johnponz

Awww Q this is where we disagree and our arguments will not reconcile. The "shareholders" of BSA are the chartered organizations not the volunteers. National exists to service and represent the chartered organizations not the volunteers. Most of the volunteers do not even have formal ties to National, they work for the individual units or individual chartered organizations. BSA is a non-profit organization and operates as such. For some reason everyone thinks of it more like a government that represents all of the people.

As I said in a previous post, looking at the BSA as a government is not the right way, and to look it rules, regulation and policies as laws is also comparing apples to oranges. The closer analogy is a business one. When the Board speaks, and it comes through a company's president in general the rest of the employees fall into line, and for the ones who don't fall into line, they leave. It is the reality of working in a corporate environment. The BSA is organized in such a way. However, it is much harder to ask someone to leave because the "employees" for the most part are volunteer

The Executive Board are volunteers too, not paid.

I am very excited. I will be attending WB weekend 1 this coming weekend starting Friday, August 24.

I explained this in a previous thread but will do it here again. The National Executive Board really does not represent the interests of the volunteers. Their job is to represent the interests of the Chartered Organizations. Think of the Chartered Organizations as stockholders and the Executive Board as the Board of Directors in a for profit corporation, the more units that a chartered organization charters the greater their influence. This is why CORs get votes at the Council Executive Board level. They are the group that really controls things within BSA, and the Executive Board r

For me this is a true big picture philosophical issue. It comes down to does the ends justify the means. My answer is no. For me it is the process that "builds character" not the results. This is particularly important when working with youth whose characters are still developing. By picking and choosing which rules to follow, you are saying that you as an individual know more than the BSA as a group. This is often manifested by comments such as "they" do not know what "they" are doing. Guess what by choosing to belong to the organization, "they" are "us" if BSA is to have any meaning.

I am not going to file a complaint nor do I want to. I really do not operatew like that. However, I do believe National puts these rules into place for a reason, and I encourage my Units to follow the rules so I do so as well. We have problems recruiting Commissioners just like everyone else but still choose to follow the rules. We want to make a good example for our Units and Youth. When I am talking to Unit leaders about getting their Charters in on time because that is what we need them to do, they know that I am coming from the high ground. I am probably going to be the DC next y

This is the definition of an Ordinary "In those hierarchically organised churches of Western Christianity which have an ecclesiastical law system, an ordinary is an officer of the church who by reason of office has ordinary power to execute the church's laws."

Again if district and council scouters will not follow the rules who will? Believe it or not part of a commissioner's job is supporting these rules and policies.(This message has been edited by Johnponz)

"Rarely is the Pastor the final say in a Church. There are usually governing boards that have the ultimate authority, including firing the Pastor." This is not true in the Roman Catholic Church. You have to go to the local ordinary (Bishop) to overrule the Pastor. Good luck with that!(This message has been edited by johnponz)

I can't believe it, but I actually agree 100% with BadenP

Again, the rule is clear a Commissioner (any Commissioner) must not be a Unit Leader. This is in the Fieldbook of Commissioner Service and you can follow this link to verify it. http://scouting.org/scoutsource/Commissioners.aspx To quote, "Commissioners must not be registered simultaneously as unit leaders. Some commissioners may be registered on a unit committee because they have a son in the unit or because of previous personal history in the unit, but their principle Scouting obligation should be with commissioner responsibilities. Commissioners may be currently registered in only one co

The language in the Field Manual for Commissioners (see above) is unambiguous in this regard. The language used is "must not." This is about as clear as it gets. Later on in the Field Manual, "Unit Leader" is defined as the Unit Leader and the various leaders that assists him/her, e.g. ASM, ACM, DL, etc. (this is paraphrased). The only leaders not excluded from a Commissioner position is a MC or a CC. Otherwise, it is a "stand alone" position as it probably should be. Some Councils and Districts choose not to follow the rules, and, frankly, shame on them. How can they expect indi

Double post. The forum has been acting weird lately(This message has been edited by johnponz)

Consistency of thought is important as it helps to avoid the hypocrite label which to me is about as bad as it gets, but we do all have our own value systems.

double post(This message has been edited by johnponz)

The uniform guide exists for a reason, and I believe we should try to follow it. That being said if someone knows the rules and chooses to break them, not much we can do. Scouts are required to be obedient by the Scout Law but there is no punishment if you're not. It is just a matter of honor. However that should not stop someone from going up to a person and letting them know what the rules are (my assumption is that they do not know the rule if they are breaking it, and I just want to inform them so they can fix it if they want to. This is being courteous, kind and friendly). In th

This thread about the BSA President eliminating the ban on gays really took a wrong left turn somewhere.

SP, For some reason I think you got me all wrong. I am actually a fairly religious person, but I understand that you cannot rationally explain a belief in something that you cannot see or measure. You simply have to BELIEVE, and there is nothing wrong with that. There is nothing wrong with having faith. It has gotten me through some really tough patches in my life, and I am certain that there is a God. I was just trying to explain how BSA is organized and why I think that the organization is unlikely to change its collective mind anytime soon. I really think a lot of people asso

I would never quote Rush Limbaugh in a conversation like this . He is hardly an expert in anything. However, your comment makes me chuckle a little as it brings us full circle to the point that made people a little crazy. If you do not like the policy, leave. This is probably the single best thing you can do if you really want to "force" the organization to change. I am really not for sure where BSA gets most of its money from though. I have a feeling most of it comes from corporate sponsors so leaving may not have as much of a financial impact as you believe. Additionally, we do not kn

BadenP, I believe we basically agree as to process. You are right that the Executive Board must use National's list which is what I meant in my post by the word "certify." However, I believe the answer by the SE as to who he works for would depend on the SE. Ours is adamant that he works for the Council, and I will bet that North Star's SE would say the same thing.

I really do not want to get into it with Baden P. However, I was just involved in the process as a volunteer, and the Council Executive Board hires the SE who is a Council employee. You do have to hire someone from a list that national provides, and the person's boss on the professional side is the Area Director (this is what the corporate world would call a matrix reporting relationship-the SE has 2 bosses). The SE reports to the Council President and the Executive Board of the Council (on the local side). This is spelled out on the following two websites from 2 different counci

The SE is a Council employee, but National "certifies" the individuals who are eligible for this position so I suppose they could take away that certification, and a new SE would have to be found. They also can hold the charter over the Council's head. National could say that the Council cannot recharter as long as the current SE is there. Finally, National could just refuse to recharter the Council which means no insurance, no advancement, etc. They could also "Black ball" the current employees in that Council so they could work in no other Council in professional positions.

In the business world, who votes and has the say at annual meetings of stockholders? Of course, it is the stockholder. The "ultimate customer" does not get a vote. If you do not own stock, it does not matter that you are a customer of Comcast and have TV, phone and internet service through them. Same with BSA, the ultimate customer does not get a vote at these meetings. There is a difference between Comcast and BSA though. BSA (I believe-I do not know the numbers for sure) gets the bulk of their funding through corporate sponsors. The sponsors get a tax break for the donation.

"That's really the crux of the matter, Beav. The BSA is not your club. It's not my club. It's an organization for the youth we serve." The above statement is not really true. The Chartering Organizations are the real customers and "shareholders [think stock]" of National. The "Ultimate Customer" is the youth membership, but National's direct customer is the Chartering Organization. There is no doubt in this fact. National, Region, Area, Council and District are all there to support the Chartered Organizations. These Chartering Organizations are the entities who really run the BSA, an