Is Neutrality Necessary Outside the Meeting

[Larry Cisar]

Situation: You are the parliamentarian for an organization. During the meetings, you maintain neutrality and nobody has a problem with that. Well, now it is election time and one group running for office has stated that they really do not care that much about the rules. Can you, as the parliamentarian, outside of the meeting, come out against them?

[jstackpo]

Is your parliamentarian a member of the association?

[Larry Cisar]

Is your parliamentarian a member of the association?

Either way or take one as a member, one as not a member, and one as a member but in a non-voting category.

[hmtcastle]

Situation: You are the parliamentarian for an organization. During the meetings, you maintain neutrality and nobody has a problem with that. Well, now it is election time and one group running for office has stated that they really do not care that much about the rules. Can you, as the parliamentarian, outside of the meeting, come out against them?

Yes.

[Dan Honemann]

Situation: You are the parliamentarian for an organization. During the meetings, you maintain neutrality and nobody has a problem with that. Well, now it is election time and one group running for office has stated that they really do not care that much about the rules. Can you, as the parliamentarian, outside of the meeting, come out against them?

No rule in RONR prohibits it, but an organization's parliamentarian should always exercise a great deal of discretion in such matters, don't you think?

[Josh Martin]

Situation: You are the parliamentarian for an organization. During the meetings, you maintain neutrality and nobody has a problem with that. Well, now it is election time and one group running for office has stated that they really do not care that much about the rules. Can you, as the parliamentarian, outside of the meeting, come out against them?

RONR concerns itself with primarily with conduct during meetings. It seems to me this is more of a question of personal or professional ethics than of the rules under RONR.

[Ann Rempel]

Situation: You are the parliamentarian for an organization. During the meetings, you maintain neutrality and nobody has a problem with that. Well, now it is election time and one group running for office has stated that they really do not care that much about the rules. Can you, as the parliamentarian, outside of the meeting, come out against them?

If I wanted to keep my job, I'd keep my mouth shut. My advice is to not serve as parliamentarian if you want to participate in the politics of the organization.

[Tim Wynn]

If I wanted to keep my job, I'd keep my mouth shut.

Okay, I'm going to make that my signature.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

... now it is election time and one group running for office has stated that they really do not care that much about the rules.

Can you, as the parliamentarian, outside of the meeting, come out against them?

What?

There is a group of people who are saying, "We don't care for rules"?

Yes, you can come out against them.

That is, you ARE allowed, as parliamentarian, to say, "I support the letter and spirit of the bylaws, and I support parliamentary procedure."

There is nothing wrong with supporting the rule of law.

So surely, there is nothing wrong with supporting the bylaws.

A parliamentarian ought not prefer anarchy in one's meetings.

[Guest Nancy N.]

What?

[snip]

Yes, you can come out against them.

That is, you ARE allowed, as parliamentarian, to say, "I support the letter and spirit of the bylaws, and I support parliamentary procedure."

[snip]

A parliamentarian ought not prefer anarchy in one's meetings.

But Kim, Larry wasn't asking about the parliamentarian coming out in favor of anything, he was asking about actively7 opposing those who "stated that they really do not care that much about the rules": the former is nonpartisan principle, the latter taking an active voice n the political arena. One's a no-brainer, the other is what this thread is about.

(Myself, I prudently agree with Tim.)

Nancy

[hmtcastle]

But Kim, Larry wasn't asking about the parliamentarian coming out in favor of anything, he was asking about actively7 opposing those who "stated that they really do not care that much about the rules": the former is nonpartisan principle, the latter taking an active voice n the political arena. One's a no-brainer, the other is what this thread is about.

I would think it would be the parliamentarian's responsibility (as it is that of any member) to oppose those who state that they have no interest in following the rules.

[Gary c Tesser]

I would think it would be the parliamentarian's responsibility (as it is that of any member) to oppose those who state that they have no interest in following the rules.

I would think so too. But when people like Ann and Dan, who we have good reason to assume know their business, are less precipitous, and the likes of Dr. Cisar up and ask the question, it may be advisable for people like Mr. Mt and me to pay a littile more attention to the edge of the cliff.

[Edited 9:41 AM to remove stupidity]

[J. J.]

Situation: You are the parliamentarian for an organization. During the meetings, you maintain neutrality and nobody has a problem with that. Well, now it is election time and one group running for office has stated that they really do not care that much about the rules. Can you, as the parliamentarian, outside of the meeting, come out against them?

No, but I think you should tell them that, as an expert, you will testify at the lawsuit.

[Ann Rempel]

No, but I think you should tell them that, as an expert, you will testify at the lawsuit.

AHA! Overtime!

[J. J.]

AHA! Overtime!

No, premium rates.

Actually, this came this past week for me. I do feel honor bound to tell the clients/potential clients that if they pursue certain courses of action that their parliamentarian will not bless their actions. He won't thwart it, but he has a duty to express the correct rule.