History

In 1867, immediately following the Civil War, U.S. Army Corp of Engineers Major Henry M. Robert was transferred to San Francisco, CA to continue his military duties². San Francisco was, at the time, a mix of people from very divergent backgrounds. Social clubs and organizations were popular, and Major Robert became involved with several. He soon noted the lack of any agreement for governing the meetings, and the inefficiencies of the decision making processes. Additionally, the rich cultural diversity of the city added complications to running a meeting. It seemed that everyone, based on their different backgrounds, had a different view on just how a meeting should be run. So, to fix some rules for holding a meeting Major Robert set out some rules for the "order" when considering any question (i.e., a yes or no question) brought before a society or organization. These rules came to be known as Robert's Rules of Order, and were subsequently revised many times as a result of feedback Major Robert got from others, when applying his rules.

Origin

Robert's Rules of Order can be traced back to the rules of U.S. Congress, which in turn came from British Parliamentary law. But these rules served only as a starting point as Major Robert recognized that the wholesale adoption of these Parliamentary rules was not possible. The House of Representatives rules are significantly different from those used in the Senate. The question of which set should be selected gave way to the recognition that neither set of rules had the needed procedures for running a social meeting. And, although both sets of Congressional rules came from British Parliamentary law useful for managing deliberation, the U.S. Congressional rules were established for limiting debate. Robert wanted a set of rules for managing the consideration of questions leading to an organization's decisions in a meeting.

Robert was clearly an individual given to visual descriptions, and his use of terms reflects that persuasion. His approach to the choice of terminology can complicate one's understanding of the terms, if one attempts to reference other forms of decision making. For example, Robert's Rules of Order call for "tabling a question", meaning it will no longer be under consideration. In common European terminology tabling a document would be making it available to others. Thus, some caution in the interpretation of Robert's terms is needed. And a "visual" interpretation of his terms can help.

The Process

To organize a meeting that will follow Robert's Rules of Order a sequence of questions is presented as a meeting's agenda. That sequence is then agreed to by the members in attendance as a first order of business, and is referred to as the Order of the Day. But, to advance the agenda, and to protect the rights of the meeting's minority views, reconsideration of the agenda's sequence can occur at any time during the meeting.

However, the "order" referred to in Robert's Rules of Order refers to the process for considering a single question, called a main motion. Decisions must be made in the correct order, or they are "out of order" and the Chair can be challenged on that point at any time, by anyone. A meeting's "parliamentarian" is appointed for the duration of the meeting to decide issues raised on the proper application of the Robert's rules. This is to prevent the Chair from mismanaging the meeting.

The "order" of things is very simple, and very linear. A question is presented (in visual terms it is taken up) as a motion³. The motion's proposer requests the Chair for the "floor" and when granted the motion is stated by the proposing member (actually, it can be done by any member, including the Chair), which is worded as:

"I move we adopt the Program Committee's report of November 19."

The next activity is to obtain a "second." Again, any member can second a motion, simply by saying, without waiting for the Chair's recognition:

"I second that motion."

The purpose of seconding a motion is to affirm that more than one member wishes to consider the question. If not, why waste everyone's time?

At this point anyone may offer a "friendly amendment" to the motion, and the motion's sponsor may accept the change without restriction by the rules. This is often done if the motion has an obvious mistake. An example would be:

"I suggest that the motion be amended to provide the committee's correct name, which is the Program and Project Committee."

The person who made the second need not concur with the "friendly amendment" and may withdraw his or her second at this time. In that case someone else must offer a second. Otherwise the "friendly amendment" is not accepted and there is no change to the original motion⁴.

The Chair then reads aloud the motion (with a friendly amendment or otherwise). To do this the Chair announces:

"There is a motion on the floor to adopt the Program and Project Committee's report on November 19. Is there any discussion?"

From this point on the motion becomes more formal, and the Rules of Order become enforced by the Chair.

The Chair then recognizes members wishing to speak on the motion.⁵ This is called "taking the floor" and once awarded the floor by the Chair all other speakers are ruled "out of order" by the Chair if they attempt to speak, with some special exceptions noted below. Chairs with a sense of the meeting are able to anticipate member's viewpoints, and will call on individuals in a pattern that allows alternating pro and con arguments.

At any point in the discussion a special set of priority questions may be raised by interrupting a speaker who has the floor. These questions all have "privilege" over the "main motion" (i.e., the motion to adopt the report). These privileged motions must be dealt with before the main motion can be called up for a vote. These privileged motions, while having no relationship to the pending motion, are of such urgency or importance that they must be resolved before continuing the discussion. These motions are, in rank order of their "privilege" are to:

• Fix the time to the meeting's adjournment
• Adjourn the meeting
• Take a recess
• Ask a question about privilege
• Call for the Order of the Day (does not require a second)

None of the above motions are debatable. When called for by a member and then seconded by another member, the Chair must resolve the question by calling for an immediate vote, before continuing the discussion on the pending motion. (That is, if the meeting has not been adjourned.) These motions are considered so critical that their resolution must take priority over all other activities of the meeting. That is why they are called "privileged."

The procedure for initiating a privileged question is simple. In the course of the discussion the individual calling for a privileged motion, when recognized by the Chair, makes the motion simply by stating:

"I move we adjourn the meeting at this time."

A second member would then state:

"I second the motion" without even waiting for the Chair's recognition.

The consideration of privileged motions is necessary to protect the rights of minority views. This may be important in certain circumstances. For example, when a question is being poorly represented, and more information is needed before a fair vote can be taken, the proper thing to do is to end the discussion. This action is done simply out of a sense of fair play, with the membership stopping the process of decision making. This action (adjourning the meeting) may seem too severe to some. But the protection of the best interests of the organization must be provided through such mechanisms. There are however other, less Draconian ways to do this within the rules. Read on.

The following is a list of "subsidiary" motions that can be made, and although not privileged (i.e., they do affect the motion being considered), they are also not debatable. These motions are to:

• Lay the question on the table
• Call for the previous question (2/3 vote required)
• Restrict or extend the limits of debate (2/3 vote required)

Previous to this list, all questions are decided by a simple majority (i.e., more than 50% of the voting members in attendance, a quorum being present). The decision to call the previous question, or restrict or extend the limits of debate require a suspension of the normal rules. This requires a 2/3 vote in favor of the motion, again to protect the rights of the minority view.

Subsidiary motions can be applied to a main motion, and to certain other motions, for the purposes of modifying them, delaying them, or otherwise disposing of them. This group of subsidiary motions are not debatable, and when moved and seconded the Chair must call the question immediately.

As an example of this process a member of the assembly would ask the Chair to be recognized to consider a subsidiary motion. When granted the floor, the member would state:

"I move that the main question be tabled for consideration at the next meeting."

After obtaining a second to a motion to table a main motion, the motion to table is immediately called by the Chair without debate. Any and all formally proposed changes to the main motion (i.e., adhering amendments) will be tabled with the main motion, should it pass. During the period that a motion is tabled no other motion on the same subject is in order that would in any way affect the question. To consider the tabled motion again it must first be "taken up" by the assembly, and when "taken up" all adhering amendments are still attached. The action to reconsider a tabled motion requires a motion and a second, and is not debatable. However, to once again take up a tabled motion some business should have been transacted that justifies its reconsideration.

Requesting consideration of a question, resolution or report at a later time is invoked by making a special order motion. This type of motion on a pending question asks the assembly to consider suspending the rules, and thus requires a 2/3 vote. In this case the motion for a special order would place the pending question on the order of business at the specified time. If the question is not pending the special order is a main motion and is debatable, amendable, and passes with a simple majority vote.

Another set of subsidiary motions are debatable, and these motions may be moved by a member at any time, when recognized by the Chair. Once moved and seconded the Chair reads the subsidiary motion, which is then discussed and voted on. This class of motion may be passed by a simple majority. These motions are to:

• Postpone to a certain time
• Commit or refer
• Amend
• Postpone indefinitely

To amend a main motion the proposer may move to insert words, add words, strike out words, or substitute text as portions or in its entirety. The process for amending a motion (main or subsidiary) is:

"I move that the second paragraph be stricken from the report and the following paragraph be inserted. ‘The committee shall study the purchase agreement and report to the membership by March 1. However, if the purchase price is reduced by 10% the committee is empowered to act with the authority of the association.'"

A second is required, and then the Chair will ask for discussion, after reading the motion to amend. After the discussion the amendment is considered, a simple majority is needed to decide whether the amendment is to be adopted. If it is adopted the amended main motion is then open for discussion once again.

When amendments to a motion, especially when considering the adoption of complex documents requiring many changes, it may be best for the assembly to refer the document to a committee. In this case a motion to refer or commit to a committee (standing or ad hoc) would be appropriate. The committee would then make the corrections, and return the revised document to the assembly for its consideration. This is a much more efficient use of the membership's time and energy.

One of the important roles of the meeting's Chair is to recognize when the discussion is no longer productive; when points are unrelated to the pending question and are thus out of order; and when members have each had sufficient opportunity to speak their points. Typically, no member is called on for more that two opportunities to speak, and the time allowed for a member to speak is commonly restricted to a few minutes for each member. Great latitude is given to the Chair to foster fair participation and to keep the meeting progressing efficiently through judicious time allocations. But any formal limits on any speaker's time requires a change of the rules (see above).

The correct order of considering motions follows the order of the listings given above, with the first item listed (i.e., to fix the time for adjournment) having priority over all other questions, and so forth down the list.

When all of the above considerations are resolved, the Chair calls for the main question. Please note, as stated above, any member can formally call for "the question," but that process is considered a suspension of the rules, requiring a 2/3 vote. The call by the Chair is a normal process to get to the event of decision making, taking into account the receptivity of the members to decide the question at that point in time, and with a sensitivity to the minority's views. When the Chair calls for the question, it is not a motion requiring a vote, but a request to vote on the motion, following what was judged by the Chair to have been sufficient discussion by the assembly.

If the Chair senses strong support either for or against the motion, it is his or her responsibility to call for the question. Otherwise, an easily resolved question can get a protracted discussion for little or no benefit, beyond allowing vocalization of what everyone has already accepted.

This is done by the Chair by stating:

"Is everyone ready for the question? The motion is to adopt the Program and Project Committee's report of November 19. All those in favor signify by saying 'Aye'. Those opposed please signify by saying ‘no'." The Chair then announces the results by stating:

"The ayes have it, and the motion is passed."

If there is any question on the decision made by a voice vote, the Chair should call for a show of hands, first calling for the ‘yes' vote, followed by the ‘no' votes. Also, immediately following a voice vote any member can call for a "division of the assembly" which requires the Chair to call for a show of hands. To invoke this rule the challenging member simply asks the chair for a "Division", or "I call for a division". No second is needed, and the Chair must act immediately on the call for a division. Chair's must guard against any abuse of this privilege by members intending to disrupt the meeting, however.

On some occasions a call for abstentions may be proper, but this is not commonly invoked. But Chairs should be prepared for one or more members wishing to have their abstention recorded in the meeting's minutes.

On the occasions of a tie vote, the Chair casts the deciding vote, and so informs the membership when declaring the results of the voting.

There are some "tricks" for handling large motions that merit note. Some questions are more easily considered if divided into components. Such divisions may be suggested by the Chair as a way of expediting the members' consideration. For other types of documents, such as a new set of by-laws, the Chair may decide to take the document by seriation (a.k.a., by paragraph). This action recognizes that the document cannot logically be divided, so the members are asked to give its consideration of the document section by section, and then vote on the adoption of the whole document.

Minutes for a meeting conducted under the Robert's Rules of Order typically are records of the decision made as specific motions, amendments and votes taken, rather than a transcript of the discussions. Such meeting minutes are thus shorter, and will have the actual decisions made by the members, with less interpretation of what happened by the organization's secretary, or the by the Chair of the meeting.

Conclusion

The point addressed by Robert's Rules of Order is that there must be some order to the consideration of questions by any organization. Without order there is chaos. And anyone who has suffered through a chaotic meeting has real motivation for adopting Robert's Rules of Order .

A Word of Caution

Major Robert once wrote, "....one who is constantly raising points of order and insisting upon a strict observance of every rule in a peaceable assembly (sic) in which most of the members are....[unfamiliar with] these rules and customs, makes himself a nuisance, hinders business, and prejudices people against parliamentary law. Such a person....either....[does not understand] its real purpose or else willfully misuses his knowledge."

Reference

Robert, Henry M. The 1915 Classic Edition. Robert's Rules of Order , Revised. Morrow Quill Paperbacks. New York. 1979. 323 pages. (ISBN 0-688-05306-8)

Footnotes:

1. Copyright 1998, David R. MacKenzie. All rights reserved. [ back]

2. He later became a General. [ back]

3. The visualness is apparent here, as the process can be "seen" to lift a document from a table for its consideration. [ back]

4. The Chair must exercise caution in the practice of allowing friendly amendments. In some instances the privilege may be abused. Comments can flow into a discussion of the question before it is formerly stated by the Chair. [ back]

5. It should be readily apparent that reports prepared for consideration by an organization must be circulated to the membership prior to the "question" to adopt. It must be recognized that the purpose of a Robert's Rules of Order meeting is not to present the contents of the report but to seek the report's adoption. For a meeting where a report will be prepared at about the same time as the meeting, and thus it cannot be circulated to the members before hand, the common practice is to introduce the report as early as possible and move that the report be considered at a later time on the agenda. This provides the members with an interval for reading the report. If this is not done, some member will likely move that the report be tabled for later consideration. [ back]