with details about motions they will be submitting at future membership meetings? Edited May 20, 2022 at 06:47 PM by gregory Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts