decorum and debate

[L. Thorson]

Members of our non-profit corporation pay yearly dues to participate in the recreational programs of this corporation. Some of the dues paying members also serve as employees of the corporation. We refer to them as member/employee. Recently an employee/member appeared before the Board under the unanimous consent rule. He made comments appoximating 3 minutes in length. The Board remained silent, i.e., no challenge as to his remarks not being germane. One month later the employee was fired because the "3 minute remarks" reflected subordination. What is the most appropriate RONR rule to cite that it is the Board that has exclusive control over the remarks of a member, a member/employee or director and disciplinary action thereof if deemed appropriate?

[L. Thorson]

Members of our non-profit corporation pay yearly dues to participate in the recreational programs of this corporation. Some of the dues paying members also serve as employees of the corporation. We refer to them as member/employee. Recently an employee/member appeared before the Board under the unanimous consent rule. He made comments appoximating 3 minutes in length. The Board remained silent, i.e., no challenge as to his remarks not being germane. One month later the employee was fired because the "3 minute remarks" reflected subordination. What is the most appropriate RONR rule to cite that it is the Board that has exclusive control over the remarks of a member, a member/employee or director and disciplinary action thereof if deemed appropriate?

[L. Thorson]

Correction by L. Thorson. The member/employee was fired by the Executive Director.

[Josh Martin]

What is the most appropriate RONR rule to cite that it is the Board that has exclusive control over the remarks of a member, a member/employee or director and disciplinary action thereof if deemed appropriate?

There is no RONR rule to cite to back up such a claim. The board only has the authority granted by the organization's rules, and that granted to it by motion of the general membership. The same goes for the Executive Director.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

Members of our non-profit corporation pay yearly dues to participate in the recreational programs of this corporation.

Some of the dues paying members also serve as employees of the corporation.

We refer to them as member/employee.

Recently an employee/member appeared before the Board under the unanimous consent rule.

He made comments appoximating 3 minutes in length.

The Board remained silent, i.e., no challenge as to his remarks not being germane.

One month later the employee was fired because the "3 minute remarks" reflected subordination.

...

The member/employee was fired by the Executive Director.

This is all very nice, but it does not change the answer to your question.

What is the most appropriate RONR rule to cite that it is the Board that ____:

(a.) has exclusive control over the remarks of a member,

(b.) has exclusive control over a member/employee,

(c.) has exclusive control over a director,

(d.) has exclusive control over disciplinary action thereof, if deemed appropriate?

There is NO SUCH RULE.

Boards have no such power, under the default rules of Robert's Rules of Order.

Any power a board has must come from somewhere OTHER THAN Robert's Rules of Order.

Thus, the real answer lies in your bylaws or constitution or articles of incorporation, i.e., your governing documents, where you board is defined, and where your board is empowered.

Q. What makes you suspect that YOUR board has such authority?