Roberts Rules of Order/ meeting question

[Gentle Ben]

have a question regards to attendance at a meeting governed by the organizations by-laws & Roberts Rules of Order.

Situation : person attends meeting late due to personal circumstances, lets say arrives about half way through the meeting. participates in discussion, voting etc while present but has no input at the meeting prior.
I will mention that a Quorum was established at beginning of meeting.

Question is, in the recorded minutes, does this person show as present at the meeting , or should they be marked as absent until time arrived , then present to end of meeting?

THanks for your input...

 

[red]

i would put them as present

 

[pusher69]

You mark them as present for the meeting. Unless they only show up at the very end of the meeting, the halfway point is valid as they may have had another meeting overlap your meeting and could not attend for the first half.

Its like the vice-versa, where you have persons in attendance for the first half of the meeting and they leave half way before the meeting is over.

 

[Aardvark154]

Depending upon the type organization you might mark them excused and note in the minutes that they joined the meeting at whatever the time was they did so.

 

[Mr Bret]

Depending upon the type organization you might mark them excused and note in the minutes that they joined the meeting at whatever the time was they did so.

I agree. It depends on how the minutes are structured, but the person's time of arrival should be reflected. If the minutes are extremely accurate, it should be easy to determine what was discussed prior to and after that person's arrival.
If it's later determined that he/she voted on a topic that was discussed prior to the arrival, the validity of the vote could be called into question.

 

[TROOPS]

This is wayyyyyy over my head. I'm blue collar.

 

[kerrixoxo]

have a question regards to attendance at a meeting governed by the organizations by-laws & Roberts Rules of Order.

Situation : person attends meeting late due to personal circumstances, lets say arrives about half way through the meeting. participates in discussion, voting etc while present but has no input at the meeting prior.
I will mention that a Quorum was established at beginning of meeting.

Question is, in the recorded minutes, does this person show as present at the meeting , or should they be marked as absent until time arrived , then present to end of meeting?

THanks for your input...

Depends on the organization as set out in their procedures. Usually if someone is late, the secretary will know about it before hand. If secretary doesn't know, meeting/voting can all continue if quorum then noted when that person arrives (same is for early departure). This is usually set up at the top with the rest of the attendance, but again depends on the org's procedures set out for meetings in their policies.

 

[SchlongConery]

This is wayyyyyy over my head. I'm blue collar.

I think they are talking about this kind of meeting.

Probably a dispute over the Grand Pooh Bah's nomination for Social Director.

 

[oldjones]

have a question regards to attendance at a meeting governed by the organizations by-laws & Roberts Rules of Order.

Situation : person attends meeting late due to personal circumstances, lets say arrives about half way through the meeting. participates in discussion, voting etc while present but has no input at the meeting prior.
I will mention that a Quorum was established at beginning of meeting.

Question is, in the recorded minutes, does this person show as present at the meeting , or should they be marked as absent until time arrived , then present to end of meeting?

THanks for your input...

They were present, so that should be recorded; they did miss a significant part of the deliberations, so that too should be recorded (the tidiest way to accomplish both might be to minute the approximate arrival time of the latecomer) especially if the matter was contentious and/or the voting was close. Whatever the Secretary records in the minutes can be improved and corrected at the next meeting when there will be a vote to approve them.

Unless there's some sort of reward/penalty attached to attendance it would seem needlessly strict for the record to call attention to absence; it's those present and participating most organizations want to note.

Although Robert's is common in bookstores, the Canadian standard for rules of order is Beauchesne's Parliamentary Forms and Procedures.

 

[TeasePlease]

For purposes of the minutes, you mark them as present with the time they attended noted.

None of the boards I'mon take recorded votes as a matter of course (only upon request by a member).

 

[needinit]

I have been a secretary for a charity in the past...we would note when the person arrived and what items they had missed (ie 1-4 etc), so we know later they did not participate in those discussions. Same if someone had to leave early

 

[Gentle Ben]

thanks for the input. gives me something to go on.

 

[fun-guy]

I can't find anything in Robertson's Rule of Order on this specific item, however I've been involved in several well known, large, international companies over the years at all levels from entry level management to board director, and we always documented minutes on the time the person arrived after the start of the meeting. We also documented those members who had to leave early as well. This way we have a complete and accurate set of minutes identifying who was involved in the discussion on any motion and who voted on the motions. This can prove to be very important in future if it had to be proven who was and who wasn't present on certain motions and voting. It simply is good business practice for the minutes to accurately reflect who was present on each item in the meeting.

 

[SchlongConery]

I can't find anything in Robertson's Rule of Order on this specific item, however I've been involved in several well known, large, international companies over the years at all levels from entry level management to board director, tem in the meeting.

I LOVE TERB!

Here goes a guy holding himself out as an expert, a director and even says he can't find anything specific (indicating he has looked it up) and yet grossly mistakes the name! Not a spelling error, not a typo, an outright mistake of the name! Lot's of people say "Robertson's Rule of ORder" as if it were a single "Rule" and that some guy named Robertson made it!

Robert's Rules of Order since 1876!

http://www.robertsrules.org

 

[red]

thanks for the input. gives me something to go on.

oh and can you mark me as present as well? i was just outside in the lobby but could hear everything

 

[kerrixoxo]

I can't find anything in Robertson's Rule of Order on this specific item, however I've been involved in several well known, large, international companies over the years at all levels from entry level management to board director, and we always documented minutes on the time the person arrived after the start of the meeting. We also documented those members who had to leave early as well. This way we have a complete and accurate set of minutes identifying who was involved in the discussion on any motion and who voted on the motions. This can prove to be very important in future if it had to be proven who was and who wasn't present on certain motions and voting. It simply is good business practice for the minutes to accurately reflect who was present on each item in the meeting.

I actually stated this in my reply. See above

 

[Aardvark154]

None of the boards I'mon take recorded votes as a matter of course (only upon request by a member).

On this I'd partially disagree, motions that are passed should be noted as having been adopted.

Now I agree that there is no reason to record what the actual numbers were or who voted which way.

 

[fun-guy]

I LOVE TERB!

Here goes a guy holding himself out as an expert, a director and even says he can't find anything specific (indicating he has looked it up) and yet grossly mistakes the name! Not a spelling error, not a typo, an outright mistake of the name! Lot's of people say "Robertson's Rule of ORder" as if it were a single "Rule" and that some guy named Robertson made it!

Robert's Rules of Order since 1876!

http://www.robertsrules.org

We're so fortunate to have such geniuses on this board as you. Thank goodness, where would we all be. I'll keep this in mind on your future postings.

Yes I was a Director, Chairman of a public trading company trading on the unlisted market and had many meetings with lawyers in attendance to ensure we were in accordance with securities law. To what do you refer to when you say I hold myself to be an expert? Expert at what exactly did I say?

Let's put aside your smart ass comments and perhaps you can help out the OP by posting where in your book for dummies that answers his question on what is proper process for the minutes when a member attends after the start of the meeting?

 

[SchlongConery]

We're so fortunate to have such geniuses on this board as you. Thank goodness, where would we all be. I'll keep this in mind on your future postings.

Yes I was a Director, Chairman of a public trading company trading on the unlisted market and had many meetings with lawyers in attendance to ensure we were in accordance with securities law. To what do you refer to when you say I hold myself to be an expert? Expert at what exactly did I say?

Let's put aside your smart ass comments and perhaps you can help out the OP by posting where in your book for dummies that answers his question on what is proper process for the minutes when a member attends after the start of the meeting?

I have a call into the "Robertson's" for some of their expert advice on their "Rule of Order"

They agree that Uncle Willy always orders first, then the ladies, then according to age.

 

[TeasePlease]

On this I'd partially disagree, motions that are passed should be noted as having been adopted.

Now I agree that there is no reason to record what the actual numbers were or who voted which way.

Thats what I mean. Minutes record the members moving and seconding motions, and whether they are carried. Actual votes for/against and by whom are not recorded unless requested.

Btw, fun-guy - it's "publicly traded company", not "public trading company", and how can a company be listed on an unlisted market"? Do you mean the OTC?