Booze

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

Oldstudentguy is 114% correct. It's a liability issue.

UNT now has something official is can take into discovery, depositions, and court and say, "Look, here is our written policy forbidding this type of behavior. Said Frat ignored it. Grant us summary judgement on our request to be released from the suit, your honor. The proper party for the death/paralysis/maiming of the drunken Frat member is the Frat that didn't obey the rules of the University."

And, that...it that. Whether they will or will not drink is the last thing the University is worried about. The first is its own liablity and the ability to transfer risk to insurers based on their risk management program. I can guaran-damn-tee you that one of their insurers' risk control or claims (or, both) people told (er..."suggested") to them that they put such policy in place.

"We're serious about underage drinking," said Kelley Reese, a UNT spokeswoman. Baloney. What they are serious about is their insurer chewing their asses out after they reported the incident as a potential claim and discovered they did not have such ban in place already.

The first thing they teach you when you go into insurance is: Rule #1 - The goal of the insurance company is to make money. It's not a charity or government agency. They won't sit arond an underwriting or claims office and blow it off, "Oh...just another drunk kid. Gosh, can't do anything about that. May as well not even try."

Insurance companies are not politicians giving into every whim of society for the sake of popularity. They are going to make money for their shareholders and guard their financial rating and strength. So, they will not long tolerate risks that don't take risk management seriously. I've seen it firsthand.

Also, if UNT lied on every application on the little Yes/No check box question that asks whether or not they have an alcohol ban on campus, and this incident has now occurred, insurance company will cancel them midterm...and, they'll have to report when they try to get a new policy that their last policy was cancelled for lying on the prior application. If that is the scenario, their market will narrow significantly, and the price to procure coverage at all will be much higher.

In that case, it could be that they can't get coverage at all. And, when you can get no liability coverage from an insurer, guess what...you are now your own insurer with your own cash and assets on the line for the plaintiffs attorney and 12 "jury of your peers" who present and hear the case of the college student killed/paralyzed/maimed because of the actions of a Frat UNT happily allows to serve alcohol.

And, in this world, the last thing any institution scrapping for money wants is its own cash and assets acting as the limit of insurance. It is much preferable to have then insurance company write the settlement and claims checks out than to do it out of your own checkbook.

Edited February 7, 2013 by The Fake Lonnie Finch

[oldguystudent]

Exactly. I kinda believe that with the exception of super dense cities like New York and Boston, where people live their whole lives without driving licences, that drinking outside one's own home will eventually become a thing of the past. I'm kinda surprised that nobody has ever been popped for DWI after a UNT game with serious repercussions for the athletic department encouraging tailgating.

Lonnie, you live in Frisco. Surely you remember the incident at Varsity Club in 2008. Guy got drunk, drove his girlfriend home, got t-boned on Custer, she died. He went to jail for, what was it, intoxicated manslaughter? Varsity paid out nearly a million dollars to the woman's family, and the owner no longer owns it.

Liability is everything. There is zero morality involved in this whatsoever.

Also, let it be clearly stated that I was in no way advocating for one thing or the other in my earlier posts. Just stating was it, and what will naturally happen as a result.

[Green P1]

Wah Wah WAh. I just hope the kid that almost died is ok.

[Rudy]

I didn't realize they were supporting the team. Seems like the tailgating continued while the games were being played.

Oh. No, You. DIDN'T.

[TIgreen01]

Oldstudentguy is 114% correct. It's a liability issue.

UNT now has something official is can take into discovery, depositions, and court and say, "Look, here is our written policy forbidding this type of behavior. Said Frat ignored it. Grant us summary judgement on our request to be released from the suit, your honor. The proper party for the death/paralysis/maiming of the drunken Frat member is the Frat that didn't obey the rules of the University."

And, that...it that. Whether they will or will not drink is the last thing the University is worried about. The first is its own liablity and the ability to transfer risk to insurers based on their risk management program. I can guaran-damn-tee you that one of their insurers' risk control or claims (or, both) people told (er..."suggested") to them that they put such policy in place.

"We're serious about underage drinking," said Kelley Reese, a UNT spokeswoman. Baloney. What they are serious about is their insurer chewing their asses out after they reported the incident as a potential claim and discovered they did not have such ban in place already.

The first thing they teach you when you go into insurance is: Rule #1 - The goal of the insurance company is to make money. It's not a charity or government agency. They won't sit arond an underwriting or claims office and blow it off, "Oh...just another drunk kid. Gosh, can't do anything about that. May as well not even try."

Insurance companies are not politicians giving into every whim of society for the sake of popularity. They are going to make money for their shareholders and guard their financial rating and strength. So, they will not long tolerate risks that don't take risk management seriously. I've seen it firsthand.

Also, if UNT lied on every application on the little Yes/No check box question that asks whether or not they have an alcohol ban on campus, and this incident has now occurred, insurance company will cancel them midterm...and, they'll have to report when they try to get a new policy that their last policy was cancelled for lying on the prior application. If that is the scenario, their market will narrow significantly, and the price to procure coverage at all will be much higher.

In that case, it could be that they can't get coverage at all. And, when you can get no liability coverage from an insurer, guess what...you are now your own insurer with your own cash and assets on the line for the plaintiffs attorney and 12 "jury of your peers" who present and hear the case of the college student killed/paralyzed/maimed because of the actions of a Frat UNT happily allows to serve alcohol.

And, in this world, the last thing any institution scrapping for money wants is its own cash and assets acting as the limit of insurance. It is much preferable to have then insurance company write the settlement and claims checks out than to do it out of your own checkbook.

This is all well and good, but our history suggests that we'll have an over-zealous admin come along and use this additionally to ban offending greek organizations. Maybe we're past that now and we have some more level heads running things in Denton than has previously been the case?

[forevereagle]

Punish all for the mistakes of a few. Way to administrate, administrators. You will probably win an administration award for administering so administratively awesome.

Given your statements in other threads, the irony of this one is not lost on me.

[Daddy Dumpsalot]

I was an SAE on campus in 2002 and we got kicked off, and it was pretty painful. Since then I frequently drive through campus and I now see the reminisce of fraternities that once were: Sigma Nu, Lambda Chi, etc. I will say that greek life is such a big part of your college experience, especially for those that can't commute home every weekend. I'm sad to say that UNT continues to backhand the Greek organizations and this will no doubt drive down the desire to be involved.

My cousin was pledging at Tx state the same time I was and they got hazed terribly and the university didn't do anything. I don't condone hazing but at some point the school needs to stop putting all the regulations in place. Incidentally, their lack of regulation is the reason they had 100+ members in their fraternities while UNT struggled with 40. Greek life really is a joke at UNT.

[oldguystudent]

My cousin was pledging at Tx state the same time I was and they got hazed terribly and the university didn't do anything.

Because I went to boarding school for high school, I really found fraternity hazing to be super amateur hour.

[Green P1]

I was an SAE on campus in 2002 and we got kicked off, and it was pretty painful. Since then I frequently drive through campus and I now see the reminisce of fraternities that once were: Sigma Nu, Lambda Chi, etc. I will say that greek life is such a big part of your college experience, especially for those that can't commute home every weekend. I'm sad to say that UNT continues to backhand the Greek organizations and this will no doubt drive down the desire to be involved.

My cousin was pledging at Tx state the same time I was and they got hazed terribly and the university didn't do anything. I don't condone hazing but at some point the school needs to stop putting all the regulations in place. Incidentally, their lack of regulation is the reason they had 100+ members in their fraternities while UNT struggled with 40. Greek life really is a joke at UNT.

That happened during my time at UNT as well. Wasn't a freshman pledge found unconscious in a dumpster on Oak St? That was a real shame.

[TheRiojas_AD]

At LSU and a lot of other schools you won't see one Greek letter on gameday. Not sure why that is, but I loved it. Makes it more about supporting your school and not a dick measuring contest between fraternities.

This is just another attempt by UNT to get rid of Greek life

Now THIS is funny. haha...

Also, I believe if I read the article correctly, alcohol is banned "until a task force is created on alcohol education." Its all in the wording...

[Grant.UNT]

are they still considering selling beer at Apogee next season??

[UNTcrazy727]

Now THIS is funny. haha...

Also, I believe if I read the article correctly, alcohol is banned "until a task force is created on alcohol education." Its all in the wording...

I really didn't mean it literally, but if you think UNT ever goes out of its way to help Greeks you're kidding yourself. Greek life could be bigger and better at UNT, but the administration does its best to prevent that from happening

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

This is all well and good, but our history suggests that we'll have an over-zealous admin come along and use this additionally to ban offending greek organizations. Maybe we're past that now and we have some more level heads running things in Denton than has previously been the case?

Well, if it means so much to Greek alumni, just have an attorney amongst them (surely some Greek alum became an attorney along the way) draw up a hold harmless agreement to the effect that any alcohol-realted injury to a Greek will be covered by whatever risk management mechanism the Greeks have in place...

...then watch as underwriters laugh at them when they try get to liability insurance with said hold harmless agreement in place to cover it.

The only other answer, really, is for the Greeks to self-insure. That will mean the Greek alumni putting up the cash to do so or shutting up.

Gosh, being an adult and having to face responsibility for drunken college kids sucks. Gah, just don't understand why an institution of higher learning won't readily and willingly agree to take on the liability of 18-22 year old drunken male students.

The world is so confusing and hostile to drunks. It's not fair. Can't Barak Obama write an executive order forcing schools to accept and cover the liability caused by drunken Frat members? It's such an important issue.

I think this also shows how far out of whack the priorities of colleges and universities are these days. They waste so much time educating and trying to get money from alumni and legislatures for the said purpose of educating when what they should really be worried about is whether a group of 40-100 males can get their medical bills paid for by somebody else when they get drunk and injure themselves and others.

[oldguystudent]

The only other answer, really, is for the Greeks to self-insure. That will mean the Greek alumni putting up the cash to do so or shutting up.

My fraternity has been self insured since the late 80s. It is an umbrella policy, with a written risk management policy in place (which, of course, has evolved over the years), semi-annual alcohol awareness training to chapter officers at national meetings, and premiums paid by the student members as part of their dues. If a student doesn't pay his insurance premiums, he's swiftly kicked out. I don't know what the per-incident limit is these days, but it was a million dollars in 1990.

The national office publishes violations of the risk management policies, insurance claims paid, and repercussions for the offending chapters on its website annually.

I hated it vehemently when I was 18. I understand it now. And let me tell you, when a chapter crosses that line, it is met with a swift and merciless hand.

I don't know what other fraternities do on these things. I know ours was the first, and chapters on campus laughed their asses of at the rules that we had to follow that they didn't, but I can only imagine that they've since followed suit. (Back then, keg parties and wet rush were still fine and dandy with the IFC, but we weren't allowed to supply alcohol in any form. The only alcohol we were allowed to have was either a licensed cash bar, or a BYOB system in which you brought your booze, turned it into a central distribution point, received tickets for it, and exchanged the tickets for your own booze through the evening.)

I would also like to comment that while fraternity life was in no way, shape or form, one of moderation, it was one of safety. None of us ever drove drunk. Ever. Part of being a pledge was taking people's keys when they entered and driving them home if they'd been drinking, then picking them up in the morning so they could retrieve their car.

Those habits have stuck with me. When you see me at games staggering around like a blithering idiot, you can bet damn skippy that I've either got a pre-arranged ride or a room at the Royale Deluxe with Cheese.

I guess the point I'm making is that I'd be shocked if any fraternity DIDN'T have self insurance anymore, and a pretty strict risk management policy to go with it. Now, getting a bunch of 18-20 year old kids to recognize and follow it 24/7? That can be herding cats.

UNT isn't trying to eliminate Greeks. It's protecting its own self interests, just like any reasonable person would do, even if it is with a wink and a nod that 18 year olds are going to drink, smoke bongs, and occasionally cross the streams.

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

An umbrella policy has to have a policy underneath it. I'm assuming that the "risk management policy." So, you weren't totally self-insured.

It sounds like you all had a self-insured retention where the insurer's dollars kicked in after it was exhausted, with an umbrella over it all to cover things such as damages for mental anguish that underlying policies often exclude.

With money as scarce as it is these days for universities due to constant budget cuts, I'd be shocked if most schools didn't already have such a policy in place. When you are scrapping for money, the last thing you want to do is have to reserve some of it for knuckleheads.

The truth is, anyone injured on university property or at a university event can sue the school. This policy just tries to narrow the liability. The school - or, it's insurer, depending on their risk management agreements - will still have to spend/waste money just to get out of the suit.

[oldguystudent]

IANAL, so here's a brief summary:

Insurance protects your chapter, officers and members, the housing corporation as well as the national fraternity and appointed volunteers, from claims arising out of bodily injury and property damage occurring at the premises or at chapter functions away from the premises. Its also protects against claims arising out of libel, slander, false arrest, invasion of privacy, eviction from the premises, consumption of food and beverages and incidental malpractice. Additionally for undergraduate members, Member Accident Protection is offered to complement health insurance for certain accidents incurred during the undergraduate term. It is important to note that insurance coverage will be compromised, if not voided all together, if chapters or individuals are found to be in violation of the FIPG Risk Management Policy.

[Mean Green 93-98]

It's been a long time; but yes, my fraternity (Delta Sig) and I imagine all others on campus at the time had liability insurance. . . . And generally, the channels of liability against a fraternity chapter don't run to the university, they run to the national fraternity.

[Daddy Dumpsalot]

That happened during my time at UNT as well. Wasn't a freshman pledge found unconscious in a dumpster on Oak St? That was a real shame.

Ha ha. No, not quite. But I'm sure this is what the UNT administration spun it as.

[MeanGreenTexan]

Ha ha. No, not quite. But I'm sure this is what the UNT administration spun it as.

No, I'm pretty sure GreenP1 is right. I was on campus at this time too. I remember it being all over the NT Daily for quite a while. It was a big deal. And the NT Daily wasn't citing the University as their sources.

Maybe something else was the breaking point to get them kicked off campus, but the SAE pledge found unconscious in or near a dumpster in the Fry street area is legit.

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

IANAL, so here's a brief summary:

It is important to note that insurance coverage will be compromised, if

not voided all together, if chapters or individuals are found to be in

violation of the FIPG Risk Management Policy.

It would be interesting to see what the Exclusions are, based on that caveat at the end. When people ask me what their policy covers, I always tell them, "It covers whatever is not excluded." And, that's the truth. Read any of your insurance policies and you'll find how broad or narrow it is based on exclusions. The insurance policy, like the Lord, giveth and taketh away.

93-98:

The channel of a lawsuit extends to whomever is named in a lawsuit. Anyone can be sued. Whether or not they are liable is another story. But, you don't have the option to not participate in a lawsuit once you are named.

What UNT has done, as stated at the outset, is give itself a written document to take to a court and remove themselves from lawsuits involving alcohol consumption involving Frats. It's a smart risk management move; but, even going to court to extract yourself from a lawsuit takes money and time.

[laxtonto]

Sorry...

Thought this was a thread about Thor...

carry on

[JesseMartin]

Food for thought: check out the University's line item in the budget for litigation and suit/settlement payments. Also remember that this doesn't even include the salaries, etc. for the Office of the General Counsel. Then think about how many academic departments (or so many other things) could be better-funded if this wasn't going to various legal costs.

Now realize that this is what we pay WITH an overzealous administration, as it would certainly be higher otherwise. Everything tends to have some sort of balance. So for anyone who is mad about everyone having to pay for the mistakes of a few, note that preventing more of these mistakes also prevents all manner of additional "payments" for the potential additional mistakes that have been avoided. Take TFLF's information to heart and then do a little research and think about all of the money we would be flushing down the crapper otherwise. Again, are there ways of dealing with things that could still have a positive outcome without the feelings of "constant crackdown"? I'd like to think so. But until someone can mediate such circumstances, you can't argue with the results.

Oh, and yes, there was a passed-out pledge in a dumpster, it's not a conspiracy theory.

[Mean Green 93-98]

Oh, and yes, there was a passed-out pledge in a dumpster, it's not a conspiracy theory.

I'm pretty sure that was Daddy Dumpsalot. . . . But he doesn't remember, he was passed out.

[Daddy Dumpsalot]

Food for thought: check out the University's line item in the budget for litigation and suit/settlement payments. Also remember that this doesn't even include the salaries, etc. for the Office of the General Counsel. Then think about how many academic departments (or so many other things) could be better-funded if this wasn't going to various legal costs.

Now realize that this is what we pay WITH an overzealous administration, as it would certainly be higher otherwise. Everything tends to have some sort of balance. So for anyone who is mad about everyone having to pay for the mistakes of a few, note that preventing more of these mistakes also prevents all manner of additional "payments" for the potential additional mistakes that have been avoided. Take TFLF's information to heart and then do a little research and think about all of the money we would be flushing down the crapper otherwise. Again, are there ways of dealing with things that could still have a positive outcome without the feelings of "constant crackdown"? I'd like to think so. But until someone can mediate such circumstances, you can't argue with the results.

Oh, and yes, there was a passed-out pledge in a dumpster, it's not a conspiracy theory.

Your whole point is stupid and your last sentence isn't correct. Please do your research before posting.

[THOR]

Sorry...

Thought this was a thread about Thor...

carry on

Jackass!!! No frat for me...I wasn't near cool enough!