BoD Officer accused of Sexual Harassment by member - President bias (?)

[Eva S]

A member of the Club submitted a complaint against one of the members of the BoD's. So there are a few issues that are called into question here.

1. Shouldn't  the officer in question be removed from duty until the investigation is completed? 

2. The VP is part of the membership committee and supposed to help members submit complaints. When this member approached the VP with this complaint, she was very clear that the way she understood it that the way she was harassed met all the classic legal definitions for sexual harassments and that she wanted to put in a complaint. She made this request in front of another member. Instead of helping the member fill out a form and move forward to stop this behavior from happening in the future; the VP turned around and made false statements to the BoD's stating that the member was making threats to sue. She was even corrected by the other member that was present at the time that the original request was made, she was told she was incorrect that that no such statement about suing was made. Shortly after this incident the member was once again sexually harassed by the Board Member, no complaint was filled out by the VP. One week later this member filled one out with the Officer - Member Liason. Is this Neglect of Duty by the VP?

3. During the last Membership meeting the member came to the meeting to hear about an update. While at the meeting she was grilled about the complaint by the Treasurer, asking if there was money offered in exchange (yes,  The officer said member would never have to work again). This seemed highly inappropriate to ask openly during a meeting. The President said he would like to be part of the investigation. HERE is the biggest and most important question. When I chaired this board, I never participated in any membership boards because the President is supposed to be seen as impartial. I had taken complaints, but then handed them off to others. When the President made this request, the member turned and said 'And how many times did YOU ASK ME OUT?'.  The answer was 5! Should this President be considered unbiased and allowed to sit on the membership committee to hear the complaint by this member? The whole thing seemed like further harassment of the this member - Completely out of line. 

 

The front door to this meeting was locked, so that only members that had keys could attend if not right on time.

I requested copies of the agenda and was told too bad, we only made 2 extras. I was basically told too bad and the VP barked at me while I was made to share copies with her. 

As a member I was told by the Treasurer I could not speak on the same subject, at the same time as previous members. When I stopped to wait for the Chair to rule on this, he was too busy reading other material and not paying attention to the meeting.

The President allowed voting via email even though it is not in the bylaws. So they had a Secretary that is now not really a Secretary (?). 

 

This club is one for supporting people in Recovery, it is vital to the community.

It should not be allowed to be run anyhow they see fit.

Thanks for any help you can provide!

Edited October 18, 2022 at 10:16 PM by Eva S

[Dan Honemann]

On 10/18/2022 at 4:54 PM, Eva S said:

A member of the Club submitted a complaint against one of the members of the BoD's. So there are a few issues that are called into question here.

1. Shouldn't  the officer in question be removed from duty until the investigation is completed? 

No.

[puzzling]

your bylaws or other regulations seem to have a complaint/ disciplinary  procedure. the process needs to follow that procedure, (as it overrules the RONR procedure) 

this same procedure should be followed to find out if the VP was negligent of her duty. At the mean time it looks like a motion to censure the VP would be on its place (not giving the right information to the board) 

Sadly since I don't have the text of your complaints/disciplinary procedure I cannot help you further 

[Josh Martin]

On 10/18/2022 at 3:54 PM, Eva S said:

A member of the Club submitted a complaint against one of the members of the BoD's. So there are a few issues that are called into question here.

I would first note that this introduction and various other information in this post appear to suggest the organization may have its own customized disciplinary procedures in its bylaws. If this is correct, then ultimately those procedures will be controlling. I have not read those procedures, and therefore have no idea what they say on this matter. 

Additionally, it seems to me that the second and third questions here are substantive rather than procedural in nature, and therefore such questions can be answered only by the society itself.

But to the extent that the rules in RONR are controlling in this matter, I would answer as follows...

On 10/18/2022 at 3:54 PM, Eva S said:

1. Shouldn't  the officer in question be removed from duty until the investigation is completed? 

I would first note that the fact that a complaint has been submitted, in and of itself, does not necessarily require that an investigation be completed, although certainly the organization could choose to do so.

In any event, under the formal disciplinary procedures in RONR, neither the submission of a complaint nor the appointment of an investigative committee is sufficient to remove an officer from duty. If the process reaches the stage where (based upon the recommendations of the investigative committee) the organization prefers charges against the officer, the organization may (but is not required to) suspend the officer of their duties, pending completion of the trial.

"A resolution preferring charges may (although it need not) be accompanied by one suspending all or some specified portion of the accused’s authority, rights, and duties as an officer or rights as a member (except those rights that relate to the trial) pending disposition of the case, effective from the time official notification of the resolution is delivered to the accused’s address." RONR (12th ed.) 63:26

It should be noted that, under the rules in RONR, formal disciplinary procedures may or may not be required for removal of an officer, depending on what the bylaws say concerning the term of office. If formal disciplinary procedures are not required, then the procedures to remove the officer are greatly abbreviated, but there is never any point during the procedure where the officer's duties are suspended.

On 10/18/2022 at 3:54 PM, Eva S said:

2. The VP is part of the membership committee and supposed to help members submit complaints. When this member approached the VP with this complaint, she was very clear that the way she understood it that the way she was harassed met all the classic legal definitions for sexual harassments and that she wanted to put in a complaint. She made this request in front of another member. Instead of helping the member fill out a form and move forward to stop this behavior from happening in the future; the VP turned around and made false statements to the BoD's stating that the member was making threats to sue. She was even corrected by the other member that was present at the time that the original request was made, she was told she was incorrect that that no such statement about suing was made. Shortly after this incident the member was once again sexually harassed by the Board Member, no complaint was filled out by the VP. One week later this member filled one out with the Officer - Member Liason. Is this Neglect of Duty by the VP?

That is not my decision to make.

I would first note that while we are told "The VP is part of the membership committee and supposed to help members submit complaints," we have not seen the rule which is the basis for this statement.

Even assuming for the sake of argument that this is, in fact, a duty of the VP, whether the particular facts and circumstances described here constitute "neglect of duty" by the VP is ultimately a question for the organization itself to answer, possibly through disciplinary procedures.

On 10/18/2022 at 3:54 PM, Eva S said:

3. During the last Membership meeting the member came to the meeting to hear about an update. While at the meeting she was grilled about the complaint by the Treasurer, asking if there was money offered in exchange (yes,  The officer said member would never have to work again). This seemed highly inappropriate to ask openly during a meeting. The President said he would like to be part of the investigation. HERE is the biggest and most important question. When I chaired this board, I never participated in any membership boards because the President is supposed to be seen as impartial. I had taken complaints, but then handed them off to others. When the President made this request, the member turned and said 'And how many times did YOU ASK ME OUT?'.  The answer was 5! Should this President be considered unbiased and allowed to sit on the membership committee to hear the complaint by this member? The whole thing seemed like further harassment of the this member - Completely out of line. 

I do not know what the organization's rules are pertaining to how members of the membership committee are selected or how members are chosen to be part of the investigation. Ultimately, whether a particular person is to be a part of a membership committee, an investigative committee, or any other committee is at the discretion of the body or person with the authority to appoint the committee, within any boundaries and limitations set in the organization's rules.

Edited October 19, 2022 at 04:35 PM by Josh Martin