From: Paul S. Wolf (Paul.S.Wolf@ALUM.WPI.EDU)
Date: Wed Jun 28 2000 - 12:06:59 CDT
I'm forwarding this at Kip's behest. I deleted some of my (and other's)
earlier comments, to reduce the amount of repetitive quotes.
=======================
Kip Keil wrote:
I still can't post to the list because my address remains in flux. I
would like to add to your comments the following, and ask if you would
consider forwarding it to the list on my behalf. TIA!
Paul is correct in his assessment, below. I would only add that
circumstances or conditions might exist in which the SM feels he must
limit the work on a project to two-hour blocks. This could be due to
safety or health considerations.
Nevertheless, if legitimate reasons exist to limit work to two hours,
the SM must be proactive in limiting work -- not just credit for work --
to two hours. And if the project requires six hours per participant to
complete, then the SM needs to see to it that he approves three two-hour
projects in keeping with the demands of safety and health.
YiS
Kip
On Tue, 27 Jun 2000, Paul S. Wolf wrote:
> A blanket "You only get 2 hours credit" rule would be a violation of
> the rules.
>
> If the Scoutmaster KNOWS at the start, that to do the project with the
> number of people anticipated to be there should take a certain length
> of time, then tells a boy, "I expect you to be there for the entire
> project, yet will only count 2 hours toward the service time
> requirement.", he is wrong, and violates the intent in the clause
> about giving prior approval. He is approving the PROJECT, not the
> length of time needed to do the project.
>
> I agree that not counting the work if a Scout loafs for 5.75 hours out
> of 6 is permissible. That's a case of "A Scout is Trustworthy."
>
> However, if he works for 45 minutes then takes a break for 15 minutes
> every hour, on a 6 hour project that involves manual labor, I would
> count all 6 hours, not just the 4.5 hours actually spent laboring.
