Council Relations
Discuss issues relating to Scout Councils, districts and working with professionals
678 topics in this forum
-
- 45 replies
- 10.3k views
-
- 8 replies
- 1.6k views
-
- 14 replies
- 1.8k views
-
- 10 replies
- 1.4k views
-
- 16 replies
- 2.8k views
-
- 2 replies
- 984 views
-
- 3 replies
- 1.1k views
-
- 0 replies
- 816 views
-
- 6 replies
- 1.1k views
-
- 5 replies
- 1.6k views
-
- 20 replies
- 2.6k views
-
- 9 replies
- 1.4k views
-
- 3 replies
- 1k views
-
- 11 replies
- 2.2k views
-
- 3 replies
- 1.1k views
-
LATEST POSTS
-
By sierracharliescouter · Posted
We have one like this in our troop. Kid just likes doing the stuff he likes to do in scouts and doesn't care about the patches. Doesn't come to regular weekday meetings often, but is usually on the hikes and camp outs. He has the skills, I see him use them regularly, just doesn't feel like going through the motions for the sign offs. He's happy. Parents are happy. Other kids and adults like him and his parents. I have no doubt he lives by the Oath and Law. -
By E V Augustine · Posted
Council does have a Unit Safety Director on staff. I have never seen or heard any indication of a Council Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) Committee. After a cursory read of the cited document, it does present a broad risk assessment algorithm and fortunately specifies the involvement of subject matter experts. Rather than ponder the risks of a developing and instituting a camp driver training program I returned to the concerns stated in my posts. Lake Erie Council has a mandatory policy that summer camp staff tow troop trailers over owned land to the respective troop campsite. Vehicles used are owned by the adult staff performing the work. This amounts to towing 75 - 100 trailers owned by as many different entities. As the troop trailers are in the temporary custody and control of Council employees this circumstance creates a bailee liability for Council. Generally this form of insurance coverage in not included in general commercial liability policies. I would expect this matter could be addressed by a phone call to Council's insurance carrier. The annual premium might be more than a few loads of gravel. -
So many things get in the way of real continuity. For our unit, early on it was job issues with the chosen individual suddenly being moved and a fortunate replacement stepping up. That resulted is a few decades of solid leadership, but in reality it was up t half a dozen doing the lifting with one at the paper apex. He and his number one ASM received the first two SB awards in our council in the 30's. Sam the SM noted then that they were in reality co-SM's. WWII brought strong step ups to help, and then Sam" son came back and stepped in for a long period. He was forced out due to adults feeling his approach was too outdated. Lots of turmoil and loss of focus, and it almost killed the unit. Finally a steady hand stepped in to level the waves. I was put in the spot against my preference at the time due to personal issues and my job, yet somehow am still there, but now a paper figurehead with others working to keep us afloat. I was forced out due to a stroke and another major issue, and our unit family discovered that issue of poor planning. We now struggle for outdoor options, but we have a few dedicated adults to hold us afloat, though none are outdoor people in the sense of consistent hiking and camping, which had been our focus for most of our history. The history, over a century is a factor though. So we struggle on and I encourage them from the pedestal they put me on and try to find some younger outdoor types, hopefully maybe even past alumni. We also struggle with the Methodist challenge since the lawsuit. Going into year 104 and hopefully can cement the history in place and use it to draw some new true outdoor Scouting adults. Should add that service has Always been a factor for our units, and that is part of its success. Also, still fewer than a hundred Eagles, so we cannot be accused of that often difficult focus. -
By InquisitiveScouter · Posted
There is a mechanism already in place... 1. Scout tells parents they would like a new Scoutmaster, and articulates GOOD reasons for it. Parents tell committee: committee evaluates and takes action, with advice and consent of COR. 2. Scout tells Boards of Review they think they'd like a new Scoutmaster, and articulates GOOD reasons for it. (BoR is made of Committee Members and parents.) Committee evaluates and takes action, with advice and consent of COR. Although I understand the sentiment, youth must not make the decision of who should be Scoutmaster. (Inmates running the asylum and all ) To implement this would mean an abdication of responsibility by COR and Troop Committee. Unfortunately, reality is often that the Scoutmaster is simply the person with a pulse who said they'd do the job. In 45+ years of Scouting, I've never seen a unit with a decent succession plan. Still looking for that unicorn. (Yes, I have failed to get this accomplished in many a unit. If I was allowed to be the benevolent dictator, things would have been different.) -
I don't know that I would call it "woke". Seems like democracy is a foundation of the country. As qwazse said, they can vote with their feet. That's probably a less desirable outcome than having a mechanism whereby the Scouts can decide they want a new adult leader.
-
-
Who's Online (See full list)
- There are no registered users currently online