Casting votes is an issue that has come up recently with a client. They sound simple but there is a little bit behind them.

Firstly, casting votes are sometimes called second votes. They occur when a vote is taken in a meeting and there is an equal number of votes in favour as there is against.

Does you constitution allow a casting vote?

The first thing you must know is whether your constitution allows a casting vote to be exercised by the person in the chair. You MUST find that out before anything.

Many organisations allow their chairman, president, presiding officer to have a deliberative vote – that’s the vote they get because they are a member, as well as a casting vote to be used when there is “an equality of votes” or a tie.

Here are the important issues.

1. The casting vote can only be used if the person presiding has already cast their deliberative vote.  So if the chair puts the issue to the vote, but does not vote him or herself and there is a tie, then the casting vote does not apply because they have not yet exercised their deliberative vote. (The deliberative vote should be used at the same time as everyone else votes – see the post on deliberative voting)

If, after they have exercise their deliberative vote there is a tie, then the casting vote can be exercised.

2.  This is the really tricky bit for some people. A wise chair will nearly always exercise their casting vote to “preserve the status quo“. That means they will vote so the situation does NOT change. In most circumstances, that means that they will vote against the proposal although some proposals are worded so that a vote in favour preserves the status quo.

I can almost hear some people saying WHY????

The answer is that by preserving the status quo, the issue is free to be raised again at a later meeting when there is more support. But the reason wise people vote this way is that if the casting vote is used to change something, then the decision has in reality been made by one person – the person in the chair. As many people are in favour as are against and it is not a sound decision.

I have read research that shows that decisions that are made upon a casting vote nearly always get reversed at a following meeting and the people who regularly use their casting votes to make changes, are often challenged for their position when they come up for election.

Now there will be times when the chair will use their casting vote to make a change. These are things where there has been considerable debate over many meetings and a decision simply has to be made.  These situations are rare but they do occur.

Bottom line is – use casting votes with great care.

Related posts:

1. Deliberative votes A deliberative vote is a vote given to a person because they are a member of the group. The term is usually applied to people who chair the meeting to draw a distinction between the vote they get as a...
2. Casting votes – a tricky issue Lee has written the following question: What happens when the ‘status quo’ is ambiguous? In this example half of a committee thinks a committee member is not eligible (to attend) while half think they are. This is an interesting question. The issue...
3. The terminolgy minefield – what do all these terms mean in meetings? The Terminology Minefield Here are some common terms that some people are not clear about. It is by no means an exhaustive list. An expanded list can be found at www.meetingsurvivalkit.com Absolute majority: The number of votes required to achieve...
4. What can an unfinancial member do at a meeting? A question has been received from John of Ballajura in WA. We had a person who is unfinancial but used to be a member attend one of our meetings. The president let him speak but would not count his vote....
5. Welcome to the Blog Here I will be commenting on issues which arise from clients and general issues relating to everything to do with meetings. You are welcome to submit questions or comments and the more questions we receive, the more useful the blog...