Jump to content

    • This is complicated by the fact that while on paper BSA assigns responsibility to COs, in practice it does not ensure those responsibilities are being carried out. Every council is different, so there may be some where COs were more conscientiously  supervised and had their charters pulled for lack of unit supervision, but that would never happen in my area because it would result in lost units and membership. BSA in my experience does not care if the CO has any role in the operations of the unit. It knowingly abdicates this oversight responsibility. 
    • Good point. The CO could easily read the charter with "blah blah blah.... we will have liability coverage to keep you safe. Ok! I'll sign."
    • That's exactly why COs are so confused about their role with BSA. With most other organizations the relationship is simply one of benign support. We also have church chartered units and the pastors know a couple of people in the organization, generally the person who comes and asks them to sign something, but they know no one else. Most of the CORs are that in name only and don't belong to the congregation. There no longer is any connection between the congregations and the unit. This isn't an issue for any other organization because they are not looking for the CO to hold a supervisory role. The reality is that the scouting model is vastly different for the CO and a supervisory role is indeed required, it's just not recognized as such. That this responsibility isn't highlighted and better emphasized is due to the conflict that BSA has had in maintaining membership numbers at all costs.     
    • I have to laugh at some naïveté amongst the local councils When the tort lawyers finish with the National Council, they will rank order the local councils from richest to poorest. They’re going to come after the richest councils, and they will do their damndest to break any covenants on gifts that they can.    Mark my words. 
    • I agree that BSA's model is not much better or worse than other youth organizations at this time.  However, times have changed and I expect many youth serving organizations are going to have to evaluate their policies.  Why?  Insurance coverage.  Insurance companies will see the billions of dollars from the BSA lawsuit and increase their rigor when insuring youth organizations. One example form below.  This is from an insurance company to buy sex abuse insurance for your organization.  You can see in their questionnaire, they ask for details on how you vet volunteers.  BSA does not do (picture IDs, personal interviews, personal references checked (we list them, how often checked), 5 years of employment history checked).  In fact, for volunteers, we only tick off 1 of the boxes listed.  Then look at background checks ... I don't think any one of us has been fingerprinted.   https://www.greatamericaninsurancegroup.com/docs/default-source/specialty-human-services/abuse.pdf?sfvrsn=b79271b1_4 So, I expect the BSA bankruptcy to have a major impact on all youth organizations.  Organizations will have a choice going forward. Drop their youth programming (see NMRA (https://www.nmra.org/nmra-risk-persons-policy).  Greatly increase their rigor on adding employees & volunteers, likely enforced through insurance company contracts Go without insurance (typically no assets, small groups) BSA's current model of having a CO sign off on volunteers is likely going to be questioned by their insurance companies going forward (and COs as well).  Someone will need to vet, interview, call references, etc.      
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • Create New...