atrox79

I want to thank everyone for their perspectives on this topic.  The committee has been talking and we met with our DE.  She stated she doesn't see a liability issue, but will double check to make sure.  And she likes how we are working together, but still within the actual "linked troop" guidelines set forth by the council.  As the youth leadership issue has never actually been addressed, we will continue with the female SPL until the next election and then have each troop elect an SPL next election.  Those two SPL's will work together on linked events.

As we discussed with our DE, this is really uncharted territory.  No one really knows what will work and what will not.  And every troop is different, which was part of the reason BSA didn't specify and left a lot of it vague (the same reason some troops have no SPL and just have PL's).  You do what works for your troop and your youth.  When BSA talks to the council about what is working and what is not, she will be using our troop as an example of what is.

5 minutes ago, HashTagScouts said:

Just, why? Let the two SPLs discuss plans and make decisions for themselves who will be the primary leader for the events.  Handcuff yourself and the other adults from stepping into this.  It is their choices to make for their units.

That's what I said we were going to do at the next election.  This election is done and over.  She was elected by both Troops to be SPL.  Whether that was wrong or right, it still isn't something you take away from any youth after they are elected.

This is why I brought all of this up in this forum.  I am not looking for documentation to justify what we are doing, I was just looking for documentation.

Some clarification.  Both troops are allowed to hold their own events (the girls troop even hold their own camp outs without the boys and vice versa).  We encourage this, actually.  During meetings, they hold a joint opening and closing, but separate during patrol times.  They meet back up during troop time if it is something that effects both troops.  A majority of our events are joint, however.  We currently have the female SPL (who is only registered with the female troop) overseeing a joint PLC.  There is a male ASPL that oversees the boys troop and a female ASPL for the girls.  As for bed checks at camp outs, that is done by the patrol leaders, not the SPL (the SPL oversees everything, but doesn't conduct them).  During the PLC, they do a good job of discussing joint events together, but if it only involves the girls troop, the boys will give input, but will not be able to vote.  If it only involves the boys troop, the girls can give input, but cannot vote (same goes with OA elections as the girls cannot vote in the boys OA elections as they are not members of that troop and vice versa).    

All of the documentation on linked troops show they can have linked events.  It just comes down to how far can you define what is a "linked" event, but I am not even sure BSA is completely clear on it.  It also makes me wonder if they are being vague to see how troops handle it to see what works.  When I say "on paper", I mean they are two separate troops.  According to BSA, they have two different troop numbers, two different SM's.

Since the female was just elected, we have decided to let this model run for the next 6 months (until the next scheduled election).  At the next election, I said we would have the boys elect their SPL and the girls elect an SPL.  The SPL's can then decide, on linked events, who can be in charge.  On solo events, it's a no brainer.  

If we had more girls, we wouldn't do the linked troops model and, eventually, that is what we are hoping for.

And, as far as me going "rogue" (according to @qwazse), I have been accused of that more than once..ha. 

3 minutes ago, ValleyBoy said:

I think her opposition to this is that even thought the troops are linked which means they only share the same unit committee.  They are 2 troops not one.  A youth member of one troop cannot hold a position in another troop that they are not a member of which means that your troop made up of male youth dose-not have a SPL.  Them wanting her as SPL is not a factor  because she cannot be because she is not a member of the male troop.   

But where is it in writing that a youth member can't hold a leadership position over another troop (over, not in).  I am not saying it doesn't exist, I just can't find it.  Youth leadership roles are not registered with BSA.  Their roles are only internal.

Plus, we have said we were going to elect 2 SPL's next election.  The girls will elect one and the boys will elect one.  This still didn't make them happy.

18 minutes ago, Treflienne said:

That is precisely the problem.   The boys are missing out on an opportunity here.

What opportunity are they missing out on?  None of them ran for SPL.  Nothing stopped them from running except they wanted her as their SPL.  

Not everyone will get to be SPL.  It is an elected position.  Your only opportunity regarding that position is to "run" for it.  And they have that opportunity every 6 months as long as they fit into the parameters the PLC has set for the position. 

2 hours ago, MattR said:

Going from 7 scouts to 3+1 patrols sounds great. I'd be interested in hearing how that happened...

 

Before I was the Scoutmaster, I was the Cub Master of our pack.  When I became Cub Master, we recruited...a lot.  We went from 3 new Cubs the year my oldest son joined to 25 new Cubs the year I took over.  Those recruitment numbers are now filtering into the Troop (and the current committee that is fighting me on this issue are the ones that were running the pack before I took over).

1 hour ago, The Latin Scot said:

Be aware that you are in violation of established BSA policy. While you may share committees, resources, and even adult leadership, you are still operating two separate troops. That means each unit, the male and the female unit, needs to operate apart from the other. That means they should not be sharing youth leadership, and your current organization of boy and girl patrols goes against the rules of the Boy Scouts of America. You need to divide your units into a boy troop (with its own SPL and patrols) and a girl troop (with its own SPL and patrols).

They are, on paper, two troops.  And the boy patrols are part of the boy troop / girl patrol part of the girl troop.  And if you look at any of the information on linked troops, it says they can do everything together.  EVERYTHING.  All camp outs, troop meetings, troop events, etc.  There is nothing that said they cannot.  They can even share the same campsite as long as girls and boys do not share a tent.  This doesn't mean we run a co-ed troop, it means we run two troops that work together.  We even have two deep leadership for BOTH troops on camp outs, even though they share campsites.

1 hour ago, The Latin Scot said:

One of the bigger issues National has to deal with is maintaining YPT standards and barriers to abuse. By ignoring the policy regarding male and female units, you are in fact violating those standards. I think you have been successful enough with recruiting new members that you should have no problem making the adjustments needed to conform with proper standards, which will only strengthen your units for both the boys and the girls. But be aware that, as it currently stands, your attempts to merge the boy and girl units will only cause headaches and potential problems down the line. 

I agree with Fred8033.  YPT and Barriers to Abuse say nothing about how youth leadership in a troop (or linked troop) should be organized.

2 hours ago, eagle90 said:

We have a similar situation.  3 boy patrols, 1 girls patrol.  There are 2 SPL's (one girl, one boy) and 4 patrol leaders.  Working very well so far.

Do all of your Scouts share a PLC?  We actually had our first PLC with the female SPL tonight and she did a great job.  We actually made a compromise this time with one SPL and two ASPLs (one female, one male).

Thanks for all of the replies and I am glad to see it definitely isn't clear to anyone.  We never had an issue for the past year when there was a boy SPL running the troop and the CC didn't raise an issue until a week before the troop elections when she found out a female was going to run for SPL (and prob get it).  Now she is concerned about "liability", however, I do not see where there is any.

This comes down to how youth leadership should be run.  I am always telling our PLC that the SPL oversee's the Patrol Leaders, but the Patrol Leaders oversee the Patrols.  It is not the SPL's job to tell a member of a patrol what to do.  And the Committee tried to bring up that we are taking away leadership positions by working as one PLC, however, we have leadership roles that are currently not even filled due to how young most of our troop is (80% are prob under 13).  They never even held a PLC or did youth leadership training before I took over.

My frustration comes when you start treating Scouts differently.  I believe Scouting teaches life skills, not boy skills.  The introduction of females in Scouts was long overdue, but they shouldn't be treated any differently.  When I see FB ads for Scouts and it has all girls, or all boys, in the ad, I feel they are missing the point of what makes this program great.  People don't want to be treated differently or want to be categorized by their sex, skin color, religion, etc.  My goal with the linked troops was to give ALL of these kids a quality program like I had as a kid.  I feel like we were doing that, but now the Committee wants to step in and tell me how to run the program.

Hello Everyone!

I will admit I am new to the boards, so if this is a question that has come up, please direct me to the correct spot (I looked and couldn't find it).

We are currently working as a linked troop.  We have two SMs and each troop has their own ASMs, but we share a Committee.   The Scoutmasters work well together (as we have been friends for years).  The two troops do a majority of their events together (meetings, summer camp, reg campouts).  We have also been acting as one PLC (one SPL for both Troops,  but elected PLs for all the patrols).  There is one girl patrol and three boy patrols.  This has been working wonderfully in the troop and attendance to all events has skyrocketed from what it was before I took over as SM (beginning of 2019).

Now that the girls are getting more experience, we had a girl run for SPL and she won.  Actually, none of the boys wanted to run against her because she is that respected in the Troop (17 and just earned her Star).  But now that we have a female SPL, our Committee wants to get National involved to make sure there is no liability issues.

We follow all of the YPT standards and Barriers to Abuse.  Personally, I think National has bigger issues than a thriving troop (that only had about 7 active Scouts 2 years ago).  I always thought youth leadership in a troop was determined by the youth with guidance by the Scoutmaster(s) ad long as it didn't violate any YPT or Barriers to Abuse.  And I always thought the purpose of the committe was to help facilitate the troop(s), not try to tear them apart (the Committee Chair was hesitant to even have a linked troop, btw).

Any suggestions on what to do with this?  I tried to suggest both Troops electing an SPL during the next election and then letting them decide who would be in charge at linked events (one serve as SPL and the other as ASPL), but they had a problem with that, also.