Committee chair problem

I’ve been both Chair and Deputy Chair and I totally agree, the Chair was absolutely wrong to overturn the decision.

He has absolutely no remit to do so if a vote had already been taken and agreed.

Don’t you have minutes of the meetings ? That would solve the issue. Challenge - it is illegal to do what they have done if it is a recognised incorporated body . The committees I am on would go mental.

Are there others who feel the same?
Personally I would check the constitution, then challenge them quoting that.

For this sort of reason I no longer sit committees! Lesson there perhaps 🤔

Shelflife

For this sort of reason I no longer sit committees! Lesson there perhaps 🤔

Committees are the work of the devil.
There are two types of people on them…those who believe in public voluntary service and those who like telling everyone else what to do, usually loudly.
Ask the rest of the committee privately how they feel OP or you may find yourself the only one with the bottle to challenge him.

Cossy, the original decision was taken, as most are, by consensus, no vote.
The new decision has been communicated only to those needed to implement it.
I am waiting to hear back from the other person directly involved. Meanwhile I am checking out theConstitution.

That's what to do. The constitution should clarify the situation for you.

Checked the Constitution and Rules and there is no clarification, other than that in the case of a tied vote the Chair has the casting vote. There was no actual vote.
This particular decision was actually made two meetings ago and reinforced at last week’s meeting.

Presumably the Chair was present at the meeting that reached the decision? Did he speak against it then?

IMO if the Chair felt in retrospect that the decision was wrong another meeting should have been called to re-discuss it.

The situation you describe is so unusual I’d be surprised if any constitution covers it.

Do others feel as you do?

If so, you could call an extraordinary meeting with one agenda item - to clarify the role of the chair and if appropriate to reconsider the changes he made.

It would be tricky, and if the vote goes in favour of the chair's actions you may feel you need to resign, but you may find that a risk worth taking.

Review the minutes of that meeting two meetings ago?

Bring it up for the agenda of the next meeting?

If a Charity, there are Charity Commission rules.

I think I am right in saying, the others, yourself included, could get into hot water if the group is a registered Uk Charity.

Cabbie21

Checked the Constitution and Rules and there is no clarification, other than that in the case of a tied vote the Chair has the casting vote. There was no actual vote.
This particular decision was actually made two meetings ago and reinforced at last week’s meeting.

If there was no vote with a motion proposal and show of hands for and against then the Chair is wrong to instigate! The committee could propose a vote of no confidence in the Chair………that’ll sort it out!

Jaxjacky

Are there others who feel the same?
Personally I would check the constitution, then challenge them quoting that.

Absolutely!!

winterwhite

Presumably the Chair was present at the meeting that reached the decision? Did he speak against it then?

IMO if the Chair felt in retrospect that the decision was wrong another meeting should have been called to re-discuss it.

The situation you describe is so unusual I’d be surprised if any constitution covers it.

Correct. What a sneaky Chair!

Plenty like that in my opinion.
Rife situation.

Sounds like the Committee I was on . The best thing I did, was resign.