Quote:
Originally Posted by als463
If the case of the one poster who said money is still expected but, sisters are not forced to come to events, I think that sounds like a decent idea to keep membership. I wonder if more GLOs offered that, they would actually keep people from terminating membership as often? I just wish we could get ladies to realize that membership is for a lifetime.
|
My issue is with the idea that senioritis or burn-out or what-have-you should be a reason to jump right to alumnae status. How is that fair to the women who remain and contribute to the chapter while Suzie Snowflake just doesn't want to anymore?
Sure, there are extreme circumstances that organizations should be flexible with. I think, for example, my chapter allowed live-outs if you got married or pregnant. Fine. Extreme financial hardship? Illness? Okay, let's find ways to work with women so we can keep them as lifelong members. But the ones who want to go "early alum" just because? Nah.
Perhaps the solution is for chapters to take a look at the obligations for seniors, on the whole (and maybe that's what you are suggesting above?). If individual chapters decide to lower attendance requirements for all seniors or let seniors live out of the house, or whatever, that's cool; that's what works for them. For example, in larger chapters, if you have enough women to fill all the committees with sophomores and juniors, then maybe you don't require seniors to be on a committee. In my own chapter, seniors didn't have to attend all of recruitment work week...they could show up on Wednesday already knowing the songs and stuff from previous years.
But if your chapter needs seniors to attend events, be on committees, and so on, because it doesn't have enough people to operate otherwise, then I don't support the idea of ducking out. I don't think it's worth it to allow that just so that we have someone as an alumnae member later on.
Threaded Mode
