Making Nominations

[JMO]

Originally Posted by Brad Gile

Hmmm. Maybe those Board members should take a class in remedial English and pass the ancient SOA English exam? Yes, that was before my time.

It was before my time, too. However, my understanding is that it was a vocabulary test. Which might not be very well correlated with the ability to understand sentences and paragraphs in English.

And if the SOA is to be a truly international organization, I'm not sure specifically mandating Engish is a good thing. We already provide for those whose primary language is French, as required in parts of Canada.

Still, serving on the board or nominating committee, and not being able to comprehend such a provision does come under the heading of "appalling."

[limabeanactuary]

Originally Posted by Brad Gile

I do, however, think it is ridiculous if the current Board can deny all bona fide FSA nominations as provided by the existing Bylaws. If they can get away with such actions, the Bylaws are a fiction and SOA becomes a farce, imo.

Considering that some people thought the bylaws allowed Board action to implement FEM [when there was a huge dispute over that very point 20 years ago, which was never resolved], I can't say I'm surprised by the novel interpretation of a right that has no effect still being a right.

[cubs1969]

What's all the fuss about? The Nominating Committee is just following the bylaws. http://www.soa.org/files/pdf/bylaws-soa.pdf

SECTION 2. Nominating Committee. The Nominating Committee is responsible for nominating candidates for election in accordance with SOA policies and may establish guidelines for conducting elections consistent with SOA policies. The Nominating Committee is composed of Fellows appointed by the Leadership Development Committee, with input from the Board of Directors and the Leadership Team. Nominating Committee members may not be candidates for election. No person may serve concurrently both as a member of the Nominating Committee and the Board of Directors. The membership of the Committee should be reasonably representative of the geographical distribution and occupational interests of the membership. The Committee selects the chair and vice-chair of the Committee, subject to the approval of the Board of Directors. Each member of the Nominating Committee serves a three-year term. No individual may serve more than two (2) terms on the Committee.

Who sets the policies?

SECTION 1. Conduct of Elections. The SOA will establish policies for conducting elections. In any election, the candidate or candidates for any office or offices receiving the highest number of valid votes under the guidelines of the Nominating Committee will be elected.

All you have to do is take the current policy, amend it to say something like "any FSA that presents a petition signed by x Fellows is automatically on the ballot" and get an interested Board member to make a motion, under new business, to accept the election policy as amended. I'm sure you can find a Board member to do that.

Originally Posted by cubs1969

All you have to do is take the current policy, amend it to say something like "any FSA that presents a petition signed by x Fellows is automatically on the ballot" and get an interested Board member to make a motion, under new business, to accept the election policy as amended. I'm sure you can find a Board member to do that.

[board]
x= one trillion
[/board]

[tbakos]

Originally Posted by Old Actuary

I do not think any person nominated by members (or by themselves) should automatically be on the ballot, as that could easily result in chaos.

Can you specify what type of chaos you anticipate may occur?

[tbakos]

Originally Posted by cubs1969

What's all the fuss about? The Nominating Committee is just following the bylaws. http://www.soa.org/files/pdf/bylaws-soa.pdf

All you have to do is take the current policy, amend it to say something like "any FSA that presents a petition signed by x Fellows is automatically on the ballot" and get an interested Board member to make a motion, under new business, to accept the election policy as amended. I'm sure you can find a Board member to do that.

What about Article III, Section 1(b) of the SoA Bylaws:

Article III, 1(b)

Fellows. Fellows shall have the same rights as Associates and, in addition, are entitled to vote, hold office, make nominations, and generally exercise the rights of full membership.

The Nominating Committee "responsibility" for nominations and an FSA member's right to "make nominations" are different things. There should be no confusion about what it means to "make a nomination".

This right must have meaning. How can one construe it to mean "suggest a name to the Nominating Committee which will then review, analyze, and consider whether or not to place that name on a ballot" - which is how the Nominating Committee "responsibility" is being interpreted. It seems the Bylaws could have been clearer if that was the intended meaning.

The identical language in the AAA Bylaws is interpreted to mean "a candidate nominated by an MAAA will have his or her name appear on the ballot for election by the members".

Certainly, the SoA policy can be changed (though not as easily as you suggest) but the question is not what the policy means but what does the Bylaws language regarding an FSA right to "make nominations" mean.

[cubs1969]

Here's the CAS Constitution

a) Fellows
The Fellows of the Society shall be the present Fellows and those who may be duly admitted to Fellowship as hereinafter provided. Fellows shall be eligible to vote, hold office, make nominations, and generally exercise the rights of full membership. Fellows are authorized to append to their names the initials F.C.A.S.

Here's the CAS Bylaws

Procedures for nominations and elections shall be established by a majority vote of the Directors present and voting at a meeting of the Board of Directors. These procedures shall be provided to the membership annually at the beginning of the election process. A majority of the votes cast by Fellows shall be necessary for the election of the President-Elect. For the election of Directors, the four candidates with the highest number of votes cast shall be elected, subject to a requirement that one-third of the valid ballots cast for Director shall be necessary for the election of a Director.

An FCAS and FSA have the same right to nominate. The functional difference is that the CAS, through its election policies promulgated by the Board, has a procedure for fellows to directly place someone on the ballot. The SOA Board can do the exact same thing. There's no need for a constitutional or bylaw change, it's just a policy change. So write something up and present it to the SOA Board. Add another bullet to the current policy and you're off and running.

The Nominating Committee currently can use its discretion to ignore nominations by fellows. The horse has left the barn for the upcoming election. Focus on future elections.

[Old Actuary]

Originally Posted by tbakos

Can you specify what type of chaos you anticipate may occur?

As I understand the proposed interpretation, each Fellow could make a nomination. Conceivably, in an admittedly extreme situation, a large number of candidates could be nominated. I would consider that chaos.

[PhildeTruth]

Originally Posted by Old Actuary

As I understand the proposed interpretation, each Fellow could make a nomination. Conceivably, in an admittedly extreme situation, a large number of candidates could be nominated. I would consider that chaos.

If you want chaos, just hope for Tom Bakos to be kept off the ballot. Hell will be raised if that happens.

[ishamael]

Originally Posted by Old Actuary

As I understand the proposed interpretation, each Fellow could make a nomination. Conceivably, in an admittedly extreme situation, a large number of candidates could be nominated. I would consider that chaos.

In many elections for volunteer positions that I have seen, the problem is usually too few candidates rather than too many.