David CO

 I don't know how most boys can make that decision without at least a few months of a troop experience. 

Almost all of the them can. My sixth graders are a whole lot smarter than many people give them credit for. 

The problem isn't that sixth graders don't know their own minds. The problem is that their adult leaders are in recruitment mode rather than helping mode. 

Most boys don't join scouting. They do make the decision without any troop experience.

Let me know if you can find anything in the BSA Rules and Regulations which states the BSA is obligated to explain their decisions let alone any benefit.

Yet they are.

Boy, he sure has a lot of nerve for someone who is only a fourth generation Texan.

The BSA looses more scouts in the first year of the troop program than any other age. 

Yes, and it is a big problem for the troop. Every year, we got a number of crossovers who really liked cub scouting, but they just didn't like boy scouting. As a scoutmaster, I wished that the weeb transition process would have made some effort to help the scouts to discern whether or not they would actually like to be boy scouts.

I don't consider a transition to be successful when the scout signs up in a troop. I think it is successful when the scout makes a good decision. Scouting is about making good decisions. Sometimes a good decision is to join a troop, but sometimes its not.

 My ultimate goal is to get these boys to stay in Scouting 

Right there is the problem.

In my local hiking club, there are just as many(if not more) 30-50 year old women as there are men. On my non-scouting hackpacking trips, I usually have more women than men join me. The trip coordinator for another backpacking club I belong to is a woman. I get just as many groans and excuses from dads as I do moms. The men have no monopoly on being lazy and out of shape.

Yep, Sadie Hawkins Day is coming up. The women are getting ready.

In regard to the council level executive boards, few have any substantial attendance from COR's.  If all the COR's attended consistently, you might see many councils run very differently, as the COR's would outnumber the appointed members.

No, the execs would still be running the show. The units don't show up because they have learned from experience that it just doesn't do any good. It is a waste of time. 

David, I think you might be using some very old data.

 

Your profile states "Chicago area."

 

Starting salary for Chicago public schools is over $50,000 a year, not $22,000.

 

https://www.nctq.org/districtPolicy/contractDatabase/district.do?id=4

 

Coach pay varies based but a head coach gets an extra $6000 a year, not $800 (page 355).

 

https://www.nctq.org/docs/CTU_Contract_2015-2019_FINAL.pdf

 

 

Not winning lottery money but certainly better than poverty level.

 

 

 

Hawkwin

Married to a HS teacher that does extracurricular work

Sorry about the -1. It was a mistake. My computer screen bounces around sometimes, and the -1 is too close and directly above the quote button. There is no way for me to remove it. My apologies. 

If you look back at my post, you will see that I was talking about the Catholic school system. Yes, the public schools pay a lot more than the Catholic schools. We also get paid less in the boonies than in the city.

I don't know if you would consider my teaching salary to have been in the poverty level, but I did qualify for food stamps for a few years. I never made more than $40,000. I couldn't have made ends meet without a second income in the family.

I identify very closely with all the blue collar families in scouting who simply can't afford all the cost increases.

Even all-boy units in the same town aren't equal. They don't have equal programs, facilities, or resources. Every troop is different.

So far, we haven't had complaints that one unit may have more of something than another. Units are allowed to compete with each other. I think this may change if the girls' unit ends up getting fewer donations and sales than the boys.

Are we going to end up with some sort of title 9 program in scouting?

I hold District and Council positions and I am Committee’s at both levels. I cannot and don’t give big money to any level of BSA. I give to FoS when I can and I designate that my United Way contribution at work go to the Council, but that is about it other than paying for my children’s activities (most of which they pay for via fundraising). Sadly, the way United Way is setup with our local Council, no one can even verify that my money gets to the Council.

 

In fact, Charter Organizations hold far more power than most of us on a Committee, they get a vote in Council business, via the CoR’s.

 

As for bloated salaries, I know the starting salaries for DE’s in my area is under $38k, about $13k less than the average for bachelor degree.on top of that they are working 60-80 hours a week.

To put that in perspective, the salary for a Catholic middle school teacher in my diocese maxes out under $38,000, and that is with a masters degree and over 20 years experience. A starting teacher gets about $22,000, with an additional $800 per season if he coaches in the evenings.

If you compare the execs salaries with those of other non-profit organizations in education and recreation, I think you will find that the SE's and DE's are paid much higher than their counterparts with similar degrees and experience.

I didn't say that the committees have much power. I said they had prestige. All the power is firmly in the hands of the execs. 

I was an IH. I know from experience that the Chartered Organizations' votes on the council don't amount to a hill of beans. The units have no power at council. In BSA, all the power is controlled by the execs.

No, that technique doesn't meet the requirements. It is not an abrupt entry.

The purpose of the training is to prepare the scout to be able to save his life in a situation where he finds himself in an unplanned and abrupt entry into the water. 

A scissor kick entry is a very useful thing if you are a skilled swimmer and you need to do a rescue. It is not very useful technique for a novice swimmer who suddenly and unexpectedly falls in the water. Nor is it useful to a novice swimmer, swimming on the surface, who is pulled under water.

If a boy would resent adults for making him learn to swim, then he will probably already resent us for making him go to school, go to the doctor, go to the dentist, and a wide variety of other unforgivable offenses. This will be just one more thing for him to add to the list.

Maybe it is more misinformed than out of line. The average Scout/Scouter have no idea of the inner workings of BSA, even at a District or Council level. I'll admit I am very deep into scouting and the intricacies often confuse me and force me to go look things up.

 

But those old men and women, didn't get there by accident. And that starts at your local district and council. The people that make the committees and boards up have a very keen interest in Scouting, they make it go, giving and raising money, serving in various positions (at local levels often several positions, because they are the ones that step up when no one else does). They are nominated and elected to those positions by fellow Scouters (and Scouts) serving on committees, and without them the program would be much different, if it existed at all.

 

And contrary to popular belief the professionals are not the ones deciding everything. In fact, I think the only professional that has a vote is the National Chief Executive and that is only on the Executive Committee. Local Executives do not vote on the Council Committee.

 

Many, if not most, were scouts as youth, including the current executive (Eagle Scout) and Commissioner (cub, boy Scout and Explore). So, while they are old men, they got there through years of dedicated service to Scouting.

All the heavy lifting is done by the scouts and unit scouters. 

It is true that district and council leaders don't get there by accident. They get there by donating large sums of money to help pay for the execs bloated salaries. In return, the execs give council leaders prestigious looking positions on the committees. One hand washes the other. 

Scouts will never have much say at the district, council, or national level. They don't have the big bucks to buy a committee post.

Remember, "making Eagles" is not the aim or goal of the program.  If the scout is having fun and enjoying the other aspects of the program he is involved with, then let him be.  If he understands that to go to the next step of rank advancement, or eventually be eligible for things like Order of the Arrow, that he needs to complete the requirement he will need to overcome the fear once (emphasis on that point- he only really needs to jump in one time and then never again as he can complete hiking or cycling and emergency preparedness MBs to get to Eagle) then your job is done.  Hounding him or making him feel he is less of a Scout because the other guys have done it is not good either.

 

It isn't all that abnormal for there to be kids who have the same fear.  For some, completing the requirement in a pool is an option they are more comfortable with if their fear is they can't see the bottom of the pond/lake.  You can't, however, change the requirement.

I agree that advancement is not the aim or goal of the program. I disagree with everything else.

I think every child should learn how to swim well enough to save their lives in an emergency situation. If necessary, they should be ordered to learn it.  A reluctant swimmer should be given no choice in this matter.

Of course, a scout leader can't force a scout to do anything. This is the parents' responsibility. As a scout leader and swimming instructor, I would sit down with the parents and advise them to order their son to do it.

If the scout leaders are too squeamish to teach a reluctant swimmer to swim, I would suggest that the parents enroll their son in a swimming class somewhere else. A good swimming instructor will get the job done.

I was a Scout since 2009 and no one asked us who or what we wanted in our program. Wouldn’t it be nice if young men were elected to national office in scouting to make decisions for the rest of us under 21? It seems wrong to have guys in their 50s (no offense) to try to imagine what it’s like to be 15 these days. They can’t possibly understand that I don’t want my sister anywhere near my scouting activities. Ask my mom if it’s easier on her to drop off both of us at the same place or if she even cares. Every other day of the week we’re being shuttled across town. One more shuttle run won’t make a difference. Having my sister on the same camp out will certainly cause me to think hard about continuing in scouting.

I have a hard enough time remembering what it is like to be 50, much less 15.

No David.

 

Looking at evidence, when faced with a choice, considering what happened in similar situations and using that to help predict what might happen in different scenarios is the argument of logic, reason and science.

I am a Science teacher. I know Science. Mr. Greene is not making an argument based on evidence or Science.

The problem with his method of collecting "evidence" is that he only talked to the people who remained in the scouting program after going co-ed. He didn't talk to those who left.

It is like judging the effectiveness of a new medicine by looking only at those who survive the treatment.

I don't think that's what people are suggesting.

 

It's a case of looking at evidence, ie what has worked all around the world, in the majority of countries and cultures on every continent.

 

It still doesn't mean you have to do it because of that, it's simply a case of if you are considering it looking at the ample evidence that there is out there.

Of course that is what Mr. Greene is suggesting.

This is the same argument that has been used to promote socialized medicine, drug legalization, abortion, gay rights, and a whole slew of liberal social agendas. It is the argument of the left.

I am sure that Mr. Greene did not use this polarizing argument without understanding that it would raise red flags with just about any conservative who reads it. 

We have all heard this internationalist, one world government argument before. It is a staple of the left. 

The founders of scouting could have set up one monolithic international organization with no borders and no national scouting associations. They wisely chose not to go that way. 

I think we should resist the argument that all national scout associations need to do things the same way. 

http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/bsa_charter_and_bylaws.pdf Feel free to familiarize yourself ...

http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/bsa_charter_and_bylaws.pdf

http://www.scouting.org/cebo.aspx

 

You could also attend council board meetings.

Or, invite acting or former council/area presidents to camp with your troop for a couple of nights.

 

I'm not saying you get top job that day, but after a few years as a DE putting in 60 hour weeks, folks might begin think you're in for the pound.

I know what the rules say. I also have been around long enough to know that this is not how it actually works. The rules and bylaws are a sham.

Chicago learned this a while back. When the units rejected the execs hand picked slate, national threatened to pull their council charter. Now, nobody rejects national's hand picked slates.

The council boards are chosen by the execs at national. I just don't know how they go about it.

Those who actually make their money/power "elsewhere" become board members ... and they determine compensation for the execs based on their experience with free market forces. If you'll do the job for less, send them your resume!

 

There are no free market forces involved at BSA. It is a rigged system.

I have no idea who these board members are or how they are selected. All I know is that they seem to rubber stamp anything the execs put in front of them. 

BSA doesn't hire from outside. You know that. 

 

I have had personal dealings with multiple SE's, two of whom have gone on to be CSE's ... all of whom could be making more $ running for-profit businesses, or have more power in public office.

 

 

If they can make more money or have more power by going elsewhere, then let them do it. That is not a good reason to overpay them or give them too much power in BSA.

Two million dollars spent to teach scouts how to be thrifty?

Yeah, I think the other 4 volunteers all want this to happen at their church, and that's why they're helping in the first place, which is great. I'm sort of the loner, as I don't attend that church and just was "directed" to this pack by the district executive. I kind of wish I could just press rewind and contact a local troop directly and offer to help. That's why I feel stuck...I want to help and I was directed to this pack by the district exec, and it seems the kind of help they need is not necessarily anything I can provide (recruitment, top-down organization and communication, etc)

You have already helped. You are the 5th volunteer on the charter application. That may be what this unit needed most (or most urgently).

I realize this is mostly just venting, and I guess I don't have any specific questions. Overall it feels like this process is lacking in organization, substance, and communication big-time, but no one else seems to be concerned, which is kind of shocking to me. I suppose if you have any words of encouragement, throw them my way!

Don't worry. Be happy.

Offer your service cheerfully, do what you are asked to do, have fun, and don't fret about all the rest of it. It is not your responsibility to run the unit, and it will not be your fault if it fails.

Even if the unit should fail, people will notice your good work and cheerful service. You will be asked to serve again.

Those families are expecting a good Scouting experience now.  Why make yourselves wait?  Wouldn't it be better for everyone if you had a heart-to-heart conversation with those boys and their families, then try to find a troop together that does things the boys wants to do?  If they joined an existing unit, they'd have a chance at a good experience right away. 

No, that wouldn't be fair to the Chartered Organization. 

This is interesting and I have to agree with Blancmange on this. If a politician visits a scout meeting in the function of being a politician, what privacy expectation is there? It seems that this is a public figure making a public appearance. Why would there be a limit to what can be photographed at this event?

Ever since the Democratic Convention where a young girl took the podium to mock Dick Chaney (and suggest that he needed a time out), it has been understood by politicians, particularly those on the right, that some people, particularly those on the left, will try to use children to score cheap shots.

So, it is not all that unusual for a politician to specify "no cameras" during the "Q and A" as a condition for accepting an appearance involving children.

BSA isn't supposed to allow people to use scouts, in uniform, for partisan political activity. I do see some value in having office holders participate in a private, off-the-record conversation with scouts as an activity to promote civic awareness and good citizenship, but these events should never be used to create a politically divisive "gotcha" moment.

Yes, there really is a very good reason for politicians to limit what can be photographed at these events. There would be a good reason for BSA to limit it as well.