InquisitiveScouter

16 hours ago, KublaiKen said:

Interestingly, our new CO wants to see the policy, and we are still going through those hurdles now. It is a dark tunnel, with no light in sight.

I am actually surprised it isn't asked for more by COs, especially now.

Please let us know how this turns out.

9 minutes ago, qwazse said:

What it means @Eagle1993, is that if the proportion of females is nonzero, I could not meet collegiate adult Venturers for coffee without me finding 21+ registered female adult to join me.

It effectively makes it pointless to be a male crew advisor.

Now that is just plain stupid...

Supposing those were assistant Scoutmasters for a Troop.  They are not over 21, nor are they "adult program participants."  So, it's ok to meet with them.  But, the second one of them let's you know they have registered with a Venturing crew, you are a YPT criminal!! LOL

Oh, the humanity 😛

1 hour ago, scoutldr said:

So I interpret this to mean if you willfully ignore BSA rules and policy, such as the G2SS, you are not covered.  I believe this is being discussed in another thread.

@scoutldrI revived this one because the other thread is about the SAFE checklist versus insurance.

9 minutes ago, mrjohns2 said:

A big thing for me is that I am the policy holder and not the BSA. 🙂

Have you ever, in your BSA life, seen a copy of the policy??  I haven't.  Haven't asked for one either

8 minutes ago, KublaiKen said:

So that's a "no," correct? You do believe that there is insurance coverage, but that like in every situation in life, the insurer will use means to avoid payment? But that simply not following the GSS isn't some sort of voiding of coverage?

I honestly don't know.

I believe that if BSA did not cover some volunteers, and word got out, there could be a mass exodus of adult volunteers.  I believe this is a great fear they have.  So, in many cases, they choose to settle it under insurance, and maybe pay a little higher premium, than have the program collapse for lack of adults.

But, legally, if you were not following the G2SS, I could see where the insurance company and BSA could say, "You are on your own..."

3 minutes ago, KublaiKen said:

I don't know. I only know in the single instance in this thread where we know what happened, the plaintiff got paid despite Scouting policies being violated, and even the law. A single data point doesn't prove the case, but clearly the insurer saw liability or exposure of some kind (maybe just PR? We don't know.) and paid to make it go away.

I get it. I am the only one who doesn't believe that the insurance won't cover you if you are violating the GSS. I would say that your belief is healthy and is probably a good indicator that you will follow the GSS. I am sure that was a good part of BSA's intention in using their language. Does my belief make me less likely to follow it? Thus far, no.

I follow it religiously, to protect Scouts and Scouters, and to protect my family assets and security (in that order).

Just now, 5thGenTexan said:

I dont know.  At Webelos Woods last November I was carrying a dutch oven back to the trailer in the dark.  I tripped over one of those really big rocks that are supposed to keep you from driving into the camp site.  I didn't just kind of trip either...  I went down, the dutch oven ended up under the middle of the trailer.  My lower abdomen was sore for two months, I had a spot on the side of my chest on the right side that hurt just as long.  My knees are just down getting to the point where they don't feel swollen all the time and dont hurt when I stand up.  So... 3 months to recover from that.  I was told I should have filled out an accident report while still in camp, but I didn't.  I don't think the GTSS prohibits doing something stupid in the dark, but things do happen.  I guess if I had done the paperwork and tried to force the issue if my condition didn't improve I could have give the BSA insurance a go.

You still can, but it will only cover your co-pays.

And that is Accident and Sickness coverage... that's a different policy than General Liability.

Also, did you know??  If you kick the bucket (heart failure) within 90 days of participating in a BSA event, your survivors can claim a $10K benefit?

*Includes loss of life resulting from Heart Failure within 90 days from the date participating in an approved Boy Scouts or Learning for Life (if purchased) activity: ———————————– ■ Life* $10,000

Your council plan might vary... 

HSR Brochure.pdf

8 minutes ago, KublaiKen said:

Yes, and I'm sure that the decision to pay isn't binary, as language saying "they won't cover you" would imply. Note that in @HashTagScoutsexample above, though we don't know if the driver was at fault in the accident, we know he was not only violating Scout policy, but the law itself, and guess what? They got paid.

Did they pay just to make this go away, and not tarnish the image of BSA??

And maybe the offending driver had nothing really for anyone to go after, so the lawyers went for the deepest pockets and hoped for this settlement regime...  again, just to make it go away...

Guessing and smh...

3 minutes ago, KublaiKen said:

That's true, but they do cover you, at least in my state. Perhaps with the array of options, auto is a bad example. Home owner's insurance pays out even if your Christmas tree started the fire.  Health insurance pays for injuries you cause through negligence, once they determine it's your fault and not someone else's (e.g., a workman's comp claim). I'd wager that behind virtually every serious Scout injury is a violation of GSS.

Agreed, and there is a difference between negligence and willful (or criminal) conduct.

13 minutes ago, KublaiKen said:

I don't actually believe that BSA 's insurance only covers you if you are following the GSS. That would be like saying your auto insurance only covers you if you are following all the traffic laws.

@RichardB, can you shed any light on BSA actions in other instances (without too many specifics, obviously)??

I could see where, if unit supervision allowed Scouts to play Vertical Dodgeball, climb up 20 feet in some trees (tree climbing and Dodgeball being prohibited activities), and one fell to his death, that they could deny coverage and allow civil suits against the adults to proceed without any support.

Anyone have any light to shed on this??

5 minutes ago, jcousino said:

The points of tour permits were transferred to the unit level when Councils did not want the liability. While there is not a council level form the checked item are now still required to be done at the unit level. Do you have records of current diver licenses and auto insurance? Leader training, non-scouter leaders on trips?

Fr. John

 

Although I concur with the practice of checking for this, could you please point out in the literature where it says a unit is required to do this?

There is a SAFE checklist to help with this...

https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/680-696(21)-SAFE-Transportation-Checklist-FPO3-5172021.pdf

But, other than you, who else is actually running this checklist?

8 minutes ago, HashTagScouts said:

100% agree. The issue of negligence is at the heart of many liability cases that end up in the legal system. I think about the case against McDonalds where a person burned themselves on coffee that spilled on them when they had to stop short. Can't imagine that McDonalds could be liable on how people drive and have an expectation someone was going to spill coffee on themselves (then again, I also readily recognize that coffee is hot). 

Recommend you read up on that case.  She was not driving at the time, and was also found 20% culpable in the incident, which reduced the damages awarded.

https://www.caoc.org/?pg=facts

28 minutes ago, HashTagScouts said:

BSA is trying not to scare the daylights out of folks

A forthright and mature discussion or clarification about behavior, risk, and consequences is always appropriate.

I had these many times with troops at my Commander's Calls.  Funny, how we had less disciplinary actions than other units in the command...

Of course, a very different situation, as I had many other disciplinary tools at my disposal (UCMJ, pay, leave, promotions, assignments, deployments, etc.), but there are some similarities in principles... 

25 minutes ago, HashTagScouts said:

BSA is trying not to scare the daylights out of folks, but, essentially if you don't follow BSA guidelines, your unit may very well find themselves on the liability hook. A good friend of mine is an attorney, and represented a family that was involved in a lawsuit with a neighboring Council. The Unit Leader and Chartered Organization were also named in the suit. Ironically, it was a case that involved exactly what Fr. John alludes to. The unit had an outing in NH, had a parent that was not a registered adult leader attending and transporting his son and two other scouts. Vehicle got into a car accident on their return leg, and one of the scouts he was transporting had some pretty significant injuries (he was seated on the side that took the impact from the other vehicle). Turns out the parent had a suspended driver's license. Council argued that they were not liable as the unit did not follow BSA policies. Council ended up settling for low amount (situation that it can be cheaper to give a few thousand to settle than pay your attorneys thousands and suffer the PR ding). 

Scouter Code of Conduct:

"When transporting youth, I will obey all laws, comply with Youth Protection guidelines, and follow safe driving practices."

Maybe another reason BSA wants all adults to be registered... 

Remember old Tour Permits, where you had to record valid driver's license and insurance info??

https://www.boyscouttrail.com/docs/formlocaltourpermit.pdf

23 minutes ago, HashTagScouts said:

BSA is trying not to scare the daylights out of folks, but, essentially if you don't follow BSA guidelines, your unit may very well find themselves on the liability hook. A good friend of mine is an attorney, and represented a family that was involved in a lawsuit with a neighboring Council. The Unit Leader and Chartered Organization were also named in the suit. Ironically, it was a case that involved exactly what Fr. John alludes to. The unit had an outing in NH, had a parent that was not a registered adult leader attending and transporting his son and two other scouts. Vehicle got into a car accident on their return leg, and one of the scouts he was transporting had some pretty significant injuries (he was seated on the side that took the impact from the other vehicle). Turns out the parent had a suspended driver's license. Council argued that they were not liable as the unit did not follow BSA policies. Council ended up settling for low amount (situation that it can be cheaper to give a few thousand to settle than pay your attorneys thousands and suffer the PR ding). 

Here's the real question:  What happens to a BSA volunteer, if they act out of accordance with BSA guidelines???

Doesn't the policy cover those cases?  Read the verbiage from G2SS:

"This coverage provides primary general liability coverage for registered adults of the Boy Scouts of America who serve in a volunteer or professional capacity concerning claims arising out of an official Scouting activity, which is defined in the insurance policy as consistent with the values, Charter and Bylaws, Rules and Regulations, operations manuals, and applicable literature of the Boy Scouts of America. This coverage responds to allegations of negligent actions by third parties that result in personal injury or property damage claims that are made and protects Scouting units and chartered organizations on a primary basis."

It even seems to imply that you will be defended (except in cases of intentional or criminal acts.):  "The general liability policy does not provide indemnification or defense coverage to those individuals who commit intentional and criminal acts. The Boy Scouts of America does not have an insurance policy that provides defense for situations involving allegations of intentional and criminal acts."

Here's some other good gouge I found.

https://montanabsa.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/BSA-Insurance.pdf

Kudos to Montana Council for being a little more forthright:

"The Guide to Safe Scouting contains a listing of unauthorized and restricted activities. Unauthorized activities are not considered official Scouting activities. Volunteers (registered and unregistered), units, chartered organizations, and local councils are jeopardizing insurance coverage for themselves and their organization by engaging in unauthorized activities."

EDIT:  Just found that last blurb in the G2SS as well, so my kudos to Montana Council are downgraded a bit 😛  

Reviving this old post, if you don't mind 😜

Can anyone out there tell me what BSA General Liability Insurance provides for you that a personal umbrella policy does not?  And vice versa?

https://www.scouting.org/health-and-safety/gss/gss10/

https://content.naic.org/article/whats-umbrella-policy

--------------------------------------------------------

Comprehensive General Liability Insurance

This coverage provides primary general liability coverage for registered adults of the Boy Scouts of America who serve in a volunteer or professional capacity concerning claims arising out of an official Scouting activity, which is defined in the insurance policy as consistent with the values, Charter and Bylaws, Rules and Regulations, operations manuals, and applicable literature of the Boy Scouts of America. This coverage responds to allegations of negligent actions by third parties that result in personal injury or property damage claims that are made and protects Scouting units and chartered organizations on a primary basis.

The BSA general liability insurance program provides volunteers and chartered organizations additional excess coverage for motor vehicles above a local council’s automobile liability policy or a volunteer’s or chartered organization’s automobile or watercraft liability policy. The owner’s motor vehicle (automobile) or watercraft liability insurance is primary. The excess insurance, whether the local council auto or BSA general liability, is available only while the motor vehicle or watercraft is in the actual use of a Scouting unit and being used during an official Scouting activity.

The insurance provided to unregistered Scouting volunteers participating in an official Scouting activity through the general liability insurance program is excess over any other insurance the volunteer might have to their benefit, usually a homeowner, personal liability, motor vehicle (automobile), or watercraft policy.

The general liability policy does not provide indemnification or defense coverage to those individuals who commit intentional and criminal acts. The Boy Scouts of America does not have an insurance policy that provides defense for situations involving allegations of intentional and criminal acts.

Scouting youth are not insured under the general liability policy.

---------------------------------------------------------

And, does anyone know the limits of this BSA coverage?  If I am an insured party, do I have a right to know? 😜

1 hour ago, KublaiKen said:

No, adult program participants are clearly defined as members who are 18 but not yet 21 and are registered in programs like Sea Scouts, Venturing, and Exploring. So those two positions are not adult program participants, nor are they "an adult fee required position as listed," since they aren't on the list. Obviously they can hold additional registered positions, like at the unit level as mentioned above, but that shouldn't be a requirement, should it? I think those positions should be listed, for clarity if nothing else.

13 hours ago, KublaiKen said:

Both Chapter and Lodge Adviser seem to be missing from the list of adult positions approved for overnight camping. Are they just considered committee members, or are they prohibited from attending overnight OA events? 🤔

It's not that they are not approved... It's that those positions are not part of the "adult fee required position(s)"   That is, you must be registered in some other position before you can be a Chapter or Lodge Adviser, insofar as I understand this...

As @HashTagScouts alludes, they must first be in a District (or unit or council) fee paid position, before they can wear the additional hat of Adviser.

15 minutes ago, jcousino said:

Here is my log for this fire BSA will never put out some thing that could be viewed as negative. (but True) do not scare the volunteers off

If most volunteers  and charter partners  where told that if a event occurs and BSA insurance determines that you where not following BSA  safety rules your on your own , remember what you signed in that charter agreement (Personal Defense and liability costs in the 9 figures for wrongful death of an 12 year old.) No rational person would knowingly take that on. Even more so in the light of BSA past insurance issues,

Love the study of outdoor risk management from my little formal training Most Troop and District level events are scary. Now with  NCAP (short term) standards most activities that i am aware of would have several safety gaps. Then at the troop level even who,s watching

Just an easy example do you know if the person driving others youths to camp  even has a valid drivers licensee . Have you checked?

Fr. John

Fr. John,

Agreed, but BSA is literally keeping their volunteers in the dark as to their own risk.  Could this be on purpose?

Instead of "If you ignore our recommendation from the Guide to Safe Scouting, you open yourself to financial ruin through lawsuits!" ... I'd turn it to the positive side:

Hey volunteers, we carry liability insurance to protect your Scouting activities!  That, along with the federal law puts a strong team in your corner should an accident occur.

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title42/chapter139&edition=prelim

You can help keep your Scouts and yourself safe by strictly adhering to all of our direction in the Guide to Safe Scouting 😛

"... BSA has liability insurance to protect its volunteers, but compliance with BSA safety guidelines is required for that insurance to be available." (2:30 in the video)

I really think BSA should clearly elaborate on what this means for volunteers who are not in compliance with BSA safety guidelines.

And the video ought to be redone for a myriad of reasons, but one of the biggest is at the end...

Way to go shooting a safety video, and then putting that final scene in...

"Appropriate personal protective equipment is required for all activities. This includes the recommended use of helmets for all participants engaged in winter sports, such as sledding and riding other sliding devices."

LOL

The question was directed at @swilliams

LOL, yes, DVOA is the Delaware Valley Orienteering Association.  (context?  no orangutans mentioned... orienteering was the subject answered... Google DVOA and orienteering and voila...)

https://www.dvoa.org/

They create orienteering maps for many state parks and public areas around the Delaware Valley.  They also sponsor orienteering events in the area.

Although I have never met anyone from DVOA, we have used their products extensively.  So, @swilliams, if you are a DVOA member, THANK YOU!

Here is a sampling of some of their publicly available maps:

http://elibrary.dcnr.pa.gov/GetDocument?docId=3559452&DocName=HICK_Orienteering.pdf

https://www.dvoa.org/learn/perm/French-Creek-Hopewell-OPC_2015.pdf

https://www.dvoa.org/learn/perm/Fort-Washington-OPC_2020.pdf

Enjoy!

Aren't those old geezers handsome!

https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2023/02/15/scouters-in-action-they-saved-the-drowning-man-from-the-rip-current/

19 hours ago, Delphinus said:

My guess is the first guy who earned $192K left, there was a gap and hence no compensation, and then James Parnell started in mid-year 2020. Still, $192K seems like an INSANELY high level of compensation for a Council Executive. Many of the high-level GS jobs and contractor jobs in the Tidewater Council area, those that require a LOT of military experience, a Top Secret/SCI security clearance, and Masters degrees, don't pay anywhere close to that much. It still makes me wonder why a guy earning that much has the audacity to come to the Packs and beg parents, most of whom don't earn anywhere close to that much, to donate more money over and above their fees and all the time spent selling popcorn.

BTW, How do you find those links/files!?

Go to the IRS Tax Exempt Organization Search page at

https://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/

Enter the criteria you want for a search.  If you know the EIN, that is easiest, as all councils do not use the same naming convention, so the search may not return good results by name.  (Tidewater's EIN is 54-0505875 )

Charity Navigator has a better search engine, IMO

https://www.charitynavigator.org/

P.S.  Tidewater also has a separate Trust Fund, EIN 54-1707488

Fair warning, the more you know and share, the greater you become PNG to your council

16 minutes ago, swilliams said:

Last year I spent a ridiculous amount of time making an orienteering map, then spent about $130 on a starter pack of control flags, race cards, and card punches.  It was a HUGE success.  The scouts loved being sent off into the woods alone.  The race/contest aspect was secondary.  I did have parents stationed at a few of the controls, we had water/Gatorade at one, and I was in roughly the center of the course with a full first-aid kit.  

The scouts have asked to do it again, so I'm working on a second map.  The best part is that it takes a LOT of mapping in the field, so I have an excuse to get outside and wander around the forest.  If any of you out there are in the area of the Watchung Reservation in NJ and want to use the first map, I would be more than happy to send you the map electronically.  It prints out to 11"X14".  You would have to supply your own course materials, but you can mark the control points with anything, really, then just come up with a way for scouts to mark that they visited each individual station.  If you have enough parents (10), they could man each point.

You a member of DVOA??

3 minutes ago, Ojoman said:

Today it is not unusual for a Council Scout Exec to be compensated (benefits & salary) at a quarter of a million or more. A really great SE is worth that and more. A board that invests that much in a council exec should expect performance. I have worked for both great council execs and for really bad ones. Councils that consistently lose membership, merge districts, cut staff and run in the red or constantly raise less money year after year probably have a leadership problem. Councils that hold their own in difficult times and grow and rise to the challenges probably have solid leadership. The field execs generally work longer hours than their compensation would reflect and where there is poor leadership they tend to 'get out' and go where they will be properly compensated and appreciated. There will always be those in the profession that are highly competent and committed to the programs and mission and councils are blessed to have them at any level. Scouting needs solid, competent and dedicated professionals. Support the good and great ones and don't tolerate incompetent ones. 

Agreed, but having the job be more competitive, by allowing an "outsider" to be considered for the job could only expand our pool of talent.

2 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

We were told by some executive board  members that after they fired the SE for running the council into the ground (just looked at the financials and HOW could the exec board not realize the SE was ruining the council when it was went into the red over $1 million over a 4 year period), that they could look for folks with outside experience for the SE. Do not know how true that was as the current SE is a lifelong professional.

 

You are correct, National gives the exec board a slate of candidates that they interview and pick. Although see above. I know when my council went thru this process, and I discovered someone I worked with was on the list, I wrote a detailed letter about the individual, and had a 90 minute meeting with the head of the selection committee. They were not selected. 

I know a wonderful woman in our area who absolutely loves Scouting.  She has four kids in the program right now.  She is from the area and is well connected in many circles in our community.  She knows what Scouting has done for our community, and knows many of the volunteers who live here (and who also have been involved with Scouting for a billion years). She has been on the board of three other local 501C3's in our community who have had a significant impact in environmental and heritage preservation, wild animal rehabilitation and community education (about the animals), and a women's shelter.  She has run successful capital campaigns for all three organizations.  She has many other qualities which would make her an excellent CEO.  Would she ever be considered?  I do not believe so.  Not part of "the club."

16 hours ago, MacBrave said:

A link to the PDF that was used to present this new "Adventure Fee" to CAC volunteers at last week's district roundtables is here:https://crossroadsbsa.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/PP.pdf?vgo_ee=PEyTUlc0mr504drzrLyWRWVLY1pGRWb2%2B0FTX4hhTec%3D

 

And as a long time volunteer in the Crossroads of America Council at both the Pack and Troop level I do not approve of this fee.

 

My word... look at slide 9, "If a Scout separates from Scouting and wants to return later, does he or she have to pay the Joining Fee again?"  YES????!!!

Their Joining Fee is simply a flat fee combining the BSA Joining Fee and the BSA Annual Registration Costs.  National has no such rule in place (that I know of), so why would the council do it?  If Jimmy takes a year off from Scouting and comes back, our local registrar does not hit them with National's Joining Fee again...  His old record is still in the system.