Announcement Announcement Module
No announcement yet.
OA officer insignia Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
- Sep 2006
I've seen it written in several places (pdfs for Lodge leadership and the handbook, I think?) that the advisers and chiefs are involved with camping promotions committees and members of the committee. I'll have to dig out the material tonight.
I have to agree with Calico as well. Even if OA youth are invited to council camp committee meetings or council exec meetings it is as a guest not a voting member. I remember this coming up when I was at NEI 1 (DE Training) in Texas on a session about the OA the National rep said that youth officers could only be honorary members of any council committee with no voting rights. What happens on a council level though is anybodys guess.
The national literature, which I quoted in my first response, says the LC is a member of the council camping or Boy Scout committee, and the CC is a member of the district committee. Nothing in the literature says they are honorary members.
Pg. 8 of the Guide for Officer and Adviser on pg. 8 states
The lodge adviser and lodge chief (emphasis mine) serve as members of the council camping or Boy Scout committee, while the chapter adviser and chapter chief (emphasis mine)serve on the district camping or Boy Scout committee.
Pg 11 states
The lodge must work closely with district and council Boy Scout or camping committees in carrying out the council camping promotion plans. The lodge adviser and lodge chief are members of the council camping or Boy Scout committee, and chapter advisers and their chiefs become members of their respective district committees. (emphasis mine) The camping committee is responsible for camping promotion. It is not the role of the Order of the Arrow to assume total responsibility for camping promotion, but rather to give full support to the entire council and district camping program. This includes monthly unit camping as well as resident camp.
pg 13 talks about the Where to Go Camping book and how it is discussed at the Camping committee meeting.
More later(This message has been edited by Eagle92)
Pg 17 Under THE KEY 3 TEAM FOR LODGE ADMINISTRATION it states under Lodge Chief
1. Elected from the youth membership of the lodge. Responsible to the Scout executive through the lodge adviser and staff adviser for performance of duties. Becomes a member of the council camping or Boy Scout committee. emphasis mine
2. Responsible for adherence to the program and policies of the lodge. Attends appropriate council, section, regional, and national OA functions.
So since he IS a member of the Council Camping or Boy Scout Committee, he needs to attend them.
Also if you look on the chart on p35, it looks as if the LC and LA are part of the Camping Committee or BS Committee.
I hate to say it, but it looks as if some councils are not running the OA lodge like they are suppose to and have the LC on the committee.
NEI-1, man I thought I was old Things do change over time. Heck I know that have changed a lot since I attended.
Why I agree with you, the question I have is this: why are there OA Lodge Adviser, Lodge AA, Chap. Adv. and Chap. AA POR patches, but none for youth when the OA is suppose to be a youth run organization?
We all know that if those folks do their job right, it can be a heck of a lot harder than being a PL and SPL, at least in my expereince. The other question is, if there are council and district level youth patches for Venturing, why not for the OA?
Not trying to argue with ya, and I hope my tone express that, but I think this could be a good discussion.
One more question, and this is for everyone: Why would you NOT want a youth voice on the Council Camping or Boy Scout Committee and the District Committee? The program is suppose to be for them, they probably have a better understanding than we give them credit for.
- Aug 2005
Eagle - that's a good question - why "POR" patches for advisors, and not for Lodge/Chapter Officers. I suspect a large part of it is that for the adults, being a Lodge Advisor or Chapter Advisor is their primary position. Lodge/Chapter Officers are not primary positions. The primary positions of youth members of the OA is the positions they hold in their units. If you are over 18 and an ASM - ASM is your primary position. Even if you are a youth with no primary position in your unit, you're primary position is still with your unit. Remember, an OA members primary responsibility is to their unit - and in the OA, even though youth membership is under 21 - you can't be a youth member of the OA without being part of a unit.
- Nov 2010
Again I ask does anyones home lodge do this. If they are on the committee do they get the committee patch and silver loops?
Even if you are a youth with no primary position in your unit, you're primary position is still with your unit.
I know this is the way it's supposed to be, and the way the literature describes it, but let's look at it realistically.
A good lodge chief puts a ton of time into his job. There's the planning of 3, 4 or more weekend-long events a year (inductions weekends, service weekends, fellowship weekends, or all combined) - council committee membership - appointing committee members - representing the lodge at non-OA events like council awards banquets, etc. - overseeing service projects - organizing a lodge leadership development conference - overseeing summer camp activities - talking regularly with his advisers, officers, committee chairmen and chapter chiefs - attending conclaves or NOAC ...
It all adds up to a lot of work, and a lot of time that young man is spending away from his troop.
My thinking has somewhat shifted on this - but I now believe that perpetuating the fiction that a lodge chief is able to hold down that job and be an active member of his unit does a disservice to those young men and their leadership. It may be possible for a few very dedicated young men - but from my own experience, as only a mere lodge vice-chief, attending troop meetings and going on campouts was the first thing to fall by the wayside. We don't pretend that the lodge adviser should be a SM or ASM. Let the lodge chief have a position patch and recognize his service like we do for the adults.
Now, that said, in my lodge the chief wears a special beaded necklace passed down from chief to chief. He's the only one who wears it, so everyone knows who he is. It looks sharp, too. So there are other options available.
- May 2008
In our lodge, the Lodge Chief wears the "Council Executive Committee" and silver loops. The Vice-Chiefs do not.
I think Shortridge hit it on the head....in our lodge we have six weekend-long events not counting LLD, Winter Banquet, Day of Service, Section Conclave, Regional/National Events (Like NOAC, Summit Corp, Indian Summer), and we have a very active Section with lots of CoCs and weekend-long planning sessions.
A good chief in an active lodge has his hands full.
Most of the CAs I know have held double duty, being ASMs, that was me for a brief time, or SMs, although only 2 have I met. LAs I've known have usually been just that, although I have met a few that were also ASMs, and 1 that was an SM. Don't know how he did it.
And Short did hit it on the head. Most LC I know unfortunately don't get to spend as much time with their troop as they would like. Esp. the college age ones. In fact I knew of 1 college age LC that hadn't seen a member of his troop until he went to an Ordeal weekend and saw several of them.
LCs have a heck of a lot of responsibilities and duties, more than most folks their age IMHO.
But again my question to everyone is: Why would you NOT want a youth's voice on a council committee or district committee?
I'll ignore that old crack,there has been no change in this policy, but because that is the way it is done in your council does not mean it is the same nationwide. In my current lodge the youth are allowed to sit on the camping committee meetings but are not allowed to vote per the SE who stated it is against National rules, his words not mine. Second, an OA handbook is hardly a reputable source for Nationals policies regarding council committees or policies, so I guess we will have to agree to disagree.
It's the Guide for Officers and Advisers, which is a nationally produced publication, and it's mentioned in multiple places. If that's not the way it's done in your council, I'd say your council is the one out of whack. As the Supreme Chief of the Fire, the Scout Executive should be following the rules - or taking steps to have them changed across the country.
The old comment was meant as a joke, my apologies if offended.
Apparently not everyone does follow the Guide to Officers and Advisers. I did a quick search on OA lodge chief and council camping committee and found this when talking about the same thing we are right now on http://central.oa-bsa.org/burningissues/
The only person on your LEC that could wear silver tabs is probably your Lodge Chief only if he was allowed a spot on the Council's Camping Committee- even then he should ware a position patch identifying his involvement with the Council.
BUT Western region OA's website in their sample LODGE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM VISITATION REPORT states that the LC should be on the Council Camping committee.
One lodge website had in their by-laws that the LC i. Is a member of the Council Camping Committee. http://www.shenshawpotoo.org/documents/conandby.pdf
But another only mentions the Lodge lay adviser being a member of the council camping committee
So as usual ALL SCOUTING IS LOCAL.
But my question still remains unanswered: Why would you NOT want a youth on the committee? They are the users; the program is suppose to be for them; they know probably better than some folks who are on the council committee what is needed, what will work, etc.
- Aug 2010
When I was Lodge Chief (95-96), I was invited to a meeting with the Scout Executive. In that meeting, he explained how he had delegated his Supreme Chief of the Fire duties to the council program director, but that he was interested in the program running well. We discussed the plans I had as Chief and what he'd like the OA's camping focus to be, since we were in the process of building a new camp. At the end of the meeting, he said "I'd like to invite you to be a member of the councl executive board", which my Adviser later told me was pretty much a formality as the LC and EAA president were always asked to be. I was considered to be the youth representitive to the board, and was alone in that role, since the EAA president declined the position. I had 2 uniforms, one of which was my troop uniform, red loops and "experienced" Vigil sash, which was worn to all OA events. When I went to board meetings, I wore the board patch, silver loops and a pristine sash.
I wasn't considered to be a part of the council camping committee, but if I recall correctly that's because I declined the position due to the meeting conflicting with my class schedule at the time. My Adviser was a non-voting member, because the idea was I would be the member with him there to advise me, rather than another voting memeber, to prevent conflict of interest.
As Eagle92 showed in his last post there is definitely a difference in what is happening at the council level nationwide. Shortridge the OA handbook applies only to the running of the lodge, NOT the council, even if it says the OA chief should be or is supposed to be a member of any council committee National policy is that the SE is the one to make that call, no one else. There are many examples of contradictions in BSA literature but the National policy is that council committee membership is the purview of the SE and Exec. members of the council. Personally it does not matter to me whether or not the lodge chief is or is not a member of the camping committee, but the OA handbook is not the final authority in the matter.
Eagle92 quoted from the Guide for Officers and Advisers (not the OA Handbook), which comes from National. What's your source, other than your own experience? Where is it written that the SE dictates who sits on council committees?
I'm not challenging, just questioning. I usually prefer to go with documents over someone's say-so.