[16917] in APO-L
Re: Exec Board Co-Offices
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sarahlynn Lester)
Wed May 28 01:58:26 1997
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 00:54:23 +0000
Reply-To: splester@artsci.wustl.edu
From: Sarahlynn Lester <splester@artsci.wustl.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list APO-L <APO-L@VM.CC.PURDUE.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <199705272318.SAA05970@ascc.artsci.wustl.edu>
Query:
> We have two PT's, a male and a female, simply to give each of our 40 to 100
> pledges more of the attention that they need to remain in the program.
Here at Alpha Phi chapter, we have been debating the role of VP
Membership/Pledge Trainer. Over the past several monthes, I've been
noticing that each chapter seems to handle this a little differently.
According to our bylaws, the Pledge Trainer is an appointed position
(by the Membership VP). The way this usually works is that an active
runs for Membership and appoints someone to the position of PT, and
usually mentions that person in his or her election speech.
Sometimes, two actives run as co-vp's and one is specified PT, to
avoid confusion for the pledges and actives--it's obvious who to
report to with a problem. We have had a couple of co-vp teams try
this by appointing each other to the position of PT, and sharing the
duties of both offices equally. I did this and it worked really well
in that instance.
We usually start a new pledge semester with anywhere from 25-45
pledges, so having two actives involved with them from the start
makes for an easier load on the officers. Why do you specify one
male and one female Pledge Trainer? We've never done that, although
it sometimes works out that way.
I was just wondering how other chapters handle the division of
duties. Thanks!
YiLFS,
--sarahlynn lester
Alpha Phi alum
(past memberhip vp/pledge trainer, treasurer)
Washington University in St. Louis
