Troop Committee Coup d'tat HELP !
Dolfan
Troop Committee Chairperson have according to BSA.
Here's what happened: After serving our troop for 5+ years and his son
getting Eagle (the 2nd in 2 yrs with 2 more this year) the Scoutmaster was
unilaterally removed from his position by the Comm. Chairperson. The Comm
Chairperson took it upon herself to contact the sponsoring body and rec'd
their authorization to make any changes the Comm Chairperson saw fit.
First off: the Comm Chairperson never rec'd OK from the full Comm for this
action; she just took it upon herself.
Second: She then demanded the Scoutmaster for his immediate resignation and
that of his wife (a comm member)
Bear in mind - the Scoutmaster had committed no crimes or anything morally
wrong. The Comm Chair just had a vendetta to remove him.
Is this "legal" ? I've got a ton more stories but this is a good starting
point. It's gotten so ridiculous that my son will probably transfer to
another troop. I write this as a concerned comm member that does not know
the "rights" or "responsibilities" of being a comm member. Is there anyone
at National I can call?
BTW - now the Comm Chair's husband is the new Scoutmaster.
Is there any way to remove the Comm Chairperson?
Thanks for any and all help.
Bill Nelson
>
>I need to know what "powers/rights/responsibilities" the Troop Committe and
>Troop Committee Chairperson have according to BSA.
The chartering organization 'owns' the troop. They have the power to hire and
fire.
Their representative (who also has the power to hire and fire) is the chartering
organization representative
The troop committee is delegated by the chartering organization to
administratively run the troop (including, in most cases, to find leadership).
So, in most cases they hire and fire the Scoutmaster. The committee chirman
runs the troop committee, either haphazardly, or via committee bylaws. If your
committee didn't make any bylaws, then the troop committee chairman can probably
fire the Scoutmaster.
Your recourse is to appeal to the chartering organization representative or
chartering organization head. They have the power to overrule the committee
chairman (and fire the committee chairman if necessary).
committee chairs and unit leader really should not be husband & wife
(presents a discontinuity if they move), but it is not illegal, especially if
you don't have a bylaw that says otherwise (hint)
Best way of finding out more is to take the new course:
Troop Committee Challenge
But in this case, contact a Unit Commissioner.
Yours in Scouting,
Bill
TrollKing
subtle. Given that the organizational structure is completely up to the
morality (?) of the natives you either get in on top or you little people.
Changing troops is a no brainer (what if they gave out merit badges and
nobody came?) and communicating/organizing the other parents to express
displeasure (if such exists, there is a side of the story we aren't hearing,
yes?) farther up the chain will certainly let some people who don't care (if
they did you would have at least suggested commitee bylaws) know how
valuable scouting is to you.
Get over it. Burn a cross on her front lawn some dark night and then go get
a life. If you can get up the balls to put the time you have been wasting
playing scoutmaster into one on one interaction with your son *without the
structure of a psuedo-paramilitary organization* you might be suprised at
the outcome.
Yours in Trolling,
TK
Dolfan <dol...@frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:9gedrq$l90$1...@node21.cwnet.roc.gblx.net...
: I need to know what "powers/rights/responsibilities" the Troop Committe
:
:
:
:
:
J.W. Walker
and
> Troop Committee Chairperson have according to BSA.
>
> Here's what happened: After serving our troop for 5+ years and his son
> getting Eagle (the 2nd in 2 yrs with 2 more this year) the Scoutmaster was
> unilaterally removed from his position by the Comm. Chairperson. The Comm
> Chairperson took it upon herself to contact the sponsoring body and rec'd
> their authorization to make any changes the Comm Chairperson saw fit.
>
>
> Thanks for any and all help.
>
>
Organization Head (not the Chartered Organization Representative) has
"authorized" the change, it is indeed a done deal... If the Chartered
Organization Head has only part of the story, and you make your feeling
known, then he may choose to take other action, including reinstating the
Scoutmaster and "firing" the Committee Chairman.
Unfortunately, I suspect that the UC will be of little help unless he "saw
it coming" and is already involved...
--
Jay Walker
wwwa...@ix.netcom.com
Wimwingwit
>Scoutmaster was unilaterally removed from his position
I've seen things like this happen.
The wonderful world of Scouting is, for many, a political game with all of the
back-stabbing and vendettas and paybacks one might expect to find in a cable TV
series.
Don't expect your council to be of help. They may even be part of the problem.
Just get out. The madness will drive you crazy, too, and you'll never know
when it will again rear its ugly head.
A sad state of affairs, I agree. Welcome to Scouting.
stan...@hotmail.com
This posting comes at a good time. I've just been involved in a dispute
with a Scouter at the District level over Eagle process and procedure, and
after the smoke cleared (everything worked out fine for the boy), instead
of doing the socially acceptable thing of just accepting what happened,
I emailed the other person a statement of my total disgust over his lack
of help, and how I felt he was part of the problem and not part of the
solution. His reply was nasty (I mean, a person who probably honestly
believes he was doing his job properly doesn't like being told that he
violated the Courteous, Kind, and Obedient points of the Scout Law in the
process), including a threat to withhold further support from me, and my
rebuttal ended with the following-
me> Furthermore, a decision to support a volunteer colleague should be based
me> entirely on what's best for the boys and not on any personal interactions
me> between the adults.
I think it happens much too often that this last point is forgotten.
Stan Krieger
Eagle Advisor
Hobdbcgv
Do not confuse the Chairs duties as the unit chair with his/her
responsibilities as the head of the Troop Committee -
ONE of the Chair's duties is to chair the troop committee.
There are several other duties of the Chair ( e.g., only the chair may
interpret policy for the unit), and (in this situation), do the assessment of
the adult leadership and their compliance with the program-
Note on other duties-
if a scoutmaster is not following the BSA program and shows no intention of
following any but his own take on scouting, the Chair definitely needs to meet
with the IH (or ChOrgRep if the IH has designated the ChOrgRep as acting on the
OH behalf in that area) and remove the Scoutmaster.
It is not a committee function and they would only be consulted as a
courtesy, and only if the Chair and the IH felt it appropriate.
IMHO nice Scoutmasters who make the parents happy by leading the boys so
they have lots of fun by definition are Scoutmasters in need of removal - they
are not following the program. It is not about an adult feeding on the energy
of youth or about an adult cheerleading a chruch group - its about developing
adolescents using the program
Thus, a good chair has to check program compliance, first to determine
training needs, and next to remove anyone who is not intending to or will not
adhere to the program as written by BSA.
(And to keep perspective in the heirarchy of the Scoutmaster and the Chair, a
charter may be in effect without an acting, appointed, or temproary
scoutmaster, but not without an appointed or acting chair.)
TrollKing
Pleasing parents (who may be made most happy by seing their children
involved in developmental activities) and providing such a degree of
leadership that this development is actually fun for the children are
certainly "not following the program" sorts of behaviors..
Toss 'em out and burn 'em at the stake and make room for more incompetants
like Hobdbcgv!!!
Yours in Superior Trolling,
TK
Hobdbcgv <hobd...@aol.comnono> wrote in message
news:20010618002618...@ng-fr1.aol.com...
<sn>.
: IMHO nice Scoutmasters who make the parents happy by leading the boys
so
: they have lots of fun by definition are Scoutmasters in need of removal -
they
: are not following the program. It is not about an adult feeding on the
energy
: of youth or about an adult cheerleading a chruch group - its about
developing
: adolescents using the program
:
<sn>
Hobdbcgv
ready to contribute their lack of knowledge and experience to any conversation,
knowing they will always be near, recognizing that their role in life is
establishing the lowest baseline for the inane.
Sacrificing their selves to make anyone else reading them feel better solely
because he is not they - noble indeed, the weaponless modern village idiot, the
troll..
Settummanque MAJ Mike Walton
> I need to know what "powers/rights/responsibilities" the Troop Committe and
> Troop Committee Chairperson have according to BSA.
What you are *really* asking is "Who has the authority to remove a
Scoutmaster or other adult" and "under what conditions can this occur"
and finally, "What recourse does a removed unit volunteer have?"
There are three questions which came out from my reading of the
situation given below:
> Here's what happened: After serving our troop for 5+ years and his son
> getting Eagle (the 2nd in 2 yrs with 2 more this year) the Scoutmaster was
> unilaterally removed from his position by the Comm. Chairperson. The Comm
> Chairperson took it upon herself to contact the sponsoring body and rec'd
> their authorization to make any changes the Comm Chairperson saw fit.
>
> First off: the Comm Chairperson never rec'd OK from the full Comm for this
> action; she just took it upon herself.
>
> Second: She then demanded the Scoutmaster for his immediate resignation and
> that of his wife (a comm member)
>
> Bear in mind - the Scoutmaster had committed no crimes or anything morally
> wrong. The Comm Chair just had a vendetta to remove him.
>
> Is this "legal" ? I've got a ton more stories but this is a good starting
> point. It's gotten so ridiculous that my son will probably transfer to
> another troop. I write this as a concerned comm member that does not know
> the "rights" or "responsibilities" of being a comm member. Is there anyone
> at National I can call?
>
> BTW - now the Comm Chair's husband is the new Scoutmaster.
>
> Is there any way to remove the Comm Chairperson?
Let's answer the questions:
"Who has the authority to remove a Scoutmaster or other adult?"
The organization which chartered your Troop appointed someone to serve
as "Chartered Organizational Representative" (what we used to called
the "Institutional Representative" and later the "Scouting
Coordinator"). Under PRESENT BSA policies, this is the person who has
the ultimate authority for "hiring, moving and firing" ALL registered
volunteers in their unit(s) ON BEHALF OF THE HEAD OF THE CHARTERING
ORGANIZATION.
For instance, using my "mythical" Cardinal Council and Troop 0
example....Troop 0 is chartered to First Baptist Church in New City,
Kentucky. The Pastor of the Church serves as the head of the
chartering organization (the Church). He appointed Larry Million to
serve as Chartered Organizational Representative for the Troop and Cub
Scout Pack which is chartered to First Baptist.
When there is an issue about volunteer registration, Larry would
normally contact the Pastor during a regular Church business meeting
or some other time.
They would discuss it, and the Pastor would recommend a course of
action for Larry to take. Many times, however, the head of the
chartering organization is NEVER TOLD about any changes to the
Scouting program, and the Chartering Organizational Rep (COR for
short) goes off and does whatever he or she chooses.
So, to answer your first question: the Chartered Organizational
Representative makes decisions ON BEHALF OF THE CHARTERED ORGANIZATION
for the removal of any volunteer from a registered position. He or she
cannot delegate this to anyone.
This is how the BSA made this work now, for exactly the reason you
explained above.
The Chair of the Committee (male or female) does NOT have that
right...and cannot act "on behalf of" the COR. If you are removed
from registration from a unit, the COR or the head of the chartering
organization must provide you this information IN PERSON preferably,
or at least by writing, registered mail. You can then appeal this
decision to the head of the chartering organization and to the Scout
Executive of your Council. You may also further appeal it to the
Region in which your local Council is a part of and to the Office of
the Chief Scout Executive; but in reality, very few appeals are done
above the local Council case *in cases of unit level volunteers being
removed*.
The second question is "Under what conditions can this occur?" In
order for a volunteer to be removed, the chartered organization MUST
have SPECIFIC REASONS why. A Scout Executive can remove a volunteer
for "no reason", but UNITS cannot remove a volunteer "just because."
There has to be specific reasons, which is the reason why the COR and
head of the chartering organization MUST inform the person preferably
in person but at least in written form of the specifics of his or her
removal. There are all kinds of justifications, depending on the
chartering organization....but it comes down to three or four major
reasons: For failure to abide by the Scouting principles (the Scout
Oath or Promise and/or Laws) and therefore demonstrating a negative
example to youth; for failure to abide by the chartered organization's
policies and rules (for instance, First Baptist has a "no smoking
policy" which extends to anyone or any organization utilizing the
buildings or grounds); for the commission of a criminal act (in some
places, misodemoners are included...so if the chartered organization
feels that the running of a stop light merits removal, that's it); and
for the failure of providing guidance to youth leaders resulting in
injury and/or harm to youth or adult members (for instance, if the
Scoutmaster didn't tell a Scout to be careful with a handaxe and the
Scout chops off a finger..).
These justifications are NOT "written down" in a book somewhere, but
they are based on my own personal experiences over the last 20 years
dealing with similiar-type activities and reasonings.
No matter what the reasoning, it must be explained to the Scouter and
should be in writing (most Councils demand this as a "CYB" ("Cover
Your Butt") tactic).
"What recourse does a removed unit volunteer have?" A lot. First, he
or she can organize a new unit. This is what happens a
lot...Scoutmasters go out of favor (probably because of "community
politics") and the old Scoutmaster goes and starts a new Troop and
ends up with half of the boys from the old Troop simply because of
loyality. He or she may end up with all of them if the program of the
new Troop is significantly better than the old Troop's was. This
happens a lot.
Second, he or she can appeal the decision and the Chartered
Organization Head (in my "mythical case", the Pastor) can reverse the
decision and remove the Committee Chair from his or her position as a
penalty...or he or she can see right through the "politics" and demand
that they work it out together....or else...He or she can further
appeal and further appeal it as well...
Third, the Troop itself can be folded and reorganized. This is also a
common thing which happens, especially if the Chartered Organizational
Head and the COR are both "figureheads" ("We'll sign the papers and
give you someplace to meet but don't bother us for money or anything
else...") What normally happens in this case is a grab for
power...and everyone ends up dividing everything...kinda like a
contested divorce...
Fourth, the Troop can continue with the new leadership and the old
Scoutmaster just fades off to the sunset (or if a good District
Executive is around and if the Scoutmaster was a good Scoutmaster and
nothing negative occurred, he or she may recommend that the former
Scoutmaster serve as a Unit Commissioner...what a switch THAT would
be, huh?? Unit Commissioners certify the charters for units that they
work with...I am not saying that "revenge is sweet", but hey...)
The Troop Committee SUPPORTS the Scoutmaster. The Chair of the Troop
Committee is the "head supporter". If he or she feels that the
present Scoutmaster isn't working out, then his or her responsibility
in part is to approach the COR and *recommend* that the Scoutmaster be
replaced. But the SCOUTMASTER also gets a chance to talk directly
with the COR too...the Scoutmaster DOES NOT "report" or "is under" the
Troop Committee Chair; The Scoutmaster works like the Chair of the
Committee works, IN TANDEM, TOGETHER, WITH THE SENIOR PATROL LEADER
and all should be talking with the COR regularily.
The COR makes the final decision and if there's any question, the head
of the chartering organization makes the final decision...after all,
it is THEIR UNIT.
Finally, there's no use in calling National, for this is a LOCAL
problem and local problems are handled locally by the Council Scout
Executive of your Council. So if you feel that this person hasn't
gotten a fair deal:
*TALK WITH THE SCOUTMASTER CANDIDILY. Find out what exactly is going
on between him and the Chair of the Committee. You'll get his or her
side on it which isn't the complete story, but you will get some
idea....
*TALK WITH THE COR...explain your concern. You know, we adults know
how to mislead and lie really well...you may just find out that the
Committee Chair didn't even APPROACH him or her about removing the
Scoutmaster (or have said something like "We're thinking about
changing Scoutmasters...you think that it's okay if we do??" and of
course, "thinking" is a way off from "doing"...and the guy or gal
probably said something like "I don't know...it sounds alright..." and
it's interpreted as a "done deal."
*TALK WITH THE SCOUT EXECUTIVE. Make an appointment to speak with
your Scout Executive...the COUNCIL Scout Executive, not the District's
Executive or Executive team member. Let your concerns be known, but
don't go into details of "who shot whom" or "who did what to whom".
Explain it and allow the Scout Executive to share what he or she knows
(probably not a whole lot, but there's that occassional time in which
he'll say "We have reason to believe that he's done something and
we're recommending that he steps down.." and you KNOW then, that it's
not just a "he said, she said, they did" deal. Scout Executives WILL
NOT TELL YOU ANYTHING IN DETAIL...don't ask, don't expect it, because
it ain't gonna happen. They have an obligation to uphold the program
of the BSA, and that comes before telling you.
Hope that all of this helps out....
Settummanque!
sandman
that the scoutmaster was removed and so they all had a meeting and decided
to transfer to a different troop. They told the fired scoutmaster and asked
him to come with.
Well the old troop now has 2 boys in it. both are the sons of the CC that
fired the Scoutmaster
--
Kansas Veterans Home Page
http://www.geocities.com/kansasvet
"Settummanque MAJ Mike Walton" <kyblk...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:34591102.01061...@posting.google.com...
TrollKing
Yours in superior trolling,
TK
Hobdbcgv <hobd...@aol.comnono> wrote in message
news:20010618021525...@ng-fr1.aol.com...
: Ah, it is so reassuring to hear the voice of those totally without
:
J.W. Walker
"Settummanque MAJ Mike Walton" <kyblk...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:34591102.01061...@posting.google.com...
> Scoutmaster or other adult" and "under what conditions can this occur"
> and finally, "What recourse does a removed unit volunteer have?"
>
>
>
> "Who has the authority to remove a Scoutmaster or other adult?"
>
> The organization which chartered your Troop appointed someone to serve
> as "Chartered Organizational Representative" (what we used to called
> the "Institutional Representative" and later the "Scouting
> Coordinator"). Under PRESENT BSA policies, this is the person who has
> the ultimate authority for "hiring, moving and firing" ALL registered
> volunteers in their unit(s) ON BEHALF OF THE HEAD OF THE CHARTERING
> ORGANIZATION.
The person who has the "ultimate authority" is the head of the Chartering
Organization... PERIOD... as you stated, the Charted Organization
Representative may act but only at the direction of the one who holds the
charter which is the Chartered Organization Head. We have danced with the
issue before and this "small point" can become quite important in a
situation like the one presented. (Yes the CR can process the paperwork BUT
he better make sure he is acting in accordance with the wishes of the
Chartered Organization Head) Do not assume that the CR, simply because he
can sign the volunteer application has the "authority" to replace anyone...
he does not. Obviously, the Committee Chairman can not remove the
Scoutmaster (or anyone else for that matter) either.
> The Chair of the Committee (male or female) does NOT have that
> right...and cannot act "on behalf of" the COR. If you are removed
> from registration from a unit, the COR or the head of the chartering
> organization must provide you this information IN PERSON preferably,
> or at least by writing, registered mail. You can then appeal this
> decision to the head of the chartering organization and to the Scout
> Executive of your Council. You may also further appeal it to the
> Region in which your local Council is a part of and to the Office of
> the Chief Scout Executive; but in reality, very few appeals are done
> above the local Council case *in cases of unit level volunteers being
> removed*.
Please site the source of information that states that the Chartered
Organization Head is required to inform a member why he has been
disqualified for membership in the Unit. I do not believe that the
Chartered Organization Head is required to provide any reason for his
actions. While that may be in his "best interest" he is not required to do
so. And nothing in the example presented is appealable beyond the Chartered
Organization Head. This is simply a Unit matter and he has acted
representing the interests of the Unit. If the Chartered Organization Head
(or anyone for that matter) "tried" to have the Scoutmaster disqualified
from membership in the BSA, that would be another matter and could be
appealed. Removing a member (or denying membership) at the Unit level is
entirely his call. The Scoutmaster is free to join another Unit or to start
his own.
> Second, he or she can appeal the decision and the Chartered
> Organization Head (in my "mythical case", the Pastor) can reverse the
> decision and remove the Committee Chair from his or her position as a
> penalty...or he or she can see right through the "politics" and demand
> that they work it out together....or else...
This is, in reality, the only "recourse" for an appeal in this situation...
> Fourth, the Troop can continue with the new leadership and the old
> Scoutmaster just fades off to the sunset (or if a good District
> Executive is around and if the Scoutmaster was a good Scoutmaster and
> nothing negative occurred, he or she may recommend that the former
> Scoutmaster serve as a Unit Commissioner...what a switch THAT would
> be, huh?? Unit Commissioners certify the charters for units that they
> work with...I am not saying that "revenge is sweet", but hey...)
Please site the source that adds "certifying" the Unit Charter to the Unit
Commissioners duties. Getting the charter in on time is one issue...
Certifying it is quite another. Selecting an individual to act as the UC for
a Unit in which he was a former member might not be a very good idea either.
But, since the UC has absolutely no "line authority" over the operations of
a Unit, I am curious just where the "revenge" (even if he wanted to) would
come from. I am also curious how this could possibly benefit either the
Scouts in the Unit or the "fired" Scoutmaster.
> The COR makes the final decision and if there's any question, the head
> of the chartering organization makes the final decision...after all,
> it is THEIR UNIT.
We really can not have two people making "final" decisions. This authority
rests only with the Chartered Organization Head and not the CR.
Why would you leave the DE out of the chain of command? The SE probably has
no clue what is going on at the Unit level (and probbaly shouldn't). The DE
probably does. Save the SE for the "banned for life" issues and let the Unit
and the DE "work things out"... Might want to get the UC and the DC involved
too.
Bottom line though is if the Chartered Organization Head has acted (or
approved the action) it is a done deal. If the CC and the CR acted without
the direct approval of the Chartered Organization Head (or he was "mislead"
and became a party to a bad decision) then "heads will roll" and one of them
will probably not be the former Scoutmaster. Such action, if warranted, will
come from the Unit, not the Council.
--
Jay Walker
wwwa...@ix.netcom.com
Settummanque MAJ Mike Walton
> The person who has the "ultimate authority" is the head of the Chartering
> Organization... PERIOD... as you stated, the Charted Organization
> Representative may act but only at the direction of the one who holds the
> charter which is the Chartered Organization Head. We have danced with the
> issue before and this "small point" can become quite important in a
> situation like the one presented.
True, but as I stated, J.W., most chartered organizational heads have
little to no clue as to what their CORs are doing...and most waves
their hands when issues like this comes up, saying "aw, you handle
it..you're the Scouting guy (gal)."
>(Yes the CR can process the paperwork BUT
> he better make sure he is acting in accordance with the wishes of the
> Chartered Organization Head) Do not assume that the CR, simply because he
> can sign the volunteer application has the "authority" to replace anyone...
> he does not. Obviously, the Committee Chairman can not remove the
> Scoutmaster (or anyone else for that matter) either.
I agree here...
> > The Chair of the Committee (male or female) does NOT have that
> > right...and cannot act "on behalf of" the COR. If you are removed
> > from registration from a unit, the COR or the head of the chartering
> > organization must provide you this information IN PERSON preferably,
> > or at least by writing, registered mail. You can then appeal this
> > decision to the head of the chartering organization and to the Scout
> > Executive of your Council. You may also further appeal it to the
> > Region in which your local Council is a part of and to the Office of
> > the Chief Scout Executive; but in reality, very few appeals are done
> > above the local Council case *in cases of unit level volunteers being
> > removed*.
>
> Please site the source of information that states that the Chartered
> Organization Head is required to inform a member why he has been
> disqualified for membership in the Unit.
The BSA's "Maintaining Standards of Membership" booklet, which I'm
sure your Scout Executive will allow you to view. This is the "how
to throw someone out of the BSA" booklet, and is controlled at the
local Council office level.
> I do not believe that the
> Chartered Organization Head is required to provide any reason for his
> actions.
He or she has to do so in order to alert the local Council to revoke
the membership fee of the volunteer or to reassign him or her to a new
position in the unit.
> While that may be in his "best interest" he is not required to do
> so. And nothing in the example presented is appealable beyond the Chartered
> Organization Head. This is simply a Unit matter and he has acted
> representing the interests of the Unit. If the Chartered Organization Head
> (or anyone for that matter) "tried" to have the Scoutmaster disqualified
> from membership in the BSA, that would be another matter and could be
> appealed. Removing a member (or denying membership) at the Unit level is
> entirely his call. The Scoutmaster is free to join another Unit or to start
> his own.
If the Council permits him or her to do so. Membership is controlled
by the local Council.
> Please site the source that adds "certifying" the Unit Charter to the Unit
> Commissioners duties.
The Unit Commissioner Fieldbook, J.W., lists "reviewing and signing
unit charters" and "participating in the rechartering of units" as
tasks that Unit Commissioners do. Some Councils have removed those
tasks and left them to the professionals to do; other Councils insist
that Unit Commissioners sign all charter/rechartering paperwork and
having it reviewed by the professional before processing at the
Council service center.
>Getting the charter in on time is one issue...
> Certifying it is quite another. Selecting an individual to act as the UC for
> a Unit in which he was a former member might not be a very good idea either.
> But, since the UC has absolutely no "line authority" over the operations of
> a Unit, I am curious just where the "revenge" (even if he wanted to) would
> come from.
A Unit Commissioner can "hold up" the processing of a charter...I've
been there, J.W., I know it can be done. I've had Commissioners to
"lose rechartering paperwork", to "forget to get the signatures" and
to "delay getting the charters into the Council office" because they
were "too busy to get them to the office." *heheheeheheheee*
> I am also curious how this could possibly benefit either the
> Scouts in the Unit or the "fired" Scoutmaster.
Without a valid charter, the unit comes to a halt. No tour permits
can be issued to units without a valid charter. No advancements can
be approved by units without a valid charter. While the local Council
has a "float period" of 120 days, a vindictive Unit Commissioner can
"lose the paperwork" and the unit thinking that they are chartered
aren't....
> > The COR makes the final decision and if there's any question, the head
> > of the chartering organization makes the final decision...after all,
> > it is THEIR UNIT.
>
> We really can not have two people making "final" decisions. This authority
> rests only with the Chartered Organization Head and not the CR.
As I stated above, I wrote this the way I did because reality says
that the COR in most cases makes those final decisions and only when
pressured do the head of the chartering organization make that
ultimate, final decision (unless it too is appealed).
> Why would you leave the DE out of the chain of command?
First, we in Scouting have NO "Chain of Command," J.W. This is what
gets a lot of Scouters -- volunteers and professionals -- in trouble.
There is NO "Chain".
This runs to the root of this entire issue, J.W. -- the Committee
Chair thought that "she was over the Scoutmaster" in making her
decision....She's NOT.
She works BESIDE and WITH the Scoutmaster, and when more people
understand this relationship, they will stop their "hen-fighting" and
start to either cooperate or decide to do something else with their
free time.
Volunteers are responsible to other volunteers. Professionals are
responsible to both volunteers in their service area and to
supervisory professionals. Scouts are responsible to other Scouts or
coordinate and meet with adults.
Second, as I explained, the issue is a PERSONAL issue and not a "UNIT"
issue.
Therefore, the Council Executive or Scout Executive should be the
person involved in this matter; NOT the District's Executive or senior
professional in that District.
I would get the Unit Commissioner involved way before now, before I
would engage a District Executive.
> The SE probably has
> no clue what is going on at the Unit level (and probbaly shouldn't).
The Council Scout Executive has MORE of a clue than you may think as
what's going on; and if this is a matter of a removal of a volunteer,
the COR or the head of the institution OWES the Scout Executive a
phone call to explain the situation.
> The DE probably does.
Then he or she is not properly spending their time wisely. District
Executives have little to no time to interviene in hen-fights between
volunteers. We try to "stick them" with such tasks, but they are
ill-equipped to do this. They are MANAGERS of the DISTRICT OPERATION
and this is why we have volunteers called "Commissioners" who are
supposed to respond to and assist with such matters.
>Save the SE for the "banned for life" issues....
We don't know, J.W., if this is such an issue, do we?? All we have
heard/read is ONE SIDE of this situation. We haven't heard from the
Committee Chair nor from the chartering organization...there could be
more than what we're reading here going on to prompt the change in
adult leadership. Maybe not. But who better to be able to decide if
a Scouter is to be removed than the person who authorizes such
removals??
> Bottom line though is if the Chartered Organization Head has acted (or
> approved the action) it is a done deal. If the CC and the CR acted without
> the direct approval of the Chartered Organization Head (or he was "mislead"
> and became a party to a bad decision) then "heads will roll" and one of them
> will probably not be the former Scoutmaster. Such action, if warranted, will
> come from the Unit, not the Council.
It may come from the Council, if the Scout Executive deems it so.
Good points, J.W....
Settummanque!
J.W. Walker
"Settummanque MAJ Mike Walton" <kyblk...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:34591102.01061...@posting.google.com...
>
> > The person who has the "ultimate authority" is the head of the
Chartering
> > Organization... PERIOD... as you stated, the Charted Organization
> > Representative may act but only at the direction of the one who holds
the
> > charter which is the Chartered Organization Head. We have danced with
the
> > issue before and this "small point" can become quite important in a
> > situation like the one presented.
>
> True, but as I stated, J.W., most chartered organizational heads have
> little to no clue as to what their CORs are doing...and most waves
> their hands when issues like this comes up, saying "aw, you handle
> it..you're the Scouting guy (gal)."
Maybe in your experience BUT I really doubt that "most" are that far removed
from the Unit. I would also suspect that "most" would want to be directly
involved in a matter as serious as "involuntarily" replacing the
Scoutmaster. It appears in this case that the Chartered Organizatiojn Head
was aware of the plan.
> > Please site the source of information that states that the Chartered
> > Organization Head is required to inform a member why he has been
> > disqualified for membership in the Unit.
>
> The BSA's "Maintaining Standards of Membership" booklet, which I'm
> sure your Scout Executive will allow you to view. This is the "how
> to throw someone out of the BSA" booklet, and is controlled at the
> local Council office level.
That is not exactly "what it says" BUT it does not actually apply to this
situation anyway. No one has been removed form membership. The Scoutmaster
"resigned". Had he refused to resign, that "might" be another matter.
> He or she has to do so in order to alert the local Council to revoke
> the membership fee of the volunteer or to reassign him or her to a new
> position in the unit.
That is not the issue here. The Scoutmaster was ask to resign his position
by the Committee Chairman with the concurrence of the Chartered Organization
Head. The Scoutmaster apparently agreed and complied. He is not being
ousted from Scouting. He is being removed as Scoutmaster of the Unit. This
is a Unit issue PERIOD.
> > While that may be in his "best interest" he is not required to do
> > so. And nothing in the example presented is appealable beyond the
Chartered
> > Organization Head. This is simply a Unit matter and he has acted
> > representing the interests of the Unit. If the Chartered Organization
Head
> > (or anyone for that matter) "tried" to have the Scoutmaster disqualified
> > from membership in the BSA, that would be another matter and could be
> > appealed. Removing a member (or denying membership) at the Unit level is
> > entirely his call. The Scoutmaster is free to join another Unit or to
start
> > his own.
>
> If the Council permits him or her to do so. Membership is controlled
> by the local Council.
Actually, Unit membership IS controlled by the Chartered Organization Head.
As long as he acts within the limits of the Charter, he is free to accept or
exclude anyone. A Unit can "limit" its membership, for example, using
criteria approved by the Chartered Organization Head... There is no "appeal"
either. (The Charter could be pulled, but that would be another issue)
> > Please site the source that adds "certifying" the Unit Charter to the
Unit
> > Commissioners duties.
>
> The Unit Commissioner Fieldbook, J.W., lists "reviewing and signing
> unit charters" and "participating in the rechartering of units" as
> tasks that Unit Commissioners do. Some Councils have removed those
> tasks and left them to the professionals to do; other Councils insist
> that Unit Commissioners sign all charter/rechartering paperwork and
> having it reviewed by the professional before processing at the
> Council service center.
>
> >Getting the charter in on time is one issue...
> > Certifying it is quite another. Selecting an individual to act as the UC
for
> > a Unit in which he was a former member might not be a very good idea
either.
> > But, since the UC has absolutely no "line authority" over the operations
of
> > a Unit, I am curious just where the "revenge" (even if he wanted to)
would
> > come from.
Reviewing and assisting are not the same as "certifying"... a term that
implies "powers" a Commissioner simply does not have. The Commissioner is
not responsible for the content or even the accuracy of the charter
renewal... only getting it in on time which can be done with or without the
Unit Commissioner.
> A Unit Commissioner can "hold up" the processing of a charter...I've
> been there, J.W., I know it can be done. I've had Commissioners to
> "lose rechartering paperwork", to "forget to get the signatures" and
> to "delay getting the charters into the Council office" because they
> were "too busy to get them to the office." *heheheeheheheee*
>
> > I am also curious how this could possibly benefit either the
> > Scouts in the Unit or the "fired" Scoutmaster.
>
> Without a valid charter, the unit comes to a halt. No tour permits
> can be issued to units without a valid charter. No advancements can
> be approved by units without a valid charter. While the local Council
> has a "float period" of 120 days, a vindictive Unit Commissioner can
> "lose the paperwork" and the unit thinking that they are chartered
> aren't....
Again, your are perpetuating the "myth" that Commissioners have some magic
powers over the operation of the Unit. This simply is not so. Any UC that
"intentionally" harmed the Unit he was assigned to assist would likely wind
up reassigned to Troop 666. Again, how would such an action benefit the
Scouts in the Unit or anyone else for that matter?... Hard to believe you
would suggest it. (hard to believe you would even be a party to it... You
could "lose your shirt" over that one)
> > Why would you leave the DE out of the chain of command?
> First, we in Scouting have NO "Chain of Command," J.W. This is what
> gets a lot of Scouters -- volunteers and professionals -- in trouble.
> There is NO "Chain".
>
> This runs to the root of this entire issue, J.W. -- the Committee
> Chair thought that "she was over the Scoutmaster" in making her
> decision....She's NOT.
Wow! no professional chain of command.... what a concept! (our DE,DD and
Field Director do not agree though) The root of this entire issue is that a
Scoutmaster was ask to resign by the CC. He did as was requested. Pretty
much a done deal at that point isn't it?
> Second, as I explained, the issue is a PERSONAL issue and not a "UNIT"
> issue.
> Therefore, the Council Executive or Scout Executive should be the
> person involved in this matter; NOT the District's Executive or senior
> professional in that District.
>
> I would get the Unit Commissioner involved way before now, before I
> would engage a District Executive.
>
> > The SE probably has no clue what is going on at the Unit level (and
probbaly shouldn't).
>
> The Council Scout Executive has MORE of a clue than you may think as
> what's going on; and if this is a matter of a removal of a volunteer,
> the COR or the head of the institution OWES the Scout Executive a
> phone call to explain the situation.
This, I guess, could be the case in a very small Council or with a very
"special" SE. I am quite sure that this would not be the "normal" procedure
in most Councils in a situation like this one though. This is clearly UNIT
issue. This is NOT removing a volunteer from the BSA.
>District Executives have little to no time to interviene in hen-fights
between
> volunteers. We try to "stick them" with such tasks, but they are
> ill-equipped to do this. They are MANAGERS of the DISTRICT OPERATION
> and this is why we have volunteers called "Commissioners" who are
> supposed to respond to and assist with such matters.
Why do you think the "average" DE would be ill-equipped to deal with this
issue?... or even better, why do you think that the "average" Commissioner
would be better prepared? From my experience, I would bet on the
professional. A good UC could work it out too. A not so good one could/would
make things much worse. Further, I suspect that the "resignation" of the
Scoutmaster in a key unit or "The Family Feud" going on in a large unit
could well have in impact on the "District Operation"... and the DE's next
promotion. I suspect that he would find the time to help.
> >Save the SE for the "banned for life" issues....
> We don't know, J.W., if this is such an issue, do we?? All we have
> heard/read is ONE SIDE of this situation.
No one has actually been removed... A Scoutmaster has been asked (and has
agreed) to resign. A "concerned parent" finds this unfair. Of course there
is a LOT more to the story as I suggested in my first post. This problem, at
face, is not a "serious" issue for the Council. It is a Unit issue. If the
Unit does not have a job for the now "retired" Scoutmaster and chooses not
to register him in another position, that is a decission that the Chartered
Orgazination Head can make... and the decission will be final.
> It may come from the Council, if the Scout Executive deems it so.
Unless there are other circumstances which are not aparent in the origonal
post, the Council will have nothing to do with it. If such exist, I suspect
that the Charterd Organization Head has made the SE aware of them and it has
been handled.
--
Jay Walker
wwwa...@ix.netcom.com
settummanque or blackeagle
drifting from it.
Here's the original posting:
>Here's what happened: After serving our >troop for 5+ years and his son
>getting Eagle (the 2nd in 2 yrs with 2 >more this year) the Scoutmaster was
>unilaterally removed from his position by >the Comm. Chairperson. The Comm
>Chairperson took it upon herself to >contact the sponsoring body and rec'd
> their authorization to make any changes >the Comm Chairperson saw fit.
>
> First off: the Comm Chairperson never >rec'd OK from the full Comm for this
>action; she just took it upon herself.
>
> Second: She then demanded the >Scoutmaster for his immediate >resignation and
that of his wife (a comm >member)
>
> Bear in mind - the Scoutmaster had >committed no crimes or anything morally
>wrong. The Comm Chair just had a >vendetta to remove him.
>
> Is this "legal" ? I've got a ton more >stories but this is a good starting
>point. It's gotten so ridiculous that my >son will probably transfer to
>another troop. I write this as a >concerned comm member that does not >know
the "rights" or "responsibilities" of >being a comm member. Is there anyone
>at National I can call?
>
> BTW - now the Comm Chair's husband >is the new Scoutmaster.
>
> Is there any way to remove the Comm >Chairperson?
The immediate question I had in reading this, J.W., was "Where is the chartered
organizational representative (the COR) and the head of the organization"? By
their absense, this told *me* that this was a situation completely thought up
by the Committee Chair; otherwise, the COR would have been involved in meeting
with the Scoutmaster and his wife and letting them know that they are not
needed any longer.
I don't believe that the COR nor the head of the organization was aware.
You stated in part:
>No one has been removed form >membership. The Scoutmaster >"resigned".
No, J.W...the Scoutmaster was *removed* and his registration as Scoutmaster was
*terminated*. This is why the Maintaining Standards of Membership booklet
applies in this case. He didn't "resign," he was told by the Committee Chair
(reading the above and only having the above to go by) to "hit the streets --
we're getting a new Scoutmaster."
>That is not the issue here. The >Scoutmaster was ask to resign his >position
by the Committee Chairman with >the concurrence of the Chartered >Organization
Head.
No, not according to the information presented here: " She then demanded the
Scoutmaster for his immediate resignation and that of his wife (a comm member)"
There were no "asking" here, J.W....the Scoutmaster was TOLD that he would be
removed...
And as I wrote before, I do agree with you that this is a unit issue as far as
we can both read into it.
>Actually, Unit membership IS controlled >by the Chartered Organization Head.
Agreed to the point that the Council utimately accepts or withdraws membership
from those they feel are unacceptable for membership.
>There is no "appeal" either.
Sure there's an appeal, J.W....that's what got us all going with this Dale
thing, remember??
>Reviewing and assisting are not the same >as "certifying"... a term that
implies >"powers" a Commissioner simply does >not have.
When a Unit Commissioner signs his or her signature that the standards of the
BSA have been met to the rechartering document, that's "certification", J.W.
Clear and simple.
When a Unit Commissioner signs the Quality Unit committment form representing
the local Council, that's a certification that the standards met have been
achieved or exceeded.
>The Commissioner is not responsible for >the content or even the accuracy of
the >charter renewal... only getting it in on >time which can be done with or
without >the Unit Commissioner.
In some Councils, that's true. In many others, however, the Unit Commissioner
is responsible for 'spot checking' and verifying that the information provided
matches up with the applications and other data provided.
>Again, your are perpetuating the "myth" >that Commissioners have some magic
>powers over the operation of the Unit.
They don't, but if the charter isn't completed and turned in, the unit stalls
until it does.
>Any UC that "intentionally" harmed the
>Unit he was assigned to assist would >likely wind up reassigned to Troop 666.
Or "promoted" to Assistant District Commissioner or District Commissioner, in
the two cases I'm thinking of.
Yeah, they should have been asked to see the door, but they weren't because the
"clique" in that particular Council chose to let it happen.
>Hard to believe you would suggest it.
I didn't suggest it, J.W....like I said, I've been there when it
occurred....and it did happen both in a big 'o Council and a 'tiny Council'
too.
>(hard to believe you would even be a party >to it... You could "lose your
shirt" over >that one)
I was the young man who thought that I could "fight the Council" against such
policies and *I* was asked to "transfer to another Council" because "I knew too
much about how things are SUPPOSED to happen, and not the way things WERE
happening in that Council".
>Wow! no professional chain of >command.... what a concept! (our DE,DD >and
Field Director do not agree though)
They don't operate under a "chain of command", J.W....there's a SUPERVISORY
CHAIN, which is fluid depending on the task at hand.
Without going too much off the "path" of this topic, professionals work for and
with someone depending on their roles. For instance, a District Executive in a
traditional District is supervised by a Field Director or by the Associate
Scout Executve or the Council Executive, depending on the size of the Council.
However, if he's serving as Camp Director, he "works for" the Council Executive
or the Associate Council Executive directly.
In a "plussed-up" District, a District Executive may be supervised by *another*
District Executive serving as either Senior District Executive, District
Executive multiple-person, or District Director. Again, he or she may be
managed directly by the senior Executive if his or her tasks are specific...for
instance, if he or she is the staff member assigned to manage the Council's
Camping program.
"Chains of Commands" went out two Chief Scout Executives ago...
We can both agree, however, that our professional managers know who "butters
their bread." *smiling*
Now, back to the topic at hand:
You stated:
>The root of this entire issue is that a
>Scoutmaster was ask to resign by the >CC. He did as was requested. Pretty
>much a done deal at that point isn't it?
Only that he wasn't ASKED to resign, he was TOLD to resign and he did so. I
don't think it's a done deal unless the COR TELLS him or INFORMS HIM (and his
wife) IN WRITING that "hey, we're sorry, but we're going with someone else..."
>This, I guess, could be the case in a very >small Council or with a very
"special" SE.
Larger Councils too, J.W., if that SE (Scout Executive) has a good relationship
with his chartered partner organizations.
>Why do you think the "average" DE would >be ill-equipped to deal with this
issue?... >or even better, why do you think that the >"average" Commissioner
would be better >prepared?
Think about the background of those two individuals, J.W....the Commissioner
has been a unit-level volunteer before, understands the "unit politics" and
understands the relationship between key Scouter and supporting Scouters.
Many professionals have NEVER been volunteers before, do not understand the
real politics which goes on in most units and which underlies who does what
when, and while they have a book knowledge of the relationships and how they
should work, most don't have a clue as to how those relationships should work.
>Further, I suspect that the "resignation" of >the Scoutmaster in a key unit or
"The >Family Feud" going on in a large unit
>could well have in impact on the "District >Operation"... and the DE's next
>promotion. I suspect that he would find >the time to help.
Only if drugged in by the volunteer.
>No one has actually been removed... A >Scoutmaster has been asked (and has
>agreed) to resign.
We disagree on this point; you say "has been asked" and I say "have been shown
the door and told to stay away."
>A "concerned parent" finds this unfair.
A "concerned parent" who is on the Troop's Committee and who was not informed
of the Scoutmaster's and fellow Troop Committeemember's removals.
Thanks...great discussion, J.W.!!
Settummanque!
settummanque, the blackeagle ((MAJ) Mike Walton)
Co-Owner/Marketing Leader kyblk...@aol.com
Rose Walton Personal Computing Coaching, Burnsville, MN
<URL::http://users.aol.com/rwcoaching/>
Be Prepared for Scouting's new Y2K pubs...get My Binder!!
J.W. Walker
news:20010619230318...@ng-cg1.aol.com...
What part of "The Comm Chairperson took it upon herself to contact the
sponsoring body and rec'd their authorization to make any changes" would
make you believe that the Chartered Organization Head was not informed?
> You stated in part:
> >No one has been removed form >membership. The Scoutmaster >"resigned".
> No, J.W...the Scoutmaster was *removed* and his registration as
Scoutmaster was
> *terminated*. This is why the Maintaining Standards of Membership booklet
> applies in this case. He didn't "resign," he was told by the Committee
Chair
> (reading the above and only having the above to go by) to "hit the
streets --
> we're getting a new Scoutmaster."
>
> >That is not the issue here. The >Scoutmaster was ask to resign his
>position
> by the Committee Chairman with >the concurrence of the Chartered
>Organization
> Head.
>
> No, not according to the information presented here: " She then demanded
the
> Scoutmaster for his immediate resignation and that of his wife (a comm
member)"
>
>
> There were no "asking" here, J.W....the Scoutmaster was TOLD that he would
be
> removed...
Weather the CC "demanded" or "ask" is actually irrelevant. The Scoutmaster
"agreed" to resign and he is not the one "complaining". Had he refused to
resign, it would be a different matter
> And as I wrote before, I do agree with you that this is a unit issue as
far as
> we can both read into it.
>
> >Actually, Unit membership IS controlled >by the Chartered Organization
Head.
>
> Agreed to the point that the Council utimately accepts or withdraws
membership
> from those they feel are unacceptable for membership.
>
> >There is no "appeal" either.
>
> Sure there's an appeal, J.W....that's what got us all going with this Dale
> thing, remember??
Dale did not "resign" from the BSA and the action was not taken by a Unit.
We have completely different issues here. If a Unit wants to disqualify an
applicant, the Chartered Origination Head can pretty much do what he wants.
> When a Unit Commissioner signs his or her signature that the standards of
the
> BSA have been met to the rechartering document, that's "certification",
J.W.
> Clear and simple.
Please quit adding words that are not there. The Commissioners role with the
recharter process is to make sure it is done on time. It can be submitted to
Council without the UC's signature.
> When a Unit Commissioner signs the Quality Unit committment form
representing
> the local Council, that's a certification that the standards met have been
> achieved or exceeded.
But that is not his function. He only processes the paperwork. It will "go
through" with or without a UC signature. If you are implying that a UC could
hold the Unit Charter ransom you would be very wrong.
> >The Commissioner is not responsible for >the content or even the accuracy
of
> the >charter renewal... only getting it in on >time which can be done with
or
> without >the Unit Commissioner.
>
> In some Councils, that's true. In many others, however, the Unit
Commissioner
> is responsible for 'spot checking' and verifying that the information
provided
> matches up with the applications and other data provided.
Again, you are trying to give the UC responsibilities he simply does not
have.
> >Any UC that "intentionally" harmed the
> >Unit he was assigned to assist would >likely wind up reassigned to Troop
666.
>
> Or "promoted" to Assistant District Commissioner or District Commissioner,
in
> the two cases I'm thinking of.
>
> Yeah, they should have been asked to see the door, but they weren't
because the
> "clique" in that particular Council chose to let it happen.
>
> >Hard to believe you would suggest it.
> I didn't suggest it, J.W....like I said, I've been there when it
> occurred....and it did happen both in a big 'o Council and a 'tiny
Council'
> too.
It sure appeared that you were offering that as a "viable option" to the
concerned Committee Member.... Again, I am sure that there is much more to
those issues too.
> >(hard to believe you would even be a party >to it... You could "lose your
> shirt" over >that one)
>
> I was the young man who thought that I could "fight the Council" against
such
> policies and *I* was asked to "transfer to another Council" because "I
knew too
> much about how things are SUPPOSED to happen, and not the way things WERE
> happening in that Council".
Since you know first hand that it is/was the "wrong" course of action why
did you bring it up at all? Wouldn't the original poster benefit more from
hearing about how it "should" happen than hearing about the exceptions.
Things must have been pretty strange for a SE to allow that to go on.
Sometimes it not so much what you know or even who you know but how you use
your knowledge and "connections" to solve a problem. Sorry you did not
prevail. their must have been a "good" reason.
> >Wow! no professional chain of >command.... what a concept! (our DE,DD
>and
> Field Director do not agree though)
>
> They don't operate under a "chain of command", J.W....there's a
SUPERVISORY
> CHAIN, which is fluid depending on the task at hand.
>
> "Chains of Commands" went out two Chief Scout Executives ago...
In our Council there is clearly both a "formal" and "informal" chain of
command. The DE plays a vital role in both. I would be very surprised to
find many Councils that did not work pretty much the same way.
Wow, we must live on different planets. In my experience, "most" UC's are
older Scouters that have pretty much "lost touch" with how the Unit
operates. They rely on "how we used to do it" and their training patch has
begun to fade. We also have a few Scouters that "think" they are qualified
and we have the few that are on a "power trip". AND we do have a few that
are very good and could definately help in the situation presented.
> Many professionals have NEVER been volunteers before, do not understand
the
> real politics which goes on in most units and which underlies who does
what
> when, and while they have a book knowledge of the relationships and how
they
> should work, most don't have a clue as to how those relationships should
work.
Our professionals, on the other hand, have been very well trained. Our
current DE is an Eagle Scout, our Senior DE was a volunteer and our Field
Director is an Eagle as well as a Cub parent. All bring a unique (but very
different) perspective the operation of our District. All would be well
prepared to handle the situation that was presented. I guess I though that
we were the norm and not the "exception". (yes, we once had a really bad DE
but we survived)
> >No one has actually been removed... A >Scoutmaster has been asked (and
has
> >agreed) to resign.
>
> We disagree on this point; you say "has been asked" and I say "have been
shown
> the door and told to stay away."
It really doesn't make any difference how he was "asked". The Scoutmaster
resigned. That is the end of the story. (Unless the Chartered Orgizination
Head "reverses" himself as we have discussed before)
(I think we are about to kill the horse, The Scoutmaster may have already
died of old age)
--
Jay Walker
wwwa...@ix.netcom.com
Settummanque MAJ Mike Walton
> It really doesn't make any difference how he was "asked". The Scoutmaster
> resigned. That is the end of the story. (Unless the Chartered Orgizination
> Head "reverses" himself as we have discussed before)
>
> (I think we are about to kill the horse, The Scoutmaster may have already
> died of old age)
*laughter* yeah...I agree, J.W...
I've seen a lot of and have been a part of several local Councils with
great Unit Commissioners and some really dogs and cats of some too.
Same goes with professionals (and as a former employee, I can say that
I've been a lot of places whereby "professional" doesn't describe some
of the actions (or inactions) of the guy or gal...
Your Council and the one I'm in now are good examples of how this all
should work...but our poster may be in a Council with poor to little
support if at all.
Again, great discussion!!
Settummanque!
HaVi KaNo
and their leaders but when you get power-hungry people in positions of
authority then let the mind games begin.
I found myself in a similar situation along with two other leaders. Our unit
changed COR's about every two years but we managed well and did not lack for
anything. Things ran smoothly and everyone got along. Then all of a sudden
here comes this domineering little Hitler with a Napoleon complex and his
wife. When he took the COR position he made it clear he did not have a clue
about Scouting and needed help but overnight he became a one-man sensation.
We began to have troubles like we never had. Most all committee meetings
became unpleasant as they wove their webs of deceit. We did have a committee
chair that he replaced with his wife without the committee knowing for
months, as the position was supposedly vacant. So we had the COR and his
wife as the CC. They would become very irritated if you ever went to the IH
without consulting them first because they were so temperamental to deal
with. It got to the point that it was hard to enjoy Scouting and focus on
the program because of their need to control every aspect. They would
question everything from why were parents needed to drive 15+ boys three
hours away to why we could not operate a troop off of $200.00-$300.00 a
year. The COR even refused to have the troop trailer's registration placed
in the charter organization's name. They nit-picked everything the leaders
tried to accomplish to pieces and never said anything good. It was always
why this and why that. Never once did we hear good job or thanks.
Too make a long story short they brought new committee members over from the
pack, whose boys were to join soon, stacking the deck and removed themselves
of us, the SM, ASM, and ASM by spoon feeding them lies. The majority of the
committee did not have a clue about Scouts as they had never been a Scout,
taken any training, or read any manuals. We got the shaft and were treated
like dirt. It was very painful and still is to this day.
Scouting should not be run like that at all. When you get people in
positions in Scouting that are not trained, refuse training, or using it as
a political agenda then you are bound to have problems. There are people
that do not stay abreast of the changes within Scouting yet they are the one
calling all the shots. To this day, I do not understand why Scouting units
are run like a huge business with a board of directors. After all, it mostly
made up of volunteers who give of their time and money. The committee is not
the ones out in the trenches with the Scouts in the rain, cold, and heat.
Nor are they there to comfort a very homesick boy during his first summer
camp experience. Yet the leaders are powerless and have no voting rights.
This about Scouting is unfair and unjust. Scout leaders deserve a voice and
not to be treated as an "employee".
Behaviors and attitudes such as this don't belong in Scouting but
unfortunately it happens. Adults should have to adhere to the Scout Oath and
Law too.
Virginia Gillam
Russ Mawson
I understand your frustration! No Scouting should not be done in that
fashion. I can only say that in Our Council Area we have what we call
Unit Commissioners who are assigned by Coucil to help correct any of
these problems. Unit Commissioners are trained to handle just these
kinds of problems. You can not do it alone. Get with your Council HQ
and ask them to have a Unit Commissioner Review your Troop.
You have a real problem here that needs to be corrected. Dictatorship
is not a Scouting form of Leadership. You owe it to your young men to
be firm and resolve this issue. Using a Unit Commissioner is my only
suggestion to resolve power plays within Units.
Yours In Scouting
Russ Mawson UC Gulfstream Council Florida