Well, Metzy Mom, I certainly agree with you that the principal needs to be held to a higher standard.

To clarify my thoughts regarding the principal's role--I don't think the principal should be on the bylaws committee at all--with or without a child in the school. But I do think that if the principal has a child in the school, the spouse should be permitted to serve on the bylaws committee, and he or she should have the same vote as any regular members.

I'd also say that husband /wife teams shouldn't be permitted on a committee where the number of members is restricted.

I agree with you that principals should serve in an advisory capacity. I don't think that they should ever be officers of PTOs. I think that PTOs should be exactly what they are called, parent teacher organizations, and teacher's spouses should not be voting members unless they have a child enrolled in the school. I don't understand why you think this is sexist.

Well, Metzy Mom, I certainly agree with you that the principal needs to be held to a higher standard.

To clarify my thoughts regarding the principal's role--I don't think the principal should be on the bylaws committee at all--with or without a child in the school. But I do think that if the principal has a child in the school, the spouse should be permitted to serve on the bylaws committee, and he or she should have the same vote as any regular members.

I'd also say that husband /wife teams shouldn't be permitted on a committee where the number of members is restricted.

I agree with you that principals should serve in an advisory capacity. I don't think that they should ever be officers of PTOs. I think that PTOs should be exactly what they are called, parent teacher organizations, and teacher's spouses should not be voting members unless they have a child enrolled in the school. I don't understand why you think this is sexist.

I understand what you are saying, Seeker, but unless that is specifically in the Bylaws, it won't matter in a battle of wills so to speak. I also think that it brings up the question of who gets to be a volunteer at all. Principals with children in the same school they work at, often times (not always...don't jump on me here...lol) are an intimidating force even without meaning to be (just ask any teacher who bought fundraising stuff from the Principal's kid even though they would not have bought something otherwise). So, I don't think that is a factor. The Principal should be an 'advisor' or even a 'problem solver' in personality disputes, but otherwise respect the fact that there are conflict of interest problems by virtue of their job. The Principal's spouse might be the only way to solve that, providing the spouse is there as a parental representative. Staff spouses can be, and most times are, not just spouses. They too are parents of children within the school. The President most likely has a child in the school and it would be very sexist at the least to say that they are not as much a stakeholder as any other parent.
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr> Spouses of staff are not stakeholders in the same way the parents and teachers are. <hr></blockquote>
There is no easy answer as to who is more important or who should carry equal, more or less weight. The argument you present
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr> Does the principal have a child enrolled in your school? If so, I would think the parental right to be involved would outweigh the relationship to the principal. <hr></blockquote>
is the only one that makes me cringe. I have seen far too many times where the Principal's kid won first place, got the prize, extra priviledges, etc. by virtue of being the 'Boss's Kid', without having earned it. My own child was the victim of this problem, whether intended or not. So, in a case where the choice comes down to what outweighs what, <blockquote>quote:</font><hr> I would think the parental right to be involved would outweigh the relationship to the principal. <hr></blockquote>, I think the Principal should be held to a higher standard of 'What Does This Look Like'. To give the appearance, whether it is true or not, of any conflict of interest problems, they must take the Principal before Parent road. Their child could be at a different school, but they cannot be the Principal of a different school.

All in all, I must say again, make sure that the restructuring of the Bylaws includes this. And as I said in my earlier post, it has to have a majority vote to ammend any rules anyway. So even where the Principal won't care for the ruling, the membership body will make the call, effectively removing the problem from any one person or persons hands.

Does the principal have a child enrolled in your school? If so, I would think the parental right to be involved would outweigh the relationship to the principal. What do your bylaws say about who is eligible for membership? Is it only the parents and teachers, or are spouses of staff also eligible? I think that only parents and teachers should be voting members. Spouses of staff are not stakeholders in the same way the parents and teachers are.

Thank you TheMetzyMom, there is nothing in our bylaws that states they can't hold a seat on the committee, We tried to reason with the pres, and the principal, that the principal should be an advisor and not hold a seat, but were shut down by both. I can fully understand that the principal has an interest, because it affects her school, but the seat should not be taken away from a parent who wants to be there. Thanks again, and we will look into making the changes.

This looks like a question of Legal VS Right. I am having to deal with a different, yet similar, type of restructuring problem. The Legal Thing? Check the current Bylaws to see if it provides an answer, but my guess is that will be no rule against the Principal or the President's hubby being on the committee. The Right Thing? No, the two in question most definately should not as they have obvious conflicts of interest. The last Thing (aka Your Saving Grace Thing...lol), is that no matter what, your membership has to approve ANY AND ALL changes. So even though your President may not agree, she does not get a choice in the matter (or a vote either according to our Bylaws...lol). So it really shouldn't matter that her hubby is going to press for her interests. Also, the Principal will have to deal with the fact that the membership has to approve ANY AND ALL changes, making it difficult for any hidden agendas for him/her (you didn't say why you didn't want the Principal on the committee, but considering it is a conflict of interest, I just assumed).

The main thing is that unless your Bylaws say these two can't serve on the committee, the fact of the matter is, they can. HINT: During the restructuring of the Bylaws, specify for the future who can and cannot serve on the committee. The Principal should be on the list of cannot's, but I think the hubby is well within his rights to be included.

Good Luck!