CynicalScouter

Told my (new) Troop Committee Chair we our council was hiring a new DE. He was just curious what the salary was. So I forwarded the job posting. "Part time?" he said. Nope. And this person had to cover 2-3 counties and dozens of units. That day he gained a much bigger appreciation for what DEs do.

E-6 after 10 years - $45,237.60. Doubles to $90,475.20. Again, not that dissimilar to what S.E.s make now, especially if you adjust for council size and number of employees in the council. And I would also note that the size of the council in terms of number of scouts served should play a factor. The budget/expenditures is used because while not all not for profits have "members" (like BSA does in the sense of Scouts) they all have expenses and budgets. But clearly no matter what data I bring, the answer will always be "all scout executives should be making less than they do now." So fine. Have at it. Don't be shocked when people leave.

But it is. 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.

Well, at least you admit it Ok, let's play this game. O-4, 2 years of service or less = $59,824.80. Double what they made on active duty would be...$119,649 or exactly what most S.E.s make. For example, the two smallest Councils in the U.S. (that I know of). Alameda Council: the S.E. makes $113,717. Piedmont Council: the S.E. makes $112,832. So, exactly what you think they should be making. But wait, you don't want someone with a bare 2 years. How about something reasonable. 10 years in. O-4 = $89,524.80. Double is $179,049.60. Which is what my S.E. makes (mid-size Council). In other words, they are being paid what you want them to be paid.

I am going to guess here that given the nature of the ongoing litigation with both the bankruptcy and GSUSA he has been advise by his attorneys to not say a single word about either. That said, there was a pretty full and complete briefing on the status of the bankruptcy (as of that point) at the NAM last year. Link is here https://vimeo.com/421340141 Conversation starts at 1:05:00 of so.

What does the median income of the area have to do with the skill set needed to be a S.E.? The median person is NOT the head of a million dollar (or multi-million dollar) organization. It also does nothing at the national level for a national organization. I asked you a very specific question. What should that number have been?

Most if not ALL of the current executives were not present when the abuse took place. Mosby was put in position less than 3 months before the bankruptcy was filed.

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%

Yes, and this is the key. Is "reasonable" going to be "BSA doesn't get its discharge order until the fund is fully paid"? Or 1-5 years? Or 25 years (Tobacco Master Settlement)?

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%

It means the potential end (or massive diminished capacity) of Boy Scout of America Scouting. If all you want is to get an Outdoor Youth Committee of your local church, Kiwanis, or whatever, have at it. Go do what Baden-Powell Association did and create your own (or Trail Life, although I'm not sure that's a good parallel) "scouting". But recognize you will never, ever be able to use anything Boy Scouts of America created or trademarked. No Eagle Scouts, in particular. So Troop 123 will either a) no longer exist or b) be required to disband and reform as the Outdoor Youth Committee of the United Methodist Church of XYZ with NO references WHATSOEVER to ANY programming or materials or products created by Boy Scouts of America. THAT is how this impacts programming

That's the other question: funding. If there's a settlement fund, will it be based on future contributions (such as the tobacco master settlement where there were payments made over the course of a decade) or will National and the Councils be expected to make good on the ENTIRE settlement fund immediately/in 2021 in order to emerge from bankruptcy?

I think this what my Key-3 were talking about: that if the plaintiffs and their lawyer don't back off and force a liquidation, they get whatever scraps are left after Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation.

Just FYI: If the defense attorneys are successful in limiting cases/liability to ONLY claims in states where there's a lookback window or expanded statute of limitations, that would possibly limit claims to 15 states and D.C. https://apnews.com/article/2ba715a1a0ee45bc8ebe97d02b77246c

I was told that part of the equation is not just the number of cases a council had BUT the possibility that the state the council is in will allow for look-back windows. In other words, if you are a council in State X and you have cases/claims lodged BUT your state has not implemented a look-back window, why on earth would you pay in? BUT if you estimate that that odds of the State X Legislature enacting a look-back window is, say, 50%, then it makes sense to contribute to the settlement A LITTLE. The Key-3 used the words "formula" or "algorithm" to suggest there is an actual computation of how much each will have to chip in for a settlement based on number of cases AND probability of successful claim being filed in the state. And from the Council's perspective, if I am in a state that is notoriously anti-plaintiffs-attorney, pro-tort-reform, I might just take my chances, NOT pay a dime/contribute to the settlement pool, and bet that the state legislature will NEVER enact a look-back window.

https://theintercept.com/2020/12/21/boy-scouts-abuse-scandal-film/

Except those trademarks may be the ONLY thing that they can't sell. Why? 36 U.S. Code § 30905 grants the "Exclusive right to emblems, badges, marks, and words" to Boy Scouts of America ("National") In order for the bankruptcy court to order the sale of the trademarks, the court would have to (in effect) overturn an act of Congress and somehow find 36 U.S. Code § 30905 not binding? Unconstitutional? I do NOT see that happening. What I've said since the beginning is this: National (the corporate entity created by Congress) survives with $0 assets and whatever Congress granted them rights to (namely the "emblems, badges, descriptive or designating marks, and words or phrases the corporation adopt[ed]") So Eagle Scout survives as belonging to Boy Scouts of America. But the HA bases? OA accounts? Desks and chairs? Norman Rockwell paintings? Paperclips at Headquarters? All liquidated. And then, they turn on the Councils and COs.

Great! Only a mere 85,000 left! Total BSA liquidation (including sale of all HA bases and liquidation of the OA account) = ~$677,000,000 $677,000,000/85,000 = $7964. They are going after Councils and COs. Guaranteed.

My troop was planning to do Sea Base 2022. We are skipping it under the assumption there will be no Sea Base by that point. And our Philmont 2021 trip is the Philmont 2020 trip that got postponed, otherwise we were not planning on doing any HA. We even debated this; when Philmont cancelled last year they offered a full refund. The families involved said they were willing to take the risk that Phimont would NOT be liquidated by July 2021.

The threat was "National" because of the pension factor. As for HA, OA, Councils, they simply said "National" so how broad that is wasn't clear and the Key-3 (really the Council President) who was discussing this was trying to give us as much information as possible without getting in trouble with the lawyers about ongoing legal discussions/negotiations. The idea is what would Plaintiffs (and their clients) rather have? An alive, but crippled, BSA National that can at least pay SOMETHING. Or a liquidated BSA National that has to pay out all pension plans for all former and current BSA employees and THEN give the plaintiffs the scraps.

My Council Key-3 hosted a annual review/update. While much of the focus was Council ops, the bankruptcy came up. The Key-3 were somewhat limited in terms of what they could say, but the broad strokes: 1) At least SOME of the plaintiffs lawyers "want us [BSA] dead." That message is coming through loud and clear 2) National's lawyers and the Committee of Councils have put liquidation(s) on the table as a warning/threat and given the TCC/Plaintiff's lawyers two options Option 1: TCC/Plaintiff's lawyers take a restructuring deal that does NOT result in the liquidation/death of BSA and that allows BSA to continue to operate/function. Option 2: TCC/Plaintiff's lawyers reject the restructuring deal. National will ask for this to convert to liquidation and plan on the Congressional Charter will allow BSA to survive with $0 assets. A complete restart. Under bankruptcy law, the BSA pension/pension holders go to the top of the list of creditors in the event of a liquidation. Once the pension is fully funded, plaintiffs attorneys get the scraps which won't be much.

Arizona man says LDS Church threatened expulsion for abuse report So, I pulled the case from the court. Even though the plaintiff is a John Doe, I an not going to link to the case. I will simply note the following 1) The defendants include both the The Corporation Of The President Of The Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter-Day Saints and The Corporation Of The Presiding Bishop Of The Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter-Day Saints. They are going after the whole organization. 2) The local Bishop is named in his person/personal capacity. 3) The local council is named. 4) The SM is named. He is apparently still alive and is a registered sex offender. What does this mean? If I had to read tea leaves, I'd bet that a) National is not going to have enough money to satisfy claimants. b) Neither will the insurance companies. c) Neither will the Councils. That means... d) COs are going on the table.

I think that folks need to realize three things: 1) Fees are not going down. Nothing is getting "returned to scouts". 2) Layoffs have already hit national and numerous councils and they are not going to stop. Part of the reason for switching to all online print-on-demand is to adjust to a permanent loss in BSA supply chain workers. 3) The introduction of these efforts is to adjust expenditures to the new reality of income/revenue. Not to reduce revenue sources/requests.

Right! I am all for scout led, but that does NOT mean that adults cannot be sources of INFORMATION or that they should withhold information from scouts about opportunities.

So, adults should withhold information from scouts? My goodness, even in the adult world I gain insights and information from newsletters I receive from national and my council. This just seems. Wow. I will never, ever support withholding (age appropriate) information from scouts. There are literally dozens of BSA awards and honors that a scout can earn. I see nothing wrong with making scouts better informed of opportunities. Whether they decide to take up those opportunities are, of course, up to then.