Twocubdad

Ask your local UW capo if they heard about what happened to the UW over in Charlotte. Several years ago there was a scandal regarding the executive director's salary and benefits. But once that crack developed and the emperor was revealed to have no clothes, the house of cards came down. There were a number of news stories about the overall dissatisfaction with the UW and, in particular, the sort of strong-arm tactics and intimidation BD is talking about. There were other stories pointing out the the shell game played with designated donations that Pack212 mentioned. The employers in the area finally realized they really were on the hook for lawsuits like camiam threatened and pulled the plug. The first year after this all hit the fan I think donations were off by two-thirds. The campaign still struggles and raises about half what it did in its hayday. Good. I won't give them a thin dime. Fortunately, being self-unemployed, I dont' have to put up with the junk BD does. UW is a shakedown racket. If you want to let other people decide which charities your money should go to, then UW is for you. Otherwise, send a check directly to the charity of you choice. Let me add that I grew up supporting the UW. My dad held every possible position in UW here from rank-and-file campaign worker to campaign chairman to chairman of the board of directors. Early on, I always contributed at work and even volunteered to help with the campaign at one job. The con-job with directed contributions really ticked me off and later, when I learned how Scouting was being treated by the UW, I finally said no more.

Do people do this in your area? Sign their emails with their entire Scouting resume? Sincerely, Joe Blow ASM, Troop 1 Troop Guide, Wood Badge S4-12 NYLT ASM Vice Chapter Adviser District Asst. Training Chairman I'm waiting for someone to come up with a little electronic square knots they can add to the bottom of emails. Sheeeesh

I suppose we're past discussing stuff like the fact that the Cubmaster should be running the B&G program, not the CC, huh? I also think you missed a couple great opportunities here: "You know, you understand this schedule thing so much better than I do and you present yourself so eloquently, I think you ought to talk to Mr. Trustee Chairman directly. Here, let me get him on the phone for you." Anyway.... So what's the frigging hold up? Waiting on a replacement? Isn't that what got you into this mess in the first place?

Absolutely.

No, but I believe the so-called Perv Files were released to the plantiffs in the Oregon case last year.

Not if you're doing it right, Short. The whole point of Leading EDGE is there are different leadership styles appropriate to different situations, groups and individuals. Remember the old "big boss" video? Same thing. Being a leader is not just being the alpha dog. All three of the boys you cited could be good leaders, if they understand the advantages and shortcomings of their leadership styles and were willing to adapt as the situation demanded. I've seen the sterotypical type-A, alpha screamers join the troop, and flame out. Tneir directive style of leadership works early on (because little kids are accustomed to that crap from adult) but gets old fast. I overheard a couple guys talking about a kid like that running for SPL -- "why would we subject ourselves to that?" summed-up the thinking of the group. (He never got elected.) I've had other kids come in the troop who wouldn't say boo to their own shadow and who you would never imagine standing up leading a group. It usually takes them a few years, but almost all eventually find their voice. In those years they are usually developing the respect of their mates by being very competent with their skills and becoming the "go to guy" when things need to be done; and by developing relationships with individuals. My older son was like that. He spent years as a Troop Guide and by the time he was SPL had be the TG for three-quarters of the troop. All those guys he had brought along as new Scouts really respected and followed him. Of the two, it's probably more difficult to teach a "directive" leader to be more patient than it is to get a shy kid to step up. I know I'm committing heresey here, but I don't particularly buy into the idea that the cut-up causing problems in the back of the room is necessary a great leader waiting to be discovered. Sometimes he's just a jackass trying to get attention. And don't confuse the other boys being entertained with being led. The cut-up may be getting a lot of laughs now, but time and time again I've had boys come to me privately and tell me they're tired of the cut-up causing problems. This really comes out on campouts when the patrol is trying to get something done (like breakfast) and the cut-up is undermining their efforts. If this guy is such a great leader and all the boys are groovin' on his natural leadership ability, how come they are complaining to the SM about him? I believe what most folks consider native leadership is simply charisma -- an ability to inspire enthusaism, loyality and affection in others. I agree it's a personality trait you either have or don't have at a very young age which is near-impossible to fake (at least for very long) if you don't have it. But that's only a part of leadership. Our troop defines leadership as the ability to motivate other to work for a common goal. That's a three-legged stool requiring inspiration, effort and vision. The cut-up in the back of the room may have the charisma or appeal to get others enthusiastic to follow him, but then what? A particular Scout may have great Scout skills and/or a terrific work ethic, but if he's sullen and non-communicative or comes off as a know-it-all, he's not going to inspire others to follow him. And without a vision or understanding what the group's goals, the group will just mark time. The troop just finished a term with one of our very charasmatic natural leaders as SPL. After his election, he had the whole troop motivated and enthusiastic. But the kid had absolutely no follow-through, no management skill, and, quite frankly, a pretty broad lazy streak. It was ugly. By the end of his term, the boys were tired of his empty promises and his inability to get things done. Leadership training in Scouting needs to take every boy at his own level and help him develop these skills to his best potential. Sometime in their lives everyone of these boys will be in a leadership position of some sort. Our job in this regard is to give them the tools to do their best in those siuations. Some of these three-legged leadership stools may end up a bit wobbly and some may be taller than others, but it's our job to help develop leadership in all of them. I know some of you will dismiss this as "management." So be it. I'll take a highly competent manager over an inspirational idiot everyday of the week and twice on Sundays.

Let it be the parent's choice. My recommendation is always to keep a boy with his friends. So in your situation it sounds like he would be better off as a Bear.

Bringing everyone home safe and healthy. But I like quawze's answer better.

At the end of the party, Moose, how would your S-I-L feel if her guests asked her to pay for the meat dishes they brought? How would she feel about a law which required her to pay? Maybe she doesn't care, but what if she had a strongly-held belief the consumption of animals is immoral. Of course if she objected, the government could change the law to require the supermarket to provide the meat for free.... Would that make her feel better about her friends violating her deep-held beliefs? They way your S-I-L actually handles this is what the Catholic church and folks are asking for -- if her guests want meat, they can buy it, cook it and eat it. Or they don't have to go to her party at all. Of if she objects, she doesn't have to invite them. Everyone makes their own free choices and takes responsibility for them -- including paying for those choices. Ultimately this isn't a First Amendment issue but the Tenth. Same for gay marriage. Why is governmental approval required for anyone to get married? In the eyes of the government, marriages should be contractual agreements between two individuals. Given the evolution of domestic law in our society, it would be reasonable for government to establish standards for such contracts -- a uniform domestic code in the way most states have uniform commercial codes or statutes of fraud which establish base-line rules for how contracts are handled. While a pure libertarian point of view may object to even that, there is enough legal entanglement with marriage (taxes, property rights, child custody issues, protection of minors, etc.) that some reasonable standards are needed? Where does that leave traditional marriages? Right where they've been for the past 2000 years. If a couple wants to scantify their marriage through the church, that should be between them and the church. If church A wants to limit marriage to a man and woman, that is their First Amendment right to do so. If church B embraces same-sex marriages (or any other screw-ball arrangement they want) it is between the couple, the church and their faith. As Thomas Jefferson said, such an arrangement neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.

Amen.

Question, Beav. Currently, how many 14 year olds are serving active federal prison time on child porn charges? Just a ballpark figure is good. Same for 14 year old girls convicted of trafficking for sexting photos of themselves. Isn't this the sort of legal boogeyman stuff you're usually railing against?

I didn't really answer the question either. Would my Scouts like to have a do-nothing weekend? Particularly one during which we "camp" inside and eat delivered pizza? I'm sure they would. I'm guessing many of them do that three weekends a month. We call that "a weekend at home." In my previous post, I noted we don't try to over program outings but leave plenty of down time for the boys to hang with their mates and just socialize. At summer camp the adults go to considerable lengths to make sure our guys have the opportunity to do stuff like this. To me, the best part of summer camp is hanging out with your buddy, going up to the trading post for a popsicle, playing cards or checkers, or working on a craft project for a merit badge. But that's after a full day of real Scouting. Personally, I would not attend a lock-in where the boys play video games and watch TV. I've got better things to do. Your mama wants a baby sitter for the weekend, she can hire one. Our troop has a program we use called Boy Scouts. There are particular things we do as part of that program. If those things don't appeal to you, you should consider another program.

Who was invited and how is just background noise. Ignore it. Your SPL needs some retraining on the patrol method. Remind him the purpose of a patrol campout is for the patrol to bond and work together as a team. It is an opportunity for the patrol leader to lead the patrol. When he's there, his obviously superior intellect and leadership skill take that role away from the PL and changes the dynamics of the patrol. In the future, if he is invited or even begged to go on patrol campouts, he may not do so. Such is the burden of leadership. Next term he can run for patrol leader.

Time out. What policy has this Scoutmaster violated? Maybe this fellow simply has a conviction that service should be done for the sake of helping others. Maybe he sees getting "credit" for providing service somehow dimishes the service. Maybe that is the philosophy of the chartered organization? We've had plenty of debates here over double dipping and who service projects may benefit. Before you start collecting feathers and heating he tar, it's worth a rational conversation. Not that I agree with him, but I think you have to give the fellow the benefit. Advancement sign-off are his call. ON THE OTHER HAND, let's do some math here, Lance. There is no activity requirement for Tenderfoot, so how is this preventing the guys from making rank? Even if the SM only counted campouts, how are boys not amassing five campouts in two years? Are the opportunities to camp not there? What does your troop's program schedule look like. This weekend alone out troop has three different activities going on in which our Scouts could participate. That's the issue. Counting service projects for activities is a red herring.

732 -- only two of the six? Wus. I wouldn't call the cops for any of these. I do believe there are situations where calling the cops is warranted, but this ain't it.

We do this once a year, the meeting which falls between Christmas and New Years. We call it Cabin Fever night, just a chance for the kids who've been bottled up in the house to get out and see their friends. We could probably charge parents for sending their boys, but I digress.... In the past we fell victim to campouts like this. Fortunately, I now have enough boys in senior leadership positions who have the maturity to make the connection that these are the only campouts kids get sent home from. Love those guys! Idle hands really are the devil's workshop. The best campouts are the ones where you get the balance between activities and down time. This month's campout hit it almost perfectly. We were doing wilderness survival camping and the patrols were given a number of things they had to accomplish. Building a shelter was a biggie. The wind was howling all day the the temps were going to be in the teens, so the boys put a lot of time and effort into the shelters. Late afternoon we called them all together and gave them food for dinner which they had to cook with no utensils. The boys disappeared into their campsites and I hardly saw them all day.

Our troop defines leadership as motivating others to work toward a common goal. That is exactly what is required here. One of the really good sessions in Wood Badge is on managing change -- just what you're going through. It's been 6 or 7 years now, but as I recall some of the main points of the session are, 1) to clearly communicate you vision for the future, 2) be prepared that not everyone will buy into your vision, and 3) you may lose some folks along the way. If you've not done so, you need to sit down with the ASM/Scout's dad and explain to him your vision for improving QC within the troop. Explain why this is important. What your ultimate goal looks like. What you need from the leaders and Scouts to achieve the goal. And in particular, how the changes you see in the troop program impacting his son and what you are prepared to do to accommodate his disabilities. I can understand your frustration and that of your AC and other ASM. Been there, done that, got the scars. Disability or not, it's easy to see the problem with the troop trying to head in one direction and this boy and his dad being Exhibit One of what you don't want. Perhaps it's time to bring in the folks from the council with experience in working with disabled Scouts. Ask them if they will come in and conduct disability training for all the troop leaders. It would be a tremendous olive branch to the dad (plus good info you need.) It may be time to develop an alternative advancement plan for the Scout. Maybe the dad doesn't want to do that -- I imagine he wants his son to complete the requirements like all the other boys. But then you need to explain to him that the bar is now higher. The boy is going to have to be more transparent with his position of leadership and do the work such that you or other troop adults can evaluate his performance. (Of course the point is, you're creating a situation where the dad can't do the work for him, but you've got to be delicate about it or the dad will throw up a wall.) Be positive. Of course you want his boy in the troop. Of course you want him to succeed, have fun and earn Eagle. But the troop is evolving. You will be willing to make any reasonable accommodation you can for the Scout's disability, but your primary responsibility is to deliver a quality program for all the Scout. Then take the AC and other ASM out for a coke and make sure they understand the situation. They -- and you -- can only move as fast as the rest of the troop is willing to go. As we tell our Scouts, when you are a leader, it's good to look back and check if anyone is still following you. As everyone has posted, you're stuck with the Star requirement completed and signed off. You can't fix the past only move forward.(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

You're a big man, JoeBob. No, it doesn't seem anyone knows of a camp being shut down. And in the spirit of your post, I'll own up to a bit of hyperbole myself. If I were inspecting and camp and the ONLY problem was the lack of certified directors, they would probably rate a conditional accreditation and we would all be on the phone trying to track down retired directors, inspectors and instructors who would be willing to hang their shingle at the camp and get them legal. The real concern, however is a camp with no trained directors is going to have LOTS of other problems, either through lack of training and knowledge or the attitude that the standards don't matter. The enforcement is like any other professional licensure. In my job I get the newsletter from the state board which list all the disciplinary action for the past quarter. The stuff with licensees is occassionally serious but usually technical, paperwork violations. The really dangerous stuff is from unlicensed folks operating without training or oversight. I think the lack of shutdowns (at least in our vision, I'm sure it happens somewhere) is testament to the training and the enforcement of the standards. The threat is real. Also understand these camps are council events and under the supervision of a (usually) professional adviser. No DE or SE is going to want a closed camp on his resume. Being council events, the council is directly on the hook for any liability. I know a couple years ago our summer camp got an conditional accreditation with a week to fix the problem. It was an absolute Katy-bar-the-door, all hands on deck fire drill to get it fixed. National Camp School remains the absolutely best Scout training I have attended, bar none. I've recommended it to Cubmasters even if they have to pay for it themselves and have no plans of ever stepping foot in a day camp. (Most wont' do it because they're afraid if their DE finds out they're trained they'll get roped into running a camp -- they're probably right.) The level of program training, the understand of the principles of Cub scouting (camp school was the first time I ever heard to the Values of Cub Scouting), the health and safety stuff is absolutely invaluable. Camp school is much, much, much better training for Cub leaders than Wood Badge can possibly -- cost about the same, takes half the time and no ticket. The instructors are the best of the best. Next month will be the sixth or seventh year I taught at camp school and I'm still amazed by what the people there do and that they tolerate a goof like me on staff.

"Meetings" are held every Tuesday night "Campouts" include sleeping under the stars or in a tent. Everything else is an "activity." Of course both campouts and activities count toward the requirement.

So, JoeBob, you would be okay dropping your boys off at a camp where no one pays attention to stuff like perishable foods being left out in the heat or that the boys are provided clean drinking water and have sanitary toilet facilities? That any ol' Tom, Dick or Harry can run the aquatics program or shooting sports? Hey, Mildred was a lifeguard in high school and besides, anyone who can't swim can wear a life jacket if they want to, right? Climbing towers seem like a fun thing for the Tigers, why shouldn't they be allowed to do all the stuff the Boy Scouts do. And since we're way out in the woods no one will ever find the camp so there's no reason to train the staff on stuff like having a suspicious person in the camp. And being Boy Scouts every one already knows first aid and what to do in an emergency. Why waste additional time? Day Camp accreditation is based on a set of "camp standards" which are updated annually by national. There are different standards for day camps, resident camps and high adventure. Some programs, like COPE and climbing have their own program standards. The curriculum for National Campiing School is built around these standards and making sure the camp directors understand them and know what is required to meet them. Every camp is required to have at least two camp school-certified adults as camp director and program director. (The training and certification varies by the type of camp you are running.) Some programs, like aquatics, shooting sports and COPE/climbing require camp school-certified supervisors over those area. Personally, I am not aware of a camp which has been closed in the manner you describe. Camp visitations teams (PC-speak for "camp inspectors") are trained to help camps meet the standards, and not disrupt the program. However they most certainly are authorized to close a camp if there is an eminent danger to the campers. More likely, if a particular camp program does not meet mandatory standards (for example, the aquatics staff doesn't have the proper certification or the pool failed to pass local health inspections) only that sub-standard area of camp would be closed until the standards are met. I can't imagine a council which would allow a camp to be closed. If I were to inspect a camp and learn that neither the CD or PD were certified, I'd be on the phone with the Scout Executive. In my council I know heaven and earth would be moved to find two directors with valid certifications. This only scratches the surface. CSDS camp school is three LOOOONG days. Resident camp school is a full week. If you want to learn more, go to http://www.ncsbsa.org/resources/standards/ which has all the 2012 standards posted. I'd recommend reading the Visitation Team orientation booklet. It's only a few pages and gives you a good overview of the process.

Seems like one of those pornography/I'll-know-it-when-I-see-it sorts of things. Of course we all know we now have a lower threshold for reporting youth protection violations -- okay, maybe "lower threshold" isn't the right phrase, but we now are required to call authorities when we used to just call the Scout Executive. I think there is a difference between us calling law enforcement as Scout leaders and a parent exercising their perogative to do so. In Trainerlady's parent thread, I would not have called LE over her kid getting socked in the jaw. But I would have done what I could to support her had she decided to do so. (Keep in mind that initially it sounded like "17" just out of the blue decided it would be fun to jack TL's son in the kisser.) There would be a point at which I would call LE, however. As substantial stash of drugs obviously intended for distribution. Your run-of-the-mill tussle between a couple boy, no. But one that turned in to an aggravated assault, yes. Use of a weapon probably would. I'll let you know when I see one.

Amazing. You're right, E92. Not having camp school-certified camp director and program director is grounds for closing a camp -- that day, not next year. For that to operate without a NCS certified camp director or program director, the visitation team would have to have falsified the camp standards accreditation forms and, at minimum, the professional adviser would have to have looked the other way. The forms specifically say "Check training card:" then ask for the name, age and expiration date from the card. Either they flat-out falsified the forms, or if they left it blank, the folks at the council and region office failed to perform their required reviews. That kinda makes all the advancement minutia we're debating in other threads seem unimportant if a council will knowingly violate a major requirement of camp operation. Wow. (Yeah, I'm on staff at NCS and conduct camp visitations. I'd shut them down.) Beav gave good advice, but here's the strategic problem: the view from the council office is this women has several boxes checked for them is and is running an adequate program -- as far as they are concerned. And thanks to you E92, numbers at day camp are trending up. That she's surley and has a few parents ticked off is small potatoes. Unless you've got some serious YP issues, the district/council is going to do the math and figure this woman solves more problems than she creates. With any luck you'll live longer than her.

I don't think so, Lisa. In the first place, jamboree doesn't use blue cards. There were multi-page carbonless forms (the boys did get the blue sheet). And there is no place on the form for a Scoutmaster's signature whatsoever. There is only one signature on the sheet -- the counselor's. (I'm holding a stack of the forms in my hot little hands now.) And if I'm not mistaken, in 2010 the form were redundant as the MB records were captured in real time on line. I've also review both the 2010 Leader's Guide and Staff Guide. Absolutely nothing on the subject. Only one paragraph in either book which basically says that Scouts will have the opportunity to work on merit badges at jamboree. For some reason the make a big deal of pointing out that boys can work on merit badges at jamboree and finish them at home or they may complete merit badges at jamboree the started at home. Duh. Basically, national jamboree completely ignores the whole issue of a Scoutmaster being involved. I'm sure everyone will draw their own conclusions from that. I will agree with you, Lisa, that it would be difficult for boys to accurately plan the MBs they want to take at jamboree and have blue cards signed in advance. Fred, I still think your're wrong about jamboree SM being the equivalent of a full time SM. I see nothing in the 2010 literature which supports that. If you can find a reference, I'd be interest to see it. And I still think your try to parse the G2A too thinly. Read the whole paragraph and take in all together. I'm going to get yelled at again for pretending to be a college English teacher, but "this is acceptable" doesn't mean "you are required to accept it." Read the whole sentence, including the part you left off: "This is acceptable, but the unit leader should still consider the recommendation and approve it if it is appropriate." In other words, the SM doesn't have to approve this alternate arrangement if he doesn't feel it is approproiate. En Loco Scoutmasterius? Can you point to a Scout who advanced through his jamboree troop? Who served on the board of review (since jamboree troops don't have troop committees?) Did the jamboree troop also conduct the Court of Honor?

Event one would have merited a ride home. I would have also found the most expensive drywall repair contractor in the area to complete the repairs and sent the kid a bill. (And I've got a drywall guy who shows up for work driving a BMW.) Event two would have resulted in a significant suspension from the troop with a hard look at explusion, depending on prior record. This is pretty aggregious hazing/bullying with which we take an extremely hard line. This sort of crap was fairly common when I took over the troop and I can tell you from experience it is a difficult part of a troop culture to change once it is engrained. A 17-year-old doing this to a new kid? I believe in criminal justice circles that's what they would call an aggravating circumstance and would be a big brick in the wall toward expulsion. On it's own, I agree that the water down the back is just a stupid adolescent prank, but could rise to the level of hazing, depending on the victim. It's funny at summer camp, but pretty mean-spirited in February. The lemonade was premeditated and would get a little higher level of attention. The punch to the face gets your butt on a paved road pretty quick. What's the history here? It's hard to imagine this is the first suggestion of this sort of behavior. The couple kids I've had like this exhibited this behavior from day one. Not usually something that happens at the flip of a switch. I don't think I'd play the police card yet, but I would sure let the leadership AND the other parents know it's in the deck. By the way, our rule is if we call a parent to come get their kid over a discipline issue, they have standard driving time plus about 15 minutes to pick their boy up. When that time's up we turn him over to the local sheriff or child protective services. Of course that's tounge-in-cheek, but our parents know that if the leaders on the ground get to the point of sending a Scout home, it's to the point that he needs to go home NOW.

"That's not your job" is a pretty short hike from "it's not my job," eh? I would love to have tramthum in my troop. The very best volunteers are the ones who really take hold of a job, make it theirs and jealously guard the quality and standards. That's especially true in an advancement chairman. I don't want a paper pusher. I want a partner who shares my vision for the troop and understands advancement policy and procedures. And I want someone who will help me promote and enforce national policy and troop procedures. In this situation, I would appreciate my AC coming to me and say "this isn't right. These dads and kids didn't follow our procedures with this." In our troop that IS the AC's job. If my AC catches some detail or knows something I don't I absolutely want him or her to bring it to my attention. Frankly, that's the job of EVERY leader in troop whether it's an advancement issue, leadership, discipline, safety or anything else. I expect all our volunteers to pull together. Tramthum, in this case, I think you enter the data as the SM asked, but also ask him to help you understand his decision. My guess is, that with these boys already out of the troop, this is a hill he's just not willing to die on. But it is reasonable for him to clarify the policy and procedures so that you two remain on the same page.