The Unwanted Parliamentarian John R. Berg, PRP

The Unwanted

Parliamentarian

By John R. Berg, PRP

Unsolicited advice has an interesting characteristic: The wise don’t need it, and the fools won’t heed it.

A parliamentarian occasionally feels unwanted when a foolish chair thinks they are too wise to benefit from a parliamentarian. It is also said that a lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client.

Exactly when is a parliamentarian needed? The 1951 6th Edition of Robert’s Rules of Order Revised contains the following on the inside back cover, which is omitted in later editions:

“The parliamentarian should not be an elected officer. …

The president may be the best parliamentarian of the organization. It is absurd and embarrassing to elect an advisory officer, when that advisor may know less about the subject than the officer he is supposed to advise.”

Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised (11th ed.) (RONR) does not specifically state that the parliamentarian should not be elected, but simply states that the parliamentarian should be appointed. Rather than advising against a parliamentarian less qualified than the presiding officer, it simply recognizes that a parliamentarian may not be needed at all meetings. (p. 465, ll. 17-21, 30-33).

Some organizations, by rule or custom, require a parliamentarian at all their meetings. This may be unnecessary for a small local organization when the business is not complex, as stated above. Because of the cost of hiring an outside parliamentarian, a member often serves as the parliamentarian in such situations. This practice prohibits the member parliamentarian from participating in debate. It could also be used to silence a member who may be perceived as a threat or hindrance to the intents of the presiding officer because of the parliamentarian’s

expertise in parliamentary procedure. See also the author’s “Member or Outside Parliamentarian?” in the Winter 2018 National Parliamentarian (Vol. 80, No. 2, pp. 12-14).

Even an experienced presiding officer may wish to have an appointed parliamentarian to assist in keeping the meeting running smoothly. This is common in the NAP with its convention, associations, and units. Having a second set of eyes and ears can help the presiding officer avoid missing important issues. Within the NAP there is a plethora of parliamentarians who will serve at no cost to the organization.

There are no firm rules for when a parliamentarian is needed. The qualifications of the presiding officer, the size of the meeting, and the complexity of the business are all factors to consider.

The focus of this article is the presiding officer who does not want a parliamentarian, or does not want an unbiased parliamentarian. Note that the organization may select a parliamentarian not of the presiding officer’s choosing, or one who does not have the confidence of the presiding officer. RONR advises against this (p. 465, ll. 30-33).

Some presiding officers may misunderstand the role of the parliamentarian and not realize that the chair retains the right to make rulings and that the parliamentarian’s rule is purely advisory. RONR (11th ed.), p. 465, ll. 13-16. Even if the parliamentarian is a voting member of the body, the parliamentarian has no right to raise a point of order when the chair is in error.

Occasionally a Professional Registered Parliamentarian or other member of the NAP or the American Institute of Parliamentarians (AIP) will be perceived as intimidating by a less experienced presiding officer. When attending a meeting other than in the capacity of a parliamentarian, it is better for an “off duty” parliamentarian to keep the copy of RONR hidden rather than brandishing it.

One PRP, serving as parliamentarian for a 21-year old presiding officer at a large convention reassured the chair by stating, “I’m just here to make you look good and keep you out of trouble.”

A presiding officer at a convention who was not accustomed to having the services of a professional parliamentarian suggested that the parliamentarian sit on the front row to be available, if needed. The parliamentarian’s response was, “You may not want everyone to hear my advice in case you don’t want to follow it.” The parliamentarian was then seated next to the chair at that and subsequent conventions.

Some unscrupulous presiding officers may prefer to have a parliamentarian who will support the chair in dominating the meeting

by having the parliamentarian back up the rulings of the chair. The parliamentarian should rarely address the assembly and should only be called upon to do so if the issue is so complex that the chair needs assistance is explaining the ruling of the chair to the assembly. RONR (11th ed.), p. 466, ll. 30-32.

Occasionally a member who disagrees with the ruling of the chair will ask for an opinion from the parliamentarian. This is inappropriate since the chair may have disregarded the advice of the parliamentarian in making the ruling. It is also out of order to criticize the ruling of the chair without appealing the ruling. RONR (11th ed.), p. 256, ll. 4-5. It would be proper for the chair to rule that the parliamentarian need not address the assembly, but this ruling could be overturned by the body on appeal, particularly if the organization is paying for the services of the parliamentarian.

If a member of the NAP or the AIP, the parliamentarian is required to be impartial and unbiased in the advice given. The Code of Ethics for Parliamentarians* jointly adopted by those organizations, states under Standard 4.3: “A parliamentarian shall ... Advise the client on the proper application of the accepted rules of parliamentary procedure

notwithstanding the client’s personal

desires in the matter” (emphasis added). Thus, the parliamentarian is not an advocate for the chair.

Often an individual who is not a member of the NAP or AIP, and not subject to their Code, will function as a parliamentarian. That person may have a different relationship to the chair, and function as an advocate for the chair. This will become evident when the chair continually calls upon the parliamentarian to back up the chair’s rulings.

Other unscrupulous presiding officers simply do not want a parliamentarian who will not support the actions of the chair. They fear that the parliamentarian will expose biased rulings. They want to get from point A to point B and don’t want anyone to get in their way.

When the presiding officer does not consult with the parliamentarian on important issues in advance, the parliamentarian may feel as frustrated as a U.S. Secret Service agent trying to protect a president who deviates from plans and protocols or walks out into crowds.

“During a meeting, the work of the parliamentarian should be limited to giving advice to the chair and, when requested, to any other

The Code of Ethics was initially adopted in 2001 and revised in 2015. [It was revised and renamed, The Code of Professional Responsibility for Parliamentarians in 2020. See pages 25-28 of this NP, or www.parliamentarians.org/documents/ for the new Code.]

member. It is also the duty of the parliamentarian—as inconspicuously as possible—to call the attention of the chair to any error in the proceedings that may affect the substantive rights of any member or may otherwise do harm.” RONR (11th ed.), p. 466, ll. 12-17.

“In advising the chair, the parliamentarian should not wait until asked for advice—that may be too late. An experienced parliamentarian will often see a problem developing and be able to head it off with a few words to the chair.” RONR (11th ed.), p. 466, ll. 28-30.

See also the author’s “The Reticent Parliamentarian” in the Spring 2019 National Parliamentarian (Vol. 80, No. 3, pp. 12-14).

There is always the danger when the parliamentarian reminds the chair of an error, such as the chair entering into the debate, that the chair will simply tell the parliamentarian to shut up. The parliamentarian may rightfully decline another engagement with that presiding officer. RONR (11th ed.), p. 467, ll. 4-7.

When the chair fails to heed the advice of the parliamentarian and chaos ensues at the meeting, the members tend to blame the parliamentarian, not realizing that the parliamentarian only serves in an advisory role. It is the members’ duty to raise points of order and appeal the decision of the chair when appropriate.

Since parliamentarians should also be qualified to serve as temporary presiding officers, it is difficult to resist the temptation to tell the chair, “Just hand me the gavel and let me do this right.” Perhaps that should be left to the topic of “The Unwanted Chair.”

Professionals such as dentists can become discouraged and depressed when their clients dread visiting them and often feel worse leaving the office than when entering it. Likewise, parliamentarians need to avoid becoming discouraged and depressed when they feel unwanted, ignored, or unappreciated at times. Bear in mind the NAP’s Vision, “To provide parliamentary leadership to the world,” and look forward to those instances when success can be appreciated.

John r. Berg, PrP, is currently president of the Washington State Association of Parliamentarians and has served as parliamentarian for a number of national organizations. In 2019 he was elected to the board of directors of the South Kitsap School District in Washington State.