Robert's rules

[Mark180]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? New York

During a union meeting, Robert's Rules was not fully followed. A question was to be voted on that the president did not want to pass and a friend of his did a short statement and asked for the vote. The president immediately called for the vote even though people still were waiting to be heard in the debate. No vote was taken to end the vote early and the friend was the second person to be heard, so there was no time to fully debate the issue. We are to vote again on the issue, it's a special order of business at the first vote. However, we are doing so at the next meeting and without notification of the re-vote by mail. My question is will this fall under special orders where notification would be needed and would this have needed to follow the appeals process or be exempt from that process since the vote was made without following the rules?

 

[FlyingRon]

First off, you have to figure out if there's any obligation to follow Robert's (or anybody else's) rules in this meeting.

I think you mean no vote was taken to end "DEBATE" (not VOTE) early.

Again absent knowing the precise rules, the nature of the issue to be voted upon, your union bylaws, contracts, membership agreements, etc... we can't advise you of the proper agenda and notification procedures.

If several of you feel that the chair in this is not following the legal procedure, why don't you band together for a legal consultation. A lawyer can examine all the documents that we can't.

 

[Mark180]

The general constitution says to follow Robert's Rules and it says the local bypass can't supersede the general constitution. The guy called for the vote and we voted on the question, but Robert's rules says everyone can debate and to end the debate early, a vote needs to be taken to end the vote. We already banded together and pointed this out for a re-vote. My question is more of if it is exempt from the appeal rules because the rules weren't followed or if it is subject to those rules and the president might point it out to get his was. Also, part of the general constitution says the president is to follow Robert's Rules and make sure the meetings are done in accordance. However, he said there was no rule about ending the debate early, but that the debate is done when anyone calls for the vote. Would this make him negligent in his duties?

 

[tranquility]

Look to the Rules to find out who determines if they are being followed or not and how to object to him. Did you do that?

 

[FlyingRon]

The general constitution says to follow Robert's Rules and it says the local bypass can't supersede the general constitution. The guy called for the vote and we voted on the question, but Robert's rules says everyone can debate and to end the debate early, a vote needs to be taken to end the vote.

No, Roberts needs a motion/vote to end the DEBATE (often called "calling the question").