NJCubScouter

The concept of a "waiting list" to join Scouting is something new to me. In the BSA membership is handled on a unit-by-unit basis, so on a nationwide basis I am not sure how we would even know whether there was a "shortage" of volunteers nationwide (or even within a council) to the point where kids were on a "waiting list". There are certainly units that have folded or merged due to a lack of leaders, and it has always been my impression that the remaining units just grow to accommodate those who were displaced. But I suppose it is analogous to my neighboring council that went out of business - if one council or unit folds, the neighbors can pick up the slack, but if it keeps happening, at some point there are no neighbors left within a practical distance. As for why more people don't volunteer, the "time" issue is the one I always hear about. As others have said, it is often an excuse for the person having other priorities. I don't think I have ever heard anyone say they would not volunteer out of concern for being "accused of something." There may have been a stray comment or two about that in these forums over the years, but the ones I recall specifically really related more to insurance.

Copying a parent or another leader on a text or email, or some other way of making the communication not be "one on one" with a youth, is now required under the BSA YP guidelines anyway.

"So I says to Bob, I says..."

What I meant was that the "1%" are NOT being marginalized. That's why you don't have to worry about it.

The BSA seems to have confidence in us unit Scouters to handle the situation, should it ever arise, in a common-sense manner.

If you are talking about the 1% I think you're talking about, i.e. the richest 1% in the country, I don't think anyone needs to worry about them being marginalized. They do just fine. References to the "1%" are generally motivated by a desire that they leave something for the other 99% of us. And yes, it is a "horrid" idea to marginalize "3% more of another group", when that group is vulnerable to being marginalized. The difference is between a group that has political power and one that doesn't.

Or we could just follow the "role model" set by National, and give the kids conflicting advice until one day we suddenly stop giving them any advice at all, hand them a Code of Conduct they've never seen or heard of before, and then claim that some (but not all, and don't tell them which is which) of the previous advice was just an April Fool's joke.

Quite often inexperienced Scouters, non-registered volunteers and parents come into this forum to tell us about various issues and to seek advice. Often the advice from some in this forum (sometimes including me) is along the lines of "find another pack/troop". I can understand this when we are talking to someone who has no power to change anything, such as when it is "just" a parent and nobody is listening to them. But I am having a difficult time reconciling this advice with the fact that RMI2.0 is the committee chair. So, RMI2.0, I have already given you some advice that is a little different - to consider becoming Cubmaster - and now I am going to give a little more. Take charge. (That sounds like a command, but what I am really suggesting is that you consider doing these things and do them if you think it is a good idea.) You are chair of the body that is responsible for making sure the pack has proper leadership. You have a Cubmaster who is not doing his job. Try to find a new one, whether it be yourself or someone else, and if it is yourself, find a new CC. If you think the pack treasurer is not doing a good job, suggest to her, politely and courteously, what needs to be fixed. If it doesn't get fixed, keep in mind that the treasurer is a committee member (or at least she should be), meaning she reports to YOU. If the den leaders, committee members and parents are ignoring your emails, that is a bit more difficult to fix since you can't replace everybody. Maybe you should have a "mandatory parent meeting" including all leaders and parents. You have a good opening to do so, since you are still a "new" CC. Before the meeting, make sure people understand that they really need to be there. At the meeting, ask whether people prefer different ways of communicating, and try to accommodate them if it is not too much of a burden. Tell them that unless everybody pulls together and starts doing their job, and communicating properly, and/or new people step up to do the jobs of those who aren't, the pack will not survive. If it turns out that they really don't care, well at least you tried. Then you can move on, but at least you tried. (Of course, you can move on now if you want, this is just some friendly advice.)

What kind of "big events" and "big activities"? I also want to address the word "they", as in "somewhere along the way they decided..." Who is "they"? Are "they" even there anymore? You are the CC now. You and the other committee members and leaders are now "they". If the pack is not having pack meetings as defined in the Cub Scout Leader Handbook (or whatever it is called now) - and I say "if" because I don't know what your "big events" and "big activities" are - then the committee can direct the Cubmaster to conduct proper pack meetings. Although as I said before, from one of your posts it sounds to me like your Cubmaster is not actually doing that job and probably has no interest in doing so.

Well, for all I know, the BSA policy on consuming alcohol may now be the same as it is in the UK. Or not. I used to know what the BSA alcohol policy was, but then about 2 months ago the BSA issued a new version of the Guide to Safe Scouting with an "updated" and "rewritten" section on alcohol. It was discussed and linked here: http://scouter.com/index.php/topic/28807-updated-guide-to-safe-scouting/?hl=%2Bguide+%2Bsafe+%2Bscouting. They took a reasonably clear and specific policy and basically changed it to "follow the policies of the BSA on this subject." Well, what is the policy? WHERE is the policy? I don't know. As someone else stated in that other thread, the G2SS now refers to the new "Scouter Code of Conduct" (which I have other issues with, but that would be a different thread) but the "Code" basically says the same thing. It refers to a policy that is somewhere else. I don't know where it is. Does anybody know? What I had been hoping was that the BSA would revise the poorly-written, confusing, weaselly-worded policy on smoking tobacco (which has been discussed in this forum a number of times over the years) and change it to something similar to the (old) policy on alcohol. Something along the lines of, "No Smoking." (I realize some here may differ, but that's my view.) Instead, they left the smoking policy as it was, and "updated" the policy on alcohol to remove the actual policy. I don't get it.

RMI2.0, your post suggests that you have run a number of pack meetings in place of the Cubmaster. It also strongly suggests that the Cubmaster is not even coming close to doing his job. It sounds to me like maybe you are the right person to be Cubmaster. Have you thought about switching from Committee Chair to Cubmaster, and and simultaneously finding another adult in the pack to be CC to replace you? Maybe the CM would welcome the suggestion that he step down. Of course, you would need the approval of the Charter Org. Rep. (or Institution Head) for these changes. So you have at least three options: You can quit, or you can withdraw into your den as Stosh suggests, or you can try to shake things up and turn the pack around. If you choose the latter, I think the first thing you need is a real Cubmaster, which might be you.

There already is one: Equipment reviews and discussions. Well, technically it is a sub-forum of this forum (Camping and High Adventure) but I don't see how it would make a difference. It's just a little more difficult to find than a main forum.

That's kind of what I figured.

Maybe you should suggest that to national, and let us know what you hear back.

How would the policy have to read to make things "equal", in your opinion?

If your "other half" is of the opposite sex, yes.

The Guide to Safe Scouting, apparently the current version (http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/34416.pdf) says: (It's on Page 2 of the Guide, which is the 11th page in the PDF file.)

Can we please limit this thread to trying to help EagleonFire? Discussions of whether councils are good or bad should be in a separate thread, and in most cases should probably be in Council Relations. Discussions of who people might or might not be showering with who should, I guess, be in Issues and Politics.

Moving this to the Advancement section, though I am not sure whether there is anything more to say on the subject, since we already seem to be getting into let-me-tell-you-how-it-was-40-years-ago territory.

Col. Flagg, for crying out loud, this thread has been open for just about 7 hours. By the standards of this forum, the horse hasn't even been born yet. A Scout is Patient. (Another one they didn't have room for.)

We don't normally close threads just because a question has been answered. Or at least, I don't. We let the discussion end of its own accord, and if people want to keep talking about something, there's no accord.

Well, I am not sure the obstacle has been avoided. Is the troop "soliciting" the donation of the funds from the club? If so, that's not permitted, right? Well, unless the club is also the CO. You have to be able to solicit funds from your own CO, right? (Although in my troop, I think the CO has in the past solicited funds from us. Don't ask, it's a long story.)

I would say that's true, either the number of adults, or the amount of adult time spent. When I was Assistant Cubmaster I probably spent half my time helping the Tiger Den Leaders, recruiting new Tiger Den Leaders, learning enough about the "new" Tiger program* to help the leaders, etc. etc. *When my son was a Tiger (1998-99 I guess) there was no Tiger handbook, there was just a packet of materials. By the time I was an ACM and trying to help the Tiger leaders, there was a handbook, so in order to help them effectively, I had to read it, or at least skim it. In effect, it was a new program.

Calico, well that is what it means, anyway. But the way it is written in the quote in the original post, it could be misinterpreted so that the "or" after "one who has completed the fifth grade" breaks the connection between the "and" and "one who has completed the fifth grade". The way it is written on the application (which I quoted above) avoids this problem by using the phrase "and is at least 10 years old" twice, so there is no question what it connects to.

It's not just a matter of cleaning up wording, it's a matter of using the same wording everywhere, which they apparently don't do now.