COBing fresh when upperclass quota isn't met

[33girl]

Originally Posted by Mevara

Where is the rule that says a chapter can COB to quota if they are over total?

http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/sh....php?p=1968037

[Mevara]

Originally Posted by 33girl

http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/sh....php?p=1968037

You referenced the exact same passage I had above. That refers to a chapter that reaches quota but then the member refuses to accept their bid. Maybe its just me but I read it as if you don't reach quota but are over total you can't COB to quota.

[AZ-AlphaXi]

Per the Unanimous Agreements

B. Each NPC fraternity chapter has the right to COB to reach Quota or its
total allowable chapter size during the regular school year as defined by
the school calendar. To accommodate the colonization of a chapter or to
allow a chapter to build its membership, the College Panhellenic Council
may vote to suspend COB for a period not to exceed three weeks.

[Mevara]

I read the MOI as a complete document and no one section can exist on its own. So if you put all the sections together you get the whole picture.

Each NPC fraternity chapter has the right to COB to reach quota or its total allowable chapter size during the regular school year as defined by the school calendar.

Vacancies in the chapter membership roll can be filled only if the chapter is below total.

When a woman negates her signed membership recruitment acceptance binding agreement, refuses to accept her matched bid at the conclusion of membership recruitment and does not participate in a ribbon or formal new member ceremony, this space in the chapter’s pledge quota was not filled. Therefore, the chapter may immediately bid and pledge another woman, even if the chapter is over total.

The purpose of COB is to enable those chapters that did not pledge quota, or pledged quota but did not reach total, to take additional new members immediately following the designated membership recruitment period.

[agzg]

Example:

Chapter has 198 members prior to formal recruitment. Total is 200.

Quota is 25. Chapter does not receive quota additions. Chapter extends bids to and pledges 20 women. Chapter now has 118 members.

The chapter may still bid 5 more women, to meet quota, via COB for the rest of the school year.

They may not bid to quota additions. Upperclassmen quota is a different animal and subject to campus PHC bylaws, I believe.

That is the whole picture. You may bid up to total, and you may bid up to quota, but it's not whichever one comes first.

To extend it, the chapter INITIATES 20 women, and never bid 25. They still have 5 bids they can give out. If an initiated member drops or transfers, they may not bid to fill her spot. They still only have 5. That's what the part you originally quoted means.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Yes, so AFAIK (and I am a few years out-of-date, admittedly), if a chapter does not fill its upperclassman quota, there are no rules to handle that specific situation. I would think they could fill those spots, but only with upperclassman. Regardless, a local rule is probably a good idea.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by Mevara

I read the MOI as a complete document and no one section can exist on its own. So if you put all the sections together you get the whole picture.

You quote page 77 but leave out the next line:

Vacancies in the chapter membership roll can be filled only if the chapter is below total. A chapter may exceed total as a result of its participation in a Panhellenic recruitment when quota/total and a preferential bidding system are used.

If the campus uses quota/total and preferential bidding, they can exceed total. If they do NOT have the above system then total is the maximum limit.

Since we're talking about a campus that uses quota, Quota rules now apply. Those rules mean you can bid to quota or total, whichever is higher. That's what the "or" in each of those means. If the chapter is at total, but did not receive quota whether through rejected bids or lack of bids, they can bid to quota. If a chapter has met quota but is not at total, they can bid to total. A chapter that has met neither can bid to whichever is higher.

Upperclass quota isn't anywhere IN the MoI and thus is entirely local AFAIK. It's up to the campus panhellenic/advisors etc. to determine how they're treated.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by Anchored4Ever

* Having an upperclassman quota increases chapter total...and there are not 2 pools for total (one freshman and one upperclassman). So, we either need to do 2 totals per chapter or just lump everyone into the same pile during formal recruitment. Because, what's happening now is really negating the stated purpose of using an upperclassman quota during formal recruitment. If they're counted in the chapter numbers which are used to decide total each year, then they're not "Freebies." The only way they'd be freebies is if they didn't count in the number which is referred to as "chapter total."

Why does upperclassman quota increase total? How are you setting your chapter total?

It sounds as though the issue may be that chapter total is too high. If formal recruitment is putting chapters exactly at total, you could drop it a bit, and it would resolve this issue.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by Anchored4Ever

Here's the thing...

* XX chaper does not meet upperclassman quota during formal recruitment, but probably would have if they had brought back the recommended amount of upperclassmen women to pref...instead of over-releasing.

* The number decided upon for total does not designate that a certain number must be upperclassmen or underclassmen...they're all considered the same in that pool. So, if XX chapter had pledged their max upperclassmen, they'd have been exactly at total and unable to COB. But, since they purposefully over-released, they're not at total.

* If this continues, then chapters will begin to 'opt out' of taking their quota of upperclassmen so that they can just go pick up more freshmen (who will be around for 4 yrs) immediately after fall recruitment is over. That's not fair or keeping with the stated intention of upperclassman quota in the first place.

* Having an upperclassman quota increases chapter total...and there are not 2 pools for total (one freshman and one upperclassman). So, we either need to do 2 totals per chapter or just lump everyone into the same pile during formal recruitment. Because, what's happening now is really negating the stated purpose of using an upperclassman quota during formal recruitment. If they're counted in the chapter numbers which are used to decide total each year, then they're not "Freebies." The only way they'd be freebies is if they didn't count in the number which is referred to as "chapter total."

Hope maybe I explained it better that time?

It sounds like total may be a little high for campus then, or that this chapter is a bit low over all. Are most chapters under total after reaching quota?

Drop total by Y and you negate this.


ETA: Dammit, just a bit slow. But that confirms what I was thinking.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by Anchored4Ever

Seems to me that if the entire chapter is going to be used to determine chapter total, then the entire pool of PNMs should "compete" against one another during recruitment. Either that or there should be 2 chapter totals...one for underclassmen & 1 for upperclassmen. Because, the way it is now, those 2 groups are separated for the purposes of recruitment and then lumped back in together to determine chapter total.

That's just not right. Can't have it both ways.

You are over-thinking this. If taking underclassman quota puts a chapter over total, they can't bid more people. They either take upperclassmen during rush, or lose those spots. Total should be set so that the regular quota puts most chapters over total.

If there is only one chapter under total, and they chose not to take upperclassmen, and then COBed to total, that is perfectly allowed, and up to that chapter, not up to the rest of the CPH.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by Anchored4Ever

Seems to me that if the entire chapter is going to be used to determine chapter total, then the entire pool of PNMs should "compete" against one another during recruitment. Either that or there should be 2 chapter totals...one for underclassmen & 1 for upperclassmen. Because, the way it is now, those 2 groups are separated for the purposes of recruitment and then lumped back in together to determine chapter total.

That's just not right. Can't have it both ways.

Except that upperclassmen generally make up 35-50% of a chapter (assuming juniors and seniors) and something like 1-10% of quota. You're comparing two very different things. Either this one chapter is below total and trying to 'take advantage' of it (and really they're not helping themselves all that much in the long run) or total is too high for the campus.

[AGDee]

In my opinion (note *opinion*), If that many chapters are COBing to get to Total, then they increased Total by too much. Additionally, if upperclassman quota is that high compared to underclassman quota, then they shouldn't even bother with upperclassman Total.

I also firmly believe that it is up to a chapter whether they want to take advantage of the upperclassman quota or not. I reviewed a chapter's numbers just last night and they have 4 seniors, 18 juniors, 4 sophomores and 15 freshman. This chapter should absolutely NOT, under any circumstance, take more juniors. They are going to lose about half their chapter in one year and are going to be in big trouble. They DO need to take a lot of sophomores. Total is 35 on this campus so they are sitting pretty right now, but are looking at disaster in a year. Nobody has the right to tell them they have to take Juniors because of an upperclassman quota.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

I still don't see what the problem is with the system you have in place. Are a lot of upperclassmen going bidless? How many/what percentage?

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by Anchored4Ever

The problem is 2 fold:

1. Under the old system (before (U) quota was initiated 3 yrs ago, the vast majority of (U) women went to only 2 (out of 7 total) chapters. Those 2 chapters had trouble making quota yearly and were hardly ever at total. Their pledge classes were usually at least 1/2 juniors, and so every other year or so 1/2 of their chapter would graduate at the same time.

2. Under the old system, unless the (U) women going through were totally AMAZING, they didn't stand a shot at getting a good bid, and many wound up dropping out around day 2/3. Now, under the new system, many more (U) women stay in through the entire process and are more evently distributed throughout all chapters.

Because of the recently instituted (U) quota, chapters are getting larger, more women are 'going Greek,' and we're able to have more impact on our campus & community. But, there are just issues that come along with growing...growing pains, so to speak...and I'm just trying to figure out how best to handle them. I really don't think that eliminating (U) quota will help, because we'll just go back to the way things were before...fewer (U) women going through and an even smaller number getting bids to the better chapters. The institution of a (U) quota, gives (U) women an 'even playing field' but it affects total and COBing. So we just need to find a way to make things even and fair for everyone.

How is it unfair to you, the chapter that is popular with no problem getting all the girls you want under any system, that the chapter that has to COB to get to Total is able to take freshman or upperclassmen to get to total? Are you afraid that by taking upperclassmen you suddenly are going to become the undesirable chapter? Don't worry about it so much! They will take 5 more women to get to Total. It will not be the end of the world and will effect your chapter in no way at all.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by Anchored4Ever

The problem is 2 fold:

1. Under the old system (before (U) quota was initiated 3 yrs ago, the vast majority of (U) women went to only 2 (out of 7 total) chapters. Those 2 chapters had trouble making quota yearly and were hardly ever at total. Their pledge classes were usually at least 1/2 juniors, and so every other year or so 1/2 of their chapter would graduate at the same time.

2. Under the old system, unless the (U) women going through were totally AMAZING, they didn't stand a shot at getting a good bid, and many wound up dropping out around day 2/3. Now, under the new system, many more (U) women stay in through the entire process and are more evently distributed throughout all chapters.

Because of the recently instituted (U) quota, chapters are getting larger, more women are 'going Greek,' and we're able to have more impact on our campus & community. But, there are just issues that come along with growing...growing pains, so to speak...and I'm just trying to figure out how best to handle them. I really don't think that eliminating (U) quota will help, because we'll just go back to the way things were before...fewer (U) women going through and an even smaller number getting bids to the better chapters. The institution of a (U) quota, gives (U) women an 'even playing field' but it affects total and COBing. So we just need to find a way to make things even and fair for everyone.

I asked what is wrong with the system you have in place now, not the old system. You have yet to explain what is uneven or unfair.