UC-Davis: Co-ed Group Request to Associate with Panhellenic
 

An interesting situation has arisen at the University of California-Davis.

A group, Lambda Delta Lambda, has requested to become an associate chapter with Panhellenic. This has posed issues:

-Lambda Delta Lambda, while identifying itself as a sorority, allows males to join. This would be a conflict with Panhellenic and its protection under Title IX rules that allow for it to remain single-sex (as IFC is protected to remain single-sex).

-From what I understand, one of the advisors is pressuring the current members of Panhellenic to vote to allow LDL, suggesting that this is a gender identity issue (LDL was originally formed as a lesbian-friendly sorority), equality, and fairness. It's been stated that NPC is "old fashioned".

-It has been "suggested" to Panhellenic that if they do not admit LDL, they will lose university recognition.

I know that IFC has at least one member that has co-ed chapters (Psi Upsilon); but in my opinion, NPC organizations, with their UAs, are a whole different situation and I don't believe that a co-ed group could truly fit in.

It also bothers me that the administration and their representatives are pushing the ladies of UCDavis's Panhellenic into a "vote the way we want or lose campus recognition".

Thoughts?

I agree with you. Strong arm tactics are not the way to go.

I do not understand why co-ed greek orgs. can't have their own council? Was that even proposed?

I hope the UC-Davis panhellenic council contacts the area NPC representative. She would be a tremendous help in working through this situation.

Their request is to become an associate member. To what extent does that status reach? What are they trying to achieve from affiliation? They can't rush with the Panhellenic chapters so what other benefits are they after? Well, I suppose they could only take girls through formal and not be included in RFM, but that starts to be pretty contrived.

I would be interested to learn more about their intentions and plan.

To what purpose would be the associate membership? I think that's a more important question. Do they just want some sort of recognition? Associate members have different rights and responsibilities.

I question the accuracy of this. Is Panhellenic actually protected under Title IX? I doubt it. Panhellenic is not itself comprised of people, whether single-sex or co-ed; it is comprised of specific organizations whose single-sex status is protected under Title IX. There's a difference.

Likewise, I don't think that either the NIC or a campus IFC are protected under Title IX; the organizations that are members of it are. And at least on some NIC organizations, chapters of which may also be members of campus IFCs—Psi Upsilon and Delta Psi/St. Anthony Hall, for example—are not single sex. That would seem to indicate that allowing some co-ed organizations into the NIC or an IFC in no way imperils the Title IX status of other NIC or IFC members.

Of course, whether this org could "mesh" with Panhellenic is a different question.

Exactly - if they're recognized by the university, why on earth would they want the hassle of Panhel meetings, fees, etc?

As the Advisory Team Chairman for the DG chapter here, I can assure you all that we are way beyond the Area Adviser. The NPC President, NPC Counsel and UCD Counsel are all involved.

I think this is the crux of the issue along with complying with our Campus Panhellenic Bylaws, which reference Unanimous Agreements.

This was my thought, too. If the CPH has to admit both genders, that sure as heck doesn't mean the individual groups do.

Why does LDL need to be on a council at all? I bet this is something the school is pushing harder than the org.

Is LDL a selective membership group?

I guess I'm having trouble seeing how same-sex status is the crux of the issue. Title IX states that requirements that membership in school organizations be open to members of both sexes, but then exempts from that requirement "a social fraternity or social sorority which is exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of Title 26, the active membership of which consists primarily of students in attendance at an institution of higher education." Panhellenic is not "a social sorority."

Good luck, dukedg!

I don’t know if this is the case at UC-Davis, but at Kentucky, all "social" GLOs must be affiliated with a campus counsel. I don’t recall the exact reasoning behind it, but it had something to do with administrative oversight and funding etc.

^^^ this. My guess is that someone in the administration wants to be able
to justify having LDL report to an administrator not just a faculty advisor? (risk management for actvities? Anti-hazing? Leadership training?)

Thanks, I need it! I don't want to share too many details on the arguments at this point since there are professionals on both sides much more familiar with the legalities than I am. Once there is a resolution, I will be happy to share more.