Guest Susan Posted November 29, 2010 at 08:58 PM Report Share Posted November 29, 2010 at 08:58 PM If the definition of an active member is not defined in the By-Laws, does past practice apply? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted November 29, 2010 at 09:07 PM Report Share Posted November 29, 2010 at 09:07 PM If the definition of an active member is not defined in the By-Laws, does past practice apply?Not necessarily. You could not, for instance, deny a member his rights simply because "past practice" was to only allow members to vote if they had, for example, attended a minimum number of meetings.RONR does not require that a member be "active".What, specifically, do you have in mind? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted November 29, 2010 at 09:17 PM Report Share Posted November 29, 2010 at 09:17 PM If the definition of an active member is not defined in the By-Laws, does past practice apply?Well, no, because RONR does not have any category of "inactive" or "active" member. The only place such a distinction could exist is in the bylaws. If it's not there it isn't anywhere.According to RONR if special membership types are not defined in the bylaws, then there is no such type of member. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted November 29, 2010 at 10:16 PM Report Share Posted November 29, 2010 at 10:16 PM If the definition of an active member is not defined in the By-Laws, does past practice apply?Only if "past practice" does not conflict with the rules of the assembly, including the parliamentary authority.I'll need to know the facts of the specific situation to get any more detailed than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.