Forum: The Racing Rules of Sailing
Class Bylaws conflict with Class Equipment Rules
Matthew Blake
0
No diagram needed here...
An international keelboat class (a "closed rule" class) is planning an equipment rule change to require the purchase of sail royalties/sail tags for new sails. The class management has put up for a vote proposed language to change the class one-design rules for this purpose. The members are very likely to approve the rule change - there is general support for the idea.
Now, the class constitution/bylaws state that the class can raise revenue from dues and new boat fees. There is no provision in the constitution/bylaws for sail royalties, or any other means of raising revenue to support class operations.
So, it seems that without a simultaneous change to the class constitution/bylaws, a conflict will be introduced into the class rules hierarchy between the constitution/bylaws and the class one-design rules. The class management became aware late in the process of this conflict, but, for a number of compelling reasons, chooses to continue on the current path and then react to any problems later, if necessary.
My understanding is, in the case of conflict, the constitution/bylaws take precedence over subordinate rules, such as the one-design class rules. I also understand that the convention in bylaws is that they are prescriptive, in that they state what the class association is permitted to do; if something is not mentioned, generally it would be prohibited. So in a sense bylaws operate similar to "closed class" equipment rules.
So, assuming this rule change process continues and the one-design rule change is approved by the class members, is approved by World Sailing, and becomes effective, BUT the class association bylaws are NOT changed to permit raising revenue from royalties ...
An international keelboat class (a "closed rule" class) is planning an equipment rule change to require the purchase of sail royalties/sail tags for new sails. The class management has put up for a vote proposed language to change the class one-design rules for this purpose. The members are very likely to approve the rule change - there is general support for the idea.
Now, the class constitution/bylaws state that the class can raise revenue from dues and new boat fees. There is no provision in the constitution/bylaws for sail royalties, or any other means of raising revenue to support class operations.
So, it seems that without a simultaneous change to the class constitution/bylaws, a conflict will be introduced into the class rules hierarchy between the constitution/bylaws and the class one-design rules. The class management became aware late in the process of this conflict, but, for a number of compelling reasons, chooses to continue on the current path and then react to any problems later, if necessary.
My understanding is, in the case of conflict, the constitution/bylaws take precedence over subordinate rules, such as the one-design class rules. I also understand that the convention in bylaws is that they are prescriptive, in that they state what the class association is permitted to do; if something is not mentioned, generally it would be prohibited. So in a sense bylaws operate similar to "closed class" equipment rules.
So, assuming this rule change process continues and the one-design rule change is approved by the class members, is approved by World Sailing, and becomes effective, BUT the class association bylaws are NOT changed to permit raising revenue from royalties ...
- Can a boat with new sails purchased after the rule change becomes effective but without a sail royalty tag on the new sails be disqualified under the new rule? Or, would that boat be justified in providing as a defense that the sail royalty is not permitted by a strict reading of the class bylaws?
- Would any of this depend on how the sailing instructions are written vis-a-vis which rules are in force for the race/regatta?
- Is this a case of administrivia and should by overlooked by the class membership, or is it important for the rules makers to pay attention to these little details and to identify and eliminate conflicts?
Comments
[You must be signed in to add a comment]
The conflict between the class bylaws and the class measurement rule is a class matter. (Wearing another hat I sometimes serve as a parliamentary procedure advisor. At the meeting to make the rule change, the chair should rule the motion re: royalties out of order. However, the “house” [the membership at the meeting] does have ways around this.)
Q1: CR’s are rules by the Def: rule. Are class ByLaws a “rule”?
Q2: If “NO” to Q1 and a class wanted their Bylaws to be a rule, what steps would be required by the class or the OA to make Bylaws a rule?
63.7. Conflict Between Rules
64.1. Penalties and Exoneration
The matter should be referred to the Technical Committee.
Philip, the TC should also not look past the CR’s unless the ByLaws have been made a rule.
1) To Angelo's point, I am looking for the definition of rule on the RRS website here and do not see any definitions on the RRS website. Is that intentional? Or is there some configuration I need to set correctly to see them? What I see in the Introduction section on the RRS website is just the first part of what is printed in the 2017-2020 RRS (I finally pulled the printed copy off my bookshelf).
2) After reading the definition of rule, and even though in this case the class "bylaws" are actually entitled "Association Rules," I think I have to agree they would not come into play in a protest unless specifically invoked by the SI's as Leo Reise pointed out. The class equipment rules are entitled "Class Rules," although, interestingly, the Class Rules are wholly encompassed by reference in the Association Rules. ("... the Class Rules are hereby made a part of these [Association] Rules as though fully set forth herein.")
3) I can see that it is still up to the class to resolve its conflict, but it does not seem that the conflict will cause any practical problems for racers, other than Greg Dargavel's point about getting the rule change passed initially. On the other hand, this does seem to leave the hypothetical disqualified boat with no recourse for the DSQ for what is a disconnect at some level in the class rules hierarchy. Maybe that is just how it is.
An analogy (all analogies break down in the end) might be SIs which alter a rule the RRS say cannot be changed.
We wrestled with that one a couple yrs ago.
https://www.racingrulesofsailing.org/posts/169-competitors-avenue-for-recourse-for-rrs-85-86-violation