Interesting rules that discourage having too much rushees
 

IFC grounds Sigma Phi Epsilon
The fraternity violated an IFC rule by signing too many rushees.

John Moss - Daily Staff Writer
February 13, 2004

OU Interfraternity Council placed Sigma Phi Epsilon on social probation until Jan. 1, 2005.

IFC, at a closed-door meeting Wednesday night, also barred the fraternity from all campus activities, including intramural and Campus Activities Council events, until January 2005, according to Andrew Sledge, member of Sigma Phi Epsilon. Sledge said his chapter’s president told him about the events of the meeting.

The fraternity will be allowed to finish competing in Sooner Scandals, a spring-semester Campus Activities Council event, IFC President Omar Zantout said.

Andy Oden, Sigma Phi Epsilon’s Oklahoma Alumni president, said the situation between the fraternity and IFC began last fall during rush, when the fraternity signed more rushees than IFC allowed.

The fraternity apparently signed 76 rushees, which was 21 more than IFC allowed fraternities to sign, Oden said.

Click here to read the rest

How can you keep people from participating in campus activities? Does that mean if they want to play intramurals they just can't call their team Sigma Phi Epsilon?

That's OU's IFC rush rules for ya...

The main reason these rules were set is that the IFC allows summer rush, though bids are not officially handed out until formal fall rush. Much like NPC's quota system, there is a cap on how many total pledges you can take in formal rush, generally around fifty to fifty-five; once you reach that total fraternities are not supposed to conduct 'open rush' (NPC = COB) until after spring formal rush. This was intended to keep the houses from aggressively recruiting incoming freshmen, who are required by OU policy to live in on-campus housing if they are under 21.

Mind you, they got off lightly... IFC could have cut their future quota for the following year's rush or flat out bar them from rush. As it was, they faced a $25,000 fine, which was later lowered to $10,000 and social probation added in a plea bargain.

Free The Sig Ep 76!!
 

I think this is terrific. The line between the good guys (the aggressive entrepreneurs) and the bad guys (restrictive bureaucrats) have never been more clearly drawn. This is EXACTLY the sort of thing that will elevate Sig Ep to prestige & power. In a well established fraternity system like OU's, the traditional big dogs don't like newcomers stepping on their turf. They tend to make rules, like sororities do, to keep the low ranking houses in line, all crafted piously in the name of "stability". They even offer ambiguous "Fraternity of the Year" honors to the lower ranking houses, but everyone knows where the real power lies. It might - might - be legit for sororities, but restrictive rush rules are anathema to men and their competitive, heirarchican natures. It's been awhile, but I remember the Betas, the SAE's, the Kappa Sigs and the Delta Tau Deltas were the large powerful houses, and the Sig Eps weren't on anyone's radar screen. Apparently, the Sig Eps have made a big move and are now taking on the system. Great for them! All the psychology is on the side of the aggressors. Let IFC do their worst. Sig Ep will get attorneys and I absolutely guarantee they will win. They will get their fine $$ back and they will get to keep their pledges and win the right to rush anyone they want at any time. But most important, they will achieve legend status for having the muscle and the manhood to take on the bid dogs and beat them at their own game.
My own fraternity at OU has struggled for years with low-to-middling membership. In spite of winning some nice-sounding awards, they are a solidly mid-tier, low prestige shop. I wish we had the vision and ambition to be a dominant force on that great fraternity campus. Good for you, Sig Ep. Go after 'em!

Yes, but they can just call themselves "Men of the Golden Heart" or something and everyone will know it's Sig Ep anyway.

I guess I'm confused but what does this have to do with housing? Do they move into the chapter house when pledgeship begins?

That's so strange from my perspective as a sorority woman.

There SHOULD be a "quota" cap on the number of men they can bid in a typical formal all-campus recruitment.

BUT... there should be a set "chapter total" and any groups who are not at that total after the all-campus recruitment period should be allowed to extend bids until they reach the chapter total cap.

This sounds like the campus Greek Advisor does not have a handle on his position as an advisor, and in turn, is not allowing a competitive Greek environment to evolve.

Why should there be a quota? What's wrong with competition? Some men want to join a 200 man fraternity and some want to join a 40 man fraternity, and they can't do so in a NPC type recruitment (i.e. communist) environment.

Wow!

firehouse, I am impressesed with your diatrabe, or not!:o Is it only because you are a PSE or a true beleiver of what the ineptitudeness of the Fine stupitity as I/you so refer to as OkieU Da!

Maybe they are trying to take lessons from the NPC to not let the newbies grow but only the OLDIES who are tried and true!:(

At least you did not say anything about LXA. By the way, of all of the Chapters that I have been to, they are my least favorite!:o

So since when Is SPE the shining light of GreekDom!:confused:

Just vent but be easy!:)

Hi Russell,

I agree with you about the diversity of the Greek System-- that some PNM's prefer a smaller group as opposed to a larger group. I believe that certainly there will always be large groups and small groups to fit everyone's needs and wants.

The national groups place a lot of emphasis on chapter total because a chapter with high numbers has stronger finances, and a larger pool from which to develop leaders (so it's not the same people being burned out all the time from having to hold muliple offices.) A chapter with high numbers is also more visibile on campus, can (conceivably) contribute more hours of community service and campus participation, and afford its chapter house and national dues. Bottom line, it's a dollars and cents thing. Although formed for our social enjoyment, national Greek orgs operate as not-for-profit groups. A larger chapter of that group is more likely to be operating strongly as opposed to a smaller group that might be operating at a financial loss. There is also the belief that a larger chapter can be more selective in its membership recruitment (IE-- it can take the guy with a low GPA, b/c there are so many other members with higher GPAs to help compensate while he works to fulfill his potential).

I love your analogy about national groups being communists! LOL. Doesn't it feel that way? Who sang that song "It's all about the Benjamins, baby?" I think bottom, line, it's all about finances and operating in the black, as opposed to being in the red.

Hope this helps. I think you're 100% on about competition being important, and I do think that the concept of quota supports this by allowing all the groups to meet on a level playing field and compete in areas like member rention, athletics, campus involvement, academics, etc. I hope I haven't offended you at all and I respect your viewpoint.

Nope. If incoming freshmen are under 21 and have less than 24 credit hours, they are required to reside in University housing, the only exception being if the freshman lives within commuting distance (within 20 miles) of OU with his or her parents.

Few, if any pledges or junior members will actually live in the fraternity house their freshman year at OU.

Firehouse is right... the IFC is effectively controlled by the larger, more established houses such as Beta, Kappa Sig and SAE. Smaller houses almost always get the shaft when it comes to rush, though they make up for it in dedication. I'm glad the Sig Eps are fighting back.

BTW, Firehouse, what house are you in, if I may ask? Our chapter has been inactive since 2000, used to be at the old Phi Delt 'Ski Lodge' at the foot of College Avenue

Response from the Chapter Counselor:

Sigma Phi Epsilon has letters of support from the national headquarters of every fraternity on campus, as well as the National Interfratenity Conference. Each of these fraternities condems the cap rule and has communicated that their local chapters are not following their own policies. The OU IFC has a cap of fifty-five pledges for each semester. The Sig Eps were fined $21,000 for breaking that cap. Upon appeal, that pealty was changed to a fine of $10,000, and social probation of four months. In addition, the Sig Eps were directed to conduct a recruitment seminar for the IFC, and an additional promise of a fine of $1,000 per pledge if we did not retain at least 90%.
None of these punishments are allowed in the IFC bylaws. We feel like these punishments are excessive and unreasonable we will continue to pursue a correction of this vindictive behavior towards Sigma Phi Epsilon.

Tim Lewis
Chapter Counselor
Sigma Phi Epsilon

I have read a number of posts by you Tom and my only question is...do you even attempt to read your own posts? Seriously, not trying to be a dick here by come on your posts don't even make grammatical sense or any sense at all most of the time.

That is because Tom is not speaking English. He is speaking Earpism. I took a class on it. Very hard to pick up.

Replies to: adpiucf, Tom Earp, AlphaSig
 

Hi, guys. Thanks for your comments.
To adpiucf: There are few if any fraternity systems with anything like total or ceiling or quota. Men and women are very different in that regard. Men are combative; women are cooperative. We're generally not interested in a more level playing field as you say. We want to win and toward that end we'd like the field to be slanted as much our way as possible. There are disadvantages to both approaches. Women have all the Pan-Hel rules and they provide stability. However, my experience in large sorority systems has been that whichever sorority currently has the lowest membership and is the closest to going out of business, is one that has nearly always dwelt in the lowest tier. Fraternity systems do not have the stability of sororities, but individual houses (like the SigEps at OU) can come from far back to challenge for the top spot.
To Tom Earp: Hi old friend and fellow Heller devotee. I appreciate your kind words but I do not know what a PSE is. As for Sig Ep being the "shining light of greekdom", they have come a long was up the ranks nationally in a relatively short time. They have done it by being exteremely aggressive in both housing and in membership. Your LXA has certainly done well too, and for the same reasons.
To AlphaSigOU: I'd rather not say right now which house is mine because I'm embarrassed that I sounded critical of them in this forum. I didn't go to school at OU but I have visited that chapter over a long time and I have always been frustrated at their lack of ambition and vision. They need to build their membership to competitive size, bulldoze their house and build a mansion to compete with Beta, SAE, K-Sig and now Sig Ep. Instead, they seem to 'not get it'.
By the way, I googled up Sig Ep's OU web page, and it's tremendous. there's a photo pf all 75 pledges dressed in matching shirts. It's an awesome statement of purpose and strength. Their composite already has over 100 men pictured. Trust me, SigEp at OU was not on the radar screen in the past. Now it looks like they've built a fantastic new home, with three-storey columns, and their membership competes in numbers and quality with SAE, Beta etc. Bully for them.

Easy, bud... that is the unique language of Tom Earp, known as Earplish! What appears to be horrendous grammatical and spelling barbarisms are nothing more than Earp-isms, which us old-timers on GC can somewhat understand. You don't learn Earplish - it learns you... right, Tom? ;) :) :D

*bump*
 

anyone?

...if that's your philosophy, then what is wrong with the established fraternities being in control of IFC and slanting the field to their direction. Just doesn't make any sense.

Anyway, I can see some problems with it. I don't like the idea of a cap, however if one fraternity was drawing all potentials at the cost of closing down every other fraternity it would be a bad situation for everyone. Who wants to be on a campus with only one fratnerity...given, it's unlikely, but there is a reason for why there was a cap.

Personally, when I see pledge classes of even 45 guys I wonder what kind of brotherhood they have. If you have pledge classes that size consistently there is no way you will get to know each other. Hell, you might not even know each other's names. Then comes cliches and all kinds of other problems that will kill a fraternity as fast as it grew to that size.

Coramoor, Thanks For Responding
 

_______________________________________________
"...if that's your philosophy, then what is wrong with the established fraternities being in control of IFC and slanting the field to their direction. Just doesn't make any sense."
_______________________________________________

That's exactly what does happen. The established fraternities take control and slant the rules their way. But, ambitious and aggressive fraternities refuse to let the upperdogs set the rules. In the SigEp case at OU, I understand the fraternity budgeted money to pay the fine, just so they could get the 75 men they wanted. But IFC decided to punish them further, and that is the point is dispute. They refuse to allow others to keep them down.

______________________________________________
"Who wants to be on a campus with only one fratnerity...given, it's unlikely, but there is a reason for why there was a cap."
______________________________________________

It goes against nature for there to be only one fraternity on campus. No matter how good a particular fraternity is, another one will spring up in opposition, or just out of general contrariness. No matter how hard they try, one fraternity CANNOT put their rivals out of business. In fact, as the top dog gets better and stronger, they will force their rivals to get better if they want to compete. If you can find a rare campus with only one fraternity, it will likely be because they used to have more and no one was any good. Competition is the key to success. If there are five fraternities, and in the unlikely event one pledges every available man on campus, the others will work harder next rush to expand their own memberships.
_____________________________________________
"Personally, when I see pledge classes of even 45 guys I wonder what kind of brotherhood they have. If you have pledge classes that size consistently there is no way you will get to know each other."
_____________________________________________

Yes, the truth is that a chapter of 150 men seldom enjoys the same intimate connecting fibers of brotherhood among all members as a much smaller house. And in truth, on many campuses a chapter of 150 men is not necessary to compete. However, it's alo true that in a chapter of, say 25 men, you might develop five lifelong friends. In a chapter of 150 men, your base of lifelong friendships expands exponentially.

When it comes to large pledge classes like that, how many pledges make it through to be initiated?

I've been in the system for 6 rushes and I've noticed that a lot of times a pledge class of 60 may only initiate 15. I had a friend that started with 36 and only 3 made it. Usually due to hazing and physical/mental abuse they quite. Then of course there are 50 guys out there that absolutly hate fraternities.

I'm not saying that this is the case there, but from my experience that is just something I think about.

You are right. Competition is the key. However, sometimes the cards get stacked. We are most likely going to lose 2 fraternities on my campus this semester b/c they just can't attrack the numbers they need. Of course going by the 55 man cap out there, no fraternity on my campus even gets close to reaching that cap. Hell, most don't even reach half that.

Caps Kill
 

Your signature is Morgantown, but I doubt that WVU has a cap of 50 on any fraternity. Caps, restrictions of any kind on membership are bad. They stiffle ambition and vision; they devalue hard work. I guarantee: take off the shackles and the fraternities will prosper.

Unfortunately, you are right about hazing and low retention. The good fraternities don't have that problem.

You a Mountaineer? I grew up in Logan.

There's not a cap here. There isn't a fraternity on campus that can even get close to breaking a 50 person cap.

Yeah, Mountaineers. Mountainqueers as most people call them, can't win a bowl game for anything.

As some one who is here at OU... The big deal is that we just brought a new fraternity on campus, to replace ZBT which left in Spring of 2002... and there are 4 other (men's) houses on campus which all have less than 40 members.

And since when is Kappa Sig a powerhouse at OU? Great guys, but they only have around 40 members, and are considered a middle tier house, mostly due to substandard housing...

The problem is that Sig Ep has repeatedly over the last 5 years ignored the cap and actually budgeted for the rush fines, and this year, once again agreed to play by the rules IFC set down, then is attempting to change them...

Yes, the Betas, SAE, and the Delts all took over the cap, but if I remember right, they only exceeded by 5 at the most, and they did pay their fines.

Four Under Forty?
 

I'm sorry that there are four fraternities at OU with under forty men. No excuse on a great campus like that. Holding back the successful chapters is no way to help the weak; they must offer an attractive product to rushees or they will go out of business. Prune the tree. Let them go if they can't compete; bring in new, hungry fraternities. As far as Kappa Sigma, I'm sorry to hear they're down. It's been awhile since I was there, but over the eyars the Betas, SAE, Delta and Kappa Sigs were the traditional strongarms. K-Sig had a huge brick house that took up an entire block. One year, a heisman Trophy candidate OU football player was their summer rush chairman. Something must have happened. OU is/was a great, great school for Greeks. Congrats on being part of such a fine school.

A cap hinders growth of a fraternity. Why would you not want a successful fraternity. It will raise the bar for other fraternities on the campus. Other fraternity should realized that they must compete, those in the bottom should have the opportunity to be on top, and those on top should strive to be better so they can stay on top. I love capitalism.

That's what I was thinking when I read about the cap. I interpreted it to mean that they were having a problem with some fraternities signing a huge amount of rushees, even guys that they never intended to initiate, they knew wouldn't keep grades, etc. in order to keep them from going to another house.

The other bad part about this is that IF SigEp agreed to follow the rules (cap) and then blatantly didnt, that's not cool and they should be consequented for that. Someone mentioned that this wasn't the first time they did that. I don't know if that's true or not, but there's a difference between "healthy competition" and just being insubordinate without good reason. I don't know enough about the situation to say which happened though.

PsychTau

I would have to agree with kstar to some degree...

I am not too far removed from the greek system at OU and the Sig Ep's were a larger house than the SAE's when I came on campus in 98. Sig Ep was my second choice behind SAE b/c they are a great bunch of guys. However, the Kappa Sig's USED TO BE a big house on campus, but would be considered a mid-tier for now. Actually, when I came on campus in 98 the SAEs were a small chapter and have recently grown to compete with the larger chapter's of Beta, Delt, Chop, Sig Ep. So this whole, little guy vs. big guy stuff is wrong. SAE had to work hard for where they have gotten, and I know the Sig Ep's have done so as well. It looks to me as though the Sig Ep's went too far over the cap and they are having to pay the consequences. I think the cap issue has its positives and its negatives. On OU's campus, it makes sense in some ways due to the large number of people who go thru rush each year (Fraternity and Sorority). If you sign over 50 guys/gals a semester, you get too big for your britches. At SAE when I was there we would not sign over 45 guys b/c we did not want to sit in class, see someone wearing our letters, and not know who it was b/c our house was so huge. Things have changed in the last couple years at SAE, alumni want to get as big as we used to be in the 70s and 80 before we got kicked off OU's campus. So, we have started signing more guys to satisfy alumni and to keep up with the bigger houses.

Now that I have written a novel... I must say that I wish the Sig Ep's the best. I hate to see any greek chapter come under fire, but do as we did when we got in trouble - pay the price, keep your mouth shut, and then come out with guns blazing when you get off probation.

Peace

Or they can fight this rule and get rid of it, which it seems they are going to do. I know national is going to back them up. I also have a feeling that NIC and FPA will also back them up.

Regarding Grades. A rushee/pledge/new member who can't keep his grades at one house, isn't going to do so at other house unless the GPA requirement is lower at the other house. Actually, you could say that a larger pledge class can afford a guy with grade issues more study partners. Other guys either currently or already taken these classes.

Also, a year is an awful long social probation. 1/3 of a college career. Thats out of hand.

That's quite a step in saying that a larger pledge class will help the grades of the pledges...

Usually in a large pledge class the pledges have to spend much more time at the house and social events/intermurals etc just to get to know the brothers-which takes time away from the prime purpose of why we are in college-Academics.

If SigEp is budgetting rush fines and has repeatedly agreed to not break rush rules but did so anyway...then obviously the fines are too low.

On my campus the University and Greek office have a loud bark, but when it comes to actually dealing out the fines/punishments fraternities just laugh at them. The rules keep getting broken and the system keeps getting worse.

Once again, I don't know how that particular chapter operates, but I've been told by several SigEp alums that nationally they have a big push in making sure their guys make grades. Who knows if a chapter says "If you don't have a 3.5 at midterm, you don't get initiated" or if they take the bottom X% of the pledge class and excuse them due to grades, even though they made the national cutoff, the chapter can always set a higher cutoff.

I'm speculating of course, but I could see on a large campus like OU, if a chapter disagrees with IFC and want to say "screw you", they could theoretically create such stipulations (ones that would be allowable under bylaws, etc.) if they didn't actually want to keep all 75 members.

Once again, this is a speculation coming to you from left field.
PsychTau

The most idiotic part about a cap is the thinking that it will help smaller houses out. Essentially what it does is creates smaller houses at the top while the smaller houses stay small.

In this instance, had SigEp only taken 55 or whatever the cap was the remaining 20 would not have joined one of the smaller houses, they would've gone to another top house where they fit in and had friends. The trickle down theory wouldn't work because at some point, those really stellar guys wouldn't be satisfied with joining a subpar house...they'd want to go SigEp.

If the intent of the school is to actually assist the smaller to mid-range houses, they need to get their headquarters to come and help and they need to provide individual assistance through the Greek Affairs Office. I'd assert that there are some groups on the campus that don't want to get bigger. Essentially what is happening is the mid-range houses are trying to get larger and feel that by holding down SigEp, it will help them out.

My question is, with SigEp being on probation, how does that make it more fair to the other houses? I'd bet that SigEp goes and exceeds their cap again and exascerbates the situation. Pike, Sigma Nu, KA, Phi Psi, Phi Kappa Sigma, etc. all can't compete because they do not go out and aggressively recruit like they should and change the system like SigEp has done.

This is why I used the phrase "you could say" when I wrote: "Actually, you could say that a larger pledge class can afford a guy with grade issues more study partners."

I didn't mean to infer that large pledge classes have better grades. Just that there would be more members who might - note might - might be able to help and equally important, have the time to help.

I am not trying to start a debate regarding "large" pledge classes (or GLO chapters) versus "small". However, I am simply trying to point out that both size groups have similar requirements (minimum GPA) and obligations (mandatory events) regarding their GLO. That both "small" and "large" pledge classes spend time at the house, attend social events and participating in intramurals etc.

Now granted, you may not be able to spend as much time with each and every guy as you would like, but you do have the ability - note I used ability - to have any number of guys to hang out with at any given time. To help you with academics. To talk with you regarding problems. To join you in a pick up game of hoops. To just hang out with. Again, I am not saying that the larger the size the better the experience but that the experience can be just as rewarding.

Basically, you get out of your GLO what you put into it.

Just as good a place to come from as any where else. :)

Bingo!

Re: Free The Sig Ep 76!!
 

There isn't a single thing you said that I don't agree with here. Who composes the IFC? If the national offices support the SigEps, couldn't they force the locals chapters to follow suit?

-Rudey
--Good job!

Rudey-

There are no locals in IFC at OU. It is all National Chapters. I will try to remember them here:

Sigma Alpha Epsilon
Delta Upsilon
Beta Theta Pi
Pi Kappa Phi
Sigma Chi
Sigma Phi Epsilon
Delta Tau Delta
Phi Kappa Sigma
Sigma Nu
Alpha Tau Omega
Pi Kappa Alpha
Lambda Chi Alpha
Kappa Sigma
Kappa Alpha
Phi Delta Theta
FIJI
Phi Kappa Psi
Triangle

This is the list of everyone in IFC at OU, so the chances of any locals backing Sig Ep is not going to happen b/c they are not represented. However, with the backing of the big names fraternities, Sig Ep has a good chance at fighting this and getting it overturned

SoonerSAE,

I think what Rudey meant is could the national organization for the local chapter to support SigEp. Not really sure about this, it depends on the different fraternity national by-laws or policies regarding recruitment. I'm sure that they can exert tremendous pressure on the local chapter to support SigEp.

Before The Lawyers Get Involved
 

Before the lawyers get involved, the leading players probably should get together and work out a solution. Holding some fraternities back is not going to make more men join the houses perceived as weaker. The SAE is right: in the 1980s, fraternity chapters were larger than in the 1990s, but average chapter size is rising sharply again across the country. How many members a chapter has should be only the business if that fraternity. If they take "too many", then the organization will collapse from the weight of bad decisions. If they have "too few' to sustain a competitive position, the they will disappear. However, my experience time after time is that the big fish eat the little fish.

I never could understand the rationale for a cap for the fraternities. I understand that they would like to "level" the playing field. What if the Rushees do not want to joined any other fraternity. It;'s not going to help the smaller house because they will not get them anyway. It will harm the fraternities that are innovative and aggresive in their recruitment.