I think that it often depends on a university’s honor/ethics code. If the code encompasses something broader with a student’s conduct on and off-campus and their membership in various orgs, etc, then the university may well have standing to do so. If you think about universities that retract admissions offers because of a student’s social media posts, etc, then I think they definitely have the wiggle room to be sticklers about handing out diplomas.
4 Likes
The problem is that these private organizations want the things that benefit them (campus police escorts at night, tax exempt status to avoid property taxes on their buildings, etc.) without the oversight and risk management. Parents would be up in arms if every legal violation (housing code, over crowding) were referred to local law enforcement (campus police are more lenient on noise or crowding ordinances).
Hence the conundrum…are they affiliated or not?
I have been hazed three times:
-
First, as a freshman in high school while waiting for the bus. A couple of big upperclassmen walked up to me, threw a penny onto the pavement, and ordered me to push it with my nose. Intimidating, but harmless in retrospect.
-
Second, as a freshman on the football team. Every freshman had to put his forehead on an upright baseball bat and spin around it ten times each way. And then run about 20 yards back to their teammates. This was a rite of passage, and aside from short-term vertigo, it was harmless.
-
Third, as a freshman on the basketball team. On the way back from a road trip, we were called to the back of the bus, one by one, to answer a range of questions posed by the varsity guys. No threats or intimidation, though some of the questions were a bit personal/embarrassing.
I was in a fraternity, and I was never asked to do anything dangerous or embarrassing. We drank at parties, of course, but that was 100% voluntary.
1 Like
Honor code violations would definitely come into play, especially at colleges that take them very seriously (and they usually apply to all enrolled students regardless of whether they are living on or off campus). Although I think we’ve already seen via the encampment/antisemitism/vandalism issues on campus this past spring, that colleges are reluctant (afraid) to pull the switch and punish students in this manner.
I’ve definitely heard of hazing in sports and clubs - even business clubs.
I never even entertained joining a fraternity in college because I didn’t want to have to fight an entire fraternity when they tried to haze me.
Discretion is the better part of valor.
1 Like
I was a member of teams, clubs and frats during my HS and college days. I can happily say that I was never hazed. Hazing probably depends on the person. 
1 Like
Harvard tried to restrict students just for joining an off campus organization (single sex) and were sued. The organizations won as Harvard withdrew the policy. The organizations weren’t accused of hazing or doing anything illegal, but Harvard tried to control their students by saying members of those organization could not have leadership positions on campus (no captains on teams, no student govt offices, no club officers) and would not receive LOR for grad schools or scholarships.
Sometimes, the colleges just have to let adults make their own decisions.
I don’t see how the national organizations could benefit from suing a local chapter; the national will just pull the charter and prevent the local from operating under that name, using the logos, etc. Sometimes the national will own a house, but usually it is rented from the university, owned by a local ‘housing board’, rented privately, etc. The local groups don’t have the funds or the structure (the kids are only members for 3-4 years) to fight the national.
1 Like
I read this article shared by @BKSquared and besides being saddened, it definitely made me think of this thread. There’s hazing in Greek organizations and bands and sports teams and the military and, I would argue, in investment banking.
Having people work 100+ hours a week on a regular basis, pulling all-nighters on a regular basis (including multiple a week), telling people not to record their hours so that HR doesn’t intervene, retaliating against people for taking any of their vacation days…I think these practices have continued because, as the WSJ wrote:
One major impediment is senior bankers who see the early years as their profession’s rite of passage. That prompts some of them to ignore safeguards meant to protect the people who work for them.
It is such a common excuse in instances of hazing (I was hazed and I lived through it/I was fine, and it helps build a bond between us, etc, etc, etc.). But two wrongs don’t make a right, and it’s time for the adults in the room to make some positive changes.
10 Likes
Very similar problems in the medical profession. There the consequences of interns/residents making mistakes due to fatigue can be tragic.
5 Likes
I know that historically it was a problem for medical residents as well. My impression, however, is that some of the rules/regs that have been instituted to reduce the long hours are being more closely followed than was depicted in that WSJ article. My evidence is entirely anecdotal (of attending physicians at teaching hospitals mentioning the need to work with the residents’ restricted hours), but it could be that the anecdotes I’m aware of don’t represent the more global culture across the U.S.
It’s also the culture at BigLaw, or it was when I was practicing. Keep in mind those bankers are the clients. The lawyers get a client request at 9 pm and have to have it for the client 1st thing next morning.
I well remember billing 36 hours in a row (which required being awake for 40+), and remember the senior associate on the deal being hospitalized due to exhaustion.
I always say there’s a reason the salaries are so high. If it was a fun job, with reasonable hours, they wouldn’t have to pay that much. Same for investment bankers.
8 Likes
Maybe you don’t mean how this comes across, but I would be careful with that statement. Usually hazing victims don’t ask to be hazed or just go along with it only because that’s what is “expected”. Many times it is not dependent on the person and it’s not within their control. (Control being the operative word here.)
6 Likes
On CC, some users tend think in absolutes. But you’re entitled to perceive my comments as you wish. However, my comment was NOT an absolute. I used the word "probably.” I’m sure there are hazing situations that I cannot imagine. I cannot think of every hazing possibility.
What I will say is that I faced hazing in my life experience. On more than one occasion. I had choices. And I was not hazed.
I can’t speak for all areas of the country, but can confirm the regulations for medical residents are carefully followed around here (upper Midwest.)
1 Like
You are entirely wrong when you say this😀
14 Likes
I’m sickened.
6 Likes
Glad to see some accountability.
4 Likes
This case is unusual because the pledge who was set on fire is also being charged.
3 Likes
Northwestern reached a settlement with a group of student plaintiffs in their claims of personal injury against the University, among other defendants, relating to allegations of hazing on the football team.
The settlement comes nearly two years after University President Michael Schill terminated former football coach Pat Fitzgerald and instituted several safeguards after the allegations of hazing and sexual abuse were made public. In lawsuits, players claimed they were subjected to racial discrimination, hazing, physical abuse and retaliation.
The students and University engaged in a “mediation process” which resulted in the settlement, a University spokesperson told The Daily. The settlement documentation is still being finalized, according to the spokesperson. Attorneys for the plaintiffs could not be immediately reached.
The settlement did not resolve Fitzgerald’s breach of contract suit against NU and Schill.
“While the settlement resolves the claims brought by the players, Coach Fitzgerald’s claims against Northwestern remain. He continues to assert that Northwestern illegally terminated his employment, violated an oral contract and defamed him, causing significant damage to his sterling reputation,” Dan K. Webb and Matthew R. Carter, Fitzgerald’s counsel, said in a statement.
A trial date for Fitzgerald’s case has been set for Nov. 3, according to Webb and Carter’s statement.
2 Likes
A lot of tough talk from officials, but I’m unimpressed. Why did you give these young men the 48 hour window to turn themselves in to save themselves from criminal records? Obviously their parents raced them to the police station! I’d be enraged if I were the victim and his family.
6 Likes