Jump to content


 

Photo

Suspending A Member For Bad Behaviour


  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#16 Deege

Deege

    Really nice person

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4845 posts
  • LocationMelbourne

Posted 12 February 2019 - 04:50 PM

We had one last year sometime and the board realised that the process was a bit too ambigious.  So they now have a posted demerit system which specifies how serious particular offences are - eg damage to course v physical/verbal abuse of fellow members.  So while it is easy to say go along with the constitution, sometimes it is worth checking to make sure that the constitution process (and any policies which underpin it) are regularly reviewed.


  • Tochakka and Forrest Gardener like this

Golflink

 

Winner C Grade Long Drive 2013 OOM #2 Heidelberg

Winner B Grade Long Drive 2015 OOM #4 Heritage

Winner B Grade NTP 2015 OOM #4 Heritage

 

Handicap PB - 12.6, baby


#17 Snappy McSnapperton

Snappy McSnapperton

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2032 posts

Posted 12 February 2019 - 05:40 PM

Certainly.  Our constitution sets the process by which a 'verdict' can be arrived at, and the options for sanctions available when found guilty (do nothing, reprimand, suspension and expulsion), but doesn't specify what offence gets what sanction.  That's up to the board to impose.  We have looked at precedent, but really it's a judgement call.  I don't know if I'd want a pre-set list or not, that might create as many problems as it solves.  Maybe if it meant for small things a letter could be sent saying don't do that again rather than going through a drawn out process. 


If I can win an OOM anyone can. 
 
http://www.golflink....k_no=3012646041

 

 


#18 PerryGroves

PerryGroves

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 445 posts

Posted 13 February 2019 - 12:01 AM

We had one last year sometime and the board realised that the process was a bit too ambigious.  So they now have a posted demerit system which specifies how serious particular offences are - eg damage to course v physical/verbal abuse of fellow members.  So while it is easy to say go along with the constitution, sometimes it is worth checking to make sure that the constitution process (and any policies which underpin it) are regularly reviewed.


In a way the ambiguity is your friend.

The more "terms of reference" you include the easier it is to argue.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users