Penn State IFC tells Barron to grow up
- Thread starter jerseylion109
- Start date
Don't they know they are talking to the all-powerful Oz!? It is scary when this article written by 18-22 year olds is ten times better then the one by the university president. But then nothing with Penn State "leadership" should surprise us.
A pox on both their houses. At what point in the recent past has the IFC taken a leadership role in addressing the problems within their organization, or does it take a tragic death to get their attention?
I don't remember apartment buildings being shut down when kids fell from balconies. I guess that's different. Somehow.
if you dont think there are more regulations now on greek life than there ever were in the 70s-80s-90s then i dont know what to tell you.. Everyone and everything is so babied now that we are losing all personal responsibility. These students are ADULTS right?
With all of the administrative bloat at PSU, they can't have a full-time Greek Life liaison position? Does it take a tragic death to get their attention?
Still waiting for the restrictions on apartment parties after Conor MacMannis death in 2014. Will it take yet another tragic balcony death to get their attention?
You do know there is a difference between the university/fraternity relationship and the university/apartment building relationship, correct?
the fact that there is no official head of greek life at PSU when there is over 8000 students involved but there are 250 assistant athletic directors is part of the problem. Get it together Barron & BOT
From what I can gather, the following:
He got wasted under age in conjunction with (not sure if before or during or both) a bid-acceptance event at a supposedly dry house. He fell down the stairs, but maybe appeared to be okay afterwards (seems obvious that he would have appeared to the also-drunk partygoers to be okay). He passed out on a couch. He woke up in the middle of the night and fell down steps again. Nobody found him until the morning, at which point he had internal injuries, including a fatal brain injury.
The apartments are privately owned and aren't affiliated with the university in any way.
Oh. Then you must mean that the apartments aren't inhabited solely by students. You know, cuz there's lots of families and regular folks living in Beaver towers.
We don't yet know. But that won't stop morons from not only jumping to conclusions, but also making policy based on newspaper headlines. Where have we seen this before?
It doesn't matter who inhabits the apartments. They're privately owned and so the university isn't exposed to any liability if/when something happens on private property that isn't owned by or affiliated with the university.
I thought we were talking about student safety? Or is it that you only care about University legal liability?
Dumbo, read the question. Is there a different relationship? Yes or No. Really simple.
What is the university supposed to do if a piece of private property that students choose to live in isn't safe? The students are adults. They can live where ever they choose. If the university doesn't own the property, what exactly do you want them to do about a dangerous situation like balconies. That's a potential liability the owners of the apartment complex assume.
What is the university supposed to do if a piece of private property that students choose to live in isn't safe? The students are adults. They can live where ever they choose. If the university doesn't own the property, what exactly do you want them to do about a dangerous situation like balconies.
This exact argument can apply to privately owned fraternity houses. Can the university do random checks and basically spy on adults?
This exact argument can apply to privately owned fraternity houses. Can the university do random checks and basically spy on adults?
They are privately owned - in some instances anyway, but aren't they recognized/sanctioned by the university? That's where the legal liability comes in for Penn State. If the members of the frats conduct themselves in a way that puts Penn State at risk of being sued, then why should Penn State be affiliated with the frats?
I guess that depends upon the legal/contractual relationship between the frats and the university.
Hm... Let's see:
Apartments: Inhabited solely by students. Lots of underage drinking; history of assaults, injuries, even death. No University oversight or responsibility.
Frats: Inhabited solely by students. Lots of underage drinking; history of assaults, injuries, even death. University recognition.
I see. So, off campus apartments are just a way for the University to solve its housing shortage without having any responsibility for the safety of the students. It's a risk transfer from the University to the students that it failed to provide housing for.
Okay. It seems that the University simply needs to divorce itself from the frats and sororities, so that students living in frat houses are truly no different whatsoever from those living in Beaver Towers. Not sure why this one group of students has its own, separate organization to broker its concerns with the University. Just saying I have never understood the relationship, and until now never spent too much time thinking about it. You know, being a GDI and all.
If you don't own something, you're not legally responsible for what happens there. Should the university also be responsible for privately owned student housing in Boalsburg, Lemont, Bellefonte, etc.?
As for a housing shortage, I don't think the university is legally bound to provide housing to students. Correct me if I'm wrong. If a student can't get on-campus housing, they may be able to work out some sort of agreement with the university to pay for off campus housing - out of the student loan disbursements - and then I could see their being some liablility on the university's part. But otherwise, if you, for example, choose to buy a house and rent it to college students. You're the owner of the property and are responsible for it's safety, up keep, etc. not the university just because university students rent from you.
How does that apply when Ira Lubert is both chair of the BOT and owner of massive apartment complexes which house students?
Not saying your premise is wrong, or attacking you, but would that not make the University liable if a kid OD's in one of Lubert's apartments?
So was The Second Mile, yet PSU got blamed for its failures.....
So let me see if I get the IFC's letter straight. They are asking for a bottom up control structure while at the same time asking for more guidance & support from the University. Hmmm.
Also, the downtown apartment buildings are not official University sanction entities. Fraternities and Sororities are. Apples to lug nuts boys and girls.
Also, the downtown apartment buildings are not official University sanction entities. Fraternities and Sororities are. Apples to lug nuts boys and girls.
How does that apply when Ira Lubert is both chair of the BOT and owner of massive apartment complexes which house students?
Not saying your premise is wrong, or attacking you, but would that not make the University liable if a kid OD's in one of Lubert's apartments?
Ha! No it makes Lubert responsible.
I don't completely get the relationship between Greek orgs. and universities. Why can't Greek orgs. simply exist off campus as private entities and with absolutely no affiliation with schools??? That would remove the liability concerns from the schools and the Greek orgs. would be free to party like it's 1999.
Easy enough for off-campus fraternities, but what about on-campus fraternities (like Beta Theta Pi) and sororities which rent dorm space from the university?
Well, maybe they need to bag all that. You want to join a club, join, but we are not offering you any deal that others don't get. Like being able, (if they are) to pick who lives on your dorm floor and shut other folks out.
This seems to be the most sensible solution. Universities need to just completely disassociate themselves from Greek orgs. I can't see Greek orgs. being anything more than a liability at this point.
BTW, this part of the IFC's open letter to Barron shows just how out of touch these guys are:
"To the Penn State Student Body: We Are Penn State. Many of the challenges we have in the fraternity and sorority community exist in varying degrees throughout the university. Beyond us, they exist across college campuses, but Penn State can and must be better. Change will be difficult, and it will take time.
We are committed to partnership with any organization or group of students who share our desire to create meaningful change."
If I am a dorm rat, I'm thinking, "Whoa, there, white sweater boy. How about we go on as we have up to now, without you dragging me into your problem. I did not let my guy die on the couch."
"To the Penn State Student Body: We Are Penn State. Many of the challenges we have in the fraternity and sorority community exist in varying degrees throughout the university. Beyond us, they exist across college campuses, but Penn State can and must be better. Change will be difficult, and it will take time.
We are committed to partnership with any organization or group of students who share our desire to create meaningful change."
If I am a dorm rat, I'm thinking, "Whoa, there, white sweater boy. How about we go on as we have up to now, without you dragging me into your problem. I did not let my guy die on the couch."
They university was "liable" for all the "victims" from TSM and Lubert and others were merely "donors."How does that apply when Ira Lubert is both chair of the BOT and owner of massive apartment complexes which house students?
Not saying your premise is wrong, or attacking you, but would that not make the University liable if a kid OD's in one of Lubert's apartments?
