InquisitiveScouter

6 minutes ago, Cburkhardt said:

Claimant attorneys who are seeking a liquidation and destruction of the BSA know this and are taking public relations steps to make the post-bankruptcy operations appear hopeless.  They are, very directly, seeking to undermine the confidence of our professional and volunteer core through some of the outlandish things they have been saying.

???

Initial membership numbers and recharter are not looking good here.  My spies tell me our council has about a 50% loss from last year...ouch  But, first reports are always wrong...

Wonder if the court will request or look at those kinds of stats to inform the decision??

1.  I never address or refer to our youth as boys, girls, or kids.  They are always "Scouts."  They have picked up on this, and notice that it is my way of showing them respect.

2. I call Scouts by their first names until they turn 18.  At the age of majority, I refer to our new Scouters as Mr./Ms.  in front of the Scouts.  This takes some getting used to

3.  Adults refer to each other, when talking to Scouts, as Mr./Ms Lastname...  Adult-to-adult is always first names.

4.  I never throw in a title request...if anyone asks me to use their title, then I ask them to use mine, "Colonel."  Only one person has ever insisted I call them a title (outside the military), and I asked for the reciprocal courtesy.  They looked sidelong at me for a sec, then complied.

5.  Some of our Scouts and adults call me "Colonel".  I have never asked them to.  They know of my military service, and those who understand what it means show me a great deal of respect by using it.

6.  When Scouts ask me what they should call me, I say "Mr. XXXXXX", but because my last name is a bit difficult, "Mr. X" is fine.

7.  I grew up in a part of the South where we called adults we knew Mr./Ms. Firstname.  It was and is a sign of "familiar respect".  If you didn't use Mr./Ms., and only used "Firstname" you'd receive a word to mind your manners.  I never got a switching for this, but know a few who did   ----- You called the adults you didn't know Mr./Ms. Lastname. 

8.  If none if the above are suitable for you, you may refer to me as "Your Majesty"

I understand the words...just don't understand why they would imply being at a council camp brings on a different rule set...

2 minutes ago, TAHAWK said:

"properly executed Scouting cohorts at council camps may be an exception"  ???

Yeah, what the heck does that mean?

1 minute ago, TAHAWK said:

One  issue was candidates calling me without anyone else on the line  or emailing me withouit copying anyone else - both contrary to YP procedures.  

I struggle with this daily...Scouts emailing me directly without cc-ing parents.  I have a cut and paste now to add to all those emails:

Please include a parent or another registered adult on all communications.

At least, when they contact me through Scoutbook, the system automatically includes parents.  I do like that feature.

2 hours ago, mrjohns2 said:

I know it has diamonds showing what changed, but it didn't seem to change much, did it? Does anyone have a tldr version? I glanced over it and it seemed the same.

The biggest change I see is that the Medical Screening Checklist was updated.  follow the link to find the updated Dec 2020 version.

https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/HealthSafety/pdf/680-057.pdf

Although, question four is a subset of question one, therefore redundant... anyone see it differently??  Am I mis-reading it?

And again, @DuctTape for National Commissioner!!

1 minute ago, DuctTape said:

Regardless of what the system changes too, I will continue to advocate for the process to require scouts making contact with the mBcs and reduce (eliminate?) any adult appointment settings. We must remember the process provides (or denies) growth and learning opportunities as much if not more than the badge requirements themselves.

I am guilty of this...mostly because of convenience, and to thwart the parents who previously did this on behalf of their Scouts.  That is, when I provided Scouts with MBC info, about 75% of the parents would make the call on their Scouts behalf to set it up. 

I agree with you, and will modify my behavior on this one...putting this back on the shoulders of the Scouts.

What do you think about this idea?

When Scout asks for counselor info for a MB, I will send an email to the Scout with about three counselors' contact info, and explicit instructions that this is their responsibility, not their parents'.  CC the parents, and BCC the counselors.  Sets expectations for all three parties in one fell swoop.

Couldn't do this before, as our MBC lists had only telephone and address info.  Now Scoutbook gives you email & phone for MBCs.

Thoughts?

17 hours ago, T2Eagle said:

but I really don't think you could set out to design IT systems as unhelpful as BSA's.

Reminds me of a military joke about government issued equipment..."Remember, your weapons are made by the lowest bidder..."

37 minutes ago, qwazse said:

So, tracking advancement is a different animal than listing each requirement for every award that a scout could earn.

Frankly, one doesn't need any pre-printed material to track advancement. Lined paper or graph paper would do. The date goes in the left margin, the scout writes the award and requirement number, and the PL signs in the right margin. If all that matters is lists of req #s and PL's signatures, it could literally be as small as a membership card for each rank. The scout comes to the SM and says "Sir, I've worked my ticket for ___ rank and am ready for my conference and BoR."

Those Scout and Tenderfoot tickets will look gnarly, but as scouts mature, we'll see their upper-rank tickets look sharp. As I've mentioned in other threads, the killer app would be the tech that could photograph the card to a cloud drive, scan the writing, and register requirement completion.

The other "universal scout tool" that I've mentioned before, is a standard-issue notebook designed for working MB's. This would replace those MB worksheets. The scout records the MB at the top of the page, lists the requirement in the margin, and makes notes relevant to the requirement in the body.

The real value is that library of specialty MB pamphlets. Fewer troops means fewer libraries and less demand. The contents are swell, but it if they were exclusively online, it would be a hassle for end-users to print and bind the 23-136 pamphlets they'd use in their career. The issue of oversupply is an indication that BSA needs to move to print-on-demand and direct mailing. This would also enable every scout-shop and trading post to resupply with exactly the inventory that they needed.

Darn it, @qwazse, didn't we tell you to stop peddling your pesky common sense around here...sheesh!!

That was one of the most well-balanced, well-told stories I have seen on the news lately.  Very glad is was done by Scouts!

Thanks for sharing

1 minute ago, mrjohns2 said:

Markup isn't the question, margin is. It doesn't matter if they have 300% markup if they are still losing money on the item. 

Agreed...point is, they have to mark up all the other merchandise to help cover the costs of the stuff that doesn't sell.

If they move to a smarter model of on-line publications, the cost savings could be translated into lower costs for other Scout Stuff...but you and I know that would never happen

5 hours ago, fred8033 said:

919 awarded in 2019.  I'm betting less than 200 sold nation wide.  Maybe 400 as I'm betting counselors buy them more than scouts. 

And probably thousands upon thousands printed...

Having a close friend who works in a Scout Shop, I can tell you the markup on all Scouting merchandise is high.  Some things over 100% (double what was paid to National Supply at wholesale.)

On 1/16/2021 at 4:40 PM, mrjohns2 said:

It is interesting that some of these items, even if they seemed expensive, must not have been "self sustaining" meaning that they were selling these at a loss. 

Yes, hmmmm...

Stamp Collecting, one of my favorites...only 919 Scouts awarded in 2019.

https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2020/02/17/2019-merit-badge-rankings-which-were-the-most-and-least-popular/

How many books do you think they printed?  There are five sitting in our Scout Shop (although I'm not sure they are current versions.)

(I did not mention Bugling, another favorite, at the bottom of the list, because it is incorporated into Music MB pamphlet; 12882 awarded.)

On 1/15/2021 at 9:39 PM, mrjohns2 said:

I don't think it means what they think it means.

Inconceivable!

9 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Again, not that dissimilar to what S.E.s make now,

It's less than half of what our current guy gets...

Your definition of similar is not similar to mine.

1 hour ago, Eagledad said:

See, each scout in his other troop is given a schedule of advancement classes to Eagle when they join. The adults also keep all the scouts advancement records and important paperwork. TheY organize it all and submit it to the EBOR. All the scouts have to do In that troop,is wait for a call from their advisor telling them when to go to there EBOR.

Cringe...

46 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Just had someone in this thread indicate they believe that S.E.s should not be making more than the median salary of the people in their council.

As a baseline....a suggestion...add percentages based on performance.  It's as good, or arbitrary, a scheme as saying pay them a percentage of their expenditures...which seems really whack, especially if most of those expenditures are fixed and they don't control that money anyway...

6 minutes ago, mrjohns2 said:

We will have a broken professional core as long we pay entry level DEs such a tiny wage for someone with a 4 year degree. 

Best comment of the day, @mrjohns2  If I could give it ten likes, I would.

58 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

But wait, you don't want someone with a bare 2 years.

You are a bit ignorant here, brother...O-4's with two years of service are pretty scarce...usually only medical career fields, who are people with their professional degrees already.  Doctors, lawyers, etc. 

The average person is promoted to O-4 at around the 11 year point.  So the comparison is an O-4 at 10-12 years service, as you point out.

And, sorry for the vague pronoun antecedent, but I meant doubling the E pay for the council level.

Hire the O's for Regional/National level...99% of the retired officers I know have more integrity in their pinkie than any council execs I have met.

2 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

What should that number have been?

Don't know.  But if you pay me 5 million dollars, I'll be glad to come up with a pay structure that provides adequate compensation for the tasks, while attracting the needed skill sets to meet those tasks.

I would trust our local grocery store manager to better manage our council than it currently is.

Most separated or retired military officers at or above the rank of O-4, and most separated or retired enlisted at or above E-6 would be great candidates as well.

Give them double what they were making on active duty, and you'd have a good start.

16 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

So, you believe that people who work for charities / not-for-profits should work for free?

Again, what is the acceptable salary? Name the number.

BSA 2019 expenses were $430.5 million. CEO made 909,437 = 0.2%

Only a Sith deals in absolutes.

Do you really think I am advocating that people work for free?

At the council level, I could see a structure of using the median income of the population you serve as a baseline.  Add a percentage increase year by year based on performance.  Many ways to skin that cat.

But  no council (that I know of) gets to select its own talent.  BSA selects the "talent pool" for them.  And they must select one of those.  So, ultimately its about surviving the long con in the network of who-you-know  to land a slot at the feeding trough.

7 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

1) As for retirement, that is what they were legally promised. As noted, the law protects retirement and pension programs for EVERYONE. Including them.

2) As for the salaries, do you expect people at National to work for free? What do you think the salary should be?

The rule of thumb is that charity CEOs are paid 1-10% of the organization's expenses.

https://d20umu42aunjpx.cloudfront.net/2016+CEO+Comp+Study/2016+CEO+Compensation+Study.pdf

The latest data (2019-2020) indicates that remains the case. "In our study, the most significant factor affecting CEO pay was the amount of money raised and spent every year. On average, a CEO at a smaller nonprofit ($500K – $1M in annual expenses) makes $85,593 each year, while the average for a CEO at large nonprofits (over $50 million in annual expenses per year) gets paid $332,089"

https://analytics.excellenceingiving.com/2019-2020-nonprofit-ceo-compensation-study/

BSA 2019 expenses were $430.5 million. CEO made 909,437 = 0.2%

Completely consistent with other youth organizations.

American Heritage Girls

https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/display_990/311443814/09_2020_prefixes_27-32%2F311443814_201905_990_2020091817312046

Expenses of $3.3 million, CEO makes 138,441 = 4%

Baden-Powell Service Association (United States) https://www.sefanys.org/sites/sefanys.org/files/webform/2019recertification990/Form 990 (2017).pdf

Expenses of $1.4 million, CEO makes 132,717 = 9.4%

National FFA Organization (formerly Future Farmers)

https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/display_990/540524844/09_2019_prefixes_48-54%2F540524844_201812_990_2019091316649330

Expenses of $30 million, CEO makes 172,241 = 0.58%

I acknowledge that "This is the Way", but I believe, at it's heart, this model is flawed.  And I know I ain't going to be the one to change it.

This data, when presented to Mom and Pop on main street, doesn't fly.  Especially in the light of the "value-added" discussions we have had.

And I do not buy the 'we have to pay these kinds of salaries to attract the talent" argument.

3 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

It means the potential end (or massive diminished capacity) of Boy Scout of America Scouting.

Except that the execs will still be getting their six or seven figure salaries and retirement compensations, no matter which way it goes.

Just now, Mrjeff said:

I still don't see the connection between law suits, trusts, bankruptcy, victims compensation and all the legal deagle verbiage and kids participating in Scouting.  This does not have to impact how Troop 123 delivers the program to it's members.  If we want Scouting to survive it will.  There may not be grand high adventure bases, national committees or even a national office.  But this debacle can't keep kids from camping, hiking, building fires and having fun unless we loose focus on the real purpose of Scouting.  A lot of people like to quote Baden Powell but few acknowledge his statement warning against Scouting being run by a corps of professionals.  I think it's imperative that we examine the methods that we as Scouters can use to keep going because there isn't much that can be done about the bankruptcy, what caused it, and how it will all turn out.  I believe that it's time that we accept the inevitable and take a positive look to the future and see what can be done with whatever is left.

 

What were your recharter fees this year, compared to last? 

Wanna place bets now on whether those fees will increase with a future-payments-victim-compensation-fund?

You can bet your sweet campfire they will.  You and I and our future Scouts will be the ones paying into this.

That's the connection...