Why Anti-Expansion?
 

Some of the undergraduates at my fraternity chapter mentioned last night that the campus really needs more Panhellenic sororities. There are twenty IFC fraternities of varying size, but only thirteen sororities. All the sororities are large with one exception. We are a large southern campus of 36,000 students, mostly residential. The sororities have big houses and large memberships. There is no shortage of prospects.
Here's where I fail to understand Panhellenic thinking. Since 1960 no new sorority has colonized our campus (one left and came back successfully within a year or so). Almost all are consistently large, strong and successful. No matter how many sororities there are, there is always someone who doesn't recruit well and has trouble.
Since 1960, like clockwork, every five-to-seven years we lose another sorority. Who will be lost each time is very obvious; there is always someone occupying the bottom rung of the system. Low membership is always the culprit.
In forty years we have lost five sororities, at regular intervals, each of whom at one time as large and well-housed. None of those sororities have come back, one assumes because they have not been allowed/asked. No new sororities have been added.
Right now, we have thirteen, and everyone can tell you who is the next in line to go under. There were once large, and they still have a nice big house.
The system is strong, but when pressed for an answer as to why no new sororities, they say 'Well, we can't expand until everyone is at total'. Do they not understand that SOMEONE IS ALWAYS going to be struggling?
It seems obvious, to me anyway, that adding new sororities will bring increased energy and a more competitive dynamic to the system...and might even help the one on the bottom get back up to where they once were.

Re: Why Anti-Expansion?
 

Don't assume - they may have been asked back and said "hell no" cause of the previous bad experience they had.

I agree that there will always be smaller chapters - I'd also argue that there are women who LIKE being in smaller chapters, but if you talk to the national HQs of sororities they would vehemently disagree. A lot of times it's not the size itself that is the culprit - it's the constant pressure to increase numbers from HQ, which stresses out the sisters and makes it hard for them to recruit effectively. Which makes the sorority smaller, which leads to more pressure etc etc.

So when you take out the sororities that have been there and don't want to come back, and the sororities that are nationally smaller and cannot afford to have comparable housing, you aren't left with anyone willing to take the chance.

Why is it always numbers, numbers, numbers? I mean I understand if you only have 5-10 and everyone else has maybe 50 or 60 but if you're only a few behind other sororities on campuse you're labeled as the underdog and unpopular. We have a sorority on my campus and they never get the numbers but they're just as dedicated as any other sorority, maybe more so. I have just always wondered why national headquarters push numbers over quality?

1) Dues to support HQ
2) Cost of Overhead is less with more members, lowering local dues
3) Longevity and membership retention-- the more members, the better to recruit with and the lower the blow when people graduate or leave the sorority for other reasons

Haha, we have you beat! We have 23 IFC fraternities and only 6 panhellenic sororities. During IFC recruitment the sororities are doing mixers every night! It's crazy!

Firehouse this is not uncommon. I know at our school the NPC orgs have had a hard time meeting numbers, but from what I have heard from the student body it is because they are not interested in those particular orgs. So basically it is a no win situation where the current orgs will continue to struggle and as a result, other great orgs are being kept out.

I don't think that has anything to do with it at some campuses - we had one of the smaller chapters on our campus and also had the cheapest dues. Of course if you build a San Simeon-esque house, your dues are going to shoot through the roof to support it.

I think that if an effort would be made among all the sororities at the national level to decrease the emphasis on numbers, it would be a beneficial thing for everyone. The reason sororities on a campus think smallest = worst is because that is the attitude passed on from HQ. Fraternities on the other hand, from what I've seen size doesn't always matter and sometimes is inversely applied (i.e. the smallest fraternity is the most exclusive, and therefore the best).

I agree with you 33grl because the one sorority that doesn't always get the numbers on my campus has the cheapest dues. So in their case, no, more members don't mean cheaper dues. I happen to know my sorority's dues is the highest on campus whereas the others fall in the middle of us and the cheapest.

EDITED TO ADD: Even though my sorority has the correct numbers, etc., if I was in the position of not always getting numbers I'd much rather have quality girls than get numbers. Why you might ask? With a quality, dedicated new member class that's small is much better than a bigger one where there's members that don't participate and give their all and/or drop out.

Don't get me wrong. I love each and every new member that has come into our sorority. There's just been some to drop, etc. I don't have anything against them. Maybe the smaller new member classes have a better advantage because the sisters of that smaller sorority can focus more attention to each new member. :)

Maybe some people are so anti-expansion because they see another chapter as a threat?

Maybe who knows, right? I don't know if anyone would openly admit that or not.

Quota? Expand?
 

some campi discourage expansion, waiting 'til the bottom ones
get "quota" But then with 2,000 girls going thru rush for ten sororities, there is a build up of considerable animosity. And a
90 girl pledge class is hardly a close group. Rarely do you EVER find the smallest group more "exclusive" Girls and guys would rather be GDIs than join the wimpy group(s) unless there is a concerted effort to re-build. When it takes three or four men's groups to combine in order to have a function with one of
these large sororities then something's awry and much is lost in terms of a good greek experience. And if your weenie small group truly has quality you will quickly not be small as everyone will want to join you. Quotas have been proven detrimental and the free enterprise system works when the door is open. We wonder why our kids do not join...we loved our chapters and no
matter how hard we tried, we could not sell it to younger kids...
and the 'dumbing down' of the colleges...have perhaps let a lot in who do not belong....I simply do not know, but do know that the 150+ chapters have horrendous attrition and darned little closeness. The IFCs and PanHels ought to do what they were intended to do....help each other, not make stupid regs and rules and exercise quotas...duh...but good luck....the system is still worth savin' Old Teke, hopin' for comebacks....

Now THAT'S crazy...........

Erik Conard = Wilson Heller?
 

By your use of the word "campi" and other philosophy, I sense you are a follower of Heller. Me too. I corresponded with him some but never met him. Greeks made a huge surge in the 1980s, then faded in the 1990s. Now, it seems to me that we are making a pretty dramatic comeback.

Heller, et al.
 

I met Wilson Benton Heller many times, dined with him and wrote to him, have kept most of his letters, er, papers...
The word campi was in my vocabulary long before I was a TKE or even a collegian. It is the Latin plural for campus.
I would like to agree with you as regards a great rebound, but
I simply do not see it, and from where I sit today's Greek
undergrads yet do not understand the words discretion, manners or consequences. Until all chapters have functioning boards and chapter advisors, the slide will continue.
Sure wish that the comeback trail would be near, and that we will have a self-fulfilling prophecy.
HOWEVER, chapter losses continue, and today's Greeks still do
not seem to understand what we are trying to say...us alums. Huge chapter losses continue, and check with your HQ as to those numbers, if you can get them. NIC has them. Men, we must have size to pay our mounting bills and the dinky 40
man chapter simply does not cut it.
SO, let us continue to try to get back on track, huh?

Re: Quota? Expand?
 

If quotas have proven to be detrimental then how come the sororities on a typical campus are larger, have more PNM's go through rush and have less inactive chapters?


On one hand you tell us bigger is better, but then on the other hand you tell us the quota system is detrimental even though the sororities are bigger than fraternities.

Re: Heller, et al.
 

Maybe you should adopt the quota system.

Re: Why Anti-Expansion?
 

If the sorority system is strong, and the sororities have large houses, large membership except for one and no shortage of membership then why the hell would you want to change it?

If the fraternies have lower numbers, less PNMs, lower GPAs and more more inactive chapters then how is their system better? Wasn't it Wilson Heller's theory that bigger is better? If the sororities have a larger average chapter size then aren't they better according to Wilson Heller's theory?

disagree, but
 

this may not be what you want to hear in this uni-sex milieu...
but women's groups are much different than mens' and while
we hail the difference, the girls will often stay together more than the boys...the guys, if they differ considerably, will tell you to
go to H, leave and the girls will simply not.
Agree or disagree...whatever, I base this on forty plus years of
observing, volunteering....what have you?
Further, the quota system has kept women's groups snobbish,
and huge numbers do not pledge...
believe me, folks, I am on your side, I want us all to win. But the
facts are there, you do not write the checks, pay the bills....
I hope to live to see the day when we all have a good Greek experience and when we do go out into the world we do so with
having had a living laboratory...the chapter....to thank for a job well done.
There will always be those on the bottom....quotas will not help.
Headquarters may/may not want to fool with chapters which are
consistently weak. And sometimes us alums simply wear out trying to keep a group of weenies afloat. Sometimes it is better
simply to pull out and return anew, stronger, and make something positive out of it all.
Let us continue to discuss, even disagree, but remember, us oldies are eager for you guys to win...we did, and we still remember. Hugs...now get busy....and I speak for uncle Tommy Earp (yes he is related to Wyatt) of Lambda Chi, too.

Whether you agree with Erik Conard is not the main theme on this thread.

I and He have the same feelings from both of our long experience with our respective Fraternitys.

I have always been against HUGE Chapters where you do not know your own Brothers or Sisters! Maybe that is my small scholl learning but it will hold true to any campi!

As was mentioned in another thread, the big chapters get recognize while the smaller ones may not so much as people wonder why they are smaller?

The reason I started my Local is because I am that way, do something new. But let me go back, I pledged a local that Affiliated with a Large National but left, so to speak!

The pledge as many as you can is the wrong/right way?

We all want GOOD people, but with the cost of living, school, dues (Risk Management Ins), and $$ for summer jobs going down, it is very hard for students to make it without grants, scholarships, and part time jobs while in school!

But to get back to the subject:

With out a strong Greek Community and backing, we all will slowly dwindle, ergo the difference of Fraternitys and Soroitys on campus such as has been posted!

Small campi are no different, we had to work with STG for Homecoming (6 Fraternitys, 3 Soroitys). Actually it was a good thing to interact with another Fraternity!

Students today just as when I was in college are looking for something different to associate with! There for, why not the NEW Soroity? NPC and thier quota/college as well sucks!

Sink or swim with the flow, but do not hold back the possibility to have Greeks Grow on your campus!

I think Erik will agree with me, WE as Greeks are our own worst enemies!:(

good words, all
 

Yes, Tom, especially your comment about us being our own worst enemy. One campus chapter spent virtually all of their first semester budget on booze and food for rush. They opened
their house to all. The freeloaders came in, drank the booze, ate the food and continued to badmouth the greeks afterwards.
If brother greeks are our enemies, then who are these "takers", those jerks who constantly belittle the greeks...some of these, by the way, wear sweatshirts with GDI on them...do they crave identification or what? It is really silly for us to fight amongst ourselves, look foolish, when we all offer like experiences.
A reply, perhaps tongue in cheek, saying why don't we adopt the
quota system...if the girls are so large and successful.
Good point on the surface, but when you cannot even get enough men to sign up for rush what the heck good are quotas?
At the U where only 200 men sign up for rush for 29 houses but
over 2,000 girls for 13 sororities...how can one make a comparison? Quota, schmota...
There is, good people, simply a differing in sexes...sorry, unisex
and co-ed chapter freaks...you are dead wrong. Vive la diference!
BUT, as in sales, out of sight, out of mind...OR, put a brick on your desk with a sign "This brick will sit here all day and neither
rush or pledge a man."
We must work on it 'til we get it right.
While Wilson B. Heller, Pike, may have over-killed size and may have come across as grumpy, he did love us all...he really did.
Did you know he was a WWI aviator and ace? He was modest.
As regards quality vs. quantity...I never espoused getting wimps
in a chapter simply to enhance numbers. This is a given, and I'd
hope you all are smart enough to know that! Keep talkin, troops!
The Fraternity experience is well worth saving. Cheers! Uncle Erik, old Kansas TKE alum now in Colorado

Yes You Are!!!!!:) To all of the Above!!!!:D

Cannot wait till next Year!!!!! Our Time!:cool:

Cranky Ole Fart! Yea For Cranky Ole Farts!!!!!!!!:cool:

YOURS,

cranky old fart
 

cranky old fart, crusty old bastard--
I do not care what you call me,
BUT
let's continue to work on our clubs so you can become
CRANKY OLD FARTS....

E C, Youse Da Best!!!!!!!!:)

Dont think these damn Kids Understand rhe old days!:D

SH-t, they have NO Clue!:(

I do not understand when We talk, they do not listen!

E C Kids Will Be Kids!:D Thank Goodness!!! Oh well!:(

Re: cranky old fart
 

i love this!!!!

ok, here is my take. first of all, i hate quota. i came from the small house, but i would rather have 20 sisters who give 100%, instead of 80- 20 who give 100% and 60 who barely give 50%!!! i know that several chapters have 150+ members and i can't even imagine that (not on my campus, but elsewhere)!!! truthfully, in most cases, on a campus with glos that own their own houses, i feel that expansion is not welcome bc the current groups will have to fight harder to pay for members to fill their house. pure and simple. you have room for 100 girls to sleep, then you need 100 girls to pay to sleep there. if you have more competition, you are going to have to fight harder to get enough people to fill the beds. empty beds= loss of money.

then with the "quota" system, the national office has this "goal" that you must meet every time. if you don't you get some sort of talk about how you didn't do it again. you start to feel like crap bc it doesn't matter that you just doubled the size of your group, but you didn't meet quota. the focus shifts from sisterhood and bonding to a constant fight to rush, cob, etc. the next thing you know, it is not fun to be in a sorority any more!

nationally speaking, there are groups with many more chapters than others in both ifc and npc. should the larger groups like teke and chi-o stop expanding bc there are groups that don't have nearly as many chapters? let's face it, more chapters= more members= more money. i am sure that when the npc sends out info on groups looking to affiliate, there are some glos who just say, we don't have the resources to even get started on this campus. i bet the same goes with ifc, too. i really don't feel like this is a purely local issue of large v. small. i think it is a more global issue.

so what do we do? how can we take care of each other not only on our individual campi, but at the npc and ifc level?

healthy differences
 

it is good we are talkin' it is good we have differences it is good
we recognize the need to hug one another
yes, while times are indeed a-changin' we have something to offer more than semester hours, diplomas, credentials....
it is called FRATERNITY
please don't forget it. from someone who cares; call me
that cranky old codger from Colorado--- Erik

OK. Here's How I Think I Works.
 

And this should be compatible with Wilson Heller's theories. In practice, there are no 'freestanding' fraternity or sorority chapters. Everyone operates within some system, and because of that each chapter is effected by its peers. For instance, at Penn State you are considered to be a large fraternity if you have fifty men. At Ole Miss you are small if you have less than 100. Both schools have excellent fraternity systems, and each system has its own standard of measurement. On my campus, the Panhellenic sororities all have big houses, and chapters of 100+. But on the same campus, the system of historically Black sororities do not have houses and their chapters are much smaller. And the Multicultural sororities are even smaller still. There is a natural heirarchy that forms within each system, and everyone seems happy. Within each system there are those who are 'large' and those who are considered 'small'. Heller's point is that in any system, circumstances and Human Nature favor the large.
In a system of large chapters - fraternity or sorority - various events and programs form around the numbers available. If you have a 'small' chapter of only sixty-five women and the largest ones have 100+ then you are hard-pressed to compete for the various honors. Dynamic and aggressive and ambitious women are attracted to the chapters that appeal to their personalities. Unfortunately, the reverse is also true. Those who are reticent, les ambitious, less energetic are attracted to the groups that reflect those traits. That's why they always seem to struggle.
So, there's no magic number. The trick is to conform to the standards of the system you're in. Heller said that every wanted quality follows size. For fraternities at Penn state, 'size' means 55-60 men. At Ole Miss it means 150.

Re: OK. Here's How I Think I Works.
 

Antitrust? - quota, voting not to expand
 

Can anyone explain how things like quote and other Panhel agreements, which limit the number of new members or new chapters, do not violate the antitrust laws? For example, a Panhel voting to not allow another group on campus because all sororities must reach quote or total first, could be seen as an oligopoly (i.e., existing NPC sororities) using trade association agreements (Panhel) to prevent new competitors (a new NPC sorority) into the market (campus).

It is one thing to have recognition requirements like bylaws, officers, advisors, insurance, and existing for a year, before recognizing a new sorority for the health of the system. It is another thing to "prevent" any new sororities from starting, which would seem to be against the antitrust laws and using market power illegally. Anyone have any insight on antitrust laws?

Re: Antitrust? - quota, voting not to expand
 

I haven't taken antitrust yet (actually not sure if i'll end up taking it before graduating law school), but the short answer to your question is:

GLOs are NOT BUSINESSES!

They're private social organizations, I'm guessing most of them are registered as not-for-profits.

Therefore antitrust laws have absolutely ZERO to do with them.

Not antitrust
 

Also, the other NPC sororities would not expand to a cmpus anyway thet has not formaly agreed to expansion. So non-NPC sororities can expand there a lot of the time, it just will not have any support form any NPCs.

Re: Re: Antitrust? - quota, voting not to expand
 

Maybe or maybe not. They are incorporated, pay taxes, have paid employees, generate millions of dollars and some operate out of 10 million dollar+ HQ buildings. Maybe they are both a social organization and a business.

Either way, why should a social organization be able to prevent another social organization from starting?

Re: Re: Re: Antitrust? - quota, voting not to expand
 

Because they've all signed the Unanimous Agreements of NPC and agreed that things will work this way with their member groups.

Now if NPC would try to prevent say Delta Sigma Theta from starting on campus, they wouldn't get very far, since they are in 2 different conferences.

Re: Re: Re: Antitrust? - quota, voting not to expand
 

Because all 26 social organizations belong to a "coalition" in NPC that has agreed to a sort of "non-compete" agreement.

>>>Either way, why should a social organization be able to prevent another social organization from starting?<<<

I don't think that one social organization CAN prevent another from starting. Several posters have pointed out, however, that NPC groups have agreed to operate in a certain way. A non-NPC group can go to a campus anytime they want to (assuming the campus administrators agree) and they don't have to have the approval of the Panhellenic Council. With NPC groups, typically the request for new groups to make presentations comes from the campus Panhellenic, not the other way around anyway. But wherever the idea comes from, NPC groups know that they need the approval of the campus Panhellenic and have no problem with it.

Re: Re: Re: Antitrust? - quota, voting not to expand
 

They're not a for-profit business. Antitrust doesn't apply. There are no owners or shareholders, no one gets a percentage of the profits. All the money is put back into the organization- philanthropies, programming, etc.

Antitrust is a very tricky, complicated thing. For those of you who are sports fans, that's one of the legal theories that some of the Big East schools that are suing the ACC are using.

Most laws aren't blanket laws- they don't cover all groups and individuals. Most are applied more narrowly. Things like freedom of speech- people try to apply it all the time in ways in which it can't legally be applied.

And once again, this whole question of expansion is only pertinent to NPC groups. It was something each group accepted when joining the NPC.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Antitrust? - quota, voting not to expand
 

Since everyone seems to be concentrating on the NPC itself. Why then, there seems to be even a better arguement there in terms of antitrust, because HQs are incorporated and do act just like businesses providing lots of services. From what I understand, just because you are a not-for-profit corporation does not mean you are exempted from the antitrust laws. Anti trust has been applied to not-for-profit hospitals.

So taking the initially example and applying to the NPC itself (i.e., trade association): all 26 organizations (oligopoly) belong to a coalition call the NPC (national trade association) that has agreed to "non-compete" agreements (Unanimous Agreements), which when applied to and through local Panhels by local chapters and NPC recommendations for setting up and running a Panhel (vertical arrangements), essentially enable the strongest of the 26 organizations (oligopoy) to use these trade association agreements to continued dominance in the market (market power) and prevent new competitors (a new NPC sorority) into the market (campus).

Please GCs, who are attorneys, can you explain for us who do not understand these things?

I'm not quite sure who you think should be suing whom for what???

And what would they hope to accomplish? What would the desired outcome be?

I'm confused as to the details of your hypo

I think I get what he's trying to say, but I think it's wrong. Luis, are you trying to say that the NPC prevents groups within it's own ranks from becoming stronger, while keeping the "higher" tier groups at the top?

If so, the NPC rules are set up to do exactly the opposite - it's set up so that when a campus decides to open up for expansion, all NPC groups who are not on that campus are allowed to submit a proposal. The school then selects the groups they feel would be a good fit for the campus and invites them to do a presentation on the group's core values, history, and goals on the campus, etc. The campus itself then chooses the group that THEY liked the best, based on the proposal, presentation, and the fit for the campus.

So in the end, the NPC makes it more fair by giving all groups the opportunity and governance structure to make the initial contact with a campus that wants to expand. But in the end, it's the members of the campus itself that select which group they want to colonize.

Does that make sense?

Luis,

Your theory would only work if there were one or two sororities that were the biggest, strongest, wealthiest sorority AT EVERY SINGLE CAMPUS THEY ARE ON. No sorority is like that.

Since the local panhellenics - not the national groups - vote for who they want to come and expand, the argument doesn't hold water. When I was in school a group colonized, and the two choices given were one of the smallest sororities in NPC and one that was considerably larger. They chose the smaller group because they felt it was a better fit for the campus, or maybe because they liked their colors better, or maybe the reps from the bigger group all had sticks up their butts. Who knows? The point is it was the collegians who chose the group, not NPC saying "this group is bigger and you must pick them."

Now, this is the way it's supposed to work. Believe me, I'm not saying that things in NPC don't need some sort of improvement to get all the sororities on an equal footing, but this is getting off on a tangent. If I get ambitious I'll find threads that DO talk about that for you. We were discussing whether NPC has the right to allow another sorority, be it big, small or whatever, to enter a campus.

pissing contests
 

you guys are arguing over meaningless points....there are a goodly number of avenues which might entice the formation of another group, be it of whatever-panhel or administrative or student generated-move.
Simple..take each case on it's own merit. The schism of the varied groups on campus which has divided IFC's into groups
who either cannot compete with each other, who are hellbent on
"heritage" issues...has clouded the fraternal waters.
'way back when....we were concerned with matters of comity,
with elimination of the "clause." Now we have moved into the opposite direction.
What has happened to civility? GLOs now appear to be some who have few standards, who charter multiple campuses, who
spread membership in urban areas...kinda willy-nilly. How do
we even manage to talk to one another, so diverse have we become? Back to basics, huh?