Running for a different officer position

[Guest joggingslowly]

Our organization's officers are elected in two year cycles with half the officers/board in odd years and the other half in even years.  Is there anywhere in Robert's Rules that state if a person currently in office with a year left is unsuccessful running for a different office in the other year's cycle, that they would have to give up their current position instead of remaining in the role?

[Rob Elsman]

A fundamental principle of parliamentary law, "one person, one vote", prohibits one person from having more than one vote on the board.  His acceptance of his election to the seat of the other year's cycle is to be interpreted as a resignation from his first seat.  RONR (12th ed.) 45:2.

[Atul Kapur]

The question was if the person in office is unsuccessful. There is nothing in RONR that says the person has to give up their position in order to run for a position in the opposite cycle.

I disagree with @Rob Elsman and say that there is nothing in RONR that requires the person to automatically resign (or be deemed to resign) their current position even if successfully elected to a different office on the opposite cycle. RONR (12th ed.) 46:31(1) explicitly allows for one individual to be elected to two different offices in the same election "unless the bylaws prohibit a person from holding both offices simultaneously" so there is no reason why the person cannot be elected to two different offices one year apart; the voters know that this person already occupies one office when they consider who to elect to the other office - the same situation as described in 46:31(1) but with a longer time between the two elections.

The fundamental principle of parliamentary law in 45:2 is not violated because, even if a person occupies two offices, they would still only be able to cast one vote. (This may be a reason for some to support another candidate in the election or for the candidate to resign one of their two offices, presumably, the one with the shorter remaining term).

To reinforce an important point, Guest joggingslowly, you should check your bylaws to see if they have any provisions about this situation.

[Rob Elsman]

On 8/1/2023 at 1:41 PM, Atul Kapur said:

...even if a person occupies two offices, they would still only be able to cast one vote.

If he can cast only one vote, he is one member with one seat on the board.  The other seat, his original seat, becomes vacant and should be filled by means of an election.  In the common parliamentary law, membership in an assembly cannot be multiplied.  One person can never become two members.

[Josh Martin]

On 8/1/2023 at 12:43 PM, Guest joggingslowly said:

Is there anywhere in Robert's Rules that state if a person currently in office with a year left is unsuccessful running for a different office in the other year's cycle, that they would have to give up their current position instead of remaining in the role?

No.

On 8/1/2023 at 7:42 PM, Rob Elsman said:

If he can cast only one vote, he is one member with one seat on the board.  The other seat, his original seat, becomes vacant and should be filled by means of an election.  In the common parliamentary law, membership in an assembly cannot be multiplied.  One person can never become two members.

Mr. Elsman, my understanding is that these are two distinct officer positions, each with its own duties, and each of which entails ex officio membership on the board. I am not aware of anything in RONR which would prevent a member from holding both offices, and indeed, there appear to be provisions explicitly stating that a member can hold both offices unless the bylaws state otherwise. I am in complete agreement that such a person is only one member on the board.

Not that any of this is relevant, since the OP's question appears to involve a situation in which the member was not elected to the other office.

[Gary Novosielski]

On 8/1/2023 at 1:43 PM, Guest joggingslowly said:

Our organization's officers are elected in two year cycles with half the officers/board in odd years and the other half in even years.  Is there anywhere in Robert's Rules that state if a person currently in office with a year left is unsuccessful running for a different office in the other year's cycle, that they would have to give up their current position instead of remaining in the role?

No, there is not.  They would definitely remain in their first position for the normal length of that term.

As you can see from the other responses, it becomes more complicated if they win the second office.  They may be automatically removed from the first one, or if elected to two offices in one election, may have to choose between them, or may actually serve wearing two hats, all depending on the rules in the bylaws, and how they apply to the specific structure and detailed situation that exists in that particular society.

[Rob Elsman]

Again, as far as the common parliamentary law is concerned, membership in an assembly is never multiplied.  One person, one member of the board with one seat on the board with one vote.

[Gary Novosielski]

On 8/1/2023 at 9:16 PM, Rob Elsman said:

Again, as far as the common parliamentary law is concerned, membership in an assembly is never multiplied.  One person, one member of the board with one seat on the board with one vote.

I agree, if we are talking about board members with essentially identical seats.  It does not make sense for one person to hold two director seats, and yet hold only one vote.  In this case, it is clear that there is one director seat vacant.  It is not unheard of for someone in the middle of a two-year director term to run for a newly beginning two-year director term.  In that case, a successful election means the first seat is vacated.

But if one person person is elected as both Secretary and Treasurer on two distinct ballots, and the bylaws do not prohibit multiple-office holding, and do provide that the board comprises those two offices among others,  then the person is on the board, has the duties of both offices, and has one vote.  The number of people on the board is reduced by one, hopefully not creating a quorum problem, and the sun comes up in the morning.

[Atul Kapur]

On 8/1/2023 at 9:16 PM, Rob Elsman said:

One person, one member of the board with one seat on the board with one vote

Close. One person, one member of the board with one vote, no matter how many offices that person occupies / seats they fill.

[Rob Elsman]

On 8/1/2023 at 8:33 PM, Gary Novosielski said:

But if one person person is elected as both Secretary and Treasurer on two distinct ballots, and the bylaws do not prohibit multiple-office holding, and do provide that the board comprises those two offices among others,  then the person is on the board, has the duties of both offices, and has one vote.  The number of people on the board is reduced by one, hopefully not creating a quorum problem, and the sun comes up in the morning.

You have to look at the language in the bylaws to know this.  The other possibility is that the bylaws specifically mandate that there be "X" number of members of the board, in which case there would have to be an election to fill the vacancy, so that the total number of members would equal the mandated number, "X".

[J. J.]

On 8/1/2023 at 9:16 PM, Rob Elsman said:

Again, as far as the common parliamentary law is concerned, membership in an assembly is never multiplied.  One person, one member of the board with one seat on the board with one vote.

Well, as far as I can tell, any membership is incidental to holding the office. 

[Rob Elsman]

Membership in an assembly is personal; therefore, it cannot be multiplied, divided, or transferred.  As I have said before: one person, one member, one seat, one vote.  A person who acquires a seat on the board by virtue of holding multiple offices is still one person.  As such, that person is one member of the board, having one seat on the board with one vote.  Such a person does not become multiple persons, does not become multiple members of the board, does not have multiple seats on the board, and does not have multiple votes.

[J. J.]

On 8/2/2023 at 9:17 AM, Rob Elsman said:

Membership in an assembly is personal; therefore, it cannot be multiplied, divided, or transferred.  As I have said before: one person, one member, one seat, one vote.  A person who acquires a seat on the board by virtue of holding multiple offices is still one person.  As such, that person is one member of the board, having one seat on the board with one vote.  Such a person does not become multiple persons, does not become multiple members of the board, does not have multiple seats on the board, and does not have multiple votes.

The "one seat" does not exist in RONR.  

[Weldon Merritt]

On 8/2/2023 at 7:17 AM, Rob Elsman said:

Membership in an assembly is personal; therefore, it cannot be multiplied, divided, or transferred.  As I have said before: one person, one member, one seat, one vote.  A person who acquires a seat on the board by virtue of holding multiple offices is still one person.  As such, that person is one member of the board, having one seat on the board with one vote.  Such a person does not become multiple persons, does not become multiple members of the board, does not have multiple seats on the board, and does not have multiple votes.

Rob, you are just flat-out wring about your "one seat" assertion. There is nothing in RONR prohibiting a member from holding multiple seats on a board. Any such provision would have to be in the bylaws. I do agree, however, that the member gets only one vote, regardless of teh number of seats held.

[Atul Kapur]

On 8/2/2023 at 9:17 AM, Rob Elsman said:

Such a person does not become multiple persons, does not become multiple members of the board, does not have multiple seats on the board, and does not have multiple votes.

Other than "does not have multiple seats on the board," , you are agreeing with everyone else. No one is saying that a person occupying more than one office or seat is more than one person or has more than one vote.

But when you say "does not have multiple seats on the board," several of us disagree with you, because RONR explicitly says that may happen.

[Rob Elsman]

On 8/2/2023 at 9:18 AM, Atul Kapur said:

...because RONR explicitly says that may happen.

Did you want to cite the book for this explicit saying? 🙂

[Gary Novosielski]

On 8/1/2023 at 10:20 PM, Rob Elsman said:

You have to look at the language in the bylaws to know this.  The other possibility is that the bylaws specifically mandate that there be "X" number of members of the board, in which case there would have to be an election to fill the vacancy, so that the total number of members would equal the mandated number, "X".

Okay, hypothetically, we run across bylaws that specify a seven-member board, comprising a president, vice president, secretary, treasurer, and three directors.  There is no explicit prohibition against someone holding multiple offices, which RONR tells us is then permitted.  All offices are elected directly by the membership, on individual ballots for the first four offices, and one ballot for the three identical director seats.

Is this an implicit contradiction?  It seems not to violate any rule in RONR.

Should we assume that the fixed board size effectively prohibits multiple-office holding?  In all cases?  Only among the identical director seats?  Only among the first four offices?  Between the two sets?

[J. J.]

On 8/2/2023 at 1:16 PM, Rob Elsman said:

Did you want to cite the book for this explicit saying? 🙂

46:31 1) last sentence.

[Rob Elsman]

On 8/2/2023 at 1:41 PM, J. J. said:

46:31 1) last sentence

Nothing in the cited language remotely indicates that one person may have two seats on one board.

[J. J.]

On 8/2/2023 at 2:46 PM, Rob Elsman said:

Nothing in the cited language remotely indicates that one person may have two seats on one board.

Yes it does, if those offices incidentally grant the holder membership. 

[Rob Elsman]

On 8/2/2023 at 1:37 PM, Gary Novosielski said:

Is this an implicit contradiction?  It seems not to violate any rule in RONR.

Should we assume that the fixed board size effectively prohibits multiple-office holding?  In all cases?  Only among the identical director seats?  Only among the first four offices?  Between the two sets?

I have not said any such thing.  Needless to say, if a society is going to permit one person to hold multiple offices simultaneously and have him serve as a member of the executive board ex officio, the bylaws concerning the composition of the executive board will have to be crafted carefully and thoughtfully.

[Gary Novosielski]

On 8/2/2023 at 10:18 AM, Atul Kapur said:

Other than "does not have multiple seats on the board," , you are agreeing with everyone else. No one is saying that a person occupying more than one office or seat is more than one person or has more than one vote.

But when you say "does not have multiple seats on the board," several of us disagree with you, because RONR explicitly says that may happen.

Well, it can't happen if those multiple seats all have the same title, e.g., Director, and are voted by multiple votes in a single section of the ballot.  Once elected to one of those seats, you can't run for another one.  And if the terms are staggered, hopping from one Director's chair to another vacates the chair departed from.

And even in the case of individual single offices, if someone is duly elected to more than one of them, it does not mean that they have multiple seats on the board.  They have a single seat but two hats, and more duties.

[Gary Novosielski]

On 8/2/2023 at 3:01 PM, Rob Elsman said:

I have not said any such thing.  Needless to say, if a society is going to permit one person to hold multiple offices simultaneously and have him serve as a member of the executive board ex officio, the bylaws concerning the composition of the executive board will have to be crafted carefully and thoughtfully.

May it ever be so.  But suppose it had only been crafted as carefully as in my hypothetical example which, experience has shown, is the more realistic expectation.  In drafting the bylaws, the size of the board is typically set; nothing is said about multiple offices because nobody thought of it; as a result, RONR allows it; and Bob's your auntie.

[Atul Kapur]

On 8/2/2023 at 4:18 PM, Gary Novosielski said:

And even in the case of individual single offices, if someone is duly elected to more than one of them, it does not mean that they have multiple seats on the board.  They have a single seat but two hats, and more duties.

You will note that I have been careful to use the phrase "occupies two offices"; adding the reference to having multiple seats was an attempt to use Mr. Elsman's terminology to save him having to translate that himself. (But I have seen multiple-office holders who can spread themselves wide enough to take up two seats.)

 

Edited August 2, 2023 at 08:37 PM by Atul Kapur
corrected typo: "them" was suposed to be "themselves"

[Gary Novosielski]

On 8/2/2023 at 4:27 PM, Atul Kapur said:

You will note that I have been careful to use the phrase "occupies two offices"; adding the reference to having multiple seats was an attempt to use Mr. Elsman's terminology to save him having to translate that himself. (But I have seen multiple-office holders who can spread them wide enough to take up two seats.)

 

The airlines are going to want to have a word with those folks.