Page 19 - The Law of Difficult Meetings

The Law of Difficult Meetings

If there is so much noise that it is not possible for the Chairman to be heard, by those making the noise at
least, officials should be despatched to approach the demonstrators in the room to put the suggestion to
them. The Chairman should take care to let the rest of the meeting know what is happening, on the principle
that the more reasonable he appears to be to the generality of the meeting, the more the generality will lose
sympathy with the demonstrators.

As to the practicalities of separate meetings with demonstrators, the number of demonstrators allowed to
attend separate discussions should be kept to a minimum. If there is a considerable body of demonstrators,
they should be invited to choose a deputation to meet company representatives. The company should
ensure that its representatives are not significantly outnumbered and that there is rough numerical parity.
This counters any psychological and, in the worst case, physical intimidation. For the latter reason, a security
officer should monitor the separate meeting in an unobtrusive manner.

B. Adjournment

Another option for the Chairman is to adjourn the meeting for, say, half an hour to give an opportunity for
people to calm down. Assuming that the articles so provide, this should be done with the consent of the
meeting. Otherwise, the Chairman may in appropriate circumstances be able to rely on his inherent power to
adjourn the meeting temporarily until order is restored.

If a half‑hour adjournment is favoured, security officers and staff should seek to establish with the
demonstrators a basis for continuing the meeting in good order. This might involve setting up a separate
meeting. If these tactics do not work, another option would be for the Chairman to adjourn the meeting for
fifteen minutes to another room at the same venue – which would have to be prepared in advance – and the
Chairman could direct that any identifiable troublemakers be refused admission to the new rooms so that the
meeting could progress in good order. Alternatively, the Chairman could adjourn the meeting of the company
for a longer period, until perhaps a week, a fortnight or three weeks ahead. Again, the Chairman could order
that identifiable trouble makers be excluded so that business at the meeting can be conducted in an orderly
manner.

Adjournment in general is discussed in greater detail at paragraph 27 (“Adjourning the meeting”) below.

C. Expulsions

The Chairman is entitled to ask anyone who is preventing the progress of the meeting by disorderly conduct
of a serious nature to leave; if the person does not leave, the Chairman is entitled to have him expelled. This
is a prerogative which flows from the Chairman’s duty to preserve order and ensure that the business of the
meeting is conducted in a proper and efficient manner. However, expulsion should only be used as a last
resort and should involve using the minimum force necessary (otherwise the person expelled would have a
claim for assault against the persons responsible, which could potentially involve the Chairman as the person
who authorised the ejection).

16