[9713] in APO-L
Comments on Pledge stds by a SC
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (James C. Porter)
Tue Oct 11 02:22:04 1994
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 1994 23:31:45 EDT
Reply-To: JPor466 <JPor466@AOL.COM>
From: "James C. Porter" <JPor466@AOL.COM>
To: Multiple recipients of list APO-L <APO-L%PURCCVM.BITNET@mitvma.mit.edu>
I have been asked by a brother (not of my section by the way) to give my
views on pledge standards. To that end, I can tell you how I handle things
in my section.
Pledging creates a number of obligations between individuals and groups. The
pledge, in addition to a small financial obligation agrees to achieve certain
goals as defined in each chapter's pledge program. These include standards
ten through twelve, no matter how the chapter wishes to state them (please
refer to your pledge manual).
In return for fulfilling the pledging requirement as defined by the chapter
IN WRITING and the above mentioned financial obligation, the chapter agrees
to provide membership in the fraternity. Almost like contract law. (you can
have all the lawyer jokes you want, I'm a CPA).
The National Pledging Standards are just that, standards to be used when
defining a pledge program. Chapters are not cookie cutter items to be diced
and sliced and laid out in neat rows. Instead each chapter has it's own
individual personality, made up of individual actives, pledges, advisors and
others, of which no two are exactly alike. As result no two people or
chapters will follow the exact same thought process. We don't churn out pledg
es like Big Mac's at McDonalds where everything is always the same. Instead
it's more like Burger King where you get to have it your way (on the other
hand, we are just playing around the fringes, because even if you add extra
mayo or cut the onions, you still have a whopper).
Once a chapter has established the pledge program, they have an obligation to
give that program to the pledge in writing in order to prevent any confusion
at a later date. If the pledge agrees to follow through by accepting the
rules of the program, both parties have an obligation to meet their
commitments that they made to each other at the beginning of the program.
NEITHER PARTY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO MAKE CHANGES IN MID PROGRAM WITHOUT THE
AGREEMENT OF BOTH PARTIES.
I don't think that anybody would deny a chapter the right to vote on their
own members. Section 19 of the standards includes "objective determinations"
which can mean something like a simple majority vote. Black-balling referred
to in this section is a reference to a practice of having a vote using white
and black balls where a single black ball veto'd the whole process. Nobody I
know of would approve of this action.
Not letting someone into the fraternity is a pretty strong step. In most
cases and in most chapters, the pledge who has not fulfilled his obligations
in the program has the choice of extending the pledgeship or dropping out of
the program. However, in a very few cases it becomes clear that this is not
going to work out and both parties part company and go their separate ways.
It is interesting to note that although the pledge is the one seeking
membership, he/she is the only one who can file a complaint to enforce the
contract written above. After all, if the pledge walks out of the program,
there is little the chapter can do about it except keep any funds due to that
point in the program. It is only if the pledge complains that the SC or RD
gets involved, and then only due to necessity. And only then to decide if
there is a violation of the membership policies of the fraternity.
If it appears that any chapter is having problems with any pledge, they
should keep a written record of what is going on. If the pledge did not meet
his service hour requirements, or point in a point system or attend required
events or pass the pledge tests or any other fixed measurement within the
program, then it is a lot easier than making a decision that the person did no
t meet the standards of sections 10 and 11 concerning leadership and
friendship. Obviously the hardest one to quantify would be the one on
Friendship.
Each chapter has a right to "a requirement that each pledge meet and establish
a fraternal relationship will all active, associate, advisory and when
possible, honorary members of the chapter". However, if this is the reason
for denying membership, the chapter should be able to quantify this beyond
"We just didn't get along". This is like firing someone for cause. You must
be able to defend your reasoning. Again, if this is your reasoning, you
should have something to hang your hat on other than dislike. It should
manifest itself in some quanifiable actions that you can document.
That being said, what do I require of my chapters? I expect them to put
their expectations to a pledge in writing, and once they are in place I expect
the chapter to keep their promise that this is all that there is. Given
that standard for this section, I have never had a problem.
I don't make any decisions on any complaint until I hear both sides of a
story and allow both sides to present whatever evidence that they have. Each
situation is unique just as are the individuals involved.
I am sure that there are brothers that will take issue with me on some part
of this or another.
But I didn't get a fireproof suit to handle this post. I built me a bunker.
Comments are welcome, but try to keep it down to a small nuclear explosion.
YiLFS
Jim Porter
Section 33 Chair
