ATTN: Chapter officers - Liability premiums

[DeltAlum]

Max,

Insurance is pretty much like anything else.

For instance, if you buy a new car, you get a warranty. If you make unauthorized changes, you void the warranty and the company or dealership won't honor it anymore.

If you have too many moving violations or accidents, an insurance company will cancel your car insurance policy.

If an insurance company sets up certain restrictions and you ignore them, it is the right of the company to void your policy.

High on the list of things that void a policy is breaking the law.

I think that's pretty easy to understand.

[madmax]

Originally posted by DeltAlum
Max,

Insurance is pretty much like anything else.

For instance, if you buy a new car, you get a warranty. If you make unauthorized changes, you void the warranty and the company or dealership won't honor it anymore.

If you have too many moving violations or accidents, an insurance company will cancel car insurance your policy.

If an insurance company sets up certain restrictions and you ignore them, it is the right of the company to void your policy.

High on the list of things that void a policy is breaking the law.

I think that's pretty easy to understand.

I do understand it.

If a chapter lives in a house and the house is insured why would that chapter buy an additional policy through their nationals if the second policy does NOT offer any additional coverage? A standard policy will cover the run of the mill accidents, such as a fire or a kid slipping on a banana peel.

DeltaAlum. What additional coverage, if any will a chapter get from a policy through their national?

[DeltAlum]

Max,

No way of knowing the answer to your question without reading the policies involved.

I don't think anyone is suggesting more than one policy.

The reason to buy through Nationals generally is that it is cheaper to buy "in quantity," if you will, than for each chapter to make its' own deal. Obviously, Nationals want you to be part of their negotiated plan because they get better rates with more participants. Kind of like group health coverage -- the more people involved, the better the rate. The new corporate buzz word is "economy of scale."

If a chapter can find a comparable policy and a cheaper deal, they should probably take it -- but I would read it VERY carefully to be sure that you are getting equal coverage. Frankly, I would be surprised if that happened. But, I've been wrong before.

You really can't afford to skimp on this. There's too much at stake -- not only for the chapter, but for the officers and advisors personally if the coverage is not good. As Shadowkat pointed out above, the insurance companies are not at all bashful about going after indivduals.

[shadokat]

What high risk activities are you having madmax? I know that if we have mixers or activities that involve alcohol, they are held at third party vendors where they do the carding, serving and such, and thus, THEY are liable when something happens to someone, not us. It's the beauty of using third party vendors.

We don't haze, so we don't have to worry about anything high risk there.

My campus had had two large fraternity house fires where the houses burned down and people died, so we do pay more for our insurance on the actual house than other chapters. We do not buy insurance from a local person. Our insurance goes through our national HQs, and each chapter pays for that. There is no insurance done locally. That's the beauty of having a national organization with a development corporation.

So to answer your question, we don't have high risk, other than the fires. Sororities don't pay nearly as much as fraternities. In our national, the average cost per sister for coverage is about $15. Just goes along again with the risk that fraternities have incurred that sororities haven't.

[DeltAlum]

And part of the reason that the sorority premiums are so low is that, at least in theory, all national sororities have "dry" houses.

Before we get started, I'm already on record as saying that I don't necessarily believe that dry housing always works. Again, though, I don't have a better idea.

But that's the way it is.

I do think that third party vendors are the way to go for parties. We were doing some of that way back in the 60's when I was in school.

It also is probably worth pointing out that we're not just talking about a standard homeowners policy here. The liability is much greater. We're insuring chapters, officers and members here -- not single people and personal property. That's a huge difference.

Frankly, with our record over the years, any local broker or company who takes on a fraternity as a client is out of his/her mind.

[Kapsig1]

Originally posted by madmax




Would it be fair to say that GLOs need insurance because they are high risk but non of their high risk activites are actually covered?

Not necessarily. All LEGAL, including some high risk activities are covered. Host liability (alcohol) is covered as long as policies and laws are followed; however, it remains a high risk activity.

SOME policies even cover the General Fraternity in cases of hazing, but the chapter members will be "swinging in the wind" from a liability standpoint in those rare cases. Our current coverage does, but with the rising costs, we will likely lose that in the policy we are currently seeking.

The General Fraternity could retain its coverage in most instances, even if the chapter and its members are found to have violated law, policy or found negligent. In those instances, insurance will pay out on claims against the General Fraternity, but will NOT cover claims against the chapter, officers or members. THIS ALL ASSUMES that we are NOT talking about an incorporated fraternity, in which case things get real different.

Brad

[Tom Earp]

Brad, correct me if I am wrong, but I think most if not all of the Greek Nationals are Incorperated!

Max, we may not be understanding what Insurace you are talking about. Are you talking about Property Insurance or Risk Management Insureance? There Is a Big Difference! Most Insurance companys will not insure on Liability of stupidity! They will Insure Your House!

Is that the difference?

Fill us in a bit!

[imsohappythatiama]

Although I wholeheartedly agree that the "alcohol issue" may well be the bell that tolls for the death of the greek system one day, I think that instituting a policy to expel members who break the law by drinking under the age of 21 would quickly prove to be a legal nightmare.

Under-age drinking is (in all states) a misdemeanor. So are most traffic violations. If an organization expells one member for drinking under age because he/she broke a state law, then why not expell all members who have recieved speeding tickets? I could go on and on.

Expelling members who drink underage, while a noble idea, will not work from a legal or a social standpoint. And asking members to snitch on other members (for any cause)for rewards will break down many of the very fibers that most GLOs attempt to build.

Although the idea of restricting membership to people 21 and older has merit, it is impractical from the standpoint that most students who are GLO types graduate college between the ages of 21 and 25. I graduated at 22, so that would have given me only 1 year as a Kappa...and would have given Kappa only 1 year of my money...not feasible.

It comes down to this, fraternity members: LOOK AT THE EXAMPLE OF SORORITIES. At Indiana U., where I was an active, and at Iowa where I was an advisor, the sororities' chapter houses were DRY. Period. There were no keggers, no room parties. When sorority girls drank, 95% of the time it was at a bar, at a third party vendor event, or at a fraternity house party.

Fraternities, if your underage members want to drink themselves silly at a venue that you have not sponsored and at a site you do not own, that is their prerogative. If they do it on your property or at one of your functions, they should be reprimanded severely and/or expelled.

If the sororities can do it (and they have), I don't understand why you can't see your way clear of following the very clear example.

(And I don't mean to be a pest, but most sororities pay double the insurance premiums they should have to pay--not because the majority of lawsuits and insurance settlements have been caused by sororities, but because they have been incurred by fraternities). We carry your burden, too, and so we have as much stake in trying to help fraternities out of their mess.

I in no way mean to make this a girls vs. boys issue, but I frankly have had it up to here with fraternities being measured by one standard and sororities being measured by another.

Thanks for starting this thread; I think we're getting at some crucial topics that are systemic to the entire Greek System.

[cash78mere]

this is probably the most informative thread i have read.

good work

[33girl]

Originally posted by Kapsig1


33 - read the studies and THEN try tear them down. Please.

Brad

I DID read the study (which by the way, didn't use a time frame in the new one either, even after all the criticism). Results of a study do no good if the information gathering and tabulating methods are faulty. In short, GIGO (garbage in, garbage out).

And you also have to question the source and reputation of the person conducting the study, and in Wechsler's case I am not the only one doing that.

http://www.thecrimson.harvard.edu/ar...spx?ref=103095

http://www2.potsdam.edu/alcohol-info...nTheNews6.html (4th & 5th item down)

Incidentally, members of the Inter-Association Task Force include NIC, NPC, AFA and the Order of Omega.

My point? Check the validity of sources before you cite them, lest you strain your own credibility.

****instrumental break****

Oh, and I'm with Tom - I thought we were discussing incorporation awhile back and came to the conclusion that the majority of GLO's were incorporated (whether or not it is explicitly stated).

[Kapsig1]

Originally posted by Tom Earp
Brad, correct me if I am wrong, but I think most if not all of the Greek Nationals are Incorperated!

Max, we may not be understanding what Insurace you are talking about. Are you talking about Property Insurance or Risk Management Insureance? There Is a Big Difference! Most Insurance companys will not insure on Liability of stupidity! They will Insure Your House!

Is that the difference?

Fill us in a bit!

NOT true Tom. Many, if not most, operate as unincorporated associations.

Brad

[Kapsig1]

Originally posted by imsohappythatiama
Although I wholeheartedly agree that the "alcohol issue" may well be the bell that tolls for the death of the greek system one day, I think that instituting a policy to expel members who break the law by drinking under the age of 21 would quickly prove to be a legal nightmare.

Under-age drinking is (in all states) a misdemeanor. So are most traffic violations. If an organization expells one member for drinking under age because he/she broke a state law, then why not expell all members who have recieved speeding tickets? I could go on and on.

Expelling members who drink underage, while a noble idea, will not work from a legal or a social standpoint. And asking members to snitch on other members (for any cause)for rewards will break down many of the very fibers that most GLOs attempt to build.

Although the idea of restricting membership to people 21 and older has merit, it is impractical from the standpoint that most students who are GLO types graduate college between the ages of 21 and 25. I graduated at 22, so that would have given me only 1 year as a Kappa...and would have given Kappa only 1 year of my money...not feasible.

It comes down to this, fraternity members: LOOK AT THE EXAMPLE OF SORORITIES. At Indiana U., where I was an active, and at Iowa where I was an advisor, the sororities' chapter houses were DRY. Period. There were no keggers, no room parties. When sorority girls drank, 95% of the time it was at a bar, at a third party vendor event, or at a fraternity house party.

Fraternities, if your underage members want to drink themselves silly at a venue that you have not sponsored and at a site you do not own, that is their prerogative. If they do it on your property or at one of your functions, they should be reprimanded severely and/or expelled.

If the sororities can do it (and they have), I don't understand why you can't see your way clear of following the very clear example.

(And I don't mean to be a pest, but most sororities pay double the insurance premiums they should have to pay--not because the majority of lawsuits and insurance settlements have been caused by sororities, but because they have been incurred by fraternities). We carry your burden, too, and so we have as much stake in trying to help fraternities out of their mess.

I in no way mean to make this a girls vs. boys issue, but I frankly have had it up to here with fraternities being measured by one standard and sororities being measured by another.

Thanks for starting this thread; I think we're getting at some crucial topics that are systemic to the entire Greek System.

Imsohappy,

Good thougts here. Lemme see if I can give you the flip side.

We are NOT talking about (if you read my earlier posts) asking chapter members to "snitch" on one another. If they drink at a bar, the liklihood that we will suffer a legal loss is small (unless we're hosting an event at that bar).

We ARE talking about when we have a chapter whose members are caught violating our policies, expelling members who are responsible for the violations. This may not be a first step, but certainly for repeat offenders.

Currently, chapters that have alcohol violations, with no previous history of offenses, are often led down the educational path, with various forms of discipline as well. Our history with that is not impressive.

The speeding ticket thing really doesn't hold water for one reason, we don't have a policy against speeding AND we/our insurers have not experienced any losses associated with one of our members speeding.

The DRY thing: We DO have expoerience with dry housing. We have numerous chapters that have been forced to go dry by host institutions. We have also experienced violations of policy AND major losses at some of those same campuses. It works for the women at wet campuses because the fraternity chapters are still stupid enough to assume the vast majority of the host liability by having wet mixers and parties at our houses. Of course, despite their policies against such, the ladies are happy to oblige us.

<<Fraternities, if your underage members want to drink themselves silly at a venue that you have not sponsored and at a site you do not own, that is their prerogative. If they do it on your property or at one of your functions, they should be reprimanded severely and/or expelled.>>

That's about as close to where we're headed as anyone has gotten. I might take issue (as I'm sure many of the sorority members would) with the "prerogative" thing. Would you say the same thing about cocaine? Many groups monitor and hold members accountable for their actions off-site. We should be no different.....but I digress.

<<(And I don't mean to be a pest, but most sororities pay double the insurance premiums they should have to pay--not because the majority of lawsuits and insurance settlements have been caused by sororities, but because they have been incurred by fraternities). We carry your burden, too, and so we have as much stake in trying to help fraternities out of their mess.>>

And we carry your burden, and have for years. Until the passage of the NPC groups rules re: prohibition of sorority participation in alcohol related social functions, I couldn't say this. But the women ASK us to help them circumvent their own policies! When juries get instructed on how a sorority chapter works with a fraternity chapter to pad the guest list, arrange for alcohol to be brought for the ladies, TRUST ME, the sororities will start getting sued too!I would suggest that we pay more of your freight than you pay ours.

It's not a guys vs. girls thing, though. We are all guilty of violating policies and the oaths we took to uphold those same policies. In the end, without dramatic change, we will all suffer the same fate.

I appreciate everyone's input - but would appreciate more, instead of bashing my ideas, give some of your own. And be specific!
Brad

[imsohappythatiama]

Brad:

Thanks for the thoughtful post. You make a lot of good points that I agree with, and others I disagree with...but at the same time, you've got us all THINKING and that is a first step.

I hope you don't see our posts (or at least mine) as "bashing your ideas"! I admire the courage it took to bring such ideas to light, and if our exploration of these difficult (to the point of madness) issues has begun to sound like bashing, let me be the first to apologize.

Whatever remedy is prescribed, in the end, however, will have to be one that has been picked over and bashed from every angle--and survives nonetheless.

You asked for our ideas. Mine is simple. The greek system (fraternities and sororites in tandem) MUST agree to keep (1) ALL fraternity and sorority-sponsored housing SUBSTANCE FREE, and (2) ALL fraternity and sorority-sponsored events monitored by law enforcement and intermediated by third party vendors.

This won't work until EVERYONE agrees to it, thereby holding each other accountable.

I am well-versed in the history of so-called "DRY" fraternity housing. In my opinion and in my experience, the reason it does not work is because a single dry chapter is holding itself to a standard (or being forced to hold itself to a standard) that its greater support community does not espouse. It's like a recovering alcoholic having a peer group made up entirely of alcoholics--at some point, recovery will fall by the wayside.

The same holds true for the recently insituted sorority "dry-mixing" policy. Until ALL NPC sororities are held to this standard AND (this is key) ALL IFC organizations pledge themselves to a dry-mixing policy, fiascoes like those Brad describes (padding guest lists, coersion, etc.) will continue (to my great dismay).

Here is the rub of all of this: to my mind, it's much less complicated than it seems. Granted, this "plan" would require widespread, unified action on the part of IFC and NPC, two organizations that don't always see eye to eye. There could be no "rolling" this plan out piece by piece. It can only work if IFC and NPC agree that beginning at the start of school year 20XX, ALL fraternity and sorority housing will be Subtance-free, and ALL fraternity and sorority-sponsored events will be third-party vended...OR ELSE.

"Or Else" meaning your charter is revoked. "Or Else" meaning we can't pay for your chapter house anymore, have your belongings on the curb by midnight. "Or Else" meaning if you can't see the error of your ways, we would rather remove our organization from the host campus than cross our fingers and hope that we're not the next ones to be sued.

I honestly believe that if IFC and NPC could move together with confidence as a unified front, we could change things for the better. I'm not saying this would solve all of the issues we as actives, alumns, advisors, and national officers will have to deal with, but it would be a major new beginning for a system that I fear is in more jeopardy than it realizes.

[Kapsig1]

Originally posted by imsohappythatiama
Brad:

Thanks for the thoughtful post. You make a lot of good points that I agree with, and others I disagree with...but at the same time, you've got us all THINKING and that is a first step.

I hope you don't see our posts (or at least mine) as "bashing your ideas"! I admire the courage it took to bring such ideas to light, and if our exploration of these difficult (to the point of madness) issues has begun to sound like bashing, let me be the first to apologize.

Whatever remedy is prescribed, in the end, however, will have to be one that has been picked over and bashed from every angle--and survives nonetheless.

You asked for our ideas. Mine is simple. The greek system (fraternities and sororites in tandem) MUST agree to keep (1) ALL fraternity and sorority-sponsored housing SUBSTANCE FREE, and (2) ALL fraternity and sorority-sponsored events monitored by law enforcement and intermediated by third party vendors.

This won't work until EVERYONE agrees to it, thereby holding each other accountable.

I am well-versed in the history of so-called "DRY" fraternity housing. In my opinion and in my experience, the reason it does not work is because a single dry chapter is holding itself to a standard (or being forced to hold itself to a standard) that its greater support community does not espouse. It's like a recovering alcoholic having a peer group made up entirely of alcoholics--at some point, recovery will fall by the wayside.

The same holds true for the recently insituted sorority "dry-mixing" policy. Until ALL NPC sororities are held to this standard AND (this is key) ALL IFC organizations pledge themselves to a dry-mixing policy, fiascoes like those Brad describes (padding guest lists, coersion, etc.) will continue (to my great dismay).

Here is the rub of all of this: to my mind, it's much less complicated than it seems. Granted, this "plan" would require widespread, unified action on the part of IFC and NPC, two organizations that don't always see eye to eye. There could be no "rolling" this plan out piece by piece. It can only work if IFC and NPC agree that beginning at the start of school year 20XX, ALL fraternity and sorority housing will be Subtance-free, and ALL fraternity and sorority-sponsored events will be third-party vended...OR ELSE.

"Or Else" meaning your charter is revoked. "Or Else" meaning we can't pay for your chapter house anymore, have your belongings on the curb by midnight. "Or Else" meaning if you can't see the error of your ways, we would rather remove our organization from the host campus than cross our fingers and hope that we're not the next ones to be sued.

I honestly believe that if IFC and NPC could move together with confidence as a unified front, we could change things for the better. I'm not saying this would solve all of the issues we as actives, alumns, advisors, and national officers will have to deal with, but it would be a major new beginning for a system that I fear is in more jeopardy than it realizes.

You are of course right about ideas needing criticism.

Thanks for the constructive input. I think your plan has great merits. Let me ask a question though. let's assume we can muster the horspower in NIC and NPC to pull this off (which I don't think is impossible); would then sorority houses be willing to open their houses to such third party events?

If not, the fraternities will continue to bear the brunt of the insurance costs, however much lower they might be.

Brad

[shadokat]

Brad--

A third party event means that the event, should it include alcohol, would be hosted at a third party, not a sorority or fraternity house. So why would a sorority open its doors to host an event of this nature? It wouldn't go with the policies you speak of.

As for women asking them men to help them circumvent the problem, that doesn't hold true everywhere. On campuses where we've had problems with third party venues, many times the men do not want to go to the third party vendor. They want the event in their house so all brothers can partake of the fun, so to speak. And if they can't do it this way, then they won't mix with the women. Unfortunately, since mixing is part of the fun of greek life, and one of the draws of new women into sororities, the sororities will violate the policy as to not hurt their reputations.

I hope that makes sense.

Heather