Little Problem
 

In my chapter, the GMC is the pledge educator, and is in charge of big brother selection. The pledges pick their top 3 choices, and are most likely given one of their top 2-unless that brother is in bad-standing with the chapter, or cannot take a little.
This year our GMC decided not to give littles to brothers that had behavior problems all year (i.e-disrespecting other brothers, disrespecting girls, and slight hazing incidences). Our GM doesn't agree with the decision, and wants to make everyone happy, but I see where our GMC is coming from.
I don't think someone that would be a bad influence should be paired with an impressionable 17 year old.
Any suggestions to find a solution to this problem? Ideas? Comments?

A.E.K.D.B

If the power's been delegated (in the bylaws, etc) to the GMC, then that's how it goes - to change that, you could amend, suspend the rules, all those great parliamentary tactics . . . or maybe just sit the EC down and talk it over, and stipulate that the EC decision will stand over the GMC's single voice.

Weird situation - let us know how it works out.

pardon my butting in...
 

It all depends on what the "behavior problems" are, and if they are bros that have been disciplined by the chapter or if they just ticked the guy in charge off. (i.e. is this guy on a power trip)

I can see his point, but on the other hand, if it ends up with a lot of pledges getting bigs that they don't like, it could backfire.

update...
 

We FINALLY got our littles, even brothers that have constant behavior trouble (which I don't agree with). The matching worked out so strange that the brother(s) in question got the most impressionable pledges-great kids, but a little too eager to please and be a part of the crowd.

To answer your question 33girl- These guys didnt just piss off a few guys, rather are guys that have to be constantly reprimanded for their behavior by our exec board.

So these guys will have littles, but will be closely watched....we'll see how this works out.