New Information/ Members want to nulify a vote made

[Guest Cameron]

Our membership had to ratify a Collective Bargaining Agreement(CBA). The president (me) held one meeting over 2 days to accommodate all the members as our schedule is difficult to get everyone to a meeting if we only do one night of voting (shift work). During the first day the committee in charge brought a motion to ratify the CBA, discussion was opened. Members had ample time to discuss their issues. Voting began and we recessed until the second day. At the 2nd day portion of the meeting the voting continued. At the end of the meeting on day 2, the members adjourned.

That was 5 days ago. Now, new information that significantly changes parts of the CBA have been brought forth. Members claim the vote to ratify the CBA was rushed (we held the vote after 15 days notice AND held the voting on the date and time of our regularly scheduled meeting).

Can the membership nullify or recall the affirmative vote to ratify the contract? If so how?

[Josh Martin]

On 6/10/2023 at 2:20 AM, Guest Cameron said:

Our membership had to ratify a Collective Bargaining Agreement(CBA). The president (me) held one meeting over 2 days to accommodate all the members as our schedule is difficult to get everyone to a meeting if we only do one night of voting (shift work). During the first day the committee in charge brought a motion to ratify the CBA, discussion was opened. Members had ample time to discuss their issues. Voting began and we recessed until the second day. At the 2nd day portion of the meeting the voting continued. At the end of the meeting on day 2, the members adjourned.

That was 5 days ago. Now, new information that significantly changes parts of the CBA have been brought forth. Members claim the vote to ratify the CBA was rushed (we held the vote after 15 days notice AND held the voting on the date and time of our regularly scheduled meeting).

Can the membership nullify or recall the affirmative vote to ratify the contract? If so how?

As a matter of parliamentary law, if there is some violation of the rules which is so egregious that it would constitute a continuing breach, then a Point of Order (followed by an Appeal if necessary) concerning the validity of the contract could be raised at a future regular meeting or at a special meeting called for this purpose. Based upon the facts presented, I do not see anything which constitutes such a breach, as all I see is that the fact that there is "new information" (which is irrelevant) and a vague claim that the process was "rushed," without pointing to any specific rules which were believed to have been violated. If there was nothing invalid which occurred, then a motion to Rescind would instead be in order, although that may be difficult in the present case since the motion involves a contract.

Since the case at hand involves contracts and (it appears) involves unions, which tend to be heavily regulated by applicable law, that will significantly complicate matters, and I imagine these questions will ultimately need to be directed to an attorney.

Edited June 10, 2023 at 12:38 PM by Josh Martin

[Atul Kapur]

From a parliamentary point of view, @Josh Martin is absolutely correct. However, this sentence gives me pause

On 6/10/2023 at 2:20 AM, Guest Cameron said:

new information that significantly changes parts of the CBA have been brought forth.

Usually, the "new information" doesn't change the agreement itself, so is irrelevant -- for example, after crying poor during negotiations, the employer announces a huge profit the day after ratification. This doesn't change the CBA, just members' feelings about how they voted. 

But if, as you say, there are actual changes to parts of the proposed CBA that was voted on, you may need to hold a new vote on the changed agreement.