New Business. After unfinished business and general orders have been disposed of, the chair asks, "Is there any new business?" Members can then introduce new items of business, or can move to take away from the table any matter that is on the table, in the order in which they are able to obtain the floor when no question is pending.... So long as members are reasonably prompt in claiming the floor, the chair cannot prevent the making of legitimate motions or deprive members of the right to introduce legitimate business, by hurrying through the proceedings.So, the motion being proposed by the AASUA Executive Committee for adoption by Council next week would breach the parliamentary rules that govern Council business*, and therefore cannot be approved.
Note that GFC operates on a similar principle to that being proposed by the AASUA Executive Committee, but GFC does not adhere to Robert's Rules of Order (or any established parliamentary procedures, for that matter). GFC procedures are clearly designed to minimize debate or motions from the floor. In fact, apart from question period, there is no opportunity for GFC members to bring forward motions except through the Executive Committee, which tightly controls the agenda. Sad to see AASUA trying to emulate GFC in this way.
*AASUA Policy & Procedures state:
§1.3.3 Parliamentary Procedures in Council
Council meetings have historically operated in the mode of Committee of the Whole in the sense of Robert's Rules of Order, inasmuch as most business involves presentation of information for discussion rather than for approval by vote. Such discussions are not, therefore, limited by the strict rules of debate, although questions are addressed through the presiding officer. In all other respects, however, Council meetings follow the general procedures as laid out in Robert's Rules of Order. In particular, when issues requiring a vote of approval are before Council, Robert's Rules of Order will be followed, with the following noted changes:
1. Members do not normally stand to speak.
2. Votes are normally taken by show of hands.
(Council, 2009.02.19)
Update
At today's (19 January, 2012) AASUA Council meeting, there was lively debate on this motion, and the matter was in the end referred to the Governance Committee.
Posts
I am not clear of all the details here, as this degree of procedural minutia is exactly what keeps me away from administration ... but ... I can offer a example of process in BioSci.
ReplyDeleteAt one point in time, we had a few motions that were both presented for the first time and came to a vote in a single council meeting. It was recognized that many of these were 'substantial', in that they influenced grad student training, new requirements, etc.
There was much grumpiness about this, particularly since there was no 'warning' this was going to happen. In BioSci, it was particularly an issue as many individuals do field work, such that they are unable to attend all meetings - these this constituency was inadvertently unable to comment (and vote) on a substantive issue. It was recognized that this is fundamentally different from someone being aware of an issue, but choosing not to engage.
To reduce the liklihood of this happening again, our chair adopted a new protocol ... such that major motions need to be on an agenda prior to voting, allowing everyone a head-up. New items can still be presented and discussed, but voting wouldn't happen until the next time.
Personally, I support this approach and think it is fair - in that it allows all members of the department to choose whether or not to engage in an issue.
If thats what AASUA is doing ... sounds reasonable to me.
Signed,
JC Cahill
JC, the "procedural minutia" are being proposed by the AASUA Executive Committee. The status quo (as required by Council's adopted rules of procedure) is that motions can be made from the floor during Council meetings with no constraints (except quorum). I for one will be voting to maintain that right next Thursday.
DeleteAs Anon @ 06:08 pm notes, AASUA Councillors should be available to attend most Council meetings, and can nominate alternates to attend in their stead if they need to miss a meeting, so not being present for a debate and vote should not be an issue.
As I said in an earlier comment, this just looks like sour grapes on the part of certain people who feel they "lost" the debate. To those people I say, channel your energies more positively, and come up with a fair, equitable, and procedurally correct survey of transportation needs for AASUA members, as should have been done in the first place.
That could make sense in some departments but in others, like mine, we do fairly often make motions on the spot to address issues that came up in the meeting and which should be dealt with before the next dept meeting. Keep in mind that at AASUA proxies are allowed so I dont' see that the work-related absenteeism is an issue.
ReplyDeleteAnd without wishing to brag (although I am proud of this), it was me who successfully moved that Robert's Rules of Order be the parliamentary procedures governing AASUA Council meetings. I was President that year, and during the presentation of this motion (which was duly on the agenda, and had been discussed at a previous Council meeting), handed the chair of the meeting to VP Walter Dixon. The motion (copied below) was approved unanimously, and is now part of AASUA's Policy & Procedures Manual.
ReplyDelete19 February 2009 Council Meeting
Motion: It is moved that the following procedures be adopted for meetings of AASUA Council:
Parliamentary Procedures in Council
Council meetings have historically operated in the mode of Committee of the Whole in the sense of Robert's Rules of Order, inasmuch as most business involves presentation of information for discussion rather than for approval by vote. Such discussions are not, therefore, limited by the strict rules of debate, although questions are addressed through the presiding officer. In all other respects, however, Council meetings follow the general procedures as laid out in Robert's Rules of Order. In particular, when issues requiring a vote of approval are before Council, Robert's Rules of Order will be followed, with the following noted changes:
1. Members do not normally stand to speak.
2. Votes are normally taken by show of hands.
Robert's Rules of Order will be followed, with the following noted changes:
ReplyDeleteWhy were changes allowed to Robert's Rules? I thought they were carved in stone, with no deviation, no matter how useful that deviation, permitted?
Robert's Rules states in §2:
Delete"In some organizations a particular practice may sometimes come to be followed as a matter of established custom so is treated practically as if it were prescribed by a rule of order."
The two exceptions noted in my motion in 2009 reflected customary practice in AASUA Council meetings.