SiouxRanger

Don't take CS seriously the minute he/she departs from commenting on btcy pleadings.

What I know of Mosby comes largely from this forum. But I see a pattern here, and it troubles me. My experience with my local council, at district and council level, was that when there was bad news to deliver to a volunteer (we no longer want you to be Chairperson of District Boy Scout Outdoor...etc.) the appropriate level professional, DE, or mid level council staffer, would recruit a volunteer senior to the volunteer to be ousted, and have the senior volunteer to the dirty work. Thereby, the face of the "ugly" would be that of a volunteer, not a professional. I saw it time and again. And so, Mosby, not of the Movement, it appears to me that he has been hired as the "senior volunteer" in my example, to deliver the bad news and he will be out the door when the dust settles. He may or may not be complicit in this. And thereby, senior National staff will remain nameless and faceless. (So, the proof of my prediction will be how long does Mosby stay on post-bankruptcy?)

My understanding is that when there is an SE vacancy, Area or Region submits the names of 3 SE candidates along with documentation regarding those 3 candidates. The LC search committee is limited to selecting one of those 3 candidates, and are to consider nothing other than the documentation provided by Area/Region, and interviews with the 3 candidates, and make their selection based on solely that. In fact, a search committee member had a good scouter friend in the council of one of the 3 candidates and contacted that good scouter friend for inside information, and when that contact became known to Area/Region, the search committee was told never to do that again. Considering that only 2 of the last 5 SE's were considered good and 3 were considered horrible, by both volunteers and many professional staff, the appearance is that Area/Region selects the 3 candidates on its criteria, such as, (who deserves a promotion, who needs to move on having worn out their welcome in their current council, and occasionally, they have sent a good one. But with a 5 year average term of office here, we have had 15 years of bad SE's over 25 years. Only ONE SE put any money into fixing up a deteriorating camp. So, 20 years of camp neglect. It sounds as if your experience is several levels above mine, which may explain the difference in view and likely our opinions. I have no doubt that there are many good scouters trying to make things work and improve them. And I understand the governance documents of National to troop and pack level. Things don't work in real life the way they are laid out on paper. My understanding is that an SE's salary is set by Area/Region/National. That the EC or EB has nominal control, it is not exercised. It is not meaningful control. No professional in my council makes anything but token efforts to run a decent program at summer camp. This summer the site manager told me of basket weaving materials being ORDERED during the second week of camp. They never arrived in time. Woodcarving knives and chisels were in horrible condition and would not cut even carvable wood. A volunteer came out and sharpened them so they were ready for the second week of camp. The total cost of all these materials and new carving tools was probably no more than $1,000. Per National's bankruptcy Exhibits, our council has some millions in liquid assets-cash and cash equivalents. And our camp had shortages of program materials.

So, this may be the best recruitment year in the last 3 or so? Maybe there will be a post-covid, bankruptcy-pending rebound.

This is just another of those aspects of all of this which has so many levels. From my understanding of compensation, governance, and promotions, successful fundraising does not increase the salary of any staff member of an LC. Directly. I am not aware of "commission" income based on fundraising. However, it is also my understanding that the SE, at least, and likely any Development Director, are judged as far a job performance on the success of LC fundraising. That might lead to an incremental raise, but the big money is an SE being promoted to a larger LC with a larger staff and greater income, and a Development Director being promoted to an SE of a small council. And, of course, the junior staff may get promoted up the ladder within the LC, and a new SE will come from outside the LC. And earning a Quality Council Award-I don't know-but expect that it includes fundraising goals, which if met, enhance promotion prospects. If anyone has specific knowledge of specific metrics, please enlighten us.

I'll just say, people are not machines. It is very difficult to tell masses of folks to do one thing, and then, when conditions change, flip the switch and expect a complete reversal of the momentum. There is likely to be loss of CO's, scouts, parents, and leaders after any reversal. People will have moved on or be fatigued by the whole mess.

Tiring, isn't it;?

Back in the Jere Ratcliff era, I read or heard from a scouter that the combined salary of the CEO of The Salvation Army and top aide (his wife) was $86,000. (per year). My SE is making over $100,000 in deferred compensation (per year).

@Gilwell_1919: If Churchill had said it, it would be called "oratory."

I agree with you. Public sentiment will likely be the controlling power which determines the future of Scouting. I was just trying to lay out the bare legal mechanism. If control of the intellectual proper ty is lost, the Movement has no handbooks, patches, training materials, etc... One cannot download a .pdf of the Guide to Safe Scouting if the "lay" owner does not make it available. All I am pointing out is that if control of the intellectual property escapes the Movement, things will get even more complicated. And I also agree that the public has little appreciation for the finer points of scouting in its many forms. If a scout shows up at the front door selling popcorn, well, scouting must be fine, and if no scout appears ever again, they may not be missed.

Well, intellectual property rights are no different in legal concept than owning a building or Philmont. In a Ch 7 liquidation, all would be sold, and the proceeds distributed to creditors Those assets will not simply pass down by some process to the LC's. The LC's are separate legal corporations. The LC's might pool their assets and purchase National's intellectual property rights, but it will not be a gift to them. The new owner could simply discontinue publication of the Scout Handbook. If I buy a car, I don't have to drive it. The inventory of Scout Handbooks already published and on the market would remain, until consumed, and then there would be no more. I don't know what the likelihood is that someone would buy those rights and do nothing with them, but my point is that control might be lost to an entity not holding the same beliefs as those in the Movement.

Understood and agreed.

A big consideration is whether National survives and controls its intellectual property. If National is liquidated, depending on who purchases National's intellectual property, there may be no Scout Handbooks published in the future until they come into the public domain. That could be a couple of decades. Someone seeking to continue a Scouting program in the absence of National will be purchasing Scout Handbooks from eBay. And rank patches and medals. And, whomever operates the unit will not have any insurance (they may not have any now). And they will need to make arrangements for meeting space. There will be no training provided unless volunteers continue to carry the torch, use training materials last available before National's collapse as supplemented by them. Ad hoc and grassroots. That is where all will be, unless whomever acquires National's intellectual property desires to continue on.

And how are actions taken by a Boy Scout Council and published in more than two dozen newspapers, inappropriate here? Particularly considering the subject matter herein discussed at length as the cause of National's bankruptcy.

Ever had an adult scouter, publicly thrown out of scouting for political reasons, (and later reinstated) come up to you at a camporee at a Council camp and say to you: "My son told me he plans to stay close to me this weekend so that no one from the Council will show up and throw me out of camp-my son thought that they wouldn't do that if he was nearby." I have heard that. So, you wield the pen-strike from my posts that which seems "over the top." Please let me know what is exaggeration.

Hardly hyperbole. For $100, I can ship a copy of the records. Ever been publicly accused as a child abuser in YOUR hometown by no less than that Beacon of Purity, the Boy Scouts of America? Because you raised the issue that the Council was bankrupt? A Council which attempted murder, but had to settle for rape, when the allegations were totally unfounded? My friends did. I know these things to be true. And perhaps, you might consider thinking before pouncing.

You likely do not know as much about this as me, and you have been spared. Nowhere near the level of trauma experienced by sexual abuse survivors, but I speak almost daily with one of my friends who experienced the "shunning" procedure of National.

Which raises the question: "Does National have any idea what 'principles' are?' Starting with, "Trustworthy..."

Hyperbolic, perhaps. But to those DAMNED by National it is not. Their reputations have been damaged in their hometowns, communities, churches... I know several scouters whose faithful longevity and recognition and awards far and away exceed those of any others I know, were so abused by National.

And so WHY would National drape itself in the American Flag, yet DENY the fundamental principles of which that Flag symbolizes?

I know that the Bill of Right does not apply. But that is not what BSA SELLS. "We are good and decent folks, Americans, God and Country, Flag, principles..." BUT if you do not play by OUR rules, WE WILL CRUSH YOU. And National will. I know these things to be true.

A Death Warrant by any other name... The BSA has a Death Warrant process.

Significant donors in my council have walked away from making any donations.

"Fire me?" (The very, very short answer is YES, National can "FIRE YOU." And it has fired volunteers for non-sexual abuse reasons (political), fired units, and sanctioned councils.) I came across your post while looking for something else. But I have returned to respond-as I must. My conscience will not permit me to pass by your post without comment. Everyone should know the things that I know. "But what I do have are a very particular set of skills; skills I have acquired over a very long career." --Liam Neeson playing Bryan Mills in Taken. In my case, substitute "knowledge" for "skills." And then you have it. [What follows is from my personal knowledge of the treatment by National, Region, Area and local council of several of my long-term, highly distinguished in Scouting, friends. I know these things to be true.] [Seat belts, please, this ride is violent.] There is a document published by National entitled "Standards of Membership and Leadership." It is a restricted document-distribution being limited to National staff, council scout executives, and select senior council staff who have a "need-to-know." I believe, though could be wrong, that National concealed even the existence of this document for decades, though there is mention in the current bankruptcy of "standards of membership and leadership," I am not clear whether those references are to the particular publication of which I am aware, or some abstract concept of "standards." (Some time ago, when the need to have a copy of this document would be helpful, a copy appeared in the mail to me, anonymously. A volunteer who knew someone, who knew someone, etc. seems to be the source of the document being sent to me.) If one offends a Scout Executive, or Council President, ENOUGH, (and perhaps there other individuals in a council's hierarchy one can offend to trigger such a result), one may receive a letter (approved by National, as I understand it), stating, in effect: "Membership is a privilege and not a right." "The Boy Scouts Of America has determined that you do not meet its standards of membership and leadership, and is revoking your membership in the Boy Scouts Of America." "You have the right to appeal this decision within 30 days of the date of this letter. Send your appeal request and any pertinent documents to ...." You will receive a refund check in the amount of the dues you last paid. (Insult to injury.) No statement of the grounds for your dismissal will be provided. Ever. And thereby, you will be BRANDED as gay, atheist, or a child abuser in your own hometown, church, community, family. "What did Tom do???' Conversation in church pew: "Where's Tom (or Mary) they are always here with their kids?" "Oh, Tom (or Mary) was thrown out of Boy Scouting." "Why?" "No one knows. He (she) won't talk about it. He (she) have just fallen off the radar." "Gee, Scouting is such a wholesome program, how could Tom (Mary) debase it so-what horrible people he/she/they are-has a criminal case been filed against Tom (Mary)? Not taking my kids over there for our usual Friday's sleepover." (I have no problem with gays or atheists-everyone is just trying to get through the day. Those folks are not my life, but as I won't let anyone think for me, I ask not that anyone let me think for them.) But branded as a child abuser? People tend to think the worst of things, so get thrown out of Scouting, folks will think you are a child abuser. Even if you are a CPA questioning some accounting issue? Lovely. Does not "Trustworthy" apply to National? (Well, that it has filed bankruptcy on account of its decades of lies about child abuse-so, apparently not.) What is the point of the principles of an organization if not to be followed by not only its adherents, but also the organization? And expulsion all because you questioned a council budget item that embarrassed some pea-brained volunteer or Scout Executive. And because you volunteered as a scout leader to help your child. If you think that a long scouting career of distinguished, meritorious service will protect you. It won't. I know this to be true. The BSA is a Congressionally chartered corporation. That is rare. National titles itself as the "Boy Scouts of America." One would think that between "Congressionally" and "America," a banished scout volunteer would be accorded the rights accorded in the Bill of Rights: To know the charges against you. Nope To present evidence (You can, but as you have no idea of the charges, what evidence do you present to rebut unknown charges? Dutch oven recipes? A list of great restaurants in Gatlinburg? The phone directory of Lower Manhattan?) To appear at your hearing and confront witnesses? Nope. Can't do that. You won't even know when or where the hearing will be held. Or who constitutes the tribunal. Or even if they ever meet or read anything you submit. (Read Arthur Koestler's Darkness At Noon, where the accused are taken into a basement, but shot in the back of the head on their way down the steps to the basement. The accused don't even get the benefit of torture.) And scouting volunteers whose membership is revoked also won't get the right to speak a single word in their defense. To confront your accusers? Nope. You will never know who you offended, or why they were offended. There is NOTHING in National's "Standards of Membership and Leadership" which accords you any legal rights whatsoever. So, if you receive such a letter, get a copy of Franz Kafka's The Trial. Read it twice. I have. It accurately portrays just what you are up against. National has structured the "membership game" that, win, lose, or draw, National always WINS! "Let them hate, as long as they FEAR." (Some French King whose name escapes me.) "Work for free, send money, don't question." Compliant and complacent volunteers, donating money, are welcome. The troublesome, well, National has its ways. I expect that if the same group of National staffers now employed retain their jobs after the bankruptcy, there will be membership retribution against identifiable posters on this forum. It seems to be National's way. (As I write this, I am looking at two Banker's boxes of files pertaining to the membership revocation war in my council from some time ago which my spouse wants me to cull. Now they are all so relevant again.) And they will not be culled. It is a question of "finding one's backbone." Most folks avoid conflict and dissention-it is unpleasant-but for some, when their line is crossed, they stand up regardless of consequences, and thereby become the leaders National espouses to create but also crushes if their efforts are just too successful toward National. Can National FIRE ME? Yep. And it won't care a whit. All I can say: "Beware the Mother that eats her children." And so, National lays down another layer of "Scouting Tradition." Deceit.

Considering the focus brought to the CH 11, Act 5, thread today by a mere court ruling or two, were the judge to so oblige...daily...the problem would be solved. (Sorry-not even worth 2 cents.)