I personally think that they should not initiate any of the girls, as it would not be fair to pick five out of the eight. They should then put the girls into the computer system during rush and place them as the first eight on their bid list. The girls should not have to pay for rush or participate in it, but they would be part of the fall quota.

My 2¢

I don't believe in holding pledges over the summer, if at ALL possible. I would initiate all 8, and deduct 3 off of their quota next year. I would also see that that chapter provides 3 more Rho Chi's than usual.

Some punishment must be meted out, or the whole concept of rules is out the window. Their National is only as informed as the chapter tells them. I think my suggestions are fair to both the chapter and the Panhellenic system, and I say that wondering if it was my own National.

honeychile

edited to add: if these women are held over, and end up deciding not to be initiated in the fall, they would still have to wait the one calendar year prior to accepting another bid. Or worse, turning them against the Greek system entirely. I don't think that they should be penalized for the chapter's (and Greek Advisor's) mistake.

I don't think that making a couple girls wait until the fall to get initiated is going to turn them off the Greek system. They might be a little disappointed, yes, but no woman I know would say, "Oh, well, they're not letting me initiate RIGHT NOW so I am going to de-pledge and then hate the Greek system forever."

If that is the step that the group takes, it would make the most sense that whichever ones accepted their bids last would be the ones held over until fall.

No, I don't think this is a fair solution, for the pledges at least . . . But there needs to be some sort of punishment or else groups will realize that they can get away with it and start doing it all the time. Personally I think the best thing would be for the rule books to be adapted in this case. I think the "no punishments that decrease the number of girls they can take in rush" was intended to keep Greek advisors from saying, "Oh, you can only take 20 girls in rush because you had a risk management infraction last year . . ." -- just so they wouldn't use it as a punishment for entirely unrelated issues. The punishment should fit the crime, and in this case it makes SENSE for them to take away the number of girls they can have next fall. It's not really a punishment, it's just trying to counteract the damage already done.

I don't think that they should hold the pledges over the summer or initiate only 5 of the 8. I also don't think that they can subtract 3 from quota for the next rush. Maybe they can add 3 to total for all of the sororities so this one sorority doesn't have an unfair advantage. I am not sure how that would work with NPC though.

Again, I ask the question, what is the process for COBs and bids? I am sure the campus has some procedures you follow, whether it be reporting your new members to Greek Life and having them sign bid cards, etc. The Greek Advisor should know where every chapter stands, or at least have the information close at hand so she can refer to it during that time.

The chapter did what their HQs asked them to, and COB'd. The NMs had no clue about any of it. I personally don't think you can punish someone for what amounts to a numbers problem the Greek Advisor should have seen from the beginning. DeltaBeta, are you mad at the chapter? Their HQs? NPC? The Greek Advisor? It seems to me you, and I could be way off, but your posts indicate you think punishment of some form is in order, and that the penalty should be set against the chapter.

This happened on a campus I work with. NOTHING happened to the group. They got a "warning" -thanks. Which basically told every other group to go do it too because nothing happens.

That situation aside I think it is improper to sanction the new members. That is completely unfair to these women who came into the system on good faith of the chapter.

I also think it is greenbook rule that you cannot impact a chapter's rush due to any type of infraction. So if the chapter appealed to NPC the sanction would probably be overturned.

Yes, I do think the chapter messed up. If HQ thought that campus total was 150, that tells me that the chapter never updated them when it was changed (YEARS AGO).

I don't know if these NMs came from Panhellenic informal, either. If these women would have pledged a different chapter had they not gotten bids there, it is really unfair to the chapters below total. There are chapters on my campus struggling to stay afloat, because they do not have enough members to keep their houses full.

It was not caught earlier because there are no specific bid card procedures for informal rush. Girls who de-pledge this semester can rush in the fall and join any chapter they choose. This has been a problem for a long time, IMO, and I wanted to change it back when I was president, but it didn't affect enough chapters to get any attention.

However, I know for a fact that each chapter was told at the end of last semester how many they could COB. I know that if my HQ told me something than the Greek Advisor, I would figure out where the error was, not just ignore one of the two sources.

**Maybe I'm a perfectionist, but the CHAPTER is responsible for knowing what their campus rules/quota/total is. If a National Officer told them to COB to 150, they should have said "Wait. . .our campus total is 145". National Officers can only work with the info you give them. . .don't be afraid to inform them of the truth.

**Correct me if I'm wrong, but de-pledging and joining another chapter 1 semester later is in DIRECT conflict with the Green Book. Changing this campus bylaw requires no vote, it is simply struck down immediately due to it's conflict with the NPC Agreements. No discussion needed, no vote by CPH required.
**Once again, National can only work with what the chapters tell them. I don't accept the response "Our National told us to." Did National know all the details?

Long story short, I think it's hard to place the blame on any one person/group. As far as the Greek Office, I think that they need to look at their own process for registering and processing NM's, as well as keeping chapter rosters correct. In any case, I DO NOT believe the chapter should go unconsequented. They of all people should have been aware of how many people they can have at one time. Chapters talk about holding their sisters to their standards all the time. . .what are the CPH and NPC standards we hold the chapters and organizations as a whole to?

I think it's fairly easy to see where the blame lies: with the chapter!!! That chapter knew what total was and they were also told how many they could COB. They COB'd too many, and that is their fault. I don't think they can blame their HQ becuase their HQ may not have had the correct info and the chapter shopuld have known better. It is unfair for a chapter to just COB more and raise campus total. That would just show other chapters that they could do the same. I also believe that the new pledges should not be penalized because they are innocent in all of this. Personally, I like honeychile's idea of requesting that the chapter provide three additional rho chis and counting 3 people on their bid list.

The problem with this suggestion is that it does not hurt the chapter in any way. I feel like it would be a dangerous precedent to set, because other chapters (and perhaps this one again) may feel they can take an extra girl or two a semester early with no consequence.

Do you think? I would think that rushing with three less women (the Rho Chi's) and already having three towards their quota would be a deterrent.

I think that there needs to be a major Green Book study session in your Panhellenic, one way or another! Even if one group did "get away with it" , there is no excuse for another chapter following suit. As a matter of fact, your Greek Advisor should be that much more vigilant in making sure that it doesn't happen again!

honeychile

AMEN to that honeychile!

If the chapter's already at 148, three fewer women rushing are probably not going to make a noticeable difference.

I do agree that the Greek advisor at this school needs to do a major re-check of the NPC rules, though. It sounds like a lot of things are going not quite right.

Limit the number they can take next time. To make them drop three girls who went through pledging and weren't balled is complete and total BS!!!!! (i'm censoring myself in the presence of ladies). I've heard of some ignorant stunts before, but forcing them to pay now because of some one else's mistake is totally unfair. NPC should have cought it before bids went out.

I second that!