Re: [802SEC] views on quorums at WG Interim Sessions
All,
The question of a WG meeting without a quorum and that does not occur
during an 802 Plenary week being able to pass motions is currently dealt
with I believe by the combination of Sections 5.1.4.2.1 and 5.1.4.6.
5.1.4.2.1 states that a WG quorum must be present at such a meeting.
5.1.4.6 states that the LMSC rules take precedence of WG rules.
As a result, a WG may not override the quorum requirement for a WG
meeting that does not occur during an 802 Plenary week as that would be
in conflict with the LMSC rules which take precedence.
wlq
pat_thaler@agilent.com wrote:
>
> Dear Roger,
>
> I think that the amount of advance time before the meeting is less
> important than the meeting (and its range of business) being
> approved by the working group.
>
> If a Working Group can authorize a committee (which we often call
> a task force) to conduct business between plenaries, then it can
> authorize a "committee of the whole" to do the same thing. When
> we do that for the task force (or a study group), the charter
> of work they can do is fairly clear - bounded by a PAR (or to
> develop a PAR). Any decisions made to alter that charter (e.g.
> changing the objectives for the PAR) are subject to review
> and approval or rejection during the working group session
> at the plenary (or at an interim with a quorum). If a Working
> Group is going to do something similar then I believe it should
> similarly bound the scope when authorizing the meeting.
>
> I would alter the your text to
> "No quorum is required at meetings held in conjunction with the
> Plenary session since the Plenary session time and place is
> established well in advance. Work may be conducted at interim Working
> Group sessions whose program of work, date and location are agreed to
> by vote at a plenary at least one month in advance of the meeting.
> Technical decisions made without a quorum at such interims are
> subject to review and modification at the plenary unless the
> Working Group has preauthorized a decision such as forwarding
> to Working Group ballot."
>
> Pat
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roger B. Marks [mailto:r.b.marks@ieee.org]
> Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 10:31 AM
> To: stds-802-sec@ieee.org
> Subject: [802SEC] views on quorums at WG Interim Sessions
>
> Dear SEC,
>
> I think that we should think about revising the 802 rules to clarify
> the quorum situation for WG Interim Sessions. I think that WGs need
> to know how to take actions that won't be later called into question
> on quorum grounds. The extra uncertainty isn't good for anyone.
>
> I think we have too many continuing question marks on this issue.
> Some WGs have no Interim Sessions, though their Task Forces do meet.
> In other cases, Interim WG meetings are held between all LMSC
> Plenaries.
>
> Also, some WG's will arrange for a vote, at the WG Plenary, to
> authorize a WG to meet and transact business, with our without a
> quorum, at an upcoming Interim. My understanding has been that not
> all SEC members accept the legitimacy of this practice.
>
> We also face questions of what to in the absence of a quorum. Some go
> by Robert, who says "The only business that can be transacted in the
> absence of a quorum is to take measures to obtain a quorum, to fix
> the time to which to adjourn, and to adjourn, or to take a recess."
> Others are more liberal, to varying degrees.
>
> Then we have the question of when the quorum applies. Does the Chair
> need to check for it? Is it assumed, unless a quorum call arises?
> What if no quorum call arises and someone later, after the session,
> challenges the presence of a quorum? Does a quorum at any point in a
> session, or in a meeting, suffice to cover the entire session?
>
> I'd like to think about a rules change to resolve the problem. First,
> however, I'd like to probe where people stand on this issue to see
> what kind of rules change would be likely to pass.
>
> To get things started, here is what I would propose. In 5.1.4.2.1, I
> would change:
>
> "No quorum is required at meetings held in conjunction with the
> Plenary session since the Plenary session time and place is
> established well in advance. A quorum is required at other Working
> Group meetings."
>
> to:
>
> "No quorum is required at meetings held in conjunction with the
> Plenary session since the Plenary session time and place is
> established well in advance. The same is true of other Working Group
> sessions whose date and location are announced at least three months
> in advance. In other cases, Working Groups are authorized to meet and
> transact business. However, no technical vote at such a meeting is
> valid unless quorum is established immediately before, after, or
> during the vote, or unless Working Group action without a quorum has
> been previously authorized by the Working Group."
>
> Could you support a change like this?
>
> I'm personally open to other ideas, but I would like an unambiguous
> LMSC policy.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Roger