|
Brother James et al,
There are some good thoughts on what I consider to be the single largest threat to greek life as we know it.
Some of my own thoughts:
"Problem/Solution 1: Hiring Risk Analysis Experts to help with out policies."
I have just returned from a meeting as the chair of Kappa Sigma'a ad-hoc RM committee. We did indeed bring in a Risk Management expert; greek specific actually. In speaking with external Risk Management Experts, few of them are even willing to talk to us becuase their experience is so limited. But, we should keep trying.
"Problem/Solution 2: Houses: Only put the lease in individual members names. That way the chapter doesn't have to be liable for every little thing that happens. The chapter can also rent the premises for events. " This may indeed reduce risk for the "chapter" as a named defendant; however, it does NOTHING to reduce the exposure for the general fraternity and/or the house corporation. REALITY: the individuals responsible will almost always be named, and the deep pockets (insurance) of the general fraternity will always be named. The HOUSE is NOT the issue, houses don't kill people, poor planning and poor controls do.
NOW - that being said; there is CERTAINLY room for improvement in the relationship between HC's and the chapter membership. Members and guests falling from roof tops, being burned as they burn trash on the property, etc is COMPLETELY preventable...and it ultimately boils down to the relationship between the local HC and the chapter.
"Problem/solution 3:
This ties back to point one, but there is a probably a legal option that seperates the antics of several fraternity members from the chapter and the actions of a single chapter from the National Organization"
The reality is that there is a TON of case law (more every day) that is decreasing this number into the range that James lines out. The fact is that judges and juries make the determination of how many members it takes to make a chapter event. So we better either deal with that; i.e, define it the same way) or face the climbing costs of insurance and settlements associated with those "functions." James is right about the "spontaneous gatherings" of members and guests that are an increasing peoce of the risk managment challenge.
I would argue it goes beyond the chapter "doing the right thing" and drill it down to each member and guest doing the right thing. Unfortunately, we often find that some members have different ideas of right and wrong!
I have seen and heard ug's and alums alike proclaim that there was nothing wrong with:
- Hanging out on the roof of a house (stupid)
- Burning trash at the house (stupid)
- Physically beating someone with a broomstick (illegal)
- hanging a pledge by his underwear (until he loses a testicle)
- serving underage members and guests at a party (illegal)
- asking a pledge class to slam a fifth of licqor each (illegal)
"But we can try and protect our groups from liability. "
While accurate, I believe this ignores the RESPONSIBILITY we have to one another (within the context of our oaths) to protect each other, our guests and our beloved Orders from harm. The losses are mere symptoms. And that boils down to behavior. While some suggest that we will never succeed in altering behavior; I have experiential evidence to the contrary. But it doesn't just happen. It takes a heck of a lot of work, consistency and meaningful discussion.
I agree that this is not a policy challenge; but it requires some policy adjustment. This is a battle of minds and hearts....with lives hanging in the balance...as well as our organizations.
I CERTAINLY appreciate the discussion and mostly the suggested solutions; however, let us not ignore the behaviors that create the liability.
Brad
|
Hybrid Mode
