Does Robert's Rules have anything to say as to who run's our meeting?
October 13, 2013 2:04 PM Subscribe
The monthly meeting of our quilt guild is this Monday. There's a big chance both our President and VP will be unavailable to preside. Does Robert's Rules cover this situation?
The details:
Our president and VP might both be unavailable (there's a small chance our VP will be present but too tired from an illness to run the meeting).
Our bylaws state our meeting are run by the President or VP if the President is unavailable. The bylaws don't go any further in an 'order of succession'.
All other board members are listed in the bylaws in no particular order.
The three available board members are: Treasurer, Secretary, and Communications Administrator.
Does Robert's Rules cover this? Usually we conduct our meetings in a semi-casual way (friendly but orderly. We have one member who, if in the wrong mood, might snark about how we aren't following Robert's Rules.
thanks in advance
The details:
Our president and VP might both be unavailable (there's a small chance our VP will be present but too tired from an illness to run the meeting).
Our bylaws state our meeting are run by the President or VP if the President is unavailable. The bylaws don't go any further in an 'order of succession'.
All other board members are listed in the bylaws in no particular order.
The three available board members are: Treasurer, Secretary, and Communications Administrator.
Does Robert's Rules cover this? Usually we conduct our meetings in a semi-casual way (friendly but orderly. We have one member who, if in the wrong mood, might snark about how we aren't following Robert's Rules.
thanks in advance
Roberts Rules defer to organizational bylaws or constitution who may preside.
This is particularly important because prerogative to call a meeting to order and determine that a quorum is present can be vital to good order. In other words, you can't just find a quorum at a house party and, boom, you're in session.
If the by-laws have no provision to back up the President and VP, a stickler would be well within his right to insist that no non-emergency resolutions would be in order to be passed.
This is only something you should actually care about if resolutions to disburse funds, sign contracts, etc., might be before the group.
posted by MattD at 2:49 PM on October 13, 2013
This is particularly important because prerogative to call a meeting to order and determine that a quorum is present can be vital to good order. In other words, you can't just find a quorum at a house party and, boom, you're in session.
If the by-laws have no provision to back up the President and VP, a stickler would be well within his right to insist that no non-emergency resolutions would be in order to be passed.
This is only something you should actually care about if resolutions to disburse funds, sign contracts, etc., might be before the group.
posted by MattD at 2:49 PM on October 13, 2013
Oh -- and you should adopt a by-law which provides for a fixed time to convene a session in addition to sessions called by the President, or for a sufficient majority of voting members to convene a session by notice to all other members, and for sessions to be able to choose a presiding officer in lieu of the President or VP.
posted by MattD at 2:55 PM on October 13, 2013
posted by MattD at 2:55 PM on October 13, 2013
The Speaker of the House would rule, but Roberts does not address this other than saying that your bylaws would rule. I suggest for the meeting that your board members elect one of the other three officers to serve as sort of a President Pro Tem to run the meeting and then address the issue at a full meeting later on to decide what happens next time. I have seen meetings canceled because there was no appropriate person to run the meeting.
posted by JohnnyGunn at 3:26 PM on October 13, 2013
posted by JohnnyGunn at 3:26 PM on October 13, 2013
Snarky member does not pound sand. Robert's Rules are a model that many organizations have adopted to run meetings, not an inherently binding law upon organizations whether or not they choose to adopt it.
I highly doubt that your quilt guild as adopted Robert's Rules. But in this case it doesn't really matter. If it hasn't adopted them, then there's no internal mechanism for there to be a meeting in the absence of the President or VP. So no meeting.
But if it has adopted the Rules, the way your bylaws are written strongly suggests that, deferring as the Rules do to your organizational bylaws, only the President or VP has the authority to call a meeting to order. Which is the first thing that needs to happen in a meeting run by the Rules.
I think you're in the situation JohnnyGunn describes: there's no one with the authority to run the meeting if both the President and VP are absent.
posted by valkyryn at 4:46 PM on October 13, 2013
I highly doubt that your quilt guild as adopted Robert's Rules. But in this case it doesn't really matter. If it hasn't adopted them, then there's no internal mechanism for there to be a meeting in the absence of the President or VP. So no meeting.
But if it has adopted the Rules, the way your bylaws are written strongly suggests that, deferring as the Rules do to your organizational bylaws, only the President or VP has the authority to call a meeting to order. Which is the first thing that needs to happen in a meeting run by the Rules.
I think you're in the situation JohnnyGunn describes: there's no one with the authority to run the meeting if both the President and VP are absent.
posted by valkyryn at 4:46 PM on October 13, 2013
Response by poster: Not thread sitting, just answering:
1.We've adopted RR as a backup for our bylaws. "If we've forgotten to add X to our bylaws then RR applies" kinda thing.
2. Quorum will be met, as per our bylaws.
3. No resolutions are on the table for this meeting, just 'fun' stuff like show and tell and a class.
4. MattD: We already have some of those in our bylaws, I'll bring up the one about a presiding officer.
5. I like the President Pro Tem idea. If not we'll have the VP or Prez stop by, call the meeting to order then kinda disappear.
thanks to everyone for the advice!
posted by pibeandres at 5:04 PM on October 13, 2013
1.We've adopted RR as a backup for our bylaws. "If we've forgotten to add X to our bylaws then RR applies" kinda thing.
2. Quorum will be met, as per our bylaws.
3. No resolutions are on the table for this meeting, just 'fun' stuff like show and tell and a class.
4. MattD: We already have some of those in our bylaws, I'll bring up the one about a presiding officer.
5. I like the President Pro Tem idea. If not we'll have the VP or Prez stop by, call the meeting to order then kinda disappear.
thanks to everyone for the advice!
posted by pibeandres at 5:04 PM on October 13, 2013
If you aren't going to actually to pass any substantive motions, then it hardly matters.
posted by grouse at 5:55 PM on October 13, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by grouse at 5:55 PM on October 13, 2013 [2 favorites]
Best answer: Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised, 10th ed. (2000) [not the most recent edition, which would be the 11th (2011), but the one I have at hand] has this to say (pp. 436-437):
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 7:30 AM on October 14, 2013 [2 favorites]
Temporary Occupants of the Chair. If it is necessary for the president to vacate the chair during a meeting, or if the president is absent, the chair is occupied temporarily by another... as follows:(Italics in original, boldface and elisions mine.)
1) A vice-president....
2) An appointed chairman pro tem. If the president vacates the chair during a meeting and no vice-president is available, he can, subject to the approval of the assembly... appoint a temporary chairman called the chairman pro tempore, or chairman pro tem....
3) An elected chairman pro tem. If neither the president nor any vice-president is present, the secretary—or in the secretary's absence, some other member—should call the meeting to order, and the assembly should immediately elect a chairman pro tem to preside during that session. Such office is terminated by the entrance of the president or a vice-president, or by the election of another chairman pro tem....
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 7:30 AM on October 14, 2013 [2 favorites]
Best answer: The latest Robert's (Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (11th Edition) from 2011) has similar language to that quoted by DevilsAdvocate (but now on pages 452-53). If that is your parliamentary authority and no higher rules (state statute, articles of incorporation) apply, then the language in Robert's should likely be followed. Even though it sounds as though no substantive business will be transacted, you likely still want to choose the member who will run the best meeting. Robert's notes that the presiding officer (whether permanent or temporary) "should be chosen principally for the ability to preside."
With that in mind, you have two options:
(1) Have the President call the meeting to order and appoint a chairman pro tem, subject to the approval of the assembly ("Is there any objection to Mary serving as chairman pro tem? [PAUSE] Hearing no objection, Mary will serve as chairman pro tem.") The return of the President or Vice-President will end the chairman pro tem's tenure.
(2) If neither the President nor Vice President will be present at the meeting, the secretary or other officer should call the meeting to order and have the body elect a chairman pro tem. The same unanimous consent process described above can save time ("Is there any objection to Mary . . .") If there is objection, the motion can be put to a vote.
FYI, it's often easier to choose someone other than the Secretary to serve as temporary presiding officer. If the Secretary takes on that responsibility, then you have to select a Secretary pro tem!
Jim Slaughter, Author
The Complete Idiot's Guide to Parliamentary Procedure Fast-Track &
Notes and Comments on Robert's Rules, Fourth Edition
posted by JimSlaughter at 3:46 PM on October 14, 2013 [1 favorite]
With that in mind, you have two options:
(1) Have the President call the meeting to order and appoint a chairman pro tem, subject to the approval of the assembly ("Is there any objection to Mary serving as chairman pro tem? [PAUSE] Hearing no objection, Mary will serve as chairman pro tem.") The return of the President or Vice-President will end the chairman pro tem's tenure.
(2) If neither the President nor Vice President will be present at the meeting, the secretary or other officer should call the meeting to order and have the body elect a chairman pro tem. The same unanimous consent process described above can save time ("Is there any objection to Mary . . .") If there is objection, the motion can be put to a vote.
FYI, it's often easier to choose someone other than the Secretary to serve as temporary presiding officer. If the Secretary takes on that responsibility, then you have to select a Secretary pro tem!
Jim Slaughter, Author
The Complete Idiot's Guide to Parliamentary Procedure Fast-Track &
Notes and Comments on Robert's Rules, Fourth Edition
posted by JimSlaughter at 3:46 PM on October 14, 2013 [1 favorite]
Response by poster: Awesome answers DevilsAdvocate & JimSlaughter!
posted by pibeandres at 3:54 PM on October 14, 2013
posted by pibeandres at 3:54 PM on October 14, 2013
« Older Help, I suffer from chronic bitchface | What's causing these mysterious round stains on my... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
Also, make sure you will have a quorum to hold the meeting- if you don't, it's a moot question who can run the meeting.
posted by ambrosia at 2:27 PM on October 13, 2013