bolar-RCU

Does anyone know how the AMA is going to grade all of the Bylaws they are going to get? I made up the Bylaws for my club about a year before this all flared up. I have since revised them to fit the AMA guidelines on their web site. Well, I hope they meet the guidelines.

Is this going to be pass/fail? Are we going to get a second chance to correct what's wrong? How many chances do we get? What about those people who are, shall we say, not very literate? Is there going to be a point when the AMA will give up on them or just write the Bylaws for them?

In any event with all of the different clubs out there, all flying under different conditions, someone has a lot of reading in front of him.

This could get messy.

J_R

Charlie Bauer, Dist VI VP, has an item on the agenda this for this weekend's EC meeting. He wants to make sure no club is denied a charter. You might write to him for details.

The last I heard, the plan was to hire several Ball State interns to read the club bylaws. The main issue is that the bylaws need to have a provision assuring the membership due process.

If the bylaws do not meet the requirements, the club will be given time to fix them, with information on where they are lacking.

There seems to be some concern in the EC. They, of course, do not want to lose any clubs over this, but, at the same time, the clubs need due process to avoid another large lawsuit.

Bottom Line: if you have some form of due process in your bylaws, you probably will not have any problems at all.

JR

Geistware

My Feedback: (16)

What is ment by "due process"?

J_R

Basically, in this context, due process is a set of rules that protect the rights of the individual member in cases of disciplinary action and/or expulsion with regard to the club. I am not a lawyer, so this may be technically incorrect, but, it should give you the idea.

Check out documents 542 and 539 on the AMA web site to see how they suggest it be handled.

http://www.modelaircraft.org/templat...5B26866E8CE3C1

JR

Jim Branaum

My Feedback: (3)

In other words, you cannot kick Frank Flightpack out of the club without haveing a PRE-DETERMINED reason (broke the written rules) for doing so. You also must have a procedure to tell him he is at risk and a method to allow him the chance to correct the problem before you take action.

The AMA document seems to allow one individual the power to cause a removal action, so I would suggest that be modified to make it 2 or 3 complainants. However, it is YOUR club.

Geistware

My Feedback: (16)

OH, OK, this I like.
It kills me when club officers kick people out because of personal reasons without "DUE PROCESS"

Al Stein

The bottom line as far as what they're going to do with the bylaws is in document 542: Document 542: the minimum standard... What it says is this:It goes on to say that club bylaws will then be evaluated and concerns sent out to the club, which will have six months to reevaluate the items of concern, but notice this: the basis on which your bylaws will be evaluated is the new standard that will come out of studying the bylaws that get submitted. In other words, you can't fail yet because the standard won't be done until after your bylaws are in hand at AMA.

If it's all about due process or individual rights, it doesn't say so in the documentation posted by the AMA... the documentation says it's about protecting the clubs and AMA from our litiguous society.

Our club just did a set of bylaws for the first time... how are y'all doing getting your bylaws done?

Hossfly

>>>>>>>>>>>>
"What is ment by "due process"?"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>...
ARTICLE VII - GENERAL DUTIES AND RULES OF CONDUCT

SECTION 1

Flying field and meeting rules of conduct are to be enforced by EACH member.

SECTION 2

When the conduct of any member becomes detrimental to the charter and welfare of the Club or if any member conducts him/her self in any way contrary to, or in violation of the Constitution, by-laws, or rules of the Club, he/she shall be notified of his/her misconduct and may appear before the membership at a regular meeting to defend his/her actions.
If upon review of charges, the membership finds the charges to be true and two-thirds (2/3) of the members present at the meeting vote to remove said member from the rolls, such member shall be so removed without return of any portion of dues or fees previously paid by said member.

Al Stein

Thanks Horace -- and a question for you (or anyone: not trying to be exclusive here) --

I think that unless further specific and well-formed guidance comes out (and maybe even then), I could easily develop a grievance procedure that fulfills the letter of the law while assuring that fair consideration can be circumvented. You seem to keep an eye on which way the winds are blowing at AMA HQ, what do you think about this due process thing... do you think it is a big part of the intent of the bylaws push and do you think it will work as defined now?

Jim Branaum

My Feedback: (3)

ROFLOL!!!

Sure it will work as defined now, if everyone in the process is honest. However as the AMA has defined it, a single person can cause any member to be thrown out of the club because he did not like him by twisting the facts and appearances a bit. In short, except for human nature yes the rules as written are good.

The problem lies in facing your accusers and proving the allegations. If (as the AMA document used to allow - I admit I have not looked since saying something about it to HQ some time ago) Roger Rockethead complains 3 times Frank Flightpack is OUT. Now if the complaint was a perception thing, Frank just got the short end. Not good. Worse if there were no witnesses to the 'infraction' to protect Frank from a misrepresentation.

Hossfly

Thanks for the kind words, Al.

>>>>>
I think that unless further specific and well-formed guidance comes out (and maybe even then), I could easily develop a grievance procedure that fulfills the letter of the law while assuring that fair consideration can be circumvented. You seem to keep an eye on which way the winds are blowing at AMA HQ, what do you think about this due process thing... do you think it is a big part of the intent of the bylaws push and do you think it will work as defined now?

Al Stein

Boy ain't that the truth!

Interesting point, Jim -- our club chose not to use the grievance portions of the AMA sample document partly for those reasons. Instead, we called for a grievance committe to formed if when/if needed and for it to consider both sides and use tools such as reprimand, suspension of privileges, or termination as it sees appropriate, with termination decisions requiring ratification of the mambership and the directors.

What we have is cumbersome and risky, but we didn't want it to be automatic -- we allow for grievances concerning anything that jeopardizes the club's continued ability to pursue its goals. Even things like littrering run contrary to the club's goal of providing a safe, clean, family-friendly place to do model aviation related things... so this way we don't automatically dismember (oops, I mean terminate the membership of) the first guy caught flicking a third cigarette butt on the lawn.

Cub_Boy

My Feedback: (6)

Hi All,

I have read through this thread and have the following comments and observations to add.

I have been a Chartered club President for some time now. My club had (although slightly outdated) a formal set of documented bylaws. To be honest not much else was documented, seems like most of the rules were on a person to person basis. This is a problem; here are the steps that I took to clean my club up starting in 2000.


(1.) Announced to the club and the Board that from the first meeting as President until I leave this club will be run as a business. (And it has been successful)

(2.) Announced that internal power groups were a thing of the past and proceeded to break those up.

(3.) Updated and ratified our bylaws in 2000 and again in 2002

(4.) Implemented a "no hearsay rule" policy, if it is not documented it is not a rule!

(5.) Everyone follows the rules (especially the Officers and Board Members) we will lead by example!

(6.) Everything we do, will be documented (EVERYTHING)

In the last three years I have over 300MB in electronic documentation for my club. This runs from everyday e-mail discussion threads to disciplinary actions. Our club can track every decision and every action for the last three years.

The AMA needs to better orient clubs on the importance of documentation and impress upon its club officers that they have a responsibility to their members to ensure their clubs are solvent and protected from liabilities.

If clubs are to survive in our current society, the "good ole boy" system of management has to give rise to a more business approach and view.

I will get off of my soapbox now....


Rick Dunn

President 2000-2003
Fly-A-Ways R/C Club

Beaverton, Oregon

Website: http://www.flyaways.org/

J_R

Posted 2/19/03 on the AMA web page
http://www.modelaircraft.org/templat...3ecmotions.asp

Moved and seconded, that no club will be forced to adopt the AMA recommended bylaws. No club will be denied being chartered because they have not adopted recommended bylaws. Every AMA club is required to have a set of bylaws. A charter will be renewed for any club that has submitted a copy of their bylaws.

(This motion was withdrawn and referred to a committee to develop a minimum standard for bylaws. All clubs are still required to submit some type of bylaws for the club to renew for 2003/2004.
—J. Hager)

Al Stein

That was an interesting little piece of action taken in context...

-- Prior to this motion the AMA already published a statement that no club would be denied a 2003 charter based on content of its bylaws, and that an external group would study the submitted bylaws.

-- This motion would have assured that clubs would, including after 2003, continue to be safe from exclusion based on the content of their bylaws and, more specifically, that a one-size-fits-all standard set of bylaws not be imposed on the clubs.

-- So, the withdrawal of the motion is a de facto claim by the Headquarters of a right to include or exclude any club based on future evaluation of their bylaws agains criteria which have yet to be determined.

-- And, looking further into the report shows that an internal AMA committee was formed, apparently to do the evaluation that we were previously told would be performed by an external group.

So, they're probably reducing the monetary expense of the evaluation. But in doing so they're reducing the objectivity of the results. Good or bad??? I dunno. You tell me.

Jim Branaum

My Feedback: (3)

I had a weekend of conversation between several about small "royal" clubs, you know those run by one or two people who own the land or etc. The issue really is due process in throwing members out.

We agreed that there needed to be SOME rules and the club 'management' needed to sign off on them. IOW, we agreed that the club 'officers' would sign a statement insuring all members documented due process.


I have conversed with Carl Maroney about this issue more than once and noted several flaws in the 'recommended' version. Some of those flaws may have been legal (depending on your state) and some were simply procedural. I (and the other officers in my club) noted that a single person can effectively throw a member out, as the 'recommended' rules allow.

In short, it is clear that the AMA leadership is trying very hard to protect the hobby, the clubs, and our resources.

Al Stein

Oh, I know.

Although I rewrote the grievance portion a bit for our club, I think it does retain the same flavor and I really wasn't sure how it would go over in a club with, shall we say, a well established structure of authority. It's been a couple of weeks now since the draft was distributed and the response has all been favorable, so maybe the group here is easier to deal with than I thought.

J_R

From the EC Minutes of the 2/8/03 meeting:

"No club denied Charter for not adopting AMA recommended bylaws

The actual motion that was voted on, MOTION I of the October 27, 2001 EC meeting, pertaining to this item was read.

Some clubs are misinterpreting this motion. They are under the impression that the samples provided by AMA are required and mandatory. The document says that their bylaws have to address certain items (for example: membership qualifications, membership assessment, resolution of grievances.) The way they address the items is up to them. It was reiterated that the only reason AMA would deny a charter is if the club does not submit a copy of their bylaws.

MOTION: Moved and seconded, that no club will be forced to adopt the AMA recommended bylaws. No club will be denied being chartered because they have not adopted recommended bylaws. Every AMA club is required to have a set of bylaws. A charter will be renewed for any club that has submitted a copy of their bylaws.

The President indicated that in lieu of this motion, the document sent to clubs will be revised to specify what AMA regards as the minimum items they need to address in their bylaws. This revision will be sent with the next mailing to clubs.

The President appointed an Ad hoc Committee on Minimum Bylaws Requirements for Clubs. Committee is B. Nelson, Chairman; Charlie Bauer and Don Koranda.

The above motion and second were withdrawn."

Al Stein

OK, well, uhhhh, I have no reason to doubt that other than that it doesn't seem to make a lot of sense in context of what's posted at the AMA site...

The AMA (on their site) says that the text you started to quote was presented as a motion that was seconded and later withdrawn... I don't understand how somebody could hear a motion read as accepted in the October minutes, vote in favor of accepting those minutes, move the same thing that was in those minutes, and have somebody else who also just heard the same thing second the repeated motion anyway.

Do you know of someplace on the web that we could look at the October meeting minutes?


BTW, the AMA posting says that the new committee will "make recommendations on the minimum requirements of bylaws allowed by the AMA." That neither says nor implies that the sample content will not be made mandatory or that charters will not be denied for noncompliance once the minimum is legislated. Akk it says is that the fellas are gonna git tagether an decide what we gotta do or don' gotta do. THEN we'll see who kin hav a charter an who can' hav one.

J_R

The minutes are posted on the AMA web page. To find them, go to http://www.modelaircraft.org/templates/ama/
chose about AMA, then chose Executive Council, then chose Executive Council News and Information. All of the agenda items, motion, and minutes for the last several years are there.

The direct link is to the quoted minutes is http://www.modelaircraft.org/templat...3ecminutes.asp

Normally, the motions appear about two weeks after the meeting and the minutes about 3-4 weeks after the meeting.

Al Stein

I'm starting to find my way around now... thanks for the assist J_R...

For others, if you want to check out a particular set of minutes from anytime back through 1999, or if you want to track an issue back through previous Executive Council meetings, you can get to a set of minutes by clicking these menu items starting from the www.modelaircraft.org AMA home page:

• ABOUT AMA on the menu at the top of the AMA home page gets you a new page with a list of top level "About AMA" links
• EXECUTIVE COUNCIL in the "About AMA" links gets you a new page with a list of "Executive Council" links
• EXECUTIVE COUNCIL NEWS AND INFORMATION in the Executive Council links gets you a new page with a list of "Executive Council meetings and links to the agenda, motions, and minutes for each.

If you go to a set of minutes, each motion appears in red, starting with the motion number and who proposed it, followed by the actual motion... which takes some getting used to before the actual motion starts to jump out at you, but it is worth looking at.

So, searching the minutes, what I saw indicated that the Bylaws requirements stemmed from a dispute between two clubs with the same name (see the Oct 2001 minutes: http://www.modelaircraft.org/templat...cminutes.asp#I ).

In May of 2002, the Bylaws committee "restated" that the EC's intent is to "create a process in which clubs deal with key membership issues..." and the "affirmed" that the AMA doesn't intend to regulate the structure and workings of the clubs beyond what's in the AMA Bylaws.

The subject of club bylaws was not touched again until this month's meeting in which the assurance (as quoted above) that clubs would be chartered was moved, seconded, and withdrawn without vote -- to be replaced by a to-be-developed mailing telling just what will be the minimum required.

If there's something in that which assures that a club will get a charter, even if it submits bylaws, could somebody with sharper eyes point it out to me?