University of Tulsa puts fraternity row on probation
 

http://www.utulsa.edu/collegian/arti...p?article=3761

Excerpts from the article:

“Three of the university’s policies have been violated by the fraternities: the failure to register an alcoholic event, the violation of the university’s alcohol policy, and the violation of federal law of no alcoholic consumption in people under 21,” said Garrison.

Because of various events like this that occurred, there are certain rules the fraternities must follow for the rest of the semester. Each is allowed to hold only two events for its philanthropy week, and these must be alcohol-free, held on campus and approved by Garrison seven days prior to the event.

Social probation will end for the fraternities at the conclusion of fall semester, assuming there are no violations of the terms and conditions.

Update September 30, 2008: Sanctions Modified

Campus paper reports:
http://www.utulsa.edu/collegian/arti...p?article=3803

Excerpt from article:


. . . “The sanctions that were previously placed were not working, and therefore they were scrapped and revised,” said Alyson Garrison, the program advisor for Greek life.

Now, if a fraternity violates TU alcohol policy, they will have next year’s pledge class cut by 33 percent.

If a second violation occurs, the pledge class will be reduced by 50 percent.

A third will make the fraternity not recognized on campus for two years.

These sanctions do not apply only to the fraternities housed on fraternity row. All of the members of the Interfraternity Council (IFC), the National Panhellenic Conference (NPC) and the National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC) are bound by the new rules.


I guess we'll have to see if these new rules are effective. However, it seems to me that making the "consequences" apply to next year's pledge class size is, maybe, risky. Next year is a long time in the future for many college-age students, and it might be unrealistic to expect GLOs to think seriously about something months and months ahead when they're doing party / event planning in the here and now.

Time will tell, I suppose.

I don't get it. I thought fraternities didn't have total/quota?

My guess is that if they violate it, they will have to reduce the pledge class they have by that percentage. So ... if you got a pledge class of 10 guys, and you had to drop by 50%, you'd have to get rid of 5.

It seems kind of stupid if that's what they're saying, but that's what it sounds like to me.

How could they do that and not get into a whole lot of other trouble?

Banditone is a TU grad, I'm sure he could shed some light on this.

TU is just up the road from here and this is the first I've heard of any sort of 'quota' sort of system for fraternities.

I'm not in undergrad at TU, but I know a couple of law students who were, I am tempted to ask them and see what's going on. The pledge classes for the fraternities didn't seem that big to begin with.

easy solution for the fraternities...

just pledge underground...

they do it at auburn, among other places, including arkansas

Whoa whoa whoa.
Who has their handy NPC "green books"? Isn't there a rule that you CANNOT reduce a New Member class size as a punishment for breaking rules (even if they're alcohol/risk management rules)?
Hopefully it won't come to that, as the GLOs will be careful this semester, but as far as I understand, Tulsa wouldn't have the authority to cut new member class sizes, anyway.

I don't know about sororities, but I think that's one of the sanctions UF gave ATO and PhiDelt in the past few years. I have some friends in Florida ATO that I can ask, but I would almost swear that's what they told me.

How would they choose which pledges to drop? I've heard of universities not allowing pledge classes at all, but I've never heard of them reducing the amount of people an organization can take in.

This should be interesting.

I think what Florida did was cap the size of the pledge class before fall. Like if say Phi Delt would normally take somewhere around 40 in a fall, the University would only let them take 15 or 20 or some number much lower.

OK, that makes sense. I thought they made pledges drop mid-process or something.

Like someone said earlier, all this will do is cause underground pledging.

Mizzou did this to either ATO or Delta Upsilon at one point. They were not allowed to take any pledges for 1 year.

I can understand universities not allowing GLOs to take any members; I was confused by them dictating how many people the organization could take.

CB cleared up my confusion, though.

^^ I quoted the wrong post. I meant to quote CB's post about UF ATO and Phi Delt. I was just adding in useless trivia about a similar incident at Mizzou.

Unless your school is attending meetings to get a headcount, I don't see why a group couldn't just ignore the school's edict and initiate whomever they want to, then only report 15 or however many pledges per semester until the restrictions go away or until things even out.

I'm not aware of HQs and schools comparing notes as to who has been initiated and pledged, so I don't really see why a group couldn't just keep two sets of books.

Not that I would ever advocate such a thing. That would be wrong.

This is ridiculous, and I can't see how they would "reduce a class by a certain percentage". The University has already screwed up rush from what I am hearing, so this crap wouldn't surprise me.

I am so glad I don't go to school these days; I'd be put on probation, kicked out of school, put in jail, etc. :rolleyes:

We are actually in talks with the University at this time about getting our chapter re-activated. This crap makes me want to wait it out a bit till they come to their senses (if they come to their senses).

ATO was allowed to take pledges, but they weren't allowed to live in the house.

DU was allowed to take pledges, but their status was more.... New Member, SigEp style.

These sanctions were in place fall '07-spring '08 ish.

Corremt me if I'm wrong, but NPC "green books" don't apply for NIC groups. Our school can and has altered pledge class allowances over the years to punish groups for breaking laws/rules. They taken future pledge classes completely away and they've placed limits on the number of pledges they can take. To my knowledge, however, they've never done so without IFC's approval and involvement.

As a private university, Tulsa can pretty much do what they want in terms of punishment. The NPC rules really govern Panhellenics trying to use recruitment restrictions as punishment. The university has the power to issue whatever punishments they see fit. The only recourse would be to sue the university, and a case like this would not be a strong one.