carebear3895

Yea because the whole point of the Boy Scouts of America is to make Scout Executives rich. DE's are slaves to SE's, we don't care about the volunteers we work alongside. Packs and Troops are just thorns in our sides in our goal to make as much money as possible. ....Give me a break...

You know why I think it is that way? Most if not all SE's were DE's like in the 70's, 80's,or 90's. From my understanding, the norm back then was to treat DE's pretty much like dirt. My guess is those SE's today don't see a reason to treat current DE's any better, because of what they went through. I'll admit there is a huge culture problem in the profession. On the plus side, I actually do see it getting better on a council by council basis.

you right. We just chill at the office and make lists of how to make life harder for volunteers. By the way have you turned in your FoS pledge card yet?

Or maybe we could remember the Scout Oath and Law when commenting on a Scout Forum

Something seems shady with that council. To me if seems like they focused almost all their resources on fundraising, not membership because they knew they could rely on the LDS to automatically meet their numbers. That would makes sense for the United Way severing ties (which you never see unless that council has a large fund surplus). But it looks like that decision to not recruit non-LDS scouts is about to blow up in their faces. Also, very weird to see a scout executive not wearing silver loops or a SE patch.

I think the BSA accepting girls is the best thing to happen to the GSUSA ironically. The past months are the first time I've ever seen them promote any of their programs outside of cookies.

So THAT'S WHY they raised membership fees!

https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2018/05/02/scout-me-in/ it was on Bryan on Scouting

In the press release, BSA had an info-graphic of linked troops still. So yes, they will still be "separate"

I have a sneaky suspicion you are correct. I, for one, look forward to the National annual meeting in late May. That's when BSA loves to do their mic drop announcements. Also it's not true co-ed (on paper at least)

Just keep running your units programs like normal. No need to make your troop into an underground resistance group

It was mentioned before, but to reiterate Venturing is technically called "Venturing BSA", but of course no one goes around saying they are part of Venturing BSA. I also wouldn't stray away from the thought that the BSA in "Scouts BSA" was put in place to prevent any push back from the GSUSA who already threatened legal action with trademark violations.

Whoever is in charge at National Supply is either getting promoted, or is getting fired

yea I guarantee you this won't be the only GSLAC camp to go.

In my time, a Director of Field Service (sometimes called assistant scout executives) is in charge of all membership and finance within the council. They are the #2 guy under the SE. They don't handle much on the program side of things, but Program Directors traditionally report to them. Field Service Directors (aka Field Directors) are middle management types, who directly oversee Unit service executives (DEs and SDEs), with membership being their focus. I've heard of a field service executive, I don't know what they do tho Program Executives (I think their official title is Parap

This GSUSA argument really drives me up the wall. First of all, Girl Scouts has a serious program issue of their own that they turn a blind eye to, which is why their program is failing. The whole "we know what girls want because we are girls" is so stupid, and is setting them on a path for continued failure. Second of all, no body is forcing girls to "convert" or join Cubs Scouts. If a girl chooses BSA over GSUSA on her own will, I think that should highlight everything. Venturing has been around for 20 years, which actually is co-ed. Heck, even 2 of the 5 national youth officers are fem

While DE's are considered "Unit-serving Executives", I'm pretty sure it's well known program and how a troop runs is not a huge responsibility of our Jobs. It's good and bad the way BSA does promotions. It's nice knowing that 99% of the time, everybody in a SE or national role started out as a DE somewhere and worked their way up. The bad is that many SE's or national guys were DE literally decades ago. I have no problem saying many are out of touch with the program. The honest truth is you are promoted if you show great numbers. So DE's in huge councils where there is more TAY t

I have access to the facilitator training. Just went through the slides again to be sure and I didn't see anything in the instructor notes

*Cough* EXECUTIVE BOARD *Cough*

Get to wear nifty "Platinum" Shoulder loops

The only thing I've ever liked more about GSUSA over BSA is they allow all older youth members to cast executive board votes.

That's one thing the old yo1 YPT had over the new one IMO. As cheesy as they were, I liked that they included scouting specific scenarios such as a leader walking off with a scout, or the scout taking pictures by the showerhouse. Plus in the old one they reiterated Two-deep in almost every training module, which I think they only mentioned once in the new YPT2. Overall, I think YPT2 looks prettier and has more in depth information about Child Abuse in general, but I think its a less effective training tool for Leaders

Oh my god National is really doing this...........Stupid

Problem is.....even the current numbers are inflated.

Actually I think it is a possible solution. DE's are spread way to thin, and less volunteers are stepping up. I think DA's are a good thing, However, it's just a temporary band-aid to a much larger ideology issue coming from national. Until that's fixed, DE's are still going to hate their jobs/lives and leave.