uniform.knotsy

Appropriate Action?

I like Oak Trees suggestion:

"I do not condemn you. Go, and rebel against the program no more."

-- Aims and Methods --

Our uniform is just one of the eight methods, and it appears that none of the eight takes precedence over the others, so why the fuss?

I find it hard to believe that any unit has such a perfect training tempo that it follows all of the methods and achieves all of the aims 100% of the time, ALL of the time. We humans are fallible, and fallible implies were less than 100%. That doesnt mean we cant try, or that we cant succeed for awhile, but it does take a certain level of credulity to believe we ARE 100% all of the time. I say dig deeper, because weve missed something small, like our level of humility. Passing the adult or youth uniform inspection doesnt mean weve achieved the three aims.

Ive worn a uniform for my country too, so I know that inspection-ready uniforms have a place in esprit de corps. But being a fierce garrison-warrior doesnt make one a competent leader in the field any more than wearing a full scout uniform makes one a competent scout or scouter. OK, so someone stands counter to the method of using a uniform (or is at least interpreted to do so). What do we do?

An absolute argument against the uniform seems ludicrous, given its prominence as a method, and as a historic artifact. Besides, no one forced us to join an organization that has historically emphasized its uniform for recruitment purposes. But consistent non-use of the method is just thatconsistent non-use of a method. It might also be tactical non-use to achieve an operational goal, over time, of being 100% uniformed, like when one needs to buy a uniform one piece at a time. Quite different, I think, is the issue of not wearing the uniform properly, as in unbuttoned shirts or clothing with non-scouting messages. This seems to be disregard for the uniform itself, not the method, which I dont think anyone in this thread is advocating (I could be wrong).

-- Interpretation --

I dont think the views Ive read in this thread are arguments AGAINST the uniform, or are arguments FOR wearing a given piece of the uniform improperly. Instead, they seem to be arguments that wearing a complete uniform, in all its forms, all of the time, is not the ONLY valid reading of the method. I see in them a plea for understanding that there are times when individuals and units are unable to obtain complete uniforms, or perhaps that current social conditions challenge Baden-Powells 19th century views about proper clothing for the outdoor program. For instance, the exorbitant price of the campaign hat is more than a full uniform, a handbook, and probably some camping gear thrown in. But, BP specifically recommended the hat as the best headgear for the outdoors. Should we not stand by his wishes? Of course not, because social needs and inflated prices required a change to oversees caps, then berets (remember?), and now baseball caps made in China (CHINA!!!).

Face it. We may have a future in which the only way to recruit units in some areas is to offer an option with a minimum focus on uniform (I hope not). The great thing about Scouting is that it adapts to the culture its used in, i.e. charter organizations. Churches, unions, public schools, civic clubs, etc can mold the aims and methods of scouting to fit their particular view (within reason). Scouting would be a small movement without this philosophy. That means charter organizations are really at the heart of this argument, not individual scouts and scouters. What will the next uniform look like? A soccer shirt and shorts? Baggy hip-hop pants? Overalls? (It might.)

So maybe this issue needs clarification by members over our volunteer-non-pay grade, like the Key 3, who can issue a definite uniform policy that addresses all sides. Until that time, arguing against a method we putatively agreed to support seems silly, and so does transposing the method into an extreme pro-uniform posture.

-- A Solution --

I dont recall any mention in this thread of a Charter Organization or the Unit Commissioner (maybe I missed it). All a representative or chairman has to do (as far as I know) is deselect an offending scout or scouter during the recharter process. Common courtesy and best practices demand counseling before resorting to that, but it can be done.

Unit commissioners can also remove a volunteer for bad performance. My crisp, new copy of Administration of Commissioner Service mentions some types of poor performance as bad chemistry, bad politics, and bad job. The book then suggests guiding volunteers before taking action because sometimes easy solutions work.

The most philosophically interesting part to me, however, is the last section: Learn for the Future. It suggests that the real problem is leadership: fully understanding the organizational need, recruitment, training/coaching, clear definition of good performance, and a more controlled process of assigning duties to new volunteers before they are ready to accept them. In other words, the problem is setting volunteers up for failure, rather than their being bad people. I agree.

"I do not condemn you. Go, and rebel against the program no more."

Yes, maybe leadership at the charter organization and committee level is the easiest and best solution. Charter organizations and committees choose leaders, so they can un-choose them. Chairmen interpret national and local policies to the troop (Troop Committee Guidebook), so the Key 3 seem to be open to local differences. Maybe proper use of these leadership tools can clarify the relative importance of the uniform for the charter organizations units, instead of individual opinion. Maybe thats how we can properly use the method of uniform to achieve the three aims, satisfy local needs, and admonish local deviants.

Hows that for appropriate action?

**********

[in reference to my first post: Ive never met the Key3, but they do represent all of us. If weight is an issue, then they also represent the problem, based on their group photo in the Scouting magazine I mentioned. Does that mean theyre schlubs? I dont know, but Ticos uniform has more awards than Ive earned, so I doubt hes anything other than an outstanding scouter. But what if he chose to wear flip-flops (being from Florida), would that make him less? No, at least not any more than being fat does. And so goes my argument against the uniform police. If the Key 3 can so obviously violate an aim to be physically fit (as my own porcine form does), which is philosophically higher than a method, why all the fuss about people outside our units who we cant control? Does that mean we cant be good scouts and scouters unless we conform to all the methods and aims at the same time, at least to suit everyone elses interpretation? I wonder what the Key 3 would say? Again, just asking . . .]

This an interesting subject . . .

I just completed basic commissioner training and noticed that the experienced commissioners in my council did one or more of the following: 1.) Embellished certain uniform parts, 2.) Wore "permanent" patches on their uniforms, 3.) Were missing uniform parts, 4.) Wore multi-colored shirts beneath their uniform (it was cold), 5. Wore XX-L to XXXXX-L size uniforms. HOWEVER, they all APPEARED to be in full uniform.

Embellishments took the form of embroidered designs on leader tabs (letters, numbers, symbols, embroidered edges). Permanent patches included a 50th anniversary Jamboree patch, among others. Missing parts included socks, hats, and belts. Red or white long-sleeved shirts worn beneath short-sleeved uniform shirts (it looked sloppy). Most uniforms would be at least Large, but there were a few XXL and above.

So, I have a question for the uniform police on this board (I having been told to get in uniform at one point) . . .

Which of these five versions (and probably more) of a full uniform do you wear?

It seems to me that you enjoy casting stones when the real Chief Scout would rather write in the dirt. And what would he write?

Thou shalt not alter thy uniform without permission from the national office?

Thou shall have a uniform that reflects your current state in situation?

Thou shalt wear approved BSA socks before choosing rocks to cast at other Scouters who are out of uniform?

Thou shall not wear long undergarments with a short-sleeved shirt?

Thou shall not be glutinous, but conform to the new BSA health standards so you can go back-country camping with your unit? (An aside: The group picture of the National Key 3 in the same issue of Scouting that admonished us for being too fat was priceless. yes, I need to lose weight too )

Just asking . . .